From the Brad Blog:
Fed Court Upholds Volusia County Decision to NOT Use Diebold Touchscreen Voting Machines
Florida County at Center of Battle Between Several Disabled Rights Groups
Emergency Appeal Filed by Group Who Received $1 Million Donation from Diebold
The BRAD BLOG has learned, a Federal District Court has ruled against the National Federation for the Blind (NFB) who had filed suit against Volusia County, Florida earlier this month to force the county to use paperless Electronic Voting Machines in the upcoming fall elections there.
The NFB has decided late in the day to file an emergency appeal to that Federal District Court decision.
From Liz Rich: My friend, Joel Pescoff wrote this comment about Andy and his torturers.
This is very disturbing to say the least.
I also see several crimes committed. Obviously, harassment but also the act of intentionally denying that they made certain credit card charges is a Title 18 USC violation – banking fraud. If they misrepresented themselves, it is another federal violation.
I suggest getting this story in the MSM. Bob Herbert, from the Times likes to write stories that center on an individual. He may be interested.
One should also try to get law enforcement involved. If it gets in the MSM, it may be easier.
From R. Miller:
Beyond despicable…when will the outrage meter be blown beyond repair?
When we were attacked, Paris said “We are all Americans.”
Now, Fox News is wishing Paris were attacked and “who’d care?”
Fox News host John Gibson stated one day before the attacks that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) “missed a golden opportunity” when it awarded the 2012 Olympic Games to London because if France had been selected to host the games, terrorists would “blow up Paris, and who cares?” Following the London attacks, Gibson reiterated that the IOC should have selected Paris instead of London because the British should “let somebody else be worried about guys with backpack bombs for a while.”
From the July 6 broadcast of Westwood One’s The Radio Factor with Bill O’Reilly, guest-hosted by Gibson:
GIBSON: By the way, just wanted to tell you people, we missed — the International Olympic Committee missed a golden opportunity today. If they had picked France, if they had picked France instead of London, to hold the Olympics, it would have been the one time we could look forward to where we didn’t worry about terrorism. They’d blow up Paris, and who cares?
From the “My Word” segment of the July 7 edition of Fox News’ The Big Story With John Gibson:
GIBSON: The bombings in London: This is why I thought the Brits should let the
French have the Olympics — let somebody else be worried about guys with backpack bombs for a while.
From David Corn:
Here’s more from me on Rove and the CIA leak case. And on the mystery of Time’s missing source(s).
More Trouble for Rove in CIA Leak Case?
July 7, 2005
What happened on Wednesday in Courtroom 8 at the federal district courthouse in Washington, DC, gave rise to more questions than answers about the shrouded-in-secrecy Plame/CIA leak investigation. But those questions may not be good for Karl Rove.
The most dramatic moment of the hour-plus hearing was when federal District Court Judge Thomas Hogan ordered New York Times reporter Judith Miller to jail for failing to reveal a source to special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald, who has been trying to find out which Bush administration officials outed undercover CIA officer Valerie Plame, the wife of former Ambassador Joseph Wilson, a critic of the Bush White House. Conservative columnist Bob Novak first published the leak in a July 14, 2003 article that cited “two senior administration officials.” Three days later, Time magazine posted a piece cowritten by Cooper that noted that “government officials” had told Time about Valerie Wilson’s employment at the CIA. Miller wrote no article on this matter but apparently she talked to at least one source about it. Her decision to honor her pledge of confidentiality to her source and resist a court order might have afforded her source–whoever that might be–a measure of protection. But minutes earlier, Cooper–who had also been held in civil contempt for not cooperating with Fitzgerald–made a dramatic statement that could lead to trouble for a source he had previously protected, and that source might be Rove.
UIC Prof’s Statistical Analysis Casts Doubt on ’04 Election Result
July 4, 2005
By Gigi Wasz
Gazette news magazine, Chicago
A University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) professor recently issued a report calling into question the results of the 2004 presidential election.
In the 30-plus page report, Ron Baiman, PhD, of UIC’s Institute of Government and Public Affairs, along with eleven other colleagues from other prestigious universities, applied quantitative data to explain the discrepancy between exit poll projections and votes actually recorded in the November election and to understand the analysis given by Edison Media Research & Mitofsky International (E/M), the pollster of record for the national election.
E/M’s poll projections predicted a win for Democrat John Kerry by 3%, however, when votes were tallied, Republican President George W. Bush was given the win by 2.5%-the largest discrepancy in the poll’s history. In its post-election analysis and report, E/M discredited its own poll projections, claiming the official vote was not corrupted and that “Kerry voters were more amenable to completing the poll questionnaire than Bush voters.”
“Using their (E/M’s) data tables, we demonstrated that their hypothesis of outspoken Kerry supporters is implausible,” explained Baiman. “If the polls were faulty because Bush voters were shy in the presence of Kerry voters and less likely to cooperate with pollsters, the polls should be the most accurate in the precincts where Bush voters were in the overwhelming majority and where exit poll participation was also at its maximum. What we find is just the opposite. In fact, the mean exit poll discrepancy was dramatically higher in Bush strongholds than in Kerry strongholds.”