TRIAD scandal in NYT

[katinmn]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/15/politics/15ohio.html?oref=login&oref=login
Lawmaker Seeks Inquiry Into Ohio Vote
By TOM ZELLER Jr.
Published: December 15, 2004
The ranking Democratic member of the House Judiciary Committee, Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, plans to ask the Federal Bureau of Investigation and a county prosecutor in Ohio today to explore "inappropriate and likely illegal election tampering" in at least one and perhaps several Ohio counties.

The request for an investigation, made in a letter that was also provided to The New York Times, includes accounts from at least two county employees, but is based largely on a sworn affidavit provided by the Hocking County deputy director of elections, Sherole Eaton.

[acmavm]

1. FINALLY, the frigging New York Times.

.

[Just Me]

3. Ready to battle?

This is war.

Democrats for Democracy!!!

[goclark]

4. About time! I hate them all!

They will never be forgiven for hiding the fraud in this election.
NEVER!

[katinmn]

5. I think we're getting somewhere, too

I read here that AP has been doing more interviews also.

[WildClarySage]

2. smoke and mirrors?

is this a diversion from the real tampering?

[laheina]

8. It doesn't amount to very much,

nor is the information that is presented very inflammatory.

[Just Me]

9. Ahhh,...don't let the fog betray your hope.

None of us have the patent on the future,...now, do we?

Never give up,...ever.

[WildClarySage]

10. It's a start,

I just hope this wasn't a planted or manipulated event to discredit those who are pulling for the recount.

Damn, these bastards are so good at BS that I'm seeing conspiracies all over the place. Just ignore me.

[KaliTracy]

15. It was written about yesterday in Blue Lemar

http://www.bluelemur.com/index.php?p=490

[For PaisAn]

6. Finally, something in the major media

I especially liked this part:

...snip...
But Brett Rapp, the president of Triad, said that although it would be unusual for an employee to ask about a specific precinct, preparing the machines for a recount was standard procedure and was done in all 41 counties where Triad handles vote counts. He added that he welcomed any investigation.

"I've been doing this since 1985, and in all my experience this is the first time that we have had any complaints whatsoever," Mr. Rapp said.

"Preparing the machines", how convenient.
This is the first time they've had complaints because it's the first time they've been outed.

[UL_Approved]

7. Kick. n/t

[hedda_foil]

11. Triad says they ALWAYS "prepare machines" for recounts

But Brett Rapp, the president of Triad, said that although it would be unusual for an employee to ask about a specific precinct, preparing the machines for a recount was standard procedure and was done in all 41 counties where Triad handles vote counts. He added that he welcomed any investigation.

"I've been doing this since 1985, and in all my experience this is the first time that we have had any complaints whatsoever," Mr. Rapp said.

[EFerrari]

13. This is what Diebold said AFTER they had to settle with Alameda

County in California.

So, I hope some lawyer out there keeps this quote because it may turn out to be a confession.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

12. WTF?

Ok, I do software quality assurance for a living, and "preparing the machines" for a recount doesn't make any goddamn sense. Consider:

During initial vote count, machine spits out X votes for Bush, Y votes for Kerry. Total number of votes, X + Y + (nader, etc., negligible) = Z

For the moment, let's not worry about whether the machine was correct or incorrect in its initial count.

The article states that the method for the recount is to select 3% of the votes, and count them by hand and then count the same votes using the machine. If there's any discrepancy between the hand count and the machine count, then you recount everything. The problem is that if the machine has been reconfigured (say, to count votes properly) after the initial count and before the recount, you'd never know that there was a discrepancy, because you don't ever count up all the votes. You never get to look at X, Y, and Z number of votes. You look at some random sample of 3% of Z. In an election that was won by, what... 2% difference, you wouldn't even be able to determine a statistically significant discrepancy based upon this type of recount.

It makes no goddamn sense to "recalibrate" the machine, as the entire point of the fucking recount is to determine whether the machine was properly calibrated at the time of the original count. Whether or not the machine is capable of giving a proper count isn't relevant AT ALL. The only relevant information is whether it was configured properly when the original vote took place.

Anybody who knows me here on DU knows that I don't put a lot of stock in the various stolen Ohio vote theories, but this is just utter fucking nonsense. If the proper operation of the machine is in question, and it requires some sort of routine maintenance "calibration" in order to work proplery, it should be done by an outside party. Regardless of the various fraud theories, etc, the company at the very least has a vested interest in making sure it's machines are known to be accurate. It's an absolutely gross conflict of interest to have company representatives doing this work. Given the number of vote counting machines in Ohio that needed to be recalibrated, I'm guessing that the process isn't fucking rocket science, and any necessary standard maintenance on the device could be done by a third party acceptable to both the government and Triad.

Speaking of that, who the savage sam hill hell names a voting machine company TRIAD for God's sake? That's like calling your aviation safety company The Trilateral Commision.

[DeepModem Mom]

14. A step in the right direction -- (nt)

[NashVegas]

16. Locking

Thread title does not = actual article title.