The Truth About the 2004 Election
Why we must not get over it

This slide show is an excellent summary of the fraud that took place in the 2004 election.

• These two documents show quite plainly why electronic voting machines are bad news. They explain the myriad of documented problems with electronic voting machines - from lost votes, vote switching, incorrect ballots, screen freezes, counting backwards, and much more.
• There are two documents available - the 14 page document is a focus on electronic voting machine malfunctions. The 70 page document thoroughly covers the issue of electronic voting.
• These documents are very informative to anyone interested in electronic voting. They are also designed to be useful for election officials who make decisions about purchasing voting equipment. People are encouraged to give them (particularly the 70 paged version) to their election officials and their legislators. The facts presented in this document dispel many of the myths surrounding electronic voting. Subjects include:
  • Myths about Testing and Certification
  • Voting System Costs
  • Myths about Electronic Voting and the Disabled

This book is a must read for anyone who wants to learn the ins and outs of computerized voting systems. You will learn about the companies behind the machines, the technologies used, how insecure the systems are, and much more.

This PDF copy is available on this CD and also can be downloaded for free on the internet at BlackBoxVoting.org. If you really want to sit down and read it, we recommend purchasing a hard copy, which is available on Amazon.com here.

Each chapter is a separate file. The Table of Contents is included in Chapter 1.

• Status Report of the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff, January 5, 2005.
• 102 pages, with photos
• Excerpt: "We have found numerous, serious election irregularities in the Ohio presidential election, which resulted in a significant disenfranchisement of voters. Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousand of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards."

• Published by US Count Votes' National Election Data Archive Project

• The next time you hear someone say that "some conspiracy nuts think the election was stolen" show them this report. It is signed by a consortium of PhD's and statistical experts. It states clearly that the National Exit Poll showed Kerry winning the popular vote by 3% (not to mention a 94 electoral vote commanding lead). Could this have happened simply because of random errors in the exit poll? The consortium of experts have an answer: NO.

  Their conclusion:

  "The absence of any statistically-plausible explanation for the discrepancy between exit poll data and the official presidential vote tally is an unanswered question of vital national importance that demands a thorough and unflinching investigation."

• Published by the Free Press
• 15 pages, with illustrations
• One of the main reasons people have been reluctant to fight election fraud this time around is the supposed 3 million vote victory that Bush had nationally. But considering that they own the vote counting, no margin of victory should stop people from investigating the facts, especially when the exit polls clearly show Kerry winning, both in the national popular vote and the Electoral College.
• This research document covers the discrepancy between the national exit poll and the "official" popular vote.

If you're starting to get discouraged, read this section. Finally some sanity!

The report, summarizes the results of a detailed study of the general election in Snohomish County, Washington, by Paul R. Lehto, Attorney at Law, and Dr. Jeffrey Hoffman, Ph.D. Based on weeks of work, during which they pored over thousands of documents obtained in open records requests from Snohomish County, the report covers the statistical, circumstantial and eyewitness testimony showing that observed electronic voting malfunctions were not party-neutral nor were they candidate-neutral; instead, they helped just one side.

The lawsuit, filed by Paul Lehto and John Wells, seeks to void the contract between the count and Sequoia Voting Systems not only because of corporate control of elections, but because the particular type of electronic voting regime instituted creates secret vote counting while simultaneously destroying the checks and balances of elections. Note: by the simple act of deploying electronic voting machines (1) the voter’s ability to observe and verify her own vote is eliminated (2) the public and the political parties’ rights to observe vote counting is eliminated (3) appeals to election boards in case of doubtful ballots is eliminated and (4) meaningful recounts are eliminated. The reason these contracts are all illegal and void, says the lawsuit, is because they attempt to and do in fact take away the rights of the public.

If you've seen some of the videos on this CD, you've probably started to scratch your head, saying "how could this happen in a democracy like America? Aren't our elections supposed to be open to the public and the media? How can these companies count our votes in secret? Is this really happening?"

Well, you're not alone, and it turns out the people who wrote the Washington State Constitution agree with you. Two lawyers have filed a lawsuit claiming that the secret vote counting is unconstitutional. The lawsuit seeks to void the contract between Sequoia Voting Systems and Snohomish County because illegally creates secret vote counting.

Although this lawsuit only affects the county, it could have a widespread affect nationwide. Many states have similar statutes in their State Constitution. This lawsuit could bring sanity back to our democracy. Be sure to stay tuned as this lawsuit proceeds.

Updates on the lawsuit are found here: http://www.votersunite.org/info/lehtolawsuit.asp

• Abstract: "With significant U.S. federal funds now available to replace outdated punch-card and mechanical voting systems, municipalities and states throughout the U.S. are adopting paperless electronic voting systems from a number of different vendors. We present a security analysis of the source code to one such machine used in a significant share of the market. Our analysis shows that this voting system is far below even the most minimal security standards applicable in other contexts. We identify several problems including unauthorized privilege escalation, incorrect use of cryptography, vulnerabilities to network threats, and poor software development processes. We show that voters, without any insider privileges, can cast unlimited votes without being detected by any mechanisms within the voting terminal software. Furthermore, we show that even the most serious of our outsider attacks could have been discovered and executed without access to the source code. We conclude that this voting system is unsuitable for use in a general election."
• More information here.

Chuck Herrin is a Republican computer security expert who is hired by Fortune 500 companies to hack into their computer systems to detect and correct security flaws. After the 2004 election, he gave a presentation to North Carolina legislators, where he demonstrated how easy and quickly central vote tabulators can be hacked and the vote counts changed without leaving any evidence. Herrin is extremely alarmed by the use of electronic voting and tabulating in US elections.

This is the presentation he gave to the North Carolina legislators.

His website provides two demonstrations where he shows "exactly how easy it would be to break into Diebold's GEMS software, which is the software used to tabulate regional voting results. This software runs on regular Windows machines and counts the votes from multiple precincts that may have used the new voting machines or optically scanned ballots, including absentee ballots. It is responsible for the accurate reporting of tens of millions of votes cast using these different types of ballots."

• This table lists conservative estimates of the shifts in the vote margins between Bush and Kerry due to error, neglect, or fraud. These estimates are based upon precinct by precinct analysis of unofficial and/or official election results in fifteen Ohio counties accounting for 62% of the registered voters in the state.
• More information: www.northnet.org/minstrel

• These fact sheets are designed to highlight the key problems with our election system in general and the key evidence in the 2004 election
• Help spread the word! Be the media! You are encouraged to print, copy, and distribute these Facts Sheets and Flyers. Please use recycled paper when it's available. All files are PDF.