Danish Reporter's Interview With Arnebeck

[Helga Scow Stern]

posted on the thread Update from Denmark

ANOTHER UPDATE: Interview with Cliff Arnebeck, Ohio


Cliff Arnebeck

Concerning the filing of the challenge of the vote:

- Were still working on it. Its complex. We have to have all the 25 contesters to sign the complaint. Its an ordeal. Weve got a team of lawyers working on it. I told the NY Times yesterday that we'd be filing werdnesday, but the date isnt carved in stone.
- We of course have a deadline, which is outside the actual time that it will be ripe to be filed, starting at three thirty yesterday afternoon. While were later than we would have liked, in terms of the actual statutory scheme, were not... If we filed today we'd be within the first 24 hours of the first clear legal opportunity to do it.
- So when's the deadline?
- Fifteen days after the certification. In two weeks.
- The electorate will meet december 13?
- Thats the schedule. The national schedule. Naturally we'll be seeking to have that modified in view of the recount and the challenge.
- What do you build your challenge on?
- We build our challenge on statistical anomalies which are not explainable in any other way than that the voting was hacked and votes where moved from Kerry to Bush in three or four counties in and around Cincinatti.
- Butler?
- Butler, Clairmount(sp?), Warren and Hamilton.
- You have analyzed these anomalies statisticly?
- Yes, analyzed them from a macro standpoint, looking at all the counties in the state, using benchmarks from other races which were competitive, then also analyzing precint by precint, each of the top three counties, where the anomalies appeared to exist on a macro analysis, so we have statistical analysis, macro, micro both pointing the same way, and with that data if you correct for that anomaly and say, that the only logical explanation is that the votes were moved, and if you move the votes back to where they were cast, then you get a concistency with what the exit polling data showed on election day. So thats pretty strong evidence.
- We think its fraud. We think we can prove it. We think we can prove it within the timeframe of this election and of course, if that is succesful - and were not dependent of the secretary of state who's both corrupt and partisan, this is filed before the Ohio supreme court - so we think we can accomplish the task of correcting for this fraud and if so, that would mean the Ohio electorial votes would be cast for Kerry, which would mean that Kerry would be president instead of Bush.
- What amount of votes were moved from Kerry to Bush?
- We can't tell at this point, but we think at minimum it's the margin. The margin. So 60.000, moving 60.000 votes in these three or four counties, 60.000 votes, deducted from Kerry and added to Bush would create a 120.000 margin. It is at least that. It may be more. This may have been done in more counties. The aggregate of the movement would mean that Kerry actually won by the margin that they reported that Bush won.
- This sounds similar to the working paper from Michael Hout, UC Berkeley on the election in Florida.
- This election?
- Have you read that report?
- No.
- They investigated how electronical voting machines moved votes to Bush. They claim that 130.000 upwards to 260.000 votes were moved from Kerry to Bush in three counties.
- Wow!
- They build this claim on statistical analysis of anomalies.
- I'm glad you brought that up. I had vaguely heard about something going on, but I didn't know the details and I didn't know they'd come up with the same scenario.
- I'll mail their working paper to you immediately.
- The New York Times did cover this (the challenge). I gave them a couple of interviews yesterday and its in todays NY Times. I'm assuming the Washington Post has it as well, I gave them two interviews yesterday. I also gave a half hour interview with CNN and I did a half hour interview with CSPAN about a week ago, its available on the internet.
- Not much media coverage?
- Thats changing. Once you make the NY Times and Washington Post you're in the main stream media.



That's it for now.
Yours

[saracat]

1. Great contact Ojai Person!

Watch someone jump me for this, but I consider this really constructive. Thank you for all your efforts with the Danish reporter. Thank you for your effoets with Adam Stone. Your getting the Berkeley info to Arnebeck might be the single most important thing done so far! :yourock:

[Helga Scow Stern]

11. Aren't the internets great!

And DU. Without this forum none of this would be happening.

[goldengreek]

12. You're a prince, Ojai.

Let's go get those fascist bastards!!

[corbett]

24. Hilarious Reply!

This is the best thread I've read since 11/3!

Yep, them Internets IS great!

[Quakerfriend]

2. Awesome post Ojai Person

I've been dying to hear what's happened with Arnebeck! Thank you over and over. This news makes my day! I'm thrilled that he is now aware of the other study that seems to parallel the fraud committed in OH!

[Quakerfriend]

4. And

He is saying John Kerry will be president with such authority..........Love this guy!

29. Yes, these Internetsssssssssssss are the best

I, too, am waiting on pins and needles re Arnebeck. Thanks so much for the interview info.

Namaste from Nepal!

[Straight Shooter]

3. Thanks, Ojai, but I'm a bit disappointed in Mr. Arnebeck, as follows:

Q. Have you read that (Berkeley) report?

A. No.

Q. They investigated how electronical voting machines moved votes to Bush. They claim that 130.000 upwards to 260.000 votes were moved from Kerry to Bush in three counties.

A. Wow!

Q. They build this claim on statistical analysis of anomalies.

A. I'm glad you brought that up. I had vaguely heard about something going on, but I didn't know the details and I didn't know they'd come up with the same scenario.

I'm perplexed how an issue which caused such an uproar as the Berkeley paper was not discussed in detail, at length, with a major operative like Mr. Arnebeck. I know he's busy, but the Berkely paper was all over the Internet and in the news.

Puzzling, to say the least. I'm disappointed. Someone on his staff or within his inner circle is not doing their job.

Edit. This also bothers me:

Q. What amount of votes were moved from Kerry to Bush?

A. We can't tell at this point, but we think at minimum it's the margin. The margin. So 60.000, moving 60.000 votes in these three or four counties, 60.000 votes, deducted from Kerry and added to Bush would create a 120.000 margin. It is at least that. It may be more. This may have been done in more counties. The aggregate of the movement would mean that Kerry actually won by the margin that they reported that Bush won.

Here's my problem with it: In the C-span interview, IIRC, Mr. Arnebeck mentioned 65,000 votes had migrated. At that time, the vote spread was being touted as 130,000 votes. Now with the certification, the vote spread is supposedly 119,000 votes. So, here is Mr. Arnebeck changing the number and citing a 60,000 vote migration, which would cover the 119,000 vote spread. Admittedly, he says it could be more, but I would prefer that he stick to his original cited discrepancies to avoid the appearance of adjusting his position to suit the current circumstances. He doesn't explain that his own analysis, and those of the experts', are the reason for changing the cited number from 65,000 to 60,000.

It's so important to stay on message and keep your numbers absolutely consistent.

I'm just sayin'

[Helga Scow Stern]

7. It just goes to show what a fog there has been. n/t

[jamboi]

8. Well, he can't be everywhere at once, and if you see something send it

to him. He actually answers. Its [e-mail]

[Straight Shooter]

10. You're right. I'll send him my post.

I have written him before, but not with any concerns per se, just to encourage him.

Thanks, jamboi and Ojai :)

[goldengreek]

13. Good point on the vote migration numbers, Straight Shooter.

It may be that his point simply is that Bush's gap is actually Kerry's. Something to keep an eye on, though.

[Straight Shooter]

16. Yes. I just want clarification from him on that.

I sent him a copy of my post, in full, and added: "That's the end of my post on Democratic Underground, Mr. Arnebeck, for your consideration. It is not my intention to criticize, merely to point out potential soft spots for the opposition to pounce upon.

I would just hate it if the MSM took one nitpicky item and used it as an all-encompassing dismissal of Mr. Arnebeck's case.

But you're right, if the final tally shrank, then so did the number of migrated votes. I imagine Mr. Arnebeck is a little fatigued, and I realize it's unrealistic for me to expect him to weigh every word.

Thanks, gg. :hi:

[goldengreek]

17. Well, you know the MSM.

Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.

[Straight Shooter]

19. I don't wanna f*ck 'em

You fuck 'em!

:evilgrin:

[goldengreek]

21. I wouldn't touch 'em with yours!!

Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha! Ha!

[dlaliberte]

25. It would then be closer to even - not flipped

I remember hearing Arnebeck say (or may be it was other peoples' interpretations of what he said) that the resulting tally would be the reverse of what Ohio reported, in terms of the gap. And you also said "...Bush's gap is actually Kerry's". However, if nothing else were changed, the result would not be reversed but close to an even match.
I was hoping to see Kerry win by a 120000 margin, not by a measly 120.

Of course, I am convinced along with everyone else here that if the election were fairly run, Kerry would have won by at least 120K. What did the exit polls predict anyway?

[goldengreek]

14. This part is actually GREAT news:

Q. Have you read that (Berkeley) report?

A. No.

Q. They investigated how electronical voting machines moved votes to Bush. They claim that 130.000 upwards to 260.000 votes were moved from Kerry to Bush in three counties.

A. Wow!

Q. They build this claim on statistical analysis of anomalies.

A. I'm glad you brought that up. I had vaguely heard about something going on, but I didn't know the details and I didn't know they'd come up with the same scenario.


This shows that two groups of professionals, independently covering two separate regions, have lifted exactly the same set of fingerprint. So in this case the failure of Arnebeck and his staff to study the paper only makes their case stronger.

[wrate]

20. Exactly, its corroboration. n/t

[txindy]

26. That was precisely my reaction when I read his response

Two independent studies that reached the same conclusion about two entirely different states. Coincidence? Hardly. They've each nailed it.

Amazing. Truly an amazing read. Thanks for posting this! :hi:

[Dolphyn]

15. I think it's great that he came up with the same scenario _independently_

Different analysis, same result: it's really more evidence.

It means that the Berkeley paper will strengthen his claim.

Edit: well, it would mean that, if they were looking at the same state. LOL

[txindy]

28. I think it strengthens his case because it happened in two states

What are the odds that the same scenario would occur in the two most contentious battleground states in this election? In only certain counties. With the same result.

Another study about the Ohio counties would corroborate Arnebeck's claim, but I also believe this Florida study out of Berkeley strengthens his case, as well.

[SueZhope]

5. Thanks this is great Important question:

wasn't the Berkeley report based in FL?? not Ohio
I thought Arnebeck is only concentrating in Ohio please clarify with reporter
for its unclear (below)

- This sounds similar to the working paper from Michael Hout, UC Berkeley on the election in Florida.
- This election?
- Have you read that report?
- No.
- They investigated how electronical voting machines moved votes to Bush. They claim that 130.000 upwards to 260.000 votes were moved from Kerry to Bush in three counties.
- Wow!
- They build this claim on statistical analysis of anomalies.
- I'm glad you brought that up. I had vaguely heard about something going on, but I didn't know the details and I didn't know they'd come up with the same scenario.

[Quakerfriend]

6. Ibeleive

he is ref'g to the study done by Dr. Phillips on OH.

[Helga Scow Stern]

18. You should maybe send the Phillips study to Arnebeck.

[StClone]

9. Has there been a DU analysis of those 3 counties?

I'd sure like to know what Arnebeck is looking at.

[myschkin]

22. It's incredible

how few they know from each other. I don't want to know how FEW Kerry now about this all... (Berkeley, Friedman)

Somebody has to inform these guys...

:-(

[wiggs]

23. kick. Interesting. nt

[Eloriel]

27. Can't you provide links?

To the orig. DU thread at least?

[BreakForNews]

30. Here's the link to the other thread

(yeah - doncha just hate that)

Here it is Eloriel
--just the same interview extract their though....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x122785

(Snip)
"Today I interviewed Cliff Arnebeck from Ohio. I'll be writing about Arnebeck and the Ohio filing for tomorrow.

He comes through as very straight and precise, but there were issues from other states that he simply hadn't heard about. It's deeply concerning to sit in Denmark and inform attorneys from Ohio about relevant and important events in Florida."