9/21/15 Update -- Kansas mathematician Beth Clarkson has a lawyer and a discovery hearing

[sketchy]

link to her newsletter:
http://us11.campaign-archive1.com/?u=aa64e1b3819716e3e24805728&id=71af0bfd72


from her post:

I have a lawyer and a discovery hearing!
http://showmethevotes.org/2015/09/22/news-on-the-lawsuit-i-have-a-lawyer-and-a-discovery-hearing-date/

I was able to discuss my case with several lawyers over the past few months. My thanks to everyone who has offered their support. Randy Rathbun of Depew Gillen Rathbun & McInteer, LC, http://www.depewgillen.com/ offered his services pro bono. He had a number of admirable qualities, but the one most important to me was his attitude that my goal of getting access to those records was attainable. He’s also a local attorney and a fellow Sedgwick County voter.


I was able to speak with the Sedgwick County Courthouse regarding scheduling of a discovery hearing. It's to be at 1:00 October 19th. My understanding is that this is a short (~15 min) hearing to determine the amount of time needed to schedule a trial. I don't know more than that, but I'm grateful to have legal counsel arranged before this occurs.
I'm scheduled to be on the Radio Sunday, Sept. 27th.

"Keep Hope Alive Radio Show with Jesse Jackson"
http://www.keephopealiveradio.com/

[randys1]

1. And as I did on the other thread

The voting machines that Sedgwick County uses have a paper record of the votes, known as Real Time Voting Machine Paper Tapes, which similar machines in Kansas and around the country do not have. Because the software is proprietary, even elections officials can’t examine it and postelection audits can’t be done, according to Pamela Smith, president of Verified Voting Foundation, a nonprofit agency whose mission is to safeguard elections in the digital age.

Clarkson asked Sedgwick County to do a recount in 2013 but the time to file had expired. She then filed an open records request, but officials refused to provide the requested documents. She filed a lawsuit but the judge said the paper records were ballots, even though they didn’t identify the voter, and thus were not subject to the state’s open records law.

https://boingboing.net/2015/08/10/kansas-officials-stonewall-mat.html

This is VERY important.

Remember, GOP always, ALWAYS steals elections or tries to.

[SusanCalvin]

16. Proprietary software + voting =

[Omaha Steve]

2. Thanks for posting

K&R!

OS

[sketchy]

3. You're very welcome!

[Vincardog]

4. Thanks for posting and fighting the good fight. Best of luck with the trial.

[madamvlb]

5. fingers crossed for you.

[ish of the hammer]

6. good on you!

I want to go back to paper ballots!!!

[Marty McGraw]

11. Being able to vote on line

receiving an electronic watermarked (or barcode type) receipt that can be backed by screen cap'ng or print followed by an always active interactive map (or a secure kmz download) that one can go back to and access with their very own pin # that shows the household and the individual's vote cast for the selected year would not be something that would be inconceivable or set up in a fashion that would prove even more dependable than paper ballot voting would be.

[questionseverything]

13. really bad idea

no chain of custody

no oversight by citizens

not to mention the possibility of hacking

[Marty McGraw]

15. hmmm..

doesn't convince me. There have been very secure ways of transacting, reception of key-codes and time allotment privileges in place for decades now. And one can obtain a proof of receipt that can be accessed anywhere and anytime when called into question.

paper ballots can be easily manipulated. Both depend on what safeguards are in place beforehand and what interests are at their handling.

Just because the only reference we have to it now comes from a bunch of twisted cronied private industries that lose all means of redressing any inconsistencies. doesn't mean that there can never be full-proof means put in place.

It has been many times prior for other areas of our life.

[SusanCalvin]

17. No.

The only place computers should be involved is with the webcams that document the hand-counting process. At the precinct level. Results posted on the door (and photographed) before the ballots leave.

[questionseverything]

20. thank you susan

any system that involves special expertise to maintain citizen oversight is undemocratic

inevitably some 1%er will gain control over that system and then just like in this article we are discussing, refuse to show the data behind results resulting in sham elections

[questionseverything]

21. the proof of receipt cracks me up

what good would that do unless every voter in precinct brought their hard copy proof of receipt together and hand counted them?

and that is assuming the receipt you see is what the program counts

democracy demands citizen oversight,there is just no way around it

http://fatallyflawedelections.blogspot.com/

http://www.sweetremedy.tv/fatallyflawed/media/RTA_Fraud_Flyer_3_7_12.pdf

last link is the best documented theft of an election i know of

[SusanCalvin]

22. "and that is assuming the receipt you see is what the program counts"

Exactly.

[Marty McGraw]

23. There are dumpster loads

of election fraud as well with the paper side of the electoral process. Just because big monied interests arrived to the punch bowl first does not mean that a process can never be made to do the right thing by the public's need. Idealistic, yeah. But then again, so is any other process as well.

[questionseverything]

24. you are suggesting a system where insiders with a high level of special expertise

would control output

that is really what we have now and it is undemocratic

you are advocating for a "trust me system"

the reason the paper system has not worked out so far is the authorities (more trust us advocates) will not allow "we the people" to count the paper

thanx for reminding me to kick this thread

[Marty McGraw]

25. Yes, very kickable thread

Beth Clarkson's efforts are remarkable to stand up for what is just and shedding light on electoral corruption.

I believe any system put in place can be made to ensure the proper type and amount of oversight needed for fairness. One system, though can be set up with ample redundancies for verifying while the other type seems old-fashioned and gives ample time to hide any wrong doing. Digital records are next to impossible to destroy if the data is allowed to disseminate widely can be and can be made to do so as well as to safeguard personal information to the extent that any top of the line security can achieve. It's not like we have not been doing similar activities on line for over a few decades now.

I understand and appreciate where you are coming from, but it's just speculative to believe one method out does the other in the anti-corruption realm. One method, though would allow for more 'eyes' for oversight if just done w/o risking one's personal information.

[questionseverything]

27. paper ballots counted at the precinct

in full view and live streamed would mean every voter could oversee the process thus i win the more eyes argument

digital records are the problem,hard copy disseminated widely is the solution

http://bradblog.com/?p=7875

read the link above, the machines produce output, the spreadsheets change the output and no one claims to have a clue as to why

since the mid 60s and the introduction of electronic voting,counting and reporting of output we have experienced the "red shift", it is the special expertise necessary to understand the output that has gotten us to this point, it is non transparent and elected officials and 1%er corporation are fighting to keep that wall between citizens and democracy

you are advocating for more of what beth is fighting

[Marty McGraw]

28. why wouldn't

having proof of every vote at the calling whenever one needs it on hand be a bad thing? Recorded both prior to and post counting to ensure no shifting occurs and to prove one against the other if any of that shifting were to take place. The only verification I have now is a little stub saying 'I voted' and a glimmer of hope that my mail-in ever makes it to it's intended destination and gets counted correctly (really hard for a camera to pick up on that). And more states are opting toward mail-in voting now. I have also spent many years showing up to vote at the local precinct as well and still just have that silly little stub to ensure that everything will be alright.

This has nothing to do with those lousy diebold units that were put in place by the Con Crony Network and knock-offs by the same ilk. Monied interests established themselves First and payed off the elected crooks to allow them exclusive access to that arena.

Both ways of doing it just suffer from the same affliction - Exclusive Access. And either way does just fine once that is out of the way.

Cameras are on those stupid bouncy balls with the Lottery shams as well. Doesn't validate any authenticity to that stage prop in my belief neither.

[questionseverything]

29. did you not read the monroe county link?

shifting occurs all the time and nothing is done about it....

heck look at the seigleman case where he went to bed thinking he had won his re election and overnight a little shifting occurred and when he woke up he had "lost"

maybe if we hadn't already been ripped off for the last 4 plus decades, but we have

unless i am misunderstanding you, each individual voter would be able to check how their vote was "supposedly" recorded...unless they all come together at the precinct and count themselves together nothing would change

the humbolt county project we fought for in the az rta case where each ballot is photographed and posted online so anyone could count them would be a step in the right direction but after 7 years in court we have not been allowed that perspective relief

precincts should be smaller so hand counting is easier and faster,it should be live streamed for transparency but you argue that fraud could still occur and of course it is possible....the 6-10 citizens(from both parties) could all decide together to rig that precinct and somehow create the illusion for the live stream that they were counting accurately butttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt

the difference is they could only affect one precinct that way, as it is now with electronic voting,counting and reporting a pre determine result is programmed in and 10s of thousands of votes can be switched electronically, voting on the net would only make that easier

[Marty McGraw]

30. But like in Wisconsin

All the Fluff & Frill doesn't amount to crap if the precinct tally never gets registered because the 'ever inclusive transparent paper ballot voting' method becomes 'mis-handled' by a crony shill fraudulently placed into a state govt. position to oversee the public good to her choosing.

http://www.aflcio.org/Blog/In-The-States/Found-Votes-Tip-Wisconsin-Court-Race-to-Walker-Ally

A simple search brings up so much more fraudulent activities that have been going on throughout the eons with paper ballots and is nothing new.

Is it okay that your view on this matter does not change my mind? It won't bother me about yours, I promise.

[questionseverything]

31. i am thrilled someone cares enough to debate

wisconsin and waukesha bring up a very important point

nichols should of had to report what her spreadsheet consisted of in advance of election day (her list of precincts or reporting units) and she should of had to show that spreadsheet as she was entering numbers instead she presented the output of her spreadsheet on election night and then later changed the output (with a clever electronic glitch story to provide cover)

but the fraud was not because of paper ballots, the fraud was because a secure chain of custody was not in place and because citizen oversight was not strong enough

http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8511

[sketchy]

7. Thank you to many kind posters for their words of encouragement, but it should go to Beth Clarkson

She would very much appreciate it, I'm sure!

[Ford_Prefect]

8. Whatever you do stay away from small aircraft.

[SusanCalvin]

18. Yep. nt

[malaise]

9. This should have 500 recs

Rec

[JackHughes]

10. Voting records will be destroyed

There will be no discovery. Those voting records will be destroyed before an independent examination ever occurs.

Republican election officials will "take one for the team," i.e., contempt of court and destruction of public records convictions, but they will never allow evidence of their election theft to be confirmed.

That would remove suspicion of widespread Republican election theft from the realm of "conspiracy theory" into "fact" and finally force election safeguards for ballot integrity.

In other words, it would be the end of the Republican Party -- and they know it.

[Dustlawyer]

12. I would say this is likely, but by no means for sure. Its been my experience that when you have a

conspiracy of several people, many of which didn't start out to do anything illegal, but got sucked in after the others did the crime, some of those people keep backup and turn over the documents. Also, if the conspiracy is big enough you will always have what we in our office call, "Deep Throats," who usually can contribute a piece of the puzzle.

I hope they get the evidence they need to take down the Kansas Secretary of State, Chris Dumbass, or whatever his name is. I truly believe that he is dirty and would stop at nothing to win for Republicans and himself. He has been a national leader in the spread of the shortened early voting hours, reducing the number of voting machines etc. Might as well call him Turd Blossom II after Carl Rove's nickname that Bush gave him.

[sketchy]

14. Your comments ring true to me

Many people are well-meaning and honest, and they undermine the plans of those who want to cheat.

[SusanCalvin]

19. And we salute them.

[Ilsa]

26. Good. It's long past time to shed light on

The voting crooks looking to steal democracy.