Analysis shows how those extra votes appeared, and it turns out to be a programming goof by the vote-riggers!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discu...dress=203x48519

I sent this ugly information into a real Judge, Bev H., Keith O and one other investigator.....

I hope they really look at everything. I am still holding out for our President Kerry. :D

I saw this. What amazes me about those who are quick to denounce that fraud occurred is they basically look at the numbers and say, yup Bush got more votes. If my watch is running fast, gaining 5-minutes every hour, does that mean in 12 hours a whole day has pasted? It's that simple--the machines are the problem and the Bushies are the liar who rigged them.

AKA: This is a financial auditors worst nightmare. Even if there was only 20 hackers involved, the amount of malfunctions of these machines prove they should be impounded, removed, their company officials jailed and a full scale IRS investigation into their money laundering. Just like ENRON who thought they beat it

Good, there needs to be no financial gain from our election process. That is one of the huge problems here!

Oops! Edited.

What do you think the chances are that any of these hackers would come forward to confirm the fraud???? Would a whistle-blower get amunity????

I sent a letter to whiteknight asking for him to E-mail us with any proof or findings. I hope he does. I also sent his letter to my cousin who is also a computer whiz but pro-Bush. I would be very much interested to see any challenges my cousin gives whiteknight. I hope whiteknight gives him a run for his money. I will post anything I get back from either one of them.

Here is something I posted on the JK Forum on Aug. 2nd. The concept behind what happened is not a new idea...

Post #9


Advanced Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1088
Joined: 26-February 04
Member No.: 9198




There's been a lot of propaganda by the proponents of the electronic voting machines that they have been tested and retested to detect any flaws in the software that might cause an erroneous vote count.
But, say the software is set that at a specific time before the polls close, or even at random periods during the time the polls are open, a bias is activated that adds or subtracts to the vote count for a given candidate. Unless the clock on the voting machine were set to the exact time the error was set to occur it would not be detected during independent testing. Since the software source code is not available to be inspected by independent reviewers, it would be a trivial exercise for a competent programmer to implement such a function. Small changes in vote count can be implemented randomly so that there would not be a spike in the count that might attract attention. A few votes in a few key races can shift the whole balance of power. We witnessed it in 2000.
Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.
Wee need a fair election.

Just a thought. <_< <_<

It depends on the hacker. If it's your typical anti-social smartass hacking in from the outside, he's probably already bragged about it on some subforum somewhere. If you're talking about pre-programmed fraud, that's another story.