Time to switch gears. Fraud ----> Irregularities

[JPJones]

We had two months to demonstrate fraud. We failed (but, hey, at least we might get to see the DVD in six months!).

A few experts in Ohio should keep digging, but the rest of us need to focus on spreading the word about 'irregularities', not fraud. No need to frighten the old ladies.

Ultimately, we need to get legislation passed. Letters to the editor, contacting congressmen, because we are concerned about 'irregularities' in the process. 'Irregularities undermine our faith in the election and we need to do something about it.' Fraud is hard for most to believe, but there was strong evidence of irregularities.

[New Earth]

1. no way

let's report the truth. this isn't FOX News. :hi:

[JPJones]

2. Then cite exactly one concrete example of fraud. n/t

[hootinholler]

55. It will come out.

Look Conyers and those guys know what they were doing when they call it irregular.

I have seen photocopies of election documents shown to me by a nationally known activist that demonstrate fraud to me. It will come out when there is an overwhelming case. Unfortunately, the courts were able to run the clock this time. Discovery hasn't even begun yet.

I still think that we should call them irregularities until the evidence is presented. It is good strategy. Grandma can talk about irregularities, but won't listen to it once fraud is brought up.

Read yer Sun-Tzu.

-Hoot

[zann725]

82. Voters attempting to vote for Kerry, who saw "Bush" vote pop up instead

That happened a lot...in a lot of different pricincts. And did NOT happen the reverse way ONCE that I've heard of. If the machines just had "glitches," then it would've erred the same way BOTH ways.

"Fraud" it is word. "Irregularity" is the "sanitized," watered-down, nothing-to-see-here, move on concept they want us to embrace!

Sorry pals, it's an "F" word...like "Fox"..."FRAUD." Spread it far and wide, with pride!

[me b zola]

83. I believe that Rep conyers has cited several criminal acts

involving both state & federal election law.

So if you prefer to say criminal activity, then who am I to stop you?

[KerryReallyWon]

69. i'm with you... no faux news here! Its.

FRAUD!!!!

[Land Shark]

3. 30 pages of fraud and irregularities evidence

The document can be downloaded from http://www.votersunite.org/info/SnohomishElectionFraudInvestigation.pdf

[New Earth]

4. and why don't we have physical concrete evidence?

the votes are tallied with f*cking computer software. :hi:

[JPJones]

8. That doesn't prove fraud. It's irregular, but there's no hard evidence

of fraud.

[BreakForNews]

85. Election '04: Is it Irregularities, Fraud or Criminal Gangs?

Some people want to say irregularities.
Some want to say fraud.

Now note this statement from John Conyers:

" Conyers prefers to call them “things that went wrong” "
http://www.blackcommentator.com/119/119_cover_vote_thieves_pf.html

That's seems a litle wish-washy by Conyers, eh?

But hold on. Here's the Kicker!

" “Well, you know, orchestrated attempts don't always require a conspiracy...” " -Conyers

Oops.... where's he going with this?? :)

The article continues:


"But conspiracies do exist; they occur every time a group of
persons plans to commit criminal acts. Conyers knows this. He’s not
only a lawyer, he’s a Watergate lawyer, having sat on the same
Judiciary Committee that saw Richard Nixon’s presidency unravel in
1973-74. District attorneys in big cities across the nation love
conspiracy law, designed to connect the seemingly random depredations
of criminal gangs. Conspirators can be convicted even if they don’t
know all the other players or the whole scope of the criminal
enterprise. They need only be shown to have acted in the furtherance
of the larger scheme.

Sounds very much like Rep. Conyers’ “orchestrated attempts,” doesn’t it? "


Oh dear.....

"The 2004 presidential election had many irregularities" .....NOPE

"The 2004 presidential had many instances of fraud" .....BETTER

"The 2004 presidential had many irregularities
and instances of fraud, consistent with a federal
vote crimes conspiracy" .....ROCKS!!

I love that line from the article:
"...conspiracy law, designed to connect the
seemingly random depredations of criminal gangs."

..seemingly random.... criminal gangs... Ahhhh...

I think I'll frame that :)

[JPJones]

5. Lots of irregularities, but no proof of fraud there n/t

[New Earth]

7. see my post right above

WHY THE HELL DO YOU THINK THERE IS NO PHYSICAL PROOF? OUR VOTES ARE TABULATED BY FUCKING MACHINES :hi: :hi: :hi: :hi:

[SnoopDog]

6. No it is not irrgularities...

Dem strong precincts - voters stand in line for 10 hours.
Repub strong precincts - wait time 15 minutes.

Exit polls.
Voting machines w/o paper trails.
Provisional ballots and disenfranchisement.

Secretary of State Blackwell -need I say more.

Sorry- this was election fraud on all levels.

We did not fail - American Democracy failed.

I am an American - not a Fascist.

[JPJones]

12. I thought we were the reality based community.

-Dem strong precincts - voters stand in line for 10 hours.

Prove that it was done intentionally. It was highly irregular, but prove it was fraud.

-Exit polls.

The election was pretty close. Were the rural communities under-represented?

-Voting machines w/o paper trails.

No proof of fraud, only the potential for fraud.

-Provisional ballots and disenfranchisement.

How is that fraud? Was it illegal?

-Secretary of State Blackwell -need I say more.

Yes, you actually do.

-Sorry- this was election fraud on all levels.

Sorry, this is fantasyland stuff unless you can prove it. There is a difference between irregularities and fraud. You have no PROOF of fraud.

[New Earth]

13. do i have to say it again?

or are you going to keep ignoring my replies?

[SnoopDog]

15. No offense - you're not worth any more of my time....

[Terre]

30. Have you read through Conyers report yet?

If not, it may give you a bit more info:
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/

PDF titled: Preserving Democracy: What Went Wrong in Ohio
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/ohiostatusrept1505.pdf


Blackwell's Fundraising Letter (just to give you an idea of the man)
http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/blackwellfundraisingltr.pdf

If after reading both, you don't believe that something went terribly wrong on 11/02 - then nothing will convince you. And if that's the case, then at least you can say you haven't suffered from "Paranoia Shift".

Ya know, humans used to think the world was FLAT, until someone PROVED that it wasn't. But wasn't it round to begin with before it was PROVEN?

[JPJones]

33. Read them. Things were terribly wrong, it's just that no one

has PROVEN fraud. Not a single concrete example.

[New Earth]

34. are you ever going to look thru my replies in this thread?

how many times do i have to say it? please.

[JPJones]

36. I replied to both of your substantive posts above n/t

[New Earth]

37. and i'm telling you

why it's nearly impossible to prove it with physical evidence. it still doesn't change the fact that it was fraud. now if you dont' think it was fraud, wtf is your point?

[JPJones]

39. Because if you are accusing people of crimes

you need to have evidence. If you accuse people of crimes with no evidence, you look like a loon.

[New Earth]

40. good

:crazy:

[Terre]

46. If I recall correctly

didn't Scott Peterson get the death penalty based on "circumstantial evidence"?

[troubleinwinter]

49. Conyers believes there is evidence of crimes, and

he is most assuredly not a loon.

[Terre]

44. When all the arrows

point in that direction, what else can you gather but that fraud occurred? How many "irregularities" favoring * would it take?

Is the whistleblower the only thing that will convince you? Do you need to see the computer code?

Here are some definitions of fraud that georgia10 looked up for her Guide:

Actionable Fraud

Fraud: n. the intentional use of deceit, a trick or some dishonest means to deprive another of his/her/its money, property or a legal right.

Constructive fraud: n. when the circumstances show that someone's actions give him/her an unfair advantage over another by unfair means ... the court may decide from the methods used and the result that it should treat the situation as if there was actual fraud even if all the technical elements of fraud have not been proven.

Common Definitions

Fraud: n. A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.

Fraud In Law: n. fraud that is presumed from the circumstances although the one who commits it need not have had any evil intent.

Website links to the above definitions (in order):
1 http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=785&bold=
2 http://dictionary.law.com/default2.asp?selected=318&bold=
3 http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=67&q=fraud
4 http://www.hyperdictionary.com/dictionary/fraud+in+law

[buddysmellgood]

70. Beautiful. But they throw around "fraud" like it's some impossible

standard. It's defined by "I'll know when the press tells me I see it."

[senegal1]

35. To prove fraud will require a court case -- however the suspicion

of fraud is there due to the overwhelming number of irregularities. To focus on the irregularities and not the case for fraud is to put the cart and the horse on two separate streets. Sorry that this might scare the little old ladies but maybe little old ladies are stronger than you think.

[Joe Chi Minh]

77. This thread will never be 100% reality-based.

Not as long as your kind infest it, jughead. One of your uber "reality-based pals thinks that if the US hadn't entered WWII, the Russians would have let the Germans occupy Western Europe!

I suspect San Marino would have had something to say about that, and the state the Russians would have left Germany in, there wouldn't have been many left alive in it, to dispute it with the San Marinese, with sticks and stones.

"Sorry, this is fantasyland stuff unless you can prove it. There is a difference between irregularities and fraud!.

Oh, foolishness, thy name is JPJones! We are not currently in a court of law, so the canons of common sense are more than adequate to make the accusation of fraud, loud, clear and repeatedly. But that is what is getting to you people, isn't it? Your conscience and the fear of people's certainty at the informal extra-legal level, nationwide and throughout the world, growing ever more widespread. Hence your posts.

Only "bent" courts could discount the overwhelming statistical evidence of intentionality, unequivocally indicating Republican fraud. So-called "irregularities" + plus causative intentionality = fraud. Overwhelming statistical probability is good enough for insurance companies and DNA identification, while the probability criteria used in both fields would be much smaller. Nuff said. Elementary reason indicates that keeping 64 machines warehoused, while poorer districts of minority voters are scandalously deprived of them, to the effective disenfranchisement of tens of thousands of voters is clear evidence of fraud. Surely there are sworn affidavits to that effect, i.e. the 2 to 10 hour waits, will be forthcoming.

[EFerrari]

9. You know, we can't call it "irregular" if it happens every time! lol

True statements work, though. We don't know what happened because our elections are broken. For the purposes of educating citizens, that works. And context is important. It really is more important to talk to my grandma in a way she can connect with than to unload everything I know and/or believe the first go round.

That's just good communication skills.

And, we know that if there is a vulnerability in a voting system, someone will try to exploit it. I think we can say that with certainty.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

10. Umm, really?

Let's soften the language?

Murder=Assisted death
Rape=Non-participant Sex
Child Abuse=Improper Child Rearing
War=Peace Objective

[New Earth]

11. LMAO!

w00t!

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

16. Thanks for laughing

But can I please get a welcome? How come I never get a welcome to D.U.?

[New Earth]

18. sorry

i don't usually welcome people cuz i don't realize if they're new unless they're conspicuously freeping :shrug: sorry :hi: Welcome to DU

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

20. That's okay, really

I'm not a freeper, mostly just a lurker. I read and read here and I love reading YOUR posts.

[New Earth]

25. me?

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

26. Yes, you.

I like your spirit.

[New Earth]

27. aww thanks

:)

[BeFree]

78. Yeah, me too, Faye,

Ya know, I will always wonder who is really welcome to DU until I see something that makes me quit wondering.

Welcome to DU, wonderingwhy.

[buddysmellgood]

72. Did you fill out welcome form sQ4629op-6?

[JPJones]

17. It has nothing to do with softening the language. It has

everything to do with backing up what we say with evidence.

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

29. Then how 'bout

Suspected FRAUD?

[JPJones]

31. A little pregnant? Fraud is fraud. Suspected fraud = irregularity. n/t

[iwillalwayswonderwhy]

41. Suspected Fraud

is circumstantial evidence without hard evidence.

What I don't like about "irregularity" is that it makes it sound like a rare, meaningless, unintentional accident.

[Liberty Belle]

14. Fraud is rampant. What do you call this?

Why do you suppose Cuyahoga County lied and claimed they had a terrorist threat to lockout the media from witnessing vote counting?

Or that Triad posted "cheat sheets" so workers wouldn't have to bother actually recounting ballots?

What on earth made votes "flip" from Kerry to Bush on so many review screens, but none went the other way?

What do you call it when voting machines are pre-programmed to default to Bush if no vote is cast, and to be cast aside as spoiled ballots (double votes) if a voter choose Kerry?

When a Democratic headquarters is burglarized, computerized voter records stolen, and Democrats are then sent mailers with bogus election dates and threats of arrest if they have unpaid parking tickets, I would call that fraud.

When thousands of Democratic registration forms are thrown away by people hired by the Republican Party to only register GOP voters, those Democrats have been defrauded.

When exit polls match tallied results in precincts with one method of voting, but precincts with certain types of voting machines all have an amazing reversal from exit poll to final outcome, what do you call that?

When a programmer testifies under oath that he was hired by a Republican Congressman to create vote-rigging software, it's obvious that fraud was intended.

When the Ohio Secretary of State refuses to count all votes, sends out the wrong weight of paper and then denies registrants the right to vote, withholds voting machines in minority neighborhoods, orders a place where ballots are stored to be left unsecured overnight, and defies state law to be sure suspicious precincts are not included in the recount, he has defrauded the voters.

[JPJones]

28. You believe there is fraud, but you don't know the facts

It was Warren county, and Kerry lawyer Jeff Rupert was in the room and saw nothing unusual.
http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:GLBEz4PkdS4J:www.middletownjournal.com/news/content/news/stories/2004/12/03/MJ1204letter.html%3Furac%3Dn%26urvf%3D11021784420420.7785416926820338+%22jeff+rupert%22+warren+county&hl=en

The lockdown was irregular, but there was a K/E lawyer watching the count.

[troubleinwinter]

47. I call it fraud.

So does Conyers and the law.

[KittyWampus]

19. I ALMOST Agree With You.

[seabeyond]

21. i want fraud, it was nation wide and the people need to know

not going to stop with irregularities. i want those too. i wasnt to make clear from here on out, support republicans you support voter suppression and intimidation, right there with when women didnt have the right to vote and the blacks had to fight for their right to vote in the 60's.

no way, leaving out voter fraud isnt good enough for me. have to start sending people to jail, get more to turn on each other. 2 months is BOT enough time to get this out. it is gonna come out. why would you want to stop now. no way

[New Earth]

23. ok, but

it's not voter fraud. it's Election Fraud :cry:

[seabeyond]

42. ALmost ALways say election fraud faye

good catch, you are right on it

[Starone]

22. Irregularities will bring in the fold

I totally agree! The word will get out so much faster if we start with voting "irregularities"...something that will pertain to both "red and blue" and won't frighten those loyal to the Grand Old. As the process unfolds more and more people will realize the fraud that is exposed. History proves that it took more than Democrats to bring down a Republican president in the '70s.

[New Earth]

24. nope

not gonna do it :hi:

[Starone]

32. "Irregularities" won't work for you because you already Know

It's those that don't know that we need to bring in now. If you go to the people with "fraud" they'll close up. It's too extreme. Irregularities are the truth...something was wrong with the election. So we say, "Let's investigate irregularities for the sake of all our futures." We investigate in the public eye....you and I know fraud will be exposed in the public eye. We deliver it to those who don't know on a silver platter. That's the job that's before those who know.

[Land Shark]

43. Irregularities produce "fraud"

Irregularities produce fraud in this sense: If you believe the vote totals literally, you're deceived and thus defrauded.

Under most consumer protection statutes, it is not required that the plaintiff prove that the merchant intended to deceive, only that a reasonable consumer would IN FACT be deceived.

If our election system is inaccurate in any way, it's a huge problem. If it's systematically inaccurate in a way that favors one party of the other, it's a huge problem and it's a gross injustice. Proving that someone intentionally gamed the system is relevant mostly to the amount of criminal punishment that should apply and to certain political consequences. But from the standpoint of election integrity, intentional fraud is interesting to investigate but not critical to prove. I think it should be investigated at all levels, but one should not get hung up on intentional fraud analysis.

Look, I'm a business and consumer fraud attorney. I prove fraud in court. Nobody admits to defrauding anybody. You have to prove it circumstantially. So before you type another post suggesting "hard evidence" of fraud is absolutely required, ask yourself if you haven't been temporarily possessed by post-election stress, because such hard evidence is rarely present even in successful cases of proving fraud.

Still, you can exercise your independent judgment on all of the facts in the study, because there's not room to state them all on DU

The document can be downloaded from http://www.votersunite.org/info/SnohomishElectionFraudInvestigation.pdf

[Wilms]

38. For me it depends on who I'm talking with and how much...

...they now about the election.

And irregularity does not preclude fraud. It even sort of suggests it as one possibility.


on edit: Anyone need a towel to wipe whip cream off their face?

[SnoopDog]

48. On Edit: that cracked me up...

I bet the republicans buy alot of knee pads!


(I know I should not have type this - but what the hell)

[Wilms]

50. I was referring to the pie fight above.

(I know I should not have type this - but what the hell)

on edit:9

[SnoopDog]

51. Opps...Probably still applies....!

[troubleinwinter]

45. Here is some information for you to try on for size:

Definition of fraud:

1)A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.
2)A piece of trickery; a trick.


Following is an excerpt from a letter from Representative John Conyers to the FBI, requesting an investigation of evidence found in the Ohio election:

"There are several important considerations you should be aware of with respect to this matter. First, this course of conduct would appear to violate several provisions of federal law, in addition to the constitutional guarantees of equal protection and due process. 42 U.S.C. 1973 provides for criminal penalties against any person who, in any election for federal office, “knowingly and willfully deprives, defrauds, or attempts to defraud the residents of a State of a fair and impartially conducted election process, by...the procurement, casting, or tabulation of ballots that are known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent under the laws of the State in which the election is held.” 42 U.S.C.1974 also requires the retention and preservation, for a period of twenty-two months from the date of a federal election, of all voting records and papers and makes it a felony for any person to “willfully steal, destroy, conceal, mutilate, or alter” any such record. Further, any tampering with ballots and/or election machinery would violate the constitutional rights of all citizens to vote and have their votes properly counted, as guaranteed by the Equal Protection and Due Process Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution."

He aslo notes violations of Ohio law.

He does not use the word "fraud", only "defrauds", "defraud" and "fraudulent", along with "felony".

You can find the letter here: http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/brockbealohelecltr121504.pdf

[joevoter]

74. I suggest "FRAUD investigation"

[troubleinwinter]

81. Hmmm... sounds like a good idea. With indictments all around.

[buddysmellgood]

52. No, irregularities is too soft. We need to call them cheats, lies, unfair,

and crimes. Irregularities, glitches and shenanigans sound like hijinx from a teen-age summer fun movie.

[New Earth]

53. l;ol

[snot]

54. I agree. PROVING fraud wd be nice, but REFORM is critical.

[me b zola]

84. Lets not forget prison sentences

Republicans are big on long prison sentences to act as deterrents to crime. What crime could be worse than thwarting the very foundation to our Democracy?

[Straight Shooter]

56. I don't like the word "irregularities." How about "error"?

People just shrug off the word "irregularities." It's too benign.

Malfunction, error, fault, anything which implies something wrong with the hardware and/or software. We want to inspect the damn machines, inside and out.

My preference is the word "error." Here is one Wikipedia definition of "error": An error is a difference between desired and actual performance. ... Errors in a system can also be latent design errors that may go unnoticed for years, until the right set of circumstances arises that cause them to become active.

For your viewing pleasure, a photo of the Ohio election:

[New Earth]

57. i dont' like the word 'error'

it presumes innocence. and i don't believe they are innocent errors for one minute.

[RaulVB]

58. To prevent people from voting by locking up voting machines is FRAUD (n/t)

[Karenca]

59. FRAUD

FRAUD...The vote was stolen from Kerry, just like it was stolen from Gore.
We will prove it, and this administration will have "scandal" written all over it.

[adolfo]

60. Go all the way

I used the word "dosh garnit" once and an old wise chinese man said to me; "If you are gonna say it, go for the gold!".

So now I say "Fuckin ballot stealing bi#$!@..."!

It is much better (& cheaper) than psychiatric therapy. Try it, you may actually enjoy it.

Since there is evidence it is your right.

[buddysmellgood]

61. Jones, you've fallen for the herring.

British fugitives in the 1800s would rub a herring across their trail, thereby diverting the bloodhounds that were hot in pursuit. In the 1920s, American investment bankers started calling preliminary prospectuses "red herrings" as a warning to investors that the documents were not complete or final and could be misleading.

The line is, "We have no proof of fraud that would have changed the outcome of the election."
The point is THE ELECTION WAS UNFAIR. Take any example you like. Any one of them is enough to reject Ohio's votes.
Define fraud. Define irregularity. At what point does an irregularity become fraud.
I don't believe intent is part of the definition of fraud. You can have a fraudulent election without an overlord. But Ohio had even that.

[Terre]

63. Some definitions of fraud defined in my post #44

but I don't think JPJones wants to comment on them.

As a matter-of-fact, I do believe s/he's "vanished". If they're going to start a thread, at least follow-through. If they can't, for whatever reason, just say so.

[moggie12]

62. Wow, JP, you've got your hands full

I've been trying the constructive approach today, too, urging people to throw themselves into the election reform effort. Haven't had too much luck so far. A lot of people are still working through the pain. (By the way, you have an excellent command of the facts -- but factual arguments don't sway the "fraud" contingent. There's that one unanswerable line of logic, as "Faye" was arguing -- they can't provide the "proof" us practical-minded people are demanding since the paperless machines ate the proof, so to speak. Half of me believes it's true, but I still want the darn proof because elected Democratic officials will look pretty doofy arguing this in public, where Americans will hear them.

Anyway, here's something practical-minded I posted in the "General Discussion: Politics" category. a list of sites where people can get info about how to support Sen. Boxer and help with election reform:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=1478105&mesg_id=1478105


I only got 20+ replies. The post that was entitled, "What is your favorite French thing", got 90+, last I looked. Oh well...I'm gonna keep trying.

[troubleinwinter]

64. Here's some FRAUD info.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x271530

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x271561

[seabeyond]

68. i am not getting why those that dont believe it is fraud insist

that all of us agree with you. what is in it for you. why is there an intense need to get me to forget about the fraud. then if you half believe i truly cannot understand how you can just shrug your shoulders on it

:shrug:

why dont you all that want to focus on the irregularity go out and work on that. and those of us that can deal with fraud issue without "feeling the pain" will go about our business trying to prove there is fraud to better help you with election irregularities in 2006

you dont need to change our mind. you dont need to convince us. i dont need to convince you

[RaulVB]

73. Well said (n/t)

[moggie12]

76. Yes, good point, "convincing" not necessary

The "half of me that believes it" hopes that people who will tenaciously keep searching for "smoking gun proof" find it. I got riled up on the issue because the true believers were calling Dems who didn't vote against certification names and saying "I'll never vote Democratic again". I guess I should shake that off and, as you say, get back to focusing on the irregularity angle, which is the one I've chosen to devote my efforts to. Like you say, if the "fraud" side comes up with more proof, that can only strengthen the "irregularity" side's efforts to help Boxer and other Dems get real election reform (what am I saying? it would be a slam-dunk after that!)

[seabeyond]

79. high five moggie, and this is the practicality of it

embrace the fact there is going to be the extreme, adn those saying democrat for life, getting out of party, me the centralist, middle of road saying hey...........wtf, i can see some really good going on both in grassroot computer communication and connection and after all, this is it, bush or kerry.....dem or repug

let em fall along side of the road. and many wont. what i do see we need to do is the fellow mothers and fathers all around me need to see they really dont want the world they think they do, it is not happening open your eyes. gonna become a scary place for your kids, hey already is because bush is creating it and saying it and feeding it

what we put out loud matters. when you and i sya exactly, when we were saying opposite, that is how we grow.

so i have total faith. i am liking what i see

[moggie12]

80. High five you back, I like what I see, too. n't

[super simian]

65. THIS "old lady" ain't scared!

Wanna see...?

Fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud fraud....

...is what you call it when people deliberately set out to deceive other people, as in deceiving them into thinking there are enough voting machines in their precinct, deceiving them into thinking they can vote on 11/3, deceiving them into thinking they registered and then tossing their registration, deceiving them into thinking that they voted for Kerry when their vote went for Bush, deceiving them into thinking they can vote with a provisional ballot and then not counting it, deceiving them by handing them a pre-punched ballot, deceiving them by giving them the wrong ballot so that they end up voting for the wrong candidate, deceiving them that their registration is not valid, and -- in the end when all these deceptions are challenged -- deceiving them into believing that there was a fair and legal recount. :silly:

That's what THIS old lady calls election fraud! :silly: And she's going to keep on calling it election fraud. :silly:

Now if you want to get onto the topic of irregularity, isn't there a pill for that?

:silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly: :silly:

[New Earth]

67. hahaha that looks like fun

FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD FRAUD

[super simian]

71. See? It is fun! n/t

[MandateThis]

87. Ol ladies call 'em as they see 'em as shout FRAUD!!!

I'm happy and proud to join Americans who understand the true meaning of democracy and speak the truth refusing to be intimidated!!! You know there were many people who said Hitler wasn't rightfully elected. Soon after, he called for terror measures and he regulated his own patriot act to oppress the people.

[FreepFryer]

66. I would have to call Blackwell's behavior, and Warren County's, fraudulent

[Al-CIAda]

75. FRAUD!

Get used to it.

His FRAUDulentcy...George Bush won the popular FRAUD...Commander in FRAUD...Hail to the FRAUD...In FRAUD we distrust...Don't FRAUD on me...One small step for man, one giant leap for FRAUDkind...ask not what your vote can do for you, ask what FRAUD has done tto your country....

[Laurab]

86. Nope that would be a step backward

Now that even some in the msm have taken to the possibility of fraud, that we worked so hard to get our representatives to discuss, we're going to change it? I think not. You're insulting grandma here. My 72 year old mom can believe fraud, she also knows a criminal when she sees one. She's seen one for the last 4 years, and is extremely worried about the next 4.

Why are you using all these "not fraud" arguments to go backwards? As someone else said, discovery has not even started. Those "irregularities" are so many in number, and so much in shrubbies favor that FRAUD is the reasonable conclusion. I believe I am reality-based. I also disagree with you.