From the email newsletter of the Media Research Council (Scaife-funded, not copyrighted):
1) With "Did Your Vote Count? The Plot Thickens" as his on-
screen header, MSNBC's Keith Olbermann on Monday night led his
Countdown program with more than 15 straight minutes of paranoid
and meaningless claims about voting irregularities in states won
by President Bush. Olbermann contended: "There is a small but
blood curdling group of reports of voting irregularities and
possible fraud -- principally in Ohio and Florida." He began with
how, citing "homeland security," one of Ohio's 88 counties blocked
media observers from watching the vote-counting, a county whose
importance he elevated: "Warren County's polls were among the last
in Ohio to close, thus among the last to report and thus among the
votes that clinched the state and the election for President
Bush."
Olbermann asked a local Ohio reporter if the county officials
"appreciate...the way they handled it has made it appear as if
they were using homeland security to cover something up?" He
wanted to know: "Is there any sense there in southern Ohio that
the election throughout the state might have been a mess or, at
worst, that it may have left the appearance of being tampered
with?"
Moving on to Florida, Olbermann recited the results in five
small counties "with decided Democratic margins" which used
optical scan devices and "suddenly voted overwhelmingly for Mr.
Bush. In Florida counties where optical scanning of paper ballots
was not used, no such violent swings were reported." The total
vote in all five counties doesn't add up to more than ten percent
of Bush's 350,000 vote margin in the state and, in fact, all the
counties Olbermann listed voted for Bush in 2000 -- so it must be
a Kathleen Harris-inspired conspiracy that spans back four years.
Olbermann brought aboard left-wing Democratic Congressman John
Conyers to indulge in the Congressman's claims about voting
irregularities. Instead of challenging him, Olbermann cued him up:
"Is it your assessment that last Tuesday's election was, to some
degree, invalid, hacked, rigged, fixed, otherwise flawed, and what
do you want done about the previous election as opposed to future
elections?" And: "Do you think that what happened, what evidence
there has been of irregularities in Ohio and Florida, altered the
outcome of the presidential election?"
Though he wasn't wearing Reynolds Wrap himself, early on
Olbermann conceded that the reports of voting problems ranged from
ones "in which believers are also likely to be wearing hats made
out of Reynolds Wrap to the other end of the spectrum in which the
believers are going to the General Accounting Office and perhaps
the FBI." As if making a complaint to the GAO makes you any more
credible.
Olbermann teased his November 8 show: "Which of these stories
will you be talking about tomorrow? 'Additional reports every
minute.' So six congressmen write demanding an immediate
investigation. Did the new voting technology tamper with last
week's presidential election? Why did an Ohio county lock down its
vote count, claiming it was for homeland security purposes? Why
did 29 heavily Democratic Florida counties, with optical ballot
scanners, wind up voting heavily Republican? Full coverage ahead."
Olbermann opened the hour: "Good evening. An Associated Press
poll tonight suggests that 54 percent of us Americans have been
given renewed confidence about the nation's electoral system based
on last week's decisive presidential election. You guys might want
to put that poll back into the field again next week. Our fifth
story on the Countdown tonight, there is a small but blood
curdling group of reports of voting irregularities and possible
fraud -- principally in Ohio and Florida. And that group of
reports is moving from that end of the spectrum in which believers
are also likely to be wearing hats made out of Reynolds Wrap to
the other end of the spectrum in which the believers are going to
the General Accounting Office and perhaps the FBI."
"What Happened in Ohio?" asked MSNBC's graphic as Olbermann
asserted: "The mainstream newspaper, The Cincinnati Enquirer,
reports that officials in Warren County, Ohio -- that's 20 miles
northeast of Cincinnati -- locked down their administration
building last Tuesday night to prevent anybody from observing the
vote count. Moreover the secrecy, unique among all 88 of Ohio's
counties, was attributed to concerns about potential terrorism.
The newspaper reports that Warren County Emergency Services
Director Frank Young had recommended the walling off of the vote
count based on information received from the Department of
Homeland Security and the FBI. Mr. Young did not explain whether
al-Qaeda might have been planning to hit Caesar Creek State Park
in Waynesville or the King's Island Amusement Park.
"But after some negotiating, reporters were finally admitted
to that building around midnight. They were kept in the lobby. The
counting went on unobserved two floors above them. Warren County's
polls were among the last in Ohio to close, thus among the last to
report and thus among the votes that clinched the state and the
election for President Bush. A local television news director
called the homeland security explanation a, quote, 'red herring.'
County Prosecutor Rachel Hertzel told the newspaper that the
Warren County commissioners were, quote, 'within their rights to
lock the building down, even though no other Ohio county did so,
because having photographers or reporters present could have
interfered with the count.' You bet, Rachel. Ohio, whose 20
electoral votes were based on a margin of two percent in the vote,
has other problems tonight. The state reports 92,000 presidential
votes did not count, ranging from votes improperly cast to votes
improperly counted.
"And in Cuyahoga County -- that is Greater Cleveland -- the
official records of 29 different voting precincts show more votes
than registered voters, to a total of 93,000 extra votes in that
county alone. As an example, in Fairview Park, 12 miles west of
Cleveland, 13,342 voters were registered. 18,472 votes were cast.
"None of this even addresses the story we told you about last
week in the town of Gahanna, outside Columbus, Ohio. There, in a
district with just 800 voters, a voting machine added 3,893 votes
to Mr. Bush's total.
(For an AP story on that inconsequential glitch:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=536&ncid=536&e=19&u=/ap/20041106/ap_on_el_pr/voting_problems )
Olbermann continued: "The problems in Ohio and equally
troubling ones from Florida, which we'll get to presently, have
led to a call for an investigation by the governmental watchdog,
the GAO. Representative John Conyers will join me in a moment to
discuss that big picture. First, back to the small picture in
Warren County in Ohio. The Cincinnati Enquirer reporter who broke
the story of the homeland security-inspired lockdown of the vote
count there is Erica Solvig, and she joins me now....We heard the
county prosecutor's opinion on this. But is it yet clear whether
or not the county might have broken any laws by doing what it
did?"
Erica Solvig, Cincinnati Enquirer: "No. That's still being
debated by the Enquirer attorney, some media representatives in
the area, and Rachel Hertzel, the county prosecutor."
Olbermann: "There's a, there's also a statement tonight from
Pat South, who's the President of the Warren County Board of
Commissioners, that three weeks before the election, they got a
series of memos from Homeland Security. Let me quote her, the rest
of her statement, directly. 'These memos were sent out statewide,
not just to Warren County, and they included a lot of planning
tools and resources to use for Election Day security. In a
face-to-face meeting between the FBI and our Director of Emergency
Services, we were informed that on a scale from 1 to 10, the
tri-state area of southwest Ohio was ranked at a high 8 to a low 9
in terms of security risk. Warren County, in particular, was rated
at 10.' A, does anybody know what she's talking about? And, B, do
any of the Warren County commissioners appreciate that even if
this was the most innocent, the most justifiable of actions, that
the way they handled it has made it appear as if they were using
homeland security to cover something up?"
Solvig: "Well, the Warren County commissioners again, they
state that it's homeland security issues, as for their feelings,
that they're just standing by the stance that it's homeland
security. They did have a meeting the Thursday prior to the
election and did announce that anyone who would be voting at the
polls would have to enter through the front door. But they said
nothing about media access being restricted...."
Olbermann: "Did they have any sense, though, did the
commissioners have any sense that there has been a bad reaction to
this just for the taste in people's mouths?"
Solvig: "Well, we at the Enquirer have received numerous e-
mails, but the county commissioners that I have talked to, when I
spoke with them last, they had said that they had not received any
e-mails or any responses saying that this was a negative action.
And they maintain their position that they were well within their
rights."
Olbermann: "Is there any sense there in southern Ohio that the
election throughout the state might have been a mess or, at worst,
that it may have left the appearance of being tampered with?"
Solvig: "Well, I think that from reader feedback, some readers
have that concern...."
For Solvig's November 5 story which so enthralled Olbermann:
http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/11/05/loc_warrenvote05.html Olbermann headed south: "And the Ohio numbers are
straightforward compared to Florida. Their county totals in
Tuesday's election might be attributable largely to largely
Democratic districts suddenly switching sides and all voting for
Mr. Bush at the same time, except that the 29 counties in which
that happened were among the 52 in the state that tallied their
votes using paper ballots that were optically scanned by machines
produced by the Diebold Corporation, the Sequoia Company or
Election Systems and Software."
With the numbers on screen, Olbermann recited some figures:
"All this data here is from the office of Florida's secretary of
state. Baker County, Florida, on the Georgia border, for instance:
69 percent of voters registered Democrats, 24 percent Republicans.
Yet President Bush got 7,738 votes, and Senator Kerry just 2,180.
In Holmes County, in the Panhandle, seven Democrats for every two
Republicans in the district. Bush beat Kerry 6,410 to 1,810. In
Dixie County, 77.5 percent registered Democrats. Bush, 4,433.
Kerry, 1,959. Lafayette County, 83 percent Democratic, Bush,
2,460. Kerry, 845. In Liberty County, Bristol, Florida, 88 percent
of registered voters there are Democrat, 8 percent Republican.
Bush, 1,927. Kerry, 1,070.
But as the MRC's Brad Wilmouth tracked down, all the counties
listed by Olbermann voted for George W. Bush in 2000 and so the
2004 vote in those counties matches past behavior and so should
have been expected. To access the 2000 presidential vote in
Florida by county:
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/elections/resultsarchive/DetailRpt.Asp?ELECTIONDATE=11/7/00&RACE=PRE&PARTY=&DIST=&GRP=&DATAMODE=
Olbermann wouldn't let go: "Five examples in 29 counties with
decided Democratic margins that suddenly voted overwhelmingly for
Mr. Bush. In Florida counties where optical scanning of paper
ballots was not used, no such violent swings were reported.
Counties with heavy Democratic registration voted Democratic,
counties with heavy Republican registration voted Republican. And
then there's one wild card to add to the Florida mixture. While
the state voted for Mr. Bush and 29 Democratic counties became
Republican strongholds, one extremely liberal state ballot
proposition passed overwhelmingly. A constitutional amendment
raising Florida's minimum wage by a dollar an hour -- 71 percent
of Florida voters approved that."
Which just means people in poorer, more rural counties are
socially conservative while also being economically liberal and so
liked President Bush and wanted to vote more money for themselves.
Olbermann even took seriously a complaint from someone who got
one percent: "There's also late news tonight of a demand for a
hand recount by one of the presidential candidates rejected in New
Hampshire, requested by Ralph Nader. The Nader-Camejo campaign
wrote to the secretary of state in Concord noting, quote, 'Reports
of irregularities in the vote reported on the Acuvote Diebold
machines in comparison to exit polls and trends in voting in New
Hampshire.' Nader suggested the irregularities favored Mr. Bush by
5 to 15 percent. The secretary of state of New Hampshire said the
request was in good order but Nader failed to include the check
for the filing fee for a recount."
Olbermann wrapped up with a left-wing Congressman: "And while
losing Florida, a congressional candidate reportedly says he has
evidence of tampering with the results of those optical scans and
is headed to the FBI with it. Six House winners from last week
have turned instead to the GAO, the General Accounting Office.
John Conyers of Michigan, Jerrold Nadler of New York, and Robert
Wexler of Florida having written to the GAO to 'immediately
undertake an investigation into the efficacy of voting machines
and new technologies used in the 2004 election,' today added three
other Representatives to their fold -- Rush Holt of New Jersey,
Robert Scott of Virginia, and Melvin Watt of North Carolina.
"And added further evidence of improprieties in last Tuesday's
vote, including quoting them here, 'Poll workers in Broward
County, Florida, expressed concern that boxes of absentee ballots
remained uncounted in the central storage facilities and were
promptly escorted out of the supervisor's office by security after
raising that concern. Joining us now, the first signatory on both
letters, Rep. John Conyers, the senior Democrat on the House
Judiciary Committee. Congressman Conyers, thank you for your time
tonight."
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI): "Well, I'm glad you're investigating
this because it's very central to the whole idea that everybody's
vote counts. And these irregularities are sufficient in number,
and more and more members are joining me every day on this...."
Olbermann: "You can choose your terminology, sir, I wouldn't
put it, especially after what you've just said, I wouldn't put any
words in your mouth, but is it your assessment that last Tuesday's
election was, to some degree, invalid, hacked, rigged, fixed,
otherwise flawed, and what do you want done about the previous
election as opposed to future elections?"
Conyers: "Well, future elections are going to be improved by
us reviewing some of these miscues and careful problems that were
raised by the media. I'm congratulating many of the news sources,
the Web pages, people that called in. Our offices continue even
now to get calls about irregularities that have to be investigated
by the GAO, and I think it will probably lead to congressional
hearings in the committee on the Judiciary."
Olbermann: "Let me ask you bluntly, sir, do you think that
what happened, what evidence there has been of irregularities in
Ohio and Florida, altered the outcome of the presidential
election?"
Conyers: "I can't tell you yes or no because I haven't had the
investigation yet...."
Olbermann: "If you get your investigation, whether it's from
the GAO or if you can get it somehow started institutionally
within Congress, and there does turn out to be significant
evidence or even proof of genuine tampering in either or both of
these states or many others that we haven't even gotten into, what
do we do then?"
Conyers: "Well, first of all, these are violations, if they
turn out to be deliberate and intended, that they're violations of
the federal law. And there will be prosecutions that follow from
it. What we're additionally looking for are ways to improve the
system...."
Olbermann: "Last question, sir. Would you and your five
colleagues be doing this if John Kerry had won this election and
the accusations were flowing in that, intentionally or otherwise,
it was the Democrats who might have had thumbs on the scales
against Mr. Bush?"
Conyers: "Well, you know, this doesn't have anything to do
with partisanship. We were the ones that, the Democrats were the
victims of 2000. We're trying to make the process work for
everybody. So it's not a matter of going after this because of the
Republicans are involved in much of the questions that have been
raised by the complaints that we have received."
Olbermann: "Representative John Conyers of Michigan, the
author, along with five of his colleagues in the House, of that
letter to the comptroller general seeking an investigation into
the technological failures in last Tuesday's election. As you
continue your reporting on this, so shall we. Thank you for your
time, sir."
Conyers: "You're more than welcome."
Olbermann: "And, by the way, that Associated Press poll with
which we began which asked if the results of the election made you
feel more confident or less confident in the fairness of this
country's electoral system -- 39 percent said less confident."
After 16 minutes of Olbermann's paranoid rantings I bet MSNBC
viewers have less confidence in the news media.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
