Evidence of an election stolen in California

John Fitzgerald ran for mayor of Martinez, California (in Contra Costa County), and lost.

Or so they say. Fitzgerald’s defeat was highly dubious.

This matters greatly, not just for the people of Martinez but for all the rest of us–because the chances are that some (at least) or the GOP’s “wins” yesterday were bogus. After all, they’ve stolen many an election in the past, and most Americans either cast their votes on, or had their ballots counted by, a wholly faith-based voting system.

But everybody out there–especially progressives–seems interested only in assigning blame for the Republicans’ (apparent) sweep. Now, the Democrats in general, and Obama in particular, do certainly deserve a lot of blame for selling out the millions of Americans who’d voted for them two years earlier. But all that is beside the point, if those Republicans were not elected to the House, but stole it.

So we should take a hard look at those victories by the GOP, before conceding that the latter actually prevailed.

Let’s start, then, by checking out this summary of the Fitzagerald campaign’s evidence that the mayoral race in Martinez, CA, was not legitimately won.


——– Original Message ——–

Subject: Election Fraud? Missing Votes?
Date: Wed, 03 Nov 2010 11:15:26 -0700
From: John Fitzgerald NEW Democrat for Congress
To: Mark

According to the “official results,” John Fitzgerald lost the election for Mayor of Martinez.  We suspect election fraud.  Here’s why:

1.  The number of votes cast for Mayor in the past 2 Mayoral elections were approximately 12,000 and 11,700, respectively.  And yet, this election there were less than 8,000 votes cast for Mayor, despite a record turnout?!  The number of votes cast for City Council were nearly identical for those past 2 elections compared with this election.  So, somehow nearly 4,000 votes for Mayor just disappeared?!

2.  Our 2 exit polls differ dramatically from the “official results.”  One poll taken citywide by our roving pollster from 10am to 5pm found a consistent 7:1 ratio of Fitzgerald over Schroder.  Another poll taken outside City Hall polling station from 6-8pm found a ratio of 1.4:1 Schroder over Fitzgerald.  And yet the “official results” from every precinct showed a consistent 3:1 ratio of votes for Schroder over Fitzgerald.  This is statistically implausible.

3.  Eyewitness reports to our team of –

— Ballot boxes being illegally removed from the Elections Building (of which reports to the City Clerk were met with indifference)

— A conversation overhead between election workers that the scanner had broken down and “ we will learn the real election results”

4.  During election observer training county officials tried to reassure our team that the vote was secured because there would always be a visible seal on the red bags which contain the memory cards. Yet, when our team members observed missing seals on the bags and attempted to report it, the County Clerk – right there on the scene – was indifferent and dismissive.   Isn’t that election fraud?

5.  The election machines and data are stored and processed inside a building owned by a real estate developer who has a vested interest in the outcome of this election.  This is a conflict of interest.

6.  There were signs for candidates posted within 100-ft of several polling stations in violation of State election codes.  Our team members complained to the polling officials to have them removed.  When we reported this to the County Clerk, he was sympathetic, but toothlessly acquiescent.

7.  The law requires the voting results to be posted on a paper tape outside each polling station.  The Unified School District office polling station had no paper tape posted outside.  When we reported this to the County Clerk, he was sympathetic, but toothlessly acquiescent.

We have videotape of much of this and will be posting a report on our website.  Meanwhile, we are pursuing election fraud investigation through the California Secretary of State’s office.  And we are assembling a coalition of other candidates whose votes may also have been stolen to fight for a recount and/or a complete hand count of the ballots.

Stay tuned folks, the election is not over yet!

Joel Kohn

campaign volunteer

1 reply on “Evidence of an election stolen in California”

I remember in both 2000 and 2004 watching the exit polls and the surreal events that followed when results didn’t match the polls. How is it that exit polling, which has a certain margin of error and as far as I can tell has always been boringly accurate, could be so different for no apparent reason?

It sounds like Fitzgerald has good reasons for his belief the election was stolen. In particular the business about election equipment and data being stored in a building owned by someone with a stake in the election.

That should not be allowed to happen.
Also the number of votes for mayor, if the turnout was record, doesn’t make sense. From the replies I’ve read on your other article, no one has answered these questions, but whatsername sure had time to insult you in various ways. That doesn’t say much for integrity imo. Very unprofessional.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.