High-ranking KY Election Officials Sentenced to 156 Years in Election Rigging Conspiracies

Clay County, KY Election Officials Sentenced to 156 Years in Election Rigging Case
ALSO: Voting Machines Impounded by State After Grand Jury Investigation in Perry County, KY

It is now officially impossible to know whether thousands of paper ballots being counted in the state of Wisconsin's Supreme Court election "recount" are the same ones actually cast on Election Day. It didn't have to be that way, unlike in Kentucky, where the voters never had a chance, and where high-ranking election officials have now been sentenced to more than 150 years in federal jail following "decades" of manipulated elections.

In 2009, a spate of high-ranking election officials in Clay County, KY --- including the County Clerk, a Circuit Court Judge, the School Superintendent, a former Magistrate, and several polling place officials --- were arrested in a massive vote buying/selling and electronic vote-machine rigging conspiracy which netted the criminals millions of dollars over the past decade. The federal charges included the County Clerk and other members of the Board of Elections having intentionally falsified election reports to include inaccurate voting results when submitted to the state.

One Republican election official pleaded guilty after the arrest two years ago, and the other eight were found guilty and convicted last year in federal court. They were sentenced this past March to a total of more than 1,871 months in federal prison.

And last week, in a separate, newly developing case, state officials impounded electronic voting machines in Perry County, KY after Republican candidates in last November's election complained of "vote rigging" on the county's 100% unverifiable electronic voting machines...

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8514

why do these people do it, why sell your soul to corporate masters?

It's those dastardly ACORN commie-rats that commit voter fraud. It was in all the papers, and a skinny white guy dressed like a pimp said so. It has to be true with all that going for it.

:silly:

White said they did that at the clerk's office after legitimate training for all election workers. She and Weaver stayed late to learn how to manipulate the machines, White said.

Weaver, then the Manchester fire chief, was the Republican judge in the precinct where White was the Democratic judge in May 2006.

White said that even though she and Weaver were of opposite parties, they worked together on Election Day.

She would strike up conversations with people she knew, White said, ushering them away from the voting machine while Weaver slipped in to change votes, or changing votes herself when Weaver got someone to step away too early.


Read more: http://www.kentucky.com/2010/02/20/1147902/clay-precinct-worker-testifies.html#ixzz1LujlrPFY

Nice try, but, as I noted in the article (did you read it) and as I also reported last year (http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7723), White testified at the trial that she had been a Republican, but was asked by Circuit Court Judge Maricle to change her party affiliation to Democrat so she could work as a "Democratic" poll judge at the precinct with Weaver.

While I have no qualms about reporting on Democrats who commit election fraud, Weaver wasn't one of them. She, like the other conspirators in this case, was a Republican.

so it wouldn't take very long for changes to be made.

The voter should always read the review page. I guess not many people actually review before casting their votes.

Here's the eSlate used in Ky. That scroll wheel can move you quickly through the ballot. So far they seem to be OK. Part of that is the good chain of custody used in our county.

I wonder if my vote counted.

Was not the fault of the machine. They would distract the voter long enough to change the vote. That's pretty bold to lure the voter out of the booth so the other judge could change the vote.

The DRE you are referring to above, like all DREs, is 100% unverifiable.

Of course, if you have any evidence to prove that even one vote, ever cast on that machine (or any other DRE) was recorded accurately as per any voter's intent, for any candidate or initiative on the ballot, in any election, please feel free to share it with us.

(Hint: Don't work too hard. No such evidence exists. Use of those machines is 100% faith-based voting. Period.)

In our elections. As yet I have seen nothing that would raise suspicion. I was precinct captain. I know my precinct. I have a good idea how the election will play out in any given race.

We rarely have more than 100 voters in non presidential years. That makes predictions easier.

08 was a record year, and it played out as expected. Obama won our precinct, and the vote reflected party lines, and showed good independent numbers.

I don't trust the machines, but so far I see no manipulation.

Next week are the state primaries. It will be very boring. No competition on the Dem side, and the Rep candidates are not inspiring the voters. David Williams will win by huge numbers on the R side. Beshear will cruise. Unless something bad happens the Dems will retain the statehouse. The Rep candidate is a dour old man, and his lt Gov running mate has some serious ethics problems concerning the use of a state vehicle, unpaid taxes, and a generally cavalier attitude toward his staff.

"I know they are unverifiable, but I have not seen any unexpected outcomes"

You can't "see" ANYTHING on these types of machines. That's the whole point! And that's what absolutely wrong with DRE e-voting systems and why they are antithetical to democracy and self-governance!

"In our elections. As yet I have seen nothing that would raise suspicion. I was precinct captain. I know my precinct. I have a good idea how the election will play out in any given race. We rarely have more than 100 voters in non presidential years. That makes predictions easier."

How ridiculous. That's your measure? What you imagine the outcome to be versus what the machines reported that it was?! That's not democracy. That's best-guessing.

Moreover, you refer to your precinct as if it's the only one in the entire county. What county is it? And where do you get the idea that ANY vote cast in the county's other precincts (much less your own) has EVER been recorded as the voter intended? You are merely trusting in a system which offers not a single piece of evidence, at all, zero, nada, to confirm that even one vote was counted as cast.

"08 was a record year, and it played out as expected. Obama won our precinct, and the vote reflected party lines, and showed good independent numbers."

That assessment, with all due respect, means absolutely nothing. Has nothing to do with election with integrity.

"I don't trust the machines, but so far I see no manipulation."

You never will, if it's done right. Nor will you "see" malfunction, most likely. And when/if a result comes up that doesn't "seem" right to you, you will be left with absolutely no recourse but to accept it as is. There will be NO evidence that the machines recorded the intent of voters correctly. None.

"Next week are the state primaries. It will be very boring. No competition on the Dem side, and the Rep candidates are not inspiring the voters. David Williams will win by huge numbers on the R side. Beshear will cruise. Unless something bad happens the Dems will retain the statehouse."

I see no reason for elections to even be held in your county, since you already know the outcome. If you have such a money crunch in your county, for some reason, why not just go with "Alfredo's Assessment"? It is as meaningful as the "results" printed out by your 100% unverifiable voting systems.

If a person's physical mark up and identification number are on the ballot and they keep possesion of it until it's counted and it's kept for recount if needed, a person can guard their vote better.

However, you get the need for technical support involved and anything can be done. Work with computers all day. It's my job to make them behave the way someone wants them to. I of course use my talents for good not evil, but we know how any kind of invisibility helps the rethugs hide their misdeeds. FULL transperancy that protects only the voters involved is the way to go.

Tig

A sad smile.

The machines used in Clay County, KY, where the officials were changing votes on them after the voter left "the booth", were ES&S iVotronic.

The last part of my story discusses the machines just impounded from Perry County, KY and those were Danaher Shouptronics and Hart eSlates.

"The voter should always read the review page. I guess not many people actually review before casting their votes."

Even if they do, it is strictly 100% impossible to know whether the machine recorded your vote the same way it was seen on the review page. That's why these systems are 100% unverifiable, faith-based voting.

"Here's the eSlate used in Ky. That scroll wheel can move you quickly through the ballot. So far they seem to be OK. Part of that is the good chain of custody used in our county."

As mentioned, the machines in Clay were ES&S iVotronic, not Hart eSlates. Nonetheless, "chain of custody" has little to nothing to do with DRE voting machines (like the iVotronic or eSlates). That they "seem to be okay", means absolutely nothing. They are designed to "seem okay", but that has nothing to do with whether or not they are, which is something you can never know either way.

So, um, good luck with those! :-)

The eSlate.

It was corrupt officials.

I am not defending the machines, I'm just saying I haven't seen any signs of widespread fraud in my precinct or county, and so far neither has the political parties. The elections have been clean, despite the machines.

since they won't let anyone see the source code how do we know it's honest.
even a test run isn't any indication. it can be programmed to give honest counts during a test.

will vote. Many like myself take note of the vote count and check to see if they are reported as counted. The media has a representative at the precincts to record the result tape numbers. they are posted for all to see.

So far the eSlate has not shown any programmed bias. We have an honest County Clerk, and his staff is very good. The chain of custody as I can see it is very good. The counting is transparent.

The case in the OP was not a fault of the machine, but of the corrupt officials using a bit of "social engineering." I do not trust the ES&S machine, and neither did our county clerk. He had three choices, the ES&S, Diebold, and eSlate. He said that was the best of the three, and so did most of the 120 counties in Ky. He was fully aware of the controversy and that informed his decision.

I would have been happier if there would be a printout of the review screen, but the eSlate has proven itself to me and the other poll workers.

When I voted the Democratic slate in 2004, the eSlate registered GW Bush for President. If I had not the patience to scroll back to the top of the ballot when I reviewed before casting (the review screen opened the ballot at the bottom), I would not have seen this flip. Correcting the presidential vote only reset it, resulting in no vote for President. Again I scrolled up the ballot in review (the ballot was very long because of all the judges) and discovered the no vote. I selected Kerry again. Upon the 3rd review, all was good & I cast my ballot.

While I waited to vote (45 mins), no one I watched voting ahead of me spent nearly the time it took me to review the ballot 3 times (maybe no one ahead of else voted the Democratic slate? Except it was a black precinct in Harris County, a Democratic stronghold).

eSlates may reliably perform as programmed, but then...

"Experienced poll workers have a good idea how their precinct will vote. Many like myself take note of the vote count and check to see if they are reported as counted."

But how do you check to see if they are "counted" as the voter intended? (Hint: You cannot. It is strictly and scientifically impossible. You are putting your faith in the Magic Election Fairy.)

"The media has a representative at the precincts to record the result tape numbers. they are posted for all to see."

And yet, nobody can see that the "result tape numbers" are accurate. But you seem okay with that, curiously enough.

"So far the eSlate has not shown any programmed bias."

And you know that HOW exactly?? Got a single piece of evidence to back up your assertion? (Hint: No. No you do not.)

"We have an honest County Clerk, and his staff is very good."

Honest like Monterey County, CA's honest 13-year Registrar of Voters Tony Anchundo? http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4362

"The chain of custody as I can see it is very good."

But you can't "see" the chain of custody. You can't see anything with a DRE vote.

"The counting is transparent."

As mentioned in the subject line: Complete and utter, disinformative nonsense. The "counting" is completely done in secret on the DRE system you laud, there is no way for any human being to oversee it. It is 100% NOT transparent.

"The case in the OP was not a fault of the machine, but of the corrupt officials using a bit of "social engineering." I do not trust the ES&S machine, and neither did our county clerk. He had three choices, the ES&S, Diebold, and eSlate. He said that was the best of the three, and so did most of the 120 counties in Ky. He was fully aware of the controversy and that informed his decision."

He is in complete denial if you believe he was "full aware of the controversy" and that he made an "informed decision".

You and/or him have been completely suckered and are now living in as much denial as the Rightwing Global Warming denialists.

"I would have been happier if there would be a printout of the review screen, but the eSlate has proven itself to me and the other poll workers."

It has proven only that you can fool some of the people, some of the time. You are one of those people, apparently. Too bad.

The results seem to be in line with how it always been, even before we had BBV. These machines are wired. There is no wireless access. I've worked with the same crew for 10 years. I have seen no hint of partisanship. Out local Dem party has no issues with how our county runs elections.

I was one of those working against the electronic voting machines. I did my best to ensure when we did go electronic, we would reject the more dubious machine manufacturing companies. We were to get vvpb's, but economic issues, including a huge EPA suit have caused the city to tightened the belt a bit. If they had rejected calls for paper ballots, I would not be as charitable. They haven't delivered, but right now other issues are front and center. Until we can hire back some police officers and firemen, I don't think I should press them on that issue.

"The elections play out as expected, voting seems to reflect party affiliation. ... The results seem to be in line with how it always been, even before we had BBV."

Cool. So why don't we just use pre-election polls and save a LOT of time and trouble?

That's not how democracy works. We don't ballpark it. We don't say "seems as expected, kinda like party affiliation". That ain't democracy. That's Sunday morning news shows.

"These machines are wired. There is no wireless access."

Has nothing to do with anything. Doesn't prevent malfunction or incorrect (or malicious) programming. Also doesn't prevent the introduction of malware by other means.

"I've worked with the same crew for 10 years. I have seen no hint of partisanship. Out local Dem party has no issues with how our county runs elections."

How about your local Republican party? Do they feel the same? Do the independents feel good about it? How would you know? How about the Greens? The Libertarians? Will they all feel good when a result shows up that doesn't "reflect party affiliation"? When it will then be too late to have absolutely ANY way in the world to determine whether the votes were recorded as per ANY voter's intent?

To be frank, I'm somewhat stunned I'm even having to have this conversation here with you.

"I was one of those working against the electronic voting machines. I did my best to ensure when we did go electronic, we would reject the more dubious machine manufacturing companies."

By "dubious", you mean the manufacturers that you had heard of? Are you aware of the problems found by world class scientists with those very Hart Intercivic eSlates you use there? Have you read, for example, the state of California's "Top to Bottom Review"? The one that didn't likely exist when your county went ahead and bought 100% unverifiable voting systems?

"We were to get vvpb's, but economic issues, including a huge EPA suit have caused the city to tightened the belt a bit."

Paper ballots are cheaper, by far, than electronic voting machines. So if you're putting your trust in whoever told you that you were "tighten(ing) the belt" by using DREs, they are not trustworthy.

"If they had rejected calls for paper ballots, I would not be as charitable. (I'm presuming you mean "haven't" there.) They haven't delivered, but right now other issues are front and center. Until we can hire back some police officers and firemen, I don't think I should press them on that issue."

Sure. Democracy can wait. I'm sure the continued election of Republicans has nothing to do with having to lay off police officers and fireman, and since your results "play out as expected", why bother to think there could have been more votes for your party had ballots actually been countable in your county.

Nothing to worry about. Carry on.

I don't trust the machines, that's why I pay attention to the elections, I get to know my precinct voting habits, and I watch the "book" to see the party breakdown of those voting.

I am just saying that so far I have seen nothing to raise suspicion.

I am talking about a printed out tape that the voter can retrieve, and produce a paper backup. I'm not talking about switching over to paper ballots. The county has been responsive to our concerns, but they have to deal with whatever budget they are given. Over the weekend a part of a city parking garage collapsed. It's going to cost a lot to fix it. We don't know if it will have to be torn down.


As long as the elections run well, and there's no sign of impropriety by machine or individual I don't think the city/county sees little need to make changes. This city has been struggling since the 08 meltdown. Keeping the lights on is the top priority right now, not an upgrade to a system that has worked as advertised.

Anyway, the county clerk office is really top shelf. I have little doubt about their honesty and ability. I know they made the best decision they could when presented with a limited choice of machines.

...but sort of explain why this nation is stuck with the same, unverifiable elections year after year after year.

"The campaigns have a good idea how the vote will go before the vote."

So no democracy necessary at all then, eh? Why bother to hold a vote?

"I don't trust the machines, that's why I pay attention to the elections, I get to know my precinct voting habits, and I watch the 'book' to see the party breakdown of those voting."

And, of course, we all know that people vote EXACTLY as they are registered in the book. Sigh...

"I am just saying that so far I have seen nothing to raise suspicion."

YOU. NEVER. WILL. THAT'S. THE. POINT. And, if you do, there will be absolutely no recourse for you.

"I am talking about a printed out tape that the voter can retrieve, and produce a paper backup. I'm not talking about switching over to paper ballots."

Those "printed out tapes" on DREs are as unverifiable as systems that don't offer that VVPAT ("Voter-verifiable Paper Audit Trail". DREs are 100% unverifiable, faith-based voting, no matter whether they offer a so-called "paper trail" or not.

"The county has been responsive to our concerns, but they have to deal with whatever budget they are given."

If you've been told its about "budget", then you have been lied to. Paper ballot elections are cheaper than DRE elections. Period. If you believe the county has been "responsive to (your) concerns", you have been played for a chump.

"Over the weekend a part of a city parking garage collapsed. It's going to cost a lot to fix it. We don't know if it will have to be torn down."

Has nothing to do with the cost of democracy.

"As long as the elections run well, and there's no sign of impropriety by machine or individual I don't think the city/county sees little need to make changes."

And you all are allowing that. Luckily, you have machines that normally offer "no sign of impropriety by machine or individual," no matter how much impropriety there is. And you fell for it. Sadly.

"This city has been struggling since the 08 meltdown. Keeping the lights on is the top priority right now, not an upgrade to a system that has worked as advertised."

"Worked as advertised". You know how they were "advertised" right? As 100% secure and impossible to tamper with -- all lines that have been disproven, by study after study, long ago.

"Anyway, the county clerk office is really top shelf. I have little doubt about their honesty and ability."

Yes, I felt the same way about Monterey County's 13-year Registrar of Voters Tony Anchundo, until he was charged with 43 criminal counts: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=4362

"I know they made the best decision they could when presented with a limited choice of machines."

Oh, they were not ALLOWED to choose hand-marked paper ballots for voters then?

How can you tell whether or not it's shown any bias? Who knows if it's reflecting how people voted? Who knows if the result tapes are correct? The skill of the poll workers isn't really relevant.

If they're so good at knowing how their precinct will vote, why even hold elections?

You seem to be quite the cheering squad for these machines.

Actually, yes, it was. Aside from the question of the user interface design that let people walk away without explicitly notifying them that their ballot had NOT yet been cast, how many voters would have let the poll worker con them out of a paper ballot before they'd finished marking it? The voting machine deliberately introduces more steps to the process, allowing this to happen.

Norm Coleman (FORMER Senator in MN) was a DEM when he came here then found out there was more "opportunities" in the Rethug party and switched sides like Benedict Arnold.

THEY can't get real DEMS to do this crap so they fake them up. Geese.


Tig

That they'll have to send their food down in pressurized containers.

sodomized by business and anti worker Republicans, but because of the civil rights act, they vote Republican.

And Mitch is a friend of Karl Rove, who's friends with Antonin Scalia and John Roberts...

The gang feels the posse approaching. Great work, BradBlog!

Ha!

Except this once, but never before or since.

be prosecuted and lose office.

Of course any direct link/proof that a candidate was involved in the fixing of an election is more than enough to get them removed from office...however, you can't convict someone for something they didn't do, know about, or have any involvement in. Likewise, you can throw out tainted ballots (but of course not digital ones!) when you know which to throw out. You can also invalidate the entire election and hold another, but you can't just throw out all the votes cast for one candidate because you know some were fraudulent. That type of response would actually make cheating easier and more effective (just cheat for your opponent, but do it poorly so you get caught and they get thrown out of office).

Electronic voting machines without a paper trail can certainly lower faith among the electrorate, but the truth is that elections have been tampered with, fixed, and corrupted since the voting group because too big to count by a show of hands.

is that crew in the photo the cast of the "Texas Chainsaw Massacre"?

Yikes!

ward, of how many bags of ballots across the state have "issues". I'm not surprised that there are some, but there seem to be so many, and so very many of them seem to be in just one county.

We have paper ballots. When things go well, we have a protective chain of custody of those ballots. We have Dems and Pukes working every polling place. (Granted, some of those might not be real Dems, or Pukes for that matter.) And we have processes with checks and balances and multiple people involved in ballot security and integrity.

What we're seeing in Waukesha is a huge anomaly. Sure, the recount revealed other counties with some issues, but they are minor, at least in comparison.

There are more than enough simple opportunities in Waukesha alone to flip the entire WI Supreme Court election.

It doesn't take "serious" collusion, when insiders had access to ballots for three weeks in "the dark". And, given how close the reported results were, it would only have taken a few ballot bags to have been messed with to get the required results. To make matters worse, WI's "recount" procedures are so bad that there seems little chance anybody would ever catch it.

Of course, feel free to let me know how it is you can vouch for the validity of the thousands of ballots that have been found to have been in opened bags. Got any evidence they were the same ballots actually cast on election day? I'll welcome your evidence.

Until then, might I recommend Democracy's Gold Standard instead: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8463

NO News reports on open ballot bags other than Waukesha and Dane.
All we know otherwise is from first hand accounts here -- Milwaukee Co had many and Marathon had a few.

benefited from this? Which politicians I mean?

Great to see something being done about election fraud.

Thanks for never giving up on this, Brad. It should be major headlines in every newspaper around the country.

:kick:

This should get much more media attention, seems like a huge story.

"There were others charged in various elements of the conspiracies as well, such as Richard Brian Hubbard, who "pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI ... he was charged with sending a threatening photo of himself holding a gun to two people who have cooperated in the investigation of the officials."

Thanks for reporting Brad and keep up the good work.

:sarcasm: :rofl:

What more evidence do you need that REPUBLICANS STEAL ELECTIONS???

If you think it only happened in Kentucky, well then you need to look a little closer.

great news

and purple states.

Why is this an apparently ridiculously hard thing to manage?

Someone votes, verify it with valid identification and then move on.

Seems simple enough... Perhaps that is the problem. Sense just doesn't make political sense.

this case and turn them into a Task force that will look into complaints around the nation?

We need a LOT more like this.

Rand Paul can get elected.

and get her take on this... this is absolutely priceless.

How will blondie defend herself to Whoppi on this one?

:rofl:

prosecute the brazillion other republicans who are out there all over this country rigging elections.

K & R

K & R

Or been hanged for trying to destroy our "democracy."

When is someone going to compile all the data of election fraud, voter intimidation and manipulation and expose what corporations are doing to our Democracy? Michael Moore? Any takers?

:toast: :bounce: :applause:

Now why isn't the MSM screaming this all over the TV? This is much more of a threat to our freedoms than Bin Laden ever was. Not that he wasn't a threat, I'm glad to see him gone, but rigged elections attack the very basis of our system and our freedoms.

With the current brand of Republicans' shoot-from-the-hip, downright-crazy rhetoric, with seemingly no fear of being held accountable for their destructive rhetoric & policies, I still believe that the vast majority of this country would not prefer them over Democrats. I believe that if not for election tampering, there might be only a fourth of the number they currently have at the federal level.

I hope the DOJ will investigate Wisconsin. I could just cry when I think those people, after all the heart & soul they've put into standing up to corruption, are very probably being cheated once again.

From the Declaration of Independence:

so little else we can count on this era of pug takeover by whatever means necessary.