Diebold tampered with 2002 elections - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Rekna · 07-21-2008, 04:16 PM

It looks like Diebold likely tampered with the 2002 elections and effected multiple races. Specifically it likely switched the results of a governor and a senator both toward the GOP. The Justice department has known this for a while now and has refused to even look into it. Also this isn't coming from loonies on the left, this is coming from a right-wing cyber security expert who was a former Mc'cain advisor!

The Raw Story | GOP cyber-security expert suggests Diebold tampered with 2002 election

Quote:

GOP cyber-security expert suggests Diebold tampered with 2002 election

A leading cyber-security expert and former adviser to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) says he has fresh evidence regarding election fraud on Diebold electronic voting machines during the 2002 Georgia gubernatorial and senatorial elections.

Stephen Spoonamore is the founder and until recently the CEO of Cybrinth LLC, an information technology policy and security firm that serves Fortune 100 companies. At a little noticed press conference in Columbus, Ohio Thursday, he discussed his investigation of a computer patch that was applied to Diebold Election Systems voting machines in Georgia right before that state's November 2002 election.

Spoonamore is one of the most prominent cyber-security experts in the country. He has appeared on CNN's Lou Dobbs and ABC's World News Tonight, and has security clearances from his work with the intelligence community and other government agencies, as well as the Department of Defense, and is one of the world’s leading authorities on hacking and cyber-espionage.

In 1995, Spoonamore received a civilian citation for his work with the Department of Defense. He was again recognized for his contributions in 2004 by the Department of Homeland Security. Spoonamore is also a registered Republican and until recently was advising the McCain campaign.

Spoonamore received the Diebold patch from a whistleblower close to the office of Cathy Cox, Georgia’s then-Secretary of State. In discussions with RAW STORY, the whistleblower -- who wishes to remain anonymous for fear of retaliation -- said that he became suspicious of Diebold's actions in Georgia for two reasons. The first red flag went up when the computer patch was installed in person by Diebold CEO Bob Urosevich, who flew in from Texas and applied it in just two counties, DeKalb and Fulton, both Democratic strongholds. The source states that Cox was not privy to these changes until after the election and that she became particularly concerned over the patch being installed in just those two counties.

The whistleblower said another flag went up when it became apparent that the patch installed by Urosevich had failed to fix a problem with the computer clock, which employees from Diebold and the Georgia Secretary of State’s office had been told the patch was designed specifically to address.

Some critics of electronic voting raised questions about the 2002 Georgia race even at the time. Incumbent Democratic Sen. Max Cleland, who was five percentage points ahead of Republican challenger Saxby Chambliss in polls taken a week before the vote, lost 53% to 46%. Incumbent Democratic Governor Roy Barnes, who led challenger Sonny Perdue in the polls by eleven points, lost 51% to 46%. However, because the Diebold machines used throughout the state provided no paper trail, it was impossible to ask for a recount in either case.

Concerned by the electoral outcome, the whistleblower approached Spoonamore because of his qualifications and asked him to examine the Diebold patch.

McCain adviser reported patch to Justice Department

The Ohio press conference was organized by Cliff Arnebeck and three other attorneys, who had filed a challenge to the results of that the 2004 presidential election in Ohio in December, 2004. That challenge was withdrawn, but in August 2006 Arnebeck filed a new case, King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood Association v. Blackwell, alleging civil rights violations in the 2004 voting. The case was stayed in 2007. On Thursday, Arnebeck filed a motion to remove the stay and allow fresh investigation.

Individuals close to Arnebeck's office said Spoonamore confirmed that the patch included nothing to repair a clock problem. Instead, he identified two parallel programs, both having the full software code and even the same audio instructions for the deaf. Spoonamore said he could not understand the need for a second copy of the exact same program -- and without access to the machine for which the patch was designed, he could not learn more. Instead, he said he took the evidence to the Cyber-Security Division of the Department of Justice and reported the series of events to authorities. The Justice Department has not yet acted on his report.
Allegations surrounding Ohio in 2004

At the Ohio press conference yesterday, the former McCain adviser said Michael Connell, of the Republican Internet development firm New Media Communications, had designed a system that made possible the real-time "tuning" of election tabulators once Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell had outsourced the hosting of vote counting on the same server which hosted GOP campaign IT systems. He said he didn't believe Connell was behind the alleged fraud, but that he should be considered a key witness.

Spoonamore also confirmed he's working with Connell on overseas election issues and that Connell is now working as John McCain's IT developer.

Connell has a long history with the Republican Party's IT infrastructure. In 2001, for example, he set up MajorityWhip.gov for then House Majority Whip Tom DeLay. He also helped built georgewbush.com, as well as the Ohio GOP site Spoonamore referenced.

Sources close to Spoonamore said he was very concerned that he would lose his contracts as a result of coming forward and would take a "large financial hit." These sources added that, despite his concerns, Spoonamore felt obligated to reveal what he knows to the public. "He felt he had no choice as an American citizen but to come forward, and he also knows the likely consequences of him doing so," one source said.

djtestudo · 07-21-2008, 05:21 PM

This is why this Republican wants electronic voting with a paper trail.

And, interestingly enough, the Democratic majority in my state is the one fighting all attempts to repair the system in Maryland by replacing Diebold or adding paper trails. So I think it probably has to do more with keeping the people paying for the machines in power.

Willravel · 07-21-2008, 05:25 PM

Wasn't there evidence of this in 2004 and 2006 as well? Maybe I forgot to post it.

dc_dux · 07-21-2008, 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djtestudo

This is why this Republican wants electronic voting with a paper trail.

And, interestingly enough, the Democratic majority in my state is the one fighting all attempts to repair the system in Maryland by replacing Diebold or adding paper trails. So I think it probably has to do more with keeping the people paying for the machines in power.

In fact, the Republicans proposed one weak bill in 2002 and have repeatedly blocked a much more comprehensive bill that had bi-partisan support snce 2003....first, they blocked the the “Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act in 2005, 2005 and 2006, and most recently,the Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008.

Quote:

Voting rights activists who hoped the federal government would help local governments pay for paper trails and audits for electronic voting machines have gone from elation to frustration as they watched Republicans who supported such a proposal in committee vote against bringing it to the House floor.

When New Jersey Democratic Rep. Rush Holt’s Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act came up for a vote in the House Administration Committee on April 2, the Republicans on the committee gave it their unanimous support. But two weeks later, those same Republican members voted against moving the bill to the House floor. It would have taken a two-thirds vote to push the bill to the floor; with most House Republicans opposed, the bill didn’t make it that far.

In May 2003, Holt proposed the Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act. That bill would have mandated a paper trail for voting machines so that voters could verify their vote and a recount could be performed, if necessary. The measure faced conservative objections on states’ rights grounds and failed to make much headway....

...So Holt introduced his new bill in January. Under the Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act, the federal government would help localities switch to paper ballots or attach printers to their electronic voting machines in time for the November elections. To overcome states’ rights objections, Holt crafted the bill as an opt-in: Nobody would be required to switch technologies or conduct audits, but federal funding would be available to offset costs for those who did....

But Holt’s bill hit a snag on April 15 when the White House put out a statement of opposition on the grounds that it was unnecessary to spend the money appropriated in the bill when funding could come instead from the Help America Vote Act.(which, btw, was false)

... Republicans say it was the bill’s cost, not the White House’s opposition, that caused them to change their votes. “The version that passed committee on April 2 did not authorize a specific dollar amount,” said Salley Collins, a spokeswoman for Republicans on the Administration Committee. “We didn’t receive the [Congressional Budget Office] score until the 14th of April, one day before it went to the floor. … So we did not know that the proposed legislation would cost $685 million — $50 million more than Holt’s first version.”

GOP objects to bill allowing recounts - Ben Adler - Politico.com

djtestudo · 07-21-2008, 08:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

In fact, the Republicans proposed one weak bill in 2002 and have repeatedly blocked a much more comprehensive bill that had bi-partisan support snce 2003....first, they blocked the the “Voter Confidence and Increased Accessibility Act in 2005, 2005 and 2006, and most recently,the Emergency Assistance for Secure Elections Act of 2008.

As I said...keeping the buyers in power.

Rekna · 07-22-2008, 11:33 AM

I can't believe no one really cares that this happened. If diebold truly changed the results of an election then that should be considered treason and they should be dealt with accordingly...

Willravel · 07-22-2008, 11:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rekna

I can't believe no one really cares that this happened. If diebold truly changed the results of an election then that should be considered treason and they should be dealt with accordingly...

I don't think you're talking about throwing them a party...

If the elections were stolen (I believe they were), then there should be lengthy and transparent (public, for the sake of making sure that the investigators are honest) investigations. If the investigations provide evidence, then that evidence should be gathered and the responsible parties should be prosecuted.

Rekna · 07-22-2008, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Willravel

I don't think you're talking about throwing them a party...

If the elections were stolen (I believe they were), then there should be lengthy and transparent (public, for the sake of making sure that the investigators are honest) investigations. If the investigations provide evidence, then that evidence should be gathered and the responsible parties should be prosecuted.

would you agree with me that election tampering should amount to high treason?

hiredgun · 07-23-2008, 04:28 AM

If the allegations of the whistleblower are true, they are utterly damning.

The CEO should not be applying patches personally. He should not be doing it to only two machines our of many hundreds or thousands. And they aren't done piecemeal in this way at the last minute, in a way that doesn't address the problem they are meant to address. No competent IT organization functions in this way. It absolutely stinks. The only out here is if the whistleblower is wrong. I truly hope that is the case.

07-21-2008, 05:21 PM	#2 (permalink)
djtestudo Baltimoron Location: Beeeeeautiful Bel Air, MD	This is why this Republican wants electronic voting with a paper trail. And, interestingly enough, the Democratic majority in my state is the one fighting all attempts to repair the system in Maryland by replacing Diebold or adding paper trails. So I think it probably has to do more with keeping the people paying for the machines in power. __________________ "Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen." --Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

07-21-2008, 05:25 PM	#3 (permalink)
Willravel ... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.	Wasn't there evidence of this in 2004 and 2006 as well? Maybe I forgot to post it.

07-22-2008, 11:33 AM	#6 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	I can't believe no one really cares that this happened. If diebold truly changed the results of an election then that should be considered treason and they should be dealt with accordingly...

07-23-2008, 04:28 AM	#9 (permalink)
hiredgun Addict	If the allegations of the whistleblower are true, they are utterly damning. The CEO should not be applying patches personally. He should not be doing it to only two machines our of many hundreds or thousands. And they aren't done piecemeal in this way at the last minute, in a way that doesn't address the problem they are meant to address. No competent IT organization functions in this way. It absolutely stinks. The only out here is if the whistleblower is wrong. I truly hope that is the case.