Reply #137: I'm not sure all of her criticisms are justified. [View All]

Certainly, Madsen is a very, very poor writer but, perhaps, a decent investigator. He finds a lot of very interesting pieces of evidence, and a lot of garbage, and mixes them together with a lot of speculation. In the end, we have some very well researched historical fiction, not journalism. Perhaps if Madsen had a good editor, things would be different.

Still, there is a lot that should not be discounted about Clinton Curtis' sworn affidavit, regardless of the writing style of the guy who first brought it to our attention, and Bev doesn't do a very good job of tearing it down.

Clint never claims that his software was every used in an actual election, indeed, he implies that it could not have been used; it was just a proof of concept demonstration of a system of vote rigging that is somewhat more advanced and undetectable (from a results analysis standpoint) than simple candidate switching. When he was asked to work on a real vote switching program, he backed out.

When Feeney first began working with Clint, he was not the Speaker of the Florida House, but rather just the corporate council and lobbyist for YEI, according to the affidavit; this is fairly plausible. The Qui Tam (or QUITAM) issue may only speak to the fact that Clint is not very legally knowledgeable or well advised, by admitting to the filing, he might have been breaking the law rather than lying, or he might just be confused about the whole thing.

There is a lot of stuff in Clint's affidavit, a lot of names, events, et cetera, that do seem to cross check with reality and this at least gives his statements a veneer of plausibility.

It seems that Bev was a little quick to judge and, from her criticisms, it is not entirely clear that she read the affidavit that closely.