The Playbook for Wisconsin is HERE

The Case for Fraud in Ohio Election 2004
I. Voter Suppression
A. Overly Restrictive Registration Requirements
B. Incompetence in Processing Registrations
C. Challenges to New Registrants on Insufficient Grounds
D. Misinformation About Voting Status/Location/Date
E. Voter Intimidation
F. Voting Machine Shortages/Malfunctions
G. Overly Restrictive Rules & Incorrect Procedure Regarding Provisional Ballots
H. Poorly Designed Absentee Ballots Caused Voters to Mark Incorrect Candidate
II. Access to Voting Systems Before Election Violates Protocol
III. A Third-Rate Burglary in Toledo
IV. Suspect Results
A. Registration Irregularities
B. Exceptionally High Voter Turnout
C. More Votes than Voters
D. Exceptionally High Rates of Undervotes
E. High Rate of Overvotes Due to Ballots Pre-Punched for Bush?
F. The Kerry/Connally Discrepancy
G. Discrepancy between Exit Polls & Tabulated Votes
V. Restricting Citizen Observation & Access to Public Documents
A. Warren County Lockdown
B. Restricting Citizen Access to Election Records
VI. What Went Wrong with the Recounts/Investigation of Vote Irregularities
A. Chain of Custody of Voting Machines & Materials Violated
B. Failure to Follow Established Procedures for Recounts
C. Failure to Allow Recount Observers to Fully Examine Materials
D. Secretary of State Blackwell has Failed to Answer Questions
VII. Recount Reveals Significant Problems
VIII. Methods of Election Fraud
A. Stuffing the Ballot Box
B. Touchscreen voting machines appear to have been set to “Bush” as Default
C. Computers pre-programmed to ‘adjust’ vote count in Bush’s favor?
D. Tampering with the Tabulators: Evidence of Hacking in Real-Time?
IX. Additional Observations
A. Irregular/Impossible Changes in Exit Polls over time on Election Night
I. Voter Suppression
A. Overly Restrictive Registration Requirements. According to Representative John
Conyers’ letter to Kenneth Blackwell (1), Blackwell’s 9/7/04 directive to reject voter
registration forms not printed on white, uncoated paper of not less than 80 lb text weight
resulted in many valid voter registration forms being rejected. While Blackwell reversed
this directive, he did not do so until 9/28/04. Not all counties were informed when the
directive was reversed – some were advised of the change by the news media.
B. Incompetence in Processing Registrations. Moss v. Bush (2), the lawsuit filed in the Ohio
Supreme Court to contest the results of the Presidential election, alleges that in the
Cleveland Area (Cuyahoga County), the Board of Elections botched the registrations of
more than 10,000 voters, preventing them from voting.
C. Challenges to New Registrants on Insufficient Grounds. Over 35,000 Ohio citizens were
targets of a voter registration scam (3). In Summit County, four elderly residents were
asked by a member of the local Republican Party to fill out and sign 976 registration
challenges for people on a list (4). The names on the list were those of new registrants
who had been sent registered mail by the Republican Party. Delivery was attempted only
once, and if the person was not home, refused the mail or did not go to the post office the
work day to receive the “campaign literature” they were placed on the list. This attempt at
suppression impacted many long-time residents of Summit County including a veteran
and an immigrant (“I came to this country because this is a great country…“). The
Summit County Board of Elections dismissed all 976 challenges after hearing the
testimony of just a few people so accused. The four people who signed the challenges
may be prosecuted.
D. Misinformation About Voting Status/Location/Date. Civil rights violations in Ohio were
egregious. According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to Kenneth Blackwell (1) in
Lake County, voters received a memo on bogus Board of Elections letterhead informing
voters who registered through Democratic and NAACP drives they could not vote. In the
Cincinnati area, African American voters received letters on official-looking letterhead,
phone calls, and ‘door-hangers’ that directed them to the wrong precinct on Election Day.
African American voters received letters on stolen NAACP letterhead claiming that
because of the expected high turnout, Republicans were asked to vote on Tuesday Nov. 2
and all other parties were being asked to vote on Thursday, November 4. In the Cleveland
and Columbus areas, voters received calls incorrectly informing them their polling place
had been changed.
E. Voter Intimidation. According to the Ohio Free Press (5), a team of 25 men calling
themselves the “Texas Strike Force” positioned themselves at a hotel across the street
from Republican Party headquarters in Franklin County, Ohio (Columbus), and
proceeded to make intimidating phone calls to likely Democratic voters, “targeting
people recently in the prison system.” The Texans’ rooms were reportedly paid for by the
Ohio Republican Party. A “hotel worker heard one caller threaten a likely voter with
being reported to the FBI and returning to jail if he voted” — a crime if committed by an
individual, but a much more serious act if engaged in by the entire interstate flying squad
and any Republican group that paid, accommodated or sent them on their felonious
mission. Local law enforcement was called.
F. Voting Machine Shortages/Malfunctions
Columbus Area (Franklin County): According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to
Kenneth Blackwell (1), throughout predominately Democratic areas in Ohio on election
day, there were reports of long lines caused by inadequate numbers of voting machines.
The Franklin County voting machine allocation report states that 2,741 voting machines
were placed “By Close of Polls” on Election Day. The County’s records reveal that they
had 2,866 “machines available” on Election Day. At least 125 machines remained
unused, even though the Board of Election’s Director Matt Damschroder (former
Executive Director of the Franklin County Republican Party) admitted on 11/19 that 77
machines malfunctioned during the day. In some precincts there were fewer voting
machines on Election Day than there had been during the spring primary. Additionally, it
appears that in a number of locations, polling places were moved from large locations,
such as gyms, where voters could comfortably wait inside to vote to smaller locations
where voters were required to wait in the rain.
An analysis by Tim Lohrentz (6) estimates that at least 22,000 Franklin County voters
were disenfranchised due to the long lines and lack of voting machines, including over
15,000 voters from heavily Democratic (> 60%) precincts. Of the 217 precincts where
there were fewer voting machines in 2004 than in 2000, 184 (85%) were Democratic.
The Free Press (7) has obtained a list of all voting machines assigned in Franklin County,
including serial numbers. The list contains at least 42 machines originally assigned to
predominantly African-American and inner city wards that voted 80% for Kerry, and
where voters waited in line for three hours and more on Election Day. These 42 machines
were blacked out on the list, raising the question of whether these were among the 68
machines the Franklin County Board of Elections has admitted holding back in the
warehouse despite obvious shortages at certain polling places. Affidavits from poll
workers confirm that numerous requests for more machines were made throughout
election day, but that few if any were delivered.
Toledo Area: Moss v. Bush (2) reports that Lucas County Election Director Paula Hicks-
Hudson said the Diebold optical scan machines jammed during testing in the weeks
before the election. Jammed or inoperable machines were reported throughout the city.
Moss v. Bush alleges that there was discriminatory assignment of more voting machines
to precincts with a majority of white voters than to precincts that had a majority of
African American voters.
Cincinnati and Mount Vernon Areas: Moss v. Bush (2) alleges that in Hamilton and
Knox Counties there was a discriminatory assignment of more voting machines to
precincts with a majority of white voters than to precincts that had a majority of African-
American voters.
Youngstown Area: Moss v. Bush (2) indicates that there were voting machine errors in
Mahoning County when 20 to 30 ES&S iVotronic machines need to be recalibrated
throughout the voting process due, in part, to reports of votes for Kerry appearing as
votes for Bush.
G. Overly Restrictive Rules & Incorrect Procedure Regarding Provisional Ballots
Cincinnati Area: Across the state of Ohio voters could cast a provisional ballot, which
was counted only if they were in their home precinct. According to Representative John
Conyers’ letter to Kenneth Blackwell (1), in Hamilton County, officials have carried this
problematic and controversial directive to a ludicrous extreme: they are refusing to count
provisional ballots cast at the correct polling place if they were cast at the wrong table in
that polling place. A Green Party recount observer learned that approximately 400 of the
Hamilton County provisional ballots were rejected because they were cast at the wrong
table (precinct) in the right polling place.
Cleveland Area: Moss v. Bush (2) alleges that in Cuyahoga County there was an effective
denial of the right to cast a provisional ballot and have that ballot counted. About 1/3 of
the provisional ballots cast (8,099 ballots) have been incorrectly ruled invalid because
they voter allegedly wasn’t registered or voted in the wrong precinct. In 2000, about 17%
were ruled invalid.
Stark County: Moss v. Bush (2) alleges that in Stark County there was an effective denial
of the right to cast a provisional ballot and have that ballot counted. The Election Board
rejected provisional ballots cast at the wrong precinct in the right polling place. In earlier
elections, a vote cast in Stark County in the wrong precinct at the right polling location
would be counted.
H. Poorly Designed Absentee Ballots Led Voters to Mark Incorrect Candidate. Moss v.
Bush (2) alleges that in the Cleveland (Cuyahoga County) and Columbus (Franklin
County) areas there were voting machine errors with respect to absentee ballots. Like the
infamous “butterfly ballots” in the 2000 Presidential Election, arrows on the absentee
ballots did not align with the correct punch hole. On information and belief, this led to
voters casting a vote for a candidate other than the candidate they intended to support.
II. Access to Voting Systems Before Election Violates Protocol
Auglaize County. Moss v. Bush (2) indicates that in a letter dated Oct. 21, 2004, Ken
Nuss, former deputy director of the County Board of Elections, claimed that Joe
McGinnis, a former employee of ES&S, the company that provides voting systems in
Auglaize County, had access to and used the main computer that is used to create the
ballot and compile election results. Mr. McGinnis’ access to and use of the main
computer was a violation of county board of elections protocol. After calling attention to
this irregularity in the voting system, Mr. Nuss was suspended and then resigned.
III. A Third-Rate Burglary in Toledo (8)
An article appeared in the Toledo Blade on October 13, 2004. Written by Robin Erb, it
included the following: “Thieves shattered a side window overnight at Lucas County
Democratic headquarters in Toledo, stealing computers with sensitive campaign
information and jeopardizing the party’s ability to deliver crucial votes on Election Day.
Among the data on the stolen computer of the party’s office manager were: e-mails
discussing campaign strategy, candidates’ schedules, financial information, and phone
numbers of party members, candidates, donors, and volunteers. Also taken were
computers belonging to a Lucas County Commissioner and to a Texas attorney working
with the Kerry campaign to ensure election security.
At Democratic headquarters, officials stopped short of publicly blaming partisan politics,
but at the same time, they all but ruled out run-of-the-mill criminals. Two other computers,
holding less sensitive information, were untouched, as were a petty cash box that usually
holds $80 to $100, televisions, portable radios, and other electronics. Moreover, other
offices inside the building, 1817 Madison Avenue, were not entered. Files, papers, and
pamphlets remained in neat piles, and campaign signs leaned, apparently undisturbed,
against a wall.”
Thus, the burglary gave the thieves exclusive possession of two months’ worth of
Democratic voter canvass records. It may have allowed them to target specific wards and
precincts for voter suppression operations, and left the Democrats unable to prevent it.
IV. Suspect Results
A. Registration Irregularities According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to J. Kenneth
Blackwell (1), there appears to be an extraordinarily high level of voter registration in
Perry County: 91%. A substantial number of these voters have never voted and have no
signature on file. An extraordinarily large number of these voters are listed as having
registered in 1977. In fact, 3,100 voters apparently registered in Perry County on
November 8, 1977.
B. Exceptionally High Voter Turnout. According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to
J. Kenneth Blackwell (1), in Miami County (Concord Southwest precinct) voter turnout
was a highly suspect and improbable 98.55%. The certified result showed 520 votes for
Bush and 157 for Kerry. This statistically improbable turnout has all but 10 of the 689
registered voters casting their ballots on Election Day. A preliminary canvas by The Free
Press of less than half the precinct found 25 registered voters admitting they had not
voted. In nearby Concord South precinct, there was a highly improbable 94.27% voter
turnout. Miami County election results indicated that 18,615 votes came in after 100% of
the precincts had reported. It is statistically suspicious that the extra votes came in at
essentially the same percentage for candidates Bush and Kerry both before and after the
18,615 votes were counted Senator Kerry had received 10,724 votes (33.92%) of the vote
after 100% of the precincts had reported. After the additional 18,615 votes were added,
his percentage remained 33.92%.
C. More Votes than Voters
(1) Discrepancies Between Number of Registered Voters & Number of Votes in Franklin
County: According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to Kenneth Blackwell (1),
a computerized voting machine in Ward 1B in the Gahanna precinct of Franklin
County recorded a total of 4,258 votes for President Bush and 260 votes for John
Kerry. However, there are only 800 registered voters in the Gahanna precinct. A
computer glitch results in recording 3,893 extra votes for Bush. Fortunately, this
glitch was caught and the numbers were adjusted to show President Bush’s true vote
count at 365 votes to Senator Kerry’s 260 votes.
(2) Discrepancies Between Number of Pollbook Signatures & Number of Votes
Perry County: According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to Kenneth
Blackwell (1), the sign-in books in Reading S precinct show that fewer than 400 total
votes were cast in that precinct. Yet, the precinct’s official tallies indicate that 489
votes were cast. Monroe Township, Precinct AAV has 226 voter signatures in the poll
books and reports 393 votes were cast. In W Lexington G AB, 350 voters are
registered. Yet, 343 votes have been reported. Perry County BOE has since issued a
correction: Only 217 votes were cast for either Kerry or Bush. The BOE explanation
is that some votes were initially counted twice. Representative Conyers’ letter notes
that it is highly improbable that every ballot was counted twice.
Michael Kolman, attorney for Bill Crane (Democratic Party Candidate for Perry
County Auditor), checked county voting records and alleges the number of votes cast
exceeded the number of people who signed the books in at least 11 of 46 precincts.
Approximately 90 voters did not sign in at one precinct, according to Kolman. At
another precinct, 21 people who voted by absentee ballot also signed the signature
books. (9)
Youngstown (Trumbull County): A careful review of nearly 200 precincts in Trumbull
County by Dr. Werner Lange revealed a considerable discrepancy between the
number of certified absentee votes and the number of registered absentee voters
identified in the poll books. The poll books are to contain not only the name of every
registered voter, but also clearly identify who voted (either by regular, absentee or
provisional means) and who did not. The Trumbull County investigation showed
some 650 more absentee votes than there were absentee voters identified in the poll
books examined. If the absentee vote inflation rate there were consistent statewide,
then over 63,000 votes were up for grabs in Ohio. A case filed in mid-November with
the Trumbull County Court of Common Pleas challenging the validity of this official
denial of access to public records has not even been given a hearing date, let alone a
ruling, from Judge Peter Kontos (10)
D. Exceptionally High Rates of Undervotes
Cleveland Area: According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to Kenneth Blackwell
(1), post election canvassing revealed that many ballots were cast without any valid
selection for president. For example, two precincts had an undervote rate of 25% each –
accounting for nearly 16,000 voters who stood in line to vote, but purportedly declined to
vote for president. This is in stark contrast to the 2% of undervoting county-wide.
Disturbingly, predominantly Democratic precincts had 75% more undervotes than those
that were predominantly Republican.
E. High Rate of Overvotes Due to Ballots Pre-Punched for Bush? The unusually high
number of Ohio votes discarded for double-punching remains unexplained. A possible
reason was shared at a 3-hour public hearing on vote irregularities in Mahoning Valley
held on December 21: A voter from Cuyahoga County stated that she inspected her paper
ballot prior to voting and was shocked to notice that it was pre-punched for Bush. She
also noticed another ballot had the same tampering problem. (10)
The graphic below, created by Joe Knapp (11), reveals that in the Cleveland area over
150 precincts in which Kerry led Bush had more than 3% ballot spoilage, while fewer
than 10 precincts in which Bush led Kerry had more than 3% ballot spoilage.
F. The Kerry/Connally Discrepancy. According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to
Kenneth Blackwell (1), in Butler County, a Democratic Candidate for State Supreme
Court, C. Ellen Connally received 59,532 votes. In contrast, the Kerry-Edwards ticket
received only 54,185 votes, 5,000 less than the Supreme Court candidate. Additionally,
the victorious Republican candidate for State Supreme Court received approximately
40,000 less votes than the Bush-Cheney ticket. [Note: Ellen Connally’s campaign was
vastly underfunded as compared to that of her opponent Thomas Moyer, Incumbent Chief
Justice.]
Moss v. Bush (2) indicates that there were 36 Ohio counties where Connally’s margin
was 1,000 votes or more better than Kerry’s unofficial results. Virtually all of these
counties use voting systems by ES&S (16 counties) or Triad (18 counties). Both
companies have ties with some members of the Republican Party. I believe that the
Kerry/Connally discrepancy is the basis of Moss v. Bush (2) claim that at least 130,656
votes cast for the Kerry-Edwards ticket were deducted from their vote tally and added to
those actually cast for Bush-Cheney. After deducting 130,656 from the certified result for
Bush-Cheney and adding 130,656 to the Kerry-Edwards ticket, the true result is that
Kerry-Edwards ticket won Ohio by at least 142,537 votes.
G. Discrepancy between Exit Polls & Tabulated Votes. Moss v. Bush (2) indicates that exit
poll data for Ohio showed Kerry would win 52.1% of the Ohio Presidential vote. The
actual certified result shows Kerry winning 48.7% of the Ohio vote. The difference
between exit poll predictions and the certified actual Kerry share of the Presidential vote
is 3.4%. According to standard statistical analysis, assuming a random exit poll sample
and an honest vote count, there is a probability of roughly one in a thousand (0.0012) that
this certified election result would occur. This implies that there is a 999/1000 chance
that the Ohio exit poll result is either not based on a random sample of that the election
itself was not honest. The probability that a pollster with the experience, reputation, and
ability of Warren Mitofsky would not be able to draw a random sample is vanishingly
small.
V. Restricting Citizen Observation & Access to Public Documents
A. Warren County Lockdown: According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to Kenneth
Blackwell (1), on election night, Warren County locked down its administration building
and barred reporters from observing the counting. When that decision was questioned,
County officials claimed they were responding to a terrorist threat that ranked “10” on a
scale of 1 to 10, and that this information was received from an FBI agent. Despite
repeated requests, County officials have declined to name that agent, however, and the
FBI has stated that they have no information about a terror threat in Warren County.
[Addendum: The Warren County lockdown may have enabled high-tech vote fraud. The
Moss v. Bush (2) lawsuit alleges that at last 63,879 votes were switched from Kerry to
Bush in Warren and six adjoining counties by high-tech fraud.]
B. Restricting Citizen Access to Election Records
Moss v. Bush (2) alleges that J. Kenneth Blackwell, using his official powers as Secretary
of State, ordered all 88 boards of election to prevent public inspection of polls books until
after certification of the vote on December 6, 2004.
Greene County (Xenia): “Efforts to audit poll records in Greene County, Ohio are being
obstructed by County Election officials and/or Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell.
According to Joan Quinn and Eve Robertson, two election observers researching voting
records, Greene County officials initially gave Quinn and Robertson access to poll
records, and then abruptly withdrew such access. Greene County Director of Elections
Carole Garman claimed that she had withdrawn access to the voting records at the
direction of Secretary Blackwell. Regardless of who ordered the denial of this access,
such an action appears to violate Ohio law. Later, at the same office, election observers
found the office unlocked, and what appeared to be locked ballot boxes, unattended. Prior
to the withdrawal of access to the books, observers had found discrepancies in election
records, and possible evidence of minority vote suppression.” (12)
VI. What Went Wrong with the Recounts/Investigation of Vote Irregularities
A. Chain of Custody of Voting Machines & Materials Violated
(1) Fulton & Henry Counties: In a letter from Congressman John Conyers to Brett A.
Rapp of Triad GSI (13), Congressman Conyers indicated that it appeared that
officials in Fulton and Henry counties had confirmed that Triad had remote access
to tabulating computers controlled by the Boards of Elections. Officials had stated
[to Ohio recount observers] “your company did not come into the Board of
Election to adjust the tabulation software, because it could be, and had been done
remotely”.
(2) Hocking County: Sharole Eaton, Deputy Director of the Hocking County Board of
Elections, filed an affidavit on 12/13/04 (14). In it she indicated that a Triad
technician (Michael) had visited her office at about 12:30 PM on Friday,
December 10th (prior to the recount).
In the affidavit, Ms. Easton indicates that the technician stated that the computer
was not coming up, that the battery had gone dead.
“He said that he could put a patch on it and fix it. He took apart both that
computer and a spare…. He worked on the computer until about 3:00 PM and
then asked me which precinct and the number of the precinct we were going to
count. I told him, Good Hope 1 # 17. He went back into the tabulation room.
Shortly after that he (illegible) stated that the computer was ready for the
recount and told us not to turn the computer off so it would charge up.”
“Michael gave us instructions on how to explain the rotation, what the tests
mean, etc. He advised Lisa and I on how to post a “cheat sheet” on the wall so
that only the board members and staff would know about it and what the codes
meant so the count would come out perfect and we wouldn’t have to do a full
hand recount of the county. He left about 5:00 PM.”
(3) Lucas County: Catherine L. Buchanan gave sworn testimony on 12/14 that Diebold
OptiScan machines were being re-programmed. (16)
(4) Mercer County: A recount observer reported the following: A Triad technician had
been at the BOE the day prior to the recount. The technician was also there during
the recount. The tech reported that he had disassembled the tabulator at 7:30 on the
morning of the recount. He said he’d replaced a box containing a switch, and then
made a remark that he didn’t have anything to do with the software, that he’s just a
hardware technician. (16)
(5) In Van Wert County the recount observer reported: “When asked if Triad had
serviced the machine, the deputy director and a board member stated that they had
serviced the machine over the phone via modem on December 9th.” (16)
(6) Hardin County: An observer, Cathy from the Democrats, reported she had seen
Brandon [the Diebold technician] the day before alone with the tabulators testing
the machines. (16)
(7) Shelby County: Kay E. Baker, Director of the Shelby County Board of Elections,
indicated in a letter to Harvey Wasserman of Columbus, Ohio that “tabulator test
decks were discarded after [the] election…” The destruction of these test decks
appears to be a violation of state law. (16)
(8) In Allen and Champaign recount observers noted that ballots were not stored
securely, some ballots were stored in open containers, others were stored in tin
containers with neither seal nor lock. (16)
(9) In Clermont County one recount observer noticed that on some ballots, there was a
sticker, the Kerry vote was covered with a sticker. No one could explain these
stickers. Later other witnesses noticed stickers on other ballots. (16)
(10) Coshocton County: The recount observer noted that ballots had been handled
prior to the recount. Witness P. stated that a board employee informed her that “a
few precincts” had been already counted prior to the start of the recount, not in the
presence of witnesses. Witness, Patricia Stout, stated that “one of the precincts
I observed was already separated into Republicans, Democrats and Other. It was
clear that this pile had been counted.” (16)
(11) Cuyahoga County: As reported by a recount observer: “…In response to the
question “How are the ballots in order?” Jacqui Maiden’s response was “How they
come out of the machine.” Anomalies were found. Almost all of the witnesses that
I spoke with felt that the ballots were not in random order, that they had been
previously sorted. There would be long runs of votes for only one candidate and
then long runs for another, which seemed statistically improbable to most.” (16)
B. Failure to Follow Established Procedures for Recounts
Recount procedure in Ohio: An initial hand recount of 3% of the ballots cast in each
county is to be followed by machine tabulation of those same ballots. This portion
of the procedure allows for examination and observation of the tabulating
equipment. If the 3% hand recount exactly matches the machine tabulation then the
remainder of the county’s ballots are to be recounted by machine and, if the hand
count did not match, a second hand recount would follow. If the second hand
recount matched the machine tabulation, then the remainder of the ballots were to
be recounted by machine. If, however, the second hand recount did not match the
machine tabulation there was to be a 100% hand recount of the county’s ballots.
(1) Non-Random Selection of Precincts
The “volunteer manual” that the Green Party observers received says “the board
must randomly select whole precincts whose total equals at least 3% of the total
vote.” (16) Ideal random selection of precincts occurred in Gallia County: The
name of each precinct was put on a slip of paper, the slips were put into a hat and
drawn one at a time until a sufficient number of precincts had been drawn that
made up 3% of the county-wide vote. The precincts selected for the recount were,
however, not randomly selected for over 80 out of the 88 counties. (16)
The Boards of Election in most Ohio counties, however, pre-selected the
precinct(s) that would be hand counted several days before the count. Thus
employees and, in some cases, the voting machine company technicians, knew in
advance the precincts that would be hand counted. In almost all cases in which
observers requested that precincts be selected randomly at the beginning of the
recount they were denied. In Allen County, Mr. Keith Cunningham, Director of the
Board of Elections, explained that it would take considerably longer to carry out
the recount if there were a random selection process employed. (16)
In many counties precincts selected were chosen based on size. In Greene County,
three precincts were chosen (31, 224, and 442), one for each counting team, that
were approximately the same size and that were the right size to add up to the
required 3% minimum for hand recount. It was pointed out by those familiar with
the population of the precincts that the choices seemed to be very calculated based
on ease of recount. (16)
In Cuyahoga County, precinct selection was done on the basis of only choosing
precincts with 550 or more votes in a cross-section of areas (one East side, one
West side, one affluent, one non-affluent). According to Professor Cyrus Taylor
(Case Western Reserve University), this selection criterion meant that only 8% of
all precincts qualified for having their ballots closely examined in the hand
recount, and that the “small fraction of precincts are not reflective of the county as
a whole. Overall, the qualifying precincts have significantly higher proportion of
votes for Bush than for Kerry, yet the county voted for Kerry by a 2:1 margin….
The vast majority of precincts have less than 550 ballots cast. It is thus possible in
principle to fiddle with the returns from most of the county without fear that they
would be checked in the hand recount of 3% of the returns.” (16)
In Hocking County the Board decided to only consider the precincts in which the
vote totals for Bush and Kerry were similar. The Green Party observer objected,
stating that selecting a precinct without a large difference in totals wasn’t a random
selection. The Board did not change their selection method. (16)
(2) Refusal to Conduct 100% Hand Recounts
In Fairfield and Monroe Counties a full recount should have been ordered when
the second hand count of the 3% sample did not match the machine vote totals.
In Greene and Huron Counties additional hand counts were completed until the
results matched the machine totals. In Fairfield County, when the hand recount
did not match the machine totals, the BOE asked the recount observers if they
would waive their right to a 100% hand recount. The observers indicated that
they would not, that the law was very clear, they would now have to perform a
mandatory hand count of the entire county. Based on what county officials said
was a recommendation from Secretary Blackwell’s office, however, the recount
was “suspended” until they could get a new machine from the vendor. (16)
C. Failure to Allow Recount Observers to Fully Examine Materials
(1) Allen County: Recount observers requested, but were not permitted to inspect the
voter registration books [pollbooks] and were told that they would not allowed to
view absentee or provisional ballots until January 10, 2005. (16)
(2) Auglaize County: Observers were not allowed to see the absentee ballots. A
witness inquired as to the capability of the DRE to print an image of the ballots as
cast. When the witness then requested that images representing 3% of the ballots
cast be printed the Director of the Board of Elections denied the request. (16)
(3) Champaign County: Observers requested access to the signature books, the poll
books, the late or voided absentee ballots and rejected provisional ballots. They
were denied access to everything but the poll books for 2 precincts. (16)
(4) Licking County: The Board of Elections decided that the recount teams would not
be allowed to inspect the voting machines and their ballot assemblies to insure
correct rotation of candidate names. Neither were they allowed to check rejected
provisional ballots to determine if denials were justified. (16)
D. Secretary of State Blackwell has Failed to Answer Questions
(1) SOS Blackwell did not respond directly to any of the 34 questions asked of him
by Congressman John Conyers, in a letter dated 12/8. SOS Blackwell replied that
he would respond to any inquires by the GAO, but not the Democratic members
of the House Judiciary Committee. (17)
(2) An AP article dated Monday, December 27th indicated that Secretary of State
Kenneth Blackwell has requested a protective order to prevent him from being
interviewed as part of a court challenge of the presidential vote. (18)
VII. Recount Reveals Significant Problems
A. Cuyahoga County: A recount observer reports that witnesses were able to look at the
signature books of 60 different precincts, including those from the 3% selected for the
hand recount and 26 other precincts of concern. They were looking to make sure that the
number of signatures in a precinct matched the number of ballots cast in that precinct. In
many cases they did not. (16)
B. In Coshocton County, according to the Green Party observer, signature book examination
conducted by the witnesses for the Democratic candidate looked at two different
precincts, with BOE personnel recounting Jefferson Twp. Precinct. Discrepancy appeared
to indicate a pattern of a 7-8% loss of votes for the Democratic candidate. Continued
review and examination was thorough and resulted in some contentious debate centered
around the degree of scrutiny. [The notes from the Green Party observer do not indicate
whether this was resolved]. (16)
C. In Coshocton County over 1,000 votes were ‘found’ between the date on which the
election was certified and the completion of the hand recount. Departing from standard
procedure, Coshocton County volunteered to do a 100% hand recount. The observers
present at the recount were given, at the beginning of the recount, a sheet showing vote
totals that was apparently printed on December 10, 2004. The vote totals on this sheet
differed from the vote totals certified by Secretary of State Blackwell on December 6th
and they differed from the results of the 100% hand recount. The Green Party observer
has suggested that some precincts must have been recounted by hand prior to the official
recount to yield the totals shown on the sheet they were given at the beginning of the
recount (printed on 12/10/04). (16)
As certified
on 12/6
Totals given
to recount
observers,
printed 12/10
Results of
100% hand
recount
(12/14).
Hand
recount minus
certified
Bush 9,277
(57.1%)
9,839 9,826
549
(50.8%)
Kerry 6,878
(42.4%)
7,378 7,412
534
(49.4%)
Peroutka 67 68 68 1
Badnarik 17 15 13 -4
Schriner 2 2 2 0
Cobb 1 1 1 0
Total 16,242 17,303 17,322 1,080
VIII. Methods of Election Fraud
A. Stuffing the Ballot Box:
The unusually high number of Ohio votes discarded for double-punching remains
unexplained. A possible reason was shared at a 3-hour public hearing on vote
irregularities in Mahoning Valley held on December 21: A voter from Cuyahoga County
stated that she inspected her paper ballot prior to voting and was shocked to notice that it
was pre-punched for Bush. She also noticed another ballot had the same tampering
problem. (9) If the voter selected Bush then the ballot would be cast for Bush. If the voter
selected any other candidate, the ballot would become an overvote (counted for no one).
B. Touchscreen voting systems (DRE’s) appear to have been set to “Bush” as default
Mark Munroe, Chairman of the Mahoning County Board of Elections, confirmed that
vote switching problems occurred in at least 16 precincts and involved some 20 to 30
ES&S machines that “needed to be recalibrated during the voting process because some
votes for a candidate were being counted for that candidate’s opponent”.
Professor Victoria Lovegren of Case Western Reserve University, an expert in computer
programming, cast very serious doubt on the validity of the Ohio vote recorded by any
BOE using these electronic devices at the Mahoning Valley public hearing on 12/21.
“One pattern that has been documented based on the experience of voters in Florida, New
Mexico, Ohio, and elsewhere (especially in swing states) is the machines appear to have
been set with a default to Bush.” Votes would be automatically cast for Bush unless the
voter successfully overrode the default choice of the computer. Likewise, if the voter
deliberately chose not to vote for president, their votes would be counted for Bush. The
exact number of votes incorrectly counted for Bush instead of Kerry by such means is
unknown. (9)
Many computer experts indicate that there is evidence that the equipment manufacturer
representatives for some of these systems have remote access to the vote machines while
they are in service, can change defaults and other settings remotely, and even monitored
the election results remotely on election day. (19)
Moss v. Bush (2) alleges, that these undetected operating instructions were only
operational on November 2, 2004. On information and belief, the logic and accuracy tests
of the DRE machines did not include setting the system date of the machine forward to
November 2, 2004, to test what would happen to the machine in actual operation on
November 2 and 3, 2004. Without such a test, it would have been very difficult to detect
the effect of unauthorized operating instructions inserted into the software. On
information and belief, some or all of the unauthorized operating instructions were preset
to delete themselves a given amount of time after the election.
C. Computers pre-programmed to ‘adjust’ vote count in Bush’s favor?
Miami County Tallies. According to Representative John Conyers’ letter to Kenneth
Blackwell (1), in Miami County, with 100% of the precincts reporting on 11/3 President
Bush had received 20,807 votes, or 65.80% of the vote, and Senator Kerry had received
10,724 votes, or 33.92% of the vote. Miami reported 31,620 voters. Inexplicably, nearly
19,000 new ballots were added after all precincts reported, boosting President Bush’s
vote count to 33,039 or 65.77%, while Senator Kerry’s vote percentage stayed exactly the
same at 33.92%.
One plausible explanation for this result is that the counters or tabulating computers were
‘set’ to deliver an approximate percentage of the vote to certain candidates, irregardless
of the actual votes cast.
D. Tampering with the Tabulators: Evidence of Hacking in Real-Time?
Moss v. Bush (2) alleges that while one of these means of changing the legitimate result
to a fraudulent result includes gaining physical or electronic access to the tabulating
machines and systems, there are many ways to gain access to the voting and vote
tabulating systems. In certain circumstances (for example when there is a modem
attached to a vote tabulating computer or when a vote tabulating computer has a wireless
access port), the person(s) who was actually changed the vote totals did not need physical
access to the computer. Electronic access can be obtained from almost anywhere in the
world under the right circumstances. By accessing the spreadsheet which contains the
results in a central tabulating computer, one change the votes actually received by one or
more candidates in a race, leaving the total votes cast in the race unchanged, and erasing
or falsifying the electronic audit trail which could show the access to the computer and
the spreadsheet.
Continued on next page…
Impossible Deviations in Votes for Cobb/Kerry on Election Night. The impossible vote
tallies for Cobb that appeared and disappeared in Hamilton, Lake, and Lucas Counties on
election night may indicate tampering with tabulators. If this does not indicate tampering,
then it does indicate elections run with exceptional sloppiness and error.
Lucas County: On election night, the Ohio Secretary of State’s website showed that with
6.06% of Lucas County’s precincts reporting, 1,917 votes had been cast George W. Bush;
0 for John F. Kerry; and 4,685 for David Cobb. The Ohio Secretary of State’s website
now shows, (with 100% of precincts having reported) 85,405 votes for George W. Bush;
128,874 for John Kerry; and 8 for David Cobb.
Image from Ohio Secretary of State’s website on 11/2/04:
(Complete ‘screenshot’ on last pages of this report.)
Hamilton County: On election night, the Ohio Secretary of State’s website showed that
with 11.25% of Hamilton County’s precincts reporting, 34,804 votes had been cast
George W. Bush; 39,541 for John F. Kerry; and 39,541 for David Cobb. The Ohio
Secretary of State’s website now shows, (with 100% of precincts having reported)
215,639 votes for George W. Bush; 190,956 for John Kerry; and 66 for David Cobb.
Image from Ohio Secretary of State’s website on 11/2/04:
(Complete ‘screenshot’ on last pages of this report.)
Lake County: On election night, total votes for Cobb went from 0 to 14,883, which was,
at the time it appeared, identical to the total for Kerry. Those totals remained in place
until 8:35cst, when the Cobb total went back to 0 and the Kerry totals went to 42,191.
Cobb’s total at certification is 8. (No image).
IX. Additional Observations
A. Irregular/Impossible Changes in Exit Polls over time on Election Night
As illustrated by the two screen captures below, Ohio state exit polls reported by CNN at
12:21 a.m. show Kerry leading Bush by 4%. The number of voters polled = 1,963. At
1:41 a.m. Bush was reported to be leading Kerry by 2.5%. The problem? Only 57 more
voters were included in the 1:41 a.m. poll results. Fifty-seven voters (2.8% of 2,020
voters) cannot change an exit poll result by 6.5%.
At 12:21 a.m. Kerry leads Bush 52% to 48% (1,963 Respondents)
At 1:41 a.m. Bush leads Kerry 51% to 48.5% (2,020 Respondents)
Please note that none of the results reported by the media were “raw.” Before releasing
any results to the media, the National Election Poll (NEP) would have already ‘adjusted’
the polls to take into account the fact that, although the precincts polled were selected
randomly, the sample was still stratified.
Also note that this year the number of polls conducted in swing states were doubled in
comparison with past elections to increase the likelihood of obtaining an accurate result.
There are 88 counties in Ohio and there were over 50 exit polls conducted on 11/2/2004.
What could explain the change in exit poll results from 12:21 a.m. to 1:41 a.m.? As
explained on the NEP website, this year in order to ‘improve the accuracy’ of the exit
poll results, the final ‘exit poll results’ were based on both the exit polls and the tabulated
votes. The results of the exit polls after 1:41 a.m. were thus contaminated with data from
tabulated votes. Of course, the exit poll and tabulated results matched when the final exit
polls results were reported. If the vote totals were fraudulent then so were the final exit
poll results.
References
1. Representative John Conyers’ letter to J. Kenneth Blackwell is available at the House
Judiciary Committee website
2. Moss v. Bush (2), lawsuit filed with the Supreme Court of Ohio is available at
.
3. Mail Scheme Earns Stamp of Disapproval

4. Summit County Board of Elections

5. Startling new revelations highlight rare Congressional hearings on Ohio vote

6. Franklin County Elections Board Targeted Heavily Democratic Precincts, by Tim Lohrentz.
Available at .
7. Ohio GOP election officials ducking subpoenas as Kerry enters stolen vote fray
.
8. Another Third Rate Burglary, by Richard Hayes Phillips
.
9. Perry County auditor files lawsuit over voting irregularities
.
10. Kerry votes switched to Bush and ballots pre-punched for Bush
.
11. Knapp’s Cuyahoga Voting Graphics
.
12. Conyers Alarmed at Efforts to Obstruct Ohio Recount Effort, Calls Witness to Monday
Hearing to Detail Such Efforts, Press Release from the Office of Representative John Conyers
.
13. Text of Follow up Letter to Triad Officials Regarding Remote Access to Tabulating
Computers (December 23, 2004). .
14. Sharole Eaton’s Affidavit .
15. Catherine L. Buchanan’s Affidavit. An attachment to: Contestors’ Emergency Motion for
Expedited Hearing and Emergency Expedited Relief to Prevent Spoilation of Evidence and to
Preserve Documentary and Electronic Evidence, available at:
.
16. Reports of Ohio Recount Observers
17. Ohio Secretary of State Blackwell’s Letter about Voting Irregularities in Ohio and Rep.
Conyers’ Letter in Response
18. Ohio Official Refuses Interview Over Vote

19. Evidence of Widespread Fraud .
Appendix A: Key Actors in Ohio Investigations/Law Suits
A. Presidential Candidates David Cobb and Michael Badnarik. Within a few days after the
election, citizens who wanted a recount, and believed that only candidates could request
a recount, contacted the third party candidates to ask them to request the recount. I know
this because I was one of the citizens who contacted them. I received a reply from
Michael Badnarik’s campaign manager indicating that they could not possibly pay for a
recount. Recounting Ohio would cost more than they had raised and spent on Badnarik’s
entire campaign. I suggested that they ask for donations, that citizens would send money
to pay for the recount. They sent an email requesting for donations and about $150,000
was raised in four days. Over 6,000 people contributed. Most donations were $50 or less.
B. The National Ballot Integrity Project has allied itself with Help American Recount to
support the ongoing work. The National Ballot Integrity Project lists among its allies:
MoveOn.Org, Democracy for America, Common Cause, Verified Voting Foundation,
Black Box Voting, True Majority, Working Assets, Rock The Vote, People for the
American Way, Lawyers Committee on Civil Rights, Interfaith Communities United for
Justice & Peace, and Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility.
C. Attorney and Chairman of Legal Affairs Committee of Common Cause Ohio, Clifford
Arnebeck, filed a lawsuit with the Ohio Supreme Court to overturn the election results.
The suit, Moss v. Bush, was filed on behalf of the citizens of Ohio. The citizen named in
the suit, Reverend Bill Moss, is the Executive Vice President of the Historically Black
Colleges and Universities.
D. The Ohio Democratic Party intervened as a plaintiff in a case filed in federal court
against J. Kenneth Blackwell. The complaint, filed by Audrey J. Schering, alleges that
Kenneth Blackwell failed in his mandatory statutory duty to provide directives to each of
the eighty-eight county Boards of Election in Ohio to assure uniform and consistent
counting of the provisional ballots. The case is based largely on Bush v. Gore (2000), 531
U.S. 98.
E. Senator John Kerry and his representatives. On December 23rd , representatives of John
Kerry filed a request for expedited discovery regarding Triad Systems voting machines,
as well as a motion for a preservation order to protect any and all discovery and preserve
any evidence on this matter in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Ohio.
F. People For the American Way Foundation filed a lawsuit on November 24 seeking to
overturn arbitrary rules that led election officials in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) not to
count one third, or more than 8,000, of the provisional ballots cast on November 2. The
percentage of provisional ballots rejected this year is almost twice the percentage thrown
out in 2000. PFAW Foundation’s legal team is asking that election officials check the
provisional ballots against voter registration cards, not electronic voting lists that are
known to contain errors. The lawsuit also requests remedies for voters affected by poll
workers who did not notify them of their correct polling place.
Appendix B:
Screenshot from the Ohio Secretary of State’s website on election night:
(Note Lucas County results.)
Appendix B:
Screenshot from the Ohio Secretary of State’s website on election night.
(Note Hamilton County results.)

Ohio Fraud Summary