Comments: Affidavit Surfaces Confirming Development of Touch Screen Voting System Vote-Switching Software

Nothing de trop, you understand. Nothing over the top. Just a simple, tasteful, quiet display of fascist power.

Posted by at December 6, 2004 03:11 PM

Jeez, did you see the Texas Longhorns overtaking the University of California Bears in the BCS rankings? Now, there's definitely some manipulation of the polls there. Who writes the BCS software? Can we get a signed affidavit?

California once again screwed by Texas. When will it ever end?

Posted by muckdog at December 6, 2004 03:18 PM

I really don't know what to make of this whole thing although in my heart I truly feel that something like this probably did happen, I am still reluctant to embrace this until further corroborating information is forthcoming. Perhaps I am remembering how that memo about Dubya and TANG story turned out to be the death of a story about how our pReznit was aWol, despite the fact that that story still remains 99% true today based upon all other documented and eye witness evidence.

Posted by emal at December 6, 2004 04:16 PM

this proves what I've said......they never set out to blatantly rig the elections, only slightly skewer them to give them a close win, matching the polls.

Posted by T2 at December 6, 2004 04:21 PM

Steve:

Call him, ask him to release the original program he wrote for Feeney. That settles it. Curtis should have the original source code if in fact he did write it as stated in his affidavit.

Posted by john at December 6, 2004 04:41 PM

Now, there's definitely some manipulation of the polls there. Who writes the BCS software? Can we get a signed affidavit?

Crystal Nacht? I was never there. -A. Hitler


That settles it. Curtis should have the original source code if in fact he did write it as stated in his affidavit.

It didn't just take his source code.


A tale of murder and vote fraud. Clinton was a choirboy compared to this stuff.

Posted by phidipides at December 6, 2004 05:20 PM

Don't forhet the "suicide" of the guy in the late 80's early 90's who was investigating what he referred to as the "octopus' that included BCCI, Bush Family, Iran/contra etc.

He was found dead in an hotel room no autopsy and the local sheriff had the body cremated before the family showed up to claim it.

I believe he started on the case of the software program for tracking criminials etc. that Ed Meese stole while he was Atty. Gen.

Posted by Ken at December 6, 2004 05:52 PM

See this for his program and code:

www.justaflyonthewall.com/voterfraudprogram.htm

Posted by davidgmills at December 6, 2004 06:30 PM

Anyone who thinks they can divulge the truth and "let the secrets see the day of light, is going to be found dead. End of story. This Country is being run by the Bush Mafia and they will kill anyone who stands in their way of what they want. Arnold is next in line to the throne.

Posted by Judith at December 6, 2004 06:38 PM

Forty years ago,all my friends thought I was crazy in thinking that Oswald had little or nothing to do with the JFK assassination; after the Warren Report appeared with its magic bullet and other inanities, they started to agree with me. Now, now of them believe that we know what happened that day on Dealey Plaza. Let's hope we find out what happened on 11/2 a lot quicker than that.

Posted by Brian Boru at December 6, 2004 10:06 PM

My initial reaction to this story when I read it here, and then at Online Journal, was "YES! Finally!" -- and simultaneously "Oh sh!t..." I really want this to become not another of those Rathergate-type debacles (as emal also mentioned).

One worrisome thing here in the comments: davidgmills provided the URL to justaflyonthewall.com. This seems to be written by the same guy discussed in the OLJ article -- all those first-person references. *BUT* the company he worked for is there (on justaflyonthewall) identified as "Wong"; the actual name of the company, though, is "Yang." It's hard to imagine the guy himself would make such a strange mistake.

Posted by FLJerseyBoy at December 7, 2004 06:34 AM

The mistake regarding Wang vs. Yang was intentional. Apparently, flyonthewall.com is Curtis' website which has been up for awhile. Be interesting to see how long it has been up since people are wanting to know why he has waited this long to "do anything." Initially Curtis wanted to keep Yang out of it, but then was forced to give up Yang's real name.

Posted by davidgmills at December 7, 2004 10:07 AM

Interesting to see Tom Feeney's name associated with this -- because he was the guy that put false felon list Voter Purge in motion, in 1998. As Speaker of the Florida House, he snuck the enabling language into a voting reform bill, in August of that year. No one knew anything about it -- except for Feeney, Jeb, and Unka Karl.

Posted by ck at December 7, 2004 12:55 PM

Interesting to see Tom Feeney's name associated with this -- because he was the guy that put false felon list Voter Purge in motion, in 1998. As Speaker of the Florida House, he snuck the enabling language into a voting reform bill, in August of that year. No one knew anything about it -- except for Feeney, Jeb, and Unka Karl.

Posted by ck at December 7, 2004 12:56 PM

you all need to go here to get up to date info on this:
Brad Blog Overflow

Posted by anonymous at December 8, 2004 02:29 AM

I am a computer programmer who is well versed in the elements of vote fraud and hacking. I also wrote a book exposing fraud in an election in Chicago in 1999. As believable as it seems when looking atthis document, I believe Clint Curtis' story lacks credibility for the following reasons:

* Curtis has a preexisting political axe to grind against Feeney and other Republicans in Florida. He has operated a Web site against Republicans for some time.
* Curtis does not have the original program - only a later mockup of what he claims to have written. Significantly, he has filled the data with a "Bush vs. Kerry" race, adding weight to the idea that he has a political axe to grind against Republicans. (Why didn't he use the labels from the original program?)
* Curtis does not explain why he is coming out with this information only now, when if it were true it would have been crucial for him to air it many months ago when he was battling Feeney publicly. If he truly had this information then, it would have been even more important than his allegations against Feeney at the time.

This last point is probably the most damning. In perspective, a vote-rigging scandal would be a far more important comment against Feeney than his other conflicts of interest, and Curtis could have - and should have - exposed it then. That he didn't suggests that he may well have fabricated this. Added to the other points above, it seems that unless Curtis can provide explanations for these questions, we should be very wary about his claims.

I'm a lifelong Democrat, by the way. I would be happy to know that Clint Curtis's claims were true, but in the absence of further proof, I am assuming it to be false.

Posted by Peter Zelchenko at December 8, 2004 12:15 PM