More ballots found in King county

[CARLHAYDEN]

As I predicted, more ballots have been found in King county.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002228539_ballots02m.html

Dean Logan doesn't believe those ballots should be counted as they come predominatly from precincts won by Rossi.

Logan, who is being called upon to resign by a member of the county council is trying to shift blame to underlings.

Even the Secretary of State is having second thoughts in defending his old friend.

Hmm.

BTW, even the Democrat party has acknowledged in its filing with the court that the election was a complete mess.

The question remains as to how long Gregoire can drag out the legal process.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Ah, but this is just the tip of the iceberg.

So much has been found already, and filed with the judge, that even the Democrats in their filing, admitted the election was badly messed up.

Moreover, Logan tried to hide this particular piece of evidence, which has riled the judge.

There's a lot more which will become public in the next few weeks.

[CARLHAYDEN]

I posted this primarily to remind Alcon that I predicted this (yes, I do have inside knowledge).

As I earlier posted, a mass of evidence is emerging.

The smart Democrats in Washington will begin edging away from Gregoire, and those in King county will be acknowledging that it is time for Logan to depart.

If the Democrats don't seperate themselves from Gregoire and Logan, they're likely to go down with the ship.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Actually, Washington is a test case for the liberal Democrats.

Can you get away with stealing an election not by paying floaters, but by rigging the results.

More primitive methods of this type were used in the bygone days, but this is a sophisticated 'modern' version.

The bottom line of the question is why even bother to go to the expense of holding elections if the likes of Dean Logan are going to decide them?

Also (for Alcon), stonewalling doesn't work.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Its doesn't matter how much "sympathy" or how many votes are cast for Rossi so long as Logan is 'counting' the votes.

There general concensus among posters on this thread is that, 'so, the election was stolen.'

No one has bother to answer my earlier question as to why one should even bother to have elections if they are to be routinely stolen.

[CARLHAYDEN]

The question becomes a definitional one.

When one disobeys a clear state law regarding the process of counting votes, is this merely a "mistake"?

When the disobedience of the law favors one party/candidate, is this merely a "mistake,"

When there is a pattern of cover up and lies about the vote count, is this merely a "mistake"?

Just how massive must the "mistakes" be to render the election results void?

[CARLHAYDEN]

The question becomes a definitional one.

When one disobeys a clear state law regarding the process of counting votes, is this merely a "mistake"?

When the disobedience of the law favors one party/candidate, is this merely a "mistake,"

When there is a pattern of cover up and lies about the vote count, is this merely a "mistake"?

Just how massive must the "mistakes" be to render the election results void?

The "mistakes" would have to be enough to effect the results; they are not there, yet.

I have NOT yet posted most of the grisly details, which do far exceed the margin of victory.

My point of this particular thread is that months after the election, more evidence emerges of Logan's perfidity.

Slowly the story is seeping out.

If you remember my predictions  (which were denied by others here at the time), they have come to pass.

I notice that everyone is skipping around the basic question of why bother to hold an election if the vote counter will alter the results?

[CARLHAYDEN]

Carl, I'm not "stonewalling." "Stonewalling" suggests that I am delaying something, which would require actually having some power on my part to delay anything. Do you not think there is any merit to the argument that the state should probably not have a change in administration five months after the first election?

As to your question: Washington State generally has smooth elections, and as a resident of it, I am very proud of that. This was a screw up. We need to fix the situation, but "routinely stolen"? We have elections that Republicans win - you can claim that the election was stolen if you like, but arguing that because you believe one close election was stolen, democracy of pointless is arguing that you should throw away the entire crop just because one banana is bruised.

We can fix this problem. Dwelling on this election like Republicans are currently is not the way to fix it - more talk about how to prevent this from happening again, not more whining about it happening.

First, can you please cite the post where I suggested YOU were "stonewalling"?

Second, you argument that since Gregoire managed to reach the Govenor's chair, she should be left there, even if it is found that she was not actually supported by a plurarilty of the voters is without merit.

Third, outside of King county, elections in Washington are generally are fair and competent.  King county is another matter.

Fourth, if Gregoire is allowed to keep her ill gotten gains, it will reward cheating.

Fifth, yes, Logan wants to "fix" more elections.

Sixth, if you REALLY want to stop these problems in the future, join in the call to fire Logan!

[CARLHAYDEN]

You posted:

I assumed that's what your post was implying. My apologies if I misinterpreted.

I reply:

Apology accepted.

You posted:

Yes, it is. However, that isn't my argument. My argument is that, personally, I believe Rossi should drop this and allow the state to move on. From a practical point of view, though, if it becomes obvious he won (I do not think it has), he should replace Gregoire.

I reply:

Nixon won in 1972 by on overwhelming margin.  Many of his supporters argued that the Watergate investigation should merely have been dropped and allow the nation to move on.

You posted

This is true. Being from the second most populated county in the state, though, I can tell you that our county auditor's office has lots of good people, but is still overloaded. It just happens that King County's is the most overloaded. We need reform, statewide.

I reply:

The state rules are clear and fair.  They were NOT followed in King County.  The only "reform" needed is to get rid of Logan, who decided to NOT follow state law.

You posted:

I'm not sure this is entirely true - it is arguable that Gregoire is not the winner, and arguments can be made that she was. Your whole argument assumes heavily that it is obvious to any educated person that Rossi won, which is simply untrue.

I reply:

Get ready for the ruling latter this year.  There is a lot of evidence on file which the press has chosen to not report (as they favor Gregoire and hope the whole thing will just go away if they ignore it).

You posted:

I wouldn't mind if Mr. Logan was fired whatsoever. However, as a Pierce County resident, there's not much call I can join that I know of. He's not my elected official, but if he was, I'd surely vote for any Republican or Libertarian opponent.

I reply:

Good. 

[CARLHAYDEN]

But Alcon, there was NEVER any evidence that Nixon ordered the Watergate breakin.

So, under your logic, Nixon should have been left alone?

Also, there is a difference between honest minor errors (non King County) and monumental violations of state laws (King county).

The minor errors outside King county can be rectified by greater training of election officials.

The actions in King county are NOY simple errors, but rather deliberate ly flouting state regulations>

[CARLHAYDEN]

It should be over in a few months.

Depends upon how long the Gregoire lawyers can drag out the process, and the determination of the judge to conclude the trial.

[CARLHAYDEN]

An excerpt from a Seattle Times article about even more problems with the King County vote:


King County election officials said a key document accounting for absentee ballots in the November election was so flawed it was virtually meaningless.

The Mail Ballot Report, which showed every absentee ballot accounted for, didn't report the correct number of ballots returned by voters. Instead, it simply added the number of ballots counted and the number rejected to show a perfectly matching number of ballots returned.

The improperly reported information came to light after officials learned that 93 valid absentee ballots weren't counted in the election.

Elections-office spokeswoman Bobbie Egan said it isn't known why the author of the report, absentee-ballot facility chief Nicole Way, didn't correctly account for ballots. "This is part of an ongoing investigation, and we cannot comment at this time," Egan said.

Way, who was placed on paid administrative leave Tuesday, could not be reached for comment. Two other staffers were suspended as well, pending completion of an investigation. A fourth worker was suspended yesterday.

"Oh, she knows better than that," Way's one-time boss, former Elections Manager Bob Bruce, said yesterday.

In calculating the number of returned ballots by adding up ballots counted and ballots rejected, Bruce said, "You have a false figure. ... If you're not keeping track of how many came in to start with, you don't have much of a check."

More to come...

[CARLHAYDEN]

As I noted earlier, this should be wrapped up latter this year.

It really depends upon how much stalling by Gregoire's lawyers the judge is willing to tolerate.

Credible rumors suggest the judge is a mite unhappy by the way King county has been less than forthcoming with honest answers.

[CARLHAYDEN]

As long as Logan is 'counting' the votes, Sims is s shoo in.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Update

The depositions should be publicly available soon.

I have had a look at the crucial ones (Logan and his associate Huennenks).

Bad news for Gregoire.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Further update.

Have had a chance to see (with exception of sealed portion)  the Logan deposition.

As much as I despise the little weasel, I almost feel sorry for him.  Its clear he thought he could contain the situation by stonewalling.

He never thought that anyone would take the time to carefully check up on the multiple inconsistencies.

He has already tried to dump the blame on subordinates, which has just antagonized even more people into providing evidence.

The question is, when he realizes he cann't divert blame to subordinates, will he point to others?

[CARLHAYDEN]

JJ

There already is in hand (in the judge's hands) enough evidence.

We're merely waiting for the process to be completed.

[CARLHAYDEN]

Further update:

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/222211_election29.html

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, it is illegal to try to compel someone to say how they voted.

Second, it is unethical.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, it is illegal to try to compel someone to say how they voted.

Second, it is unethical.

There have been two recent cases in Texas where voters have been required to indicate who they had voted for, one was in a Democrat primary in 1992, and the other was a state representative race in 2004.

Check Article VI., Section 6. of th Constitution of the State of Washington.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, it is illegal to try to compel someone to say how they voted.

Second, it is unethical.

Here is what the contstitutional section really says:

All elections shall be by ballot. The legislature shall provide for such method of voting as will secure to every elector absolute secrecy in preparing and depositing his ballot.

"Preparing and depositing" is far different than "disclosing by way of a court order."

There is nothing either illegal or unethical in this.

First, there is no question that the wording is not a precise as could be desired.

Second, there is a long history in Washington supporting secrecy of the vote (when I have more time I'll try to give you cites on this).

Third, the attempt to compel a voter to disclose how he voted is unethical for several reasons:

a. are you going to imprison someone for refusing to disclose their vote, but not for voting illegally?

b. how do you deal with a witness who lies (and how would you know)?

The bottom line which everyone is ignoring is that there are far more illegal votes counted than the margin of 'victory.'

Lets hold the election where the rules are complied with, and see the results.

[CARLHAYDEN]

jimrtex,

The situation in Washington is far more complex.

First, there were a number of votes counted which never went throught the verification process (contrary to state law).

Second, a number of people cast both absentee and precinct ballots (both were counted, again contrary to state law).

Third, a number of dead people rose from the grave and voted (tell me how you're going to hie them into court to ask them how they voted).

Fourth, a number of convicted felons not restored to their civil rights voted (again, contrary to state law).  While those that can be found can be (theoretically taken to court to seek identification of their vote), this will NOT happen in Washington.

Fifth, there are other problems with the vote in that apparently valid votes were discarded (King County).

[CARLHAYDEN]

You apparently don't understand.

In a number of precincts in King County, ballots were processed which were unverified.  There is NO way whatsoever of seperating them.

With respect you your other statement, let me be equally as pity, abeit on point.  You just don't seem to understand.
Its not that you lack the intellect to understand, but simply have decided that once an election is stolen, the thief must get away with it.

No one (except perhaps you) argues that there were several thousand ballots counted that should NOT have been counted.

The number of ballots counted illegimately (by the way I have previously on other threads listed the Washington Administrative Code sections involved) are far more than the 'margin' of victory.

There is a line between healthy skepticism, and obstinate unwillingness to accept basic facts.

You're now at that line.

[CARLHAYDEN]

You apparently don't understand.

In a number of precincts in King County, ballots were processed which were unverified.  There is NO way whatsoever of seperating them.

With respect you your other statement, let me be equally as pity, abeit on point.  You just don't seem to understand.
Its not that you lack the intellect to understand, but simply have decided that once an election is stolen, the thief must get away with it.

No one (except perhaps you) argues that there were several thousand ballots counted that should NOT have been counted.

The number of ballots counted illegimately (by the way I have previously on other threads listed the Washington Administrative Code sections involved) are far more than the 'margin' of victory.

There is a line between healthy skepticism, and obstinate unwillingness to accept basic facts.

You're now at that line.

First of all, you can quantify the number of improper ballots, and in the case of provisonal ballots, there should be a record of who voted.  I'm not yet seeing a problem of not being able to determine if these voters were legitimate or not, and if now, for whom the voted for.

You seem to have confused "counted illegitimately" with "votes cast by people not entitled to vote."  They are two different things.  There should be a record of who voted, including who cast provisional ballots.  The might be 1000 votes that were "counted illegitimately" and we might find out that 950 of them were votes of people entitled to vote.

What you are suggesting might be the ex post facto deprivation of the right to vote of most, if not all, of these people.  Get some evidence that these people were ineligible to vote, if possible factor out those votes, and then look at the situation.  I will admit that you are closer to the possibility of a re-vote (or judicial overturning of the result), but you still have a long way to go.

Let me make it simple for you.

First, (as I previously noted) how are you going to determine how the dead voted?

Second, how are you going to determine that when it is clear that a convicted felon voted illegally, the way that person voted?  Will you just take their word for it?  Will you take their word for it that they were never guilty of the crime(s) for which they were convicted.

Third, due to the failure of King County to follow the procedures established by law, it is impossible to selecte out the multiple votes cast or in many instances the provisional ballots improperly tabulated.

[CARLHAYDEN]

First, to list all the specific names of the persons who:

a.) were deceased at the time they supposedly voted, or
b.) cast more than one ballot, or
c.) where not legally entitled to vote but did so (felony convictions) would take up too much of this forum, and my time.  There has been an implication made that I am some how making up these points.

In category one, two names which have been released to the press as deceased long before the November election, but who supposedly cast a ballot in that election are:

John A. Fey (Seattle) died in May of 2004
Joe D. Burk (Seattle) died in May of 2004.

In the category of those casting more than one ballot in the 2004 gubenatorial election is Dustin S O'Coilain of Seattle.

A rather lengthy list of the convicted felons who cast votes in the 2004 Governor's race despite not having had their civil rights restored, is available, although the Democrats are NOT denying this in court!

In yet another specific example, Precinct 1823 in King Counted counted 343 ballots, while there were only 272 voters listed as having voted!!!

Finally, this thread started with the citation of ballots which were found but not counted because they came from precincts in King county carried by Rossi.