READER COMMENTS ON

"Clint Curtis Testifies at Texas Legislature on the Ease of E-Vote Flipping"

(9 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... socrates said on 6/27/2008 @ 1:31 pm PT...





{Ed Note: All the way off topic, and so long it can't help but hijack the thread. I copied it and am mailing it back to you so you can use it when there is an open thread, or on your own blog and can just link us to it. --99} {Ed Note: Oh, well, fine. Brad was at a pitstop with broadband and chose to answer you, so I'm putting it back in for you. --99} Nice, this is a perfect thread for me to post on. Claims have been made, falsely, that BradBlog became an internet force because of its coverage of the Clinton Curtis dog story. There was AnonymousArmy at DailyKos running his mouth off about it being a planted story. AA was also well-known for being right in the middle of the scripted election integrity forum rubbish. There was also a "Fintan Dunne" who took the same angle. Now the Clinton dog story is but one story. And my condolensces go to Mr. Curtis, albeit years later. There are other strange happenings on the internet which are tough to put into words. There was the Jason Leopold thing, with saying Bush and Cheney had been indicted. There's this Wayne Madsen character who strangely enough gets linked to by Raw Story. There is much more I could say as regards to other internet personalities who are linked. In short, there has been a deliberate attempt to stymie freedom of association on the internet by raising noise to signal ratios. There was someone named ~A who had a blog called Watching the Watchers. He linked to many progressive sites including Brad's Velvet Revolution and Raw Story. Here is a wayback machine article written by ~A called My personal experience with Bev Harris' Caustic Personality. If this link ever gets scrubbed, the paper was screenshot and is available at my humble forum. To quote ~A: She is doing good work, and she is a patriot, don't get me wrong. I like what she's doing, but the more I find out about her and the more I have to deal in the same space as her (I'm doing the fifty states voting irregularity research, not with her), the more I just don't think she's the right person to be doing what she's doing. Fifty state voting irregularity research? Was that like the work Steven Hertzberg did for his Votewatch campaign? Hertzberg was a prolific poster at "Fintan Dunne's" forum. "Fintan" has called Brad a CIA fake. He has called Bev Harris a 9/11 CIA rat! And here is where things get really strange. One of ~A's bloggers was Ron Brynaert, now executive editor of Raw Story. Ron's claim to fame is that he was a Jeff Gannon scholar. I smell a rat, and I don't think it's Bev Harris. So Ron Brynaert of Raw Story, why don't you tell us what you know about ~A and his fifty state voting irregularity research which sounds suspiciously like Hertzberg's Votewatch. ~A actually made a few posts a long time ago to BradBlogToo. Maybe there is a way to figure this thing out. So how 'bout it Brad, any comments? You don't find this at all strange?

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 6/27/2008 @ 2:56 pm PT...





To "quickly" answer Soc's question, since I saw it before 99 has removed it, no, I don't find any of the stuff you mentioned strange. I do find some of it inaccurate, however, and as previously, always welcome you to e-mail me personally with any questions that I may be able to answer prior to posting unsupported, speculative stuff about folks. Of the items you mentioned that I remember: I know "~A" personally, as he used to work as an editor for RAW STORY while running Watching the Watchers. He was very good at covering election fraud related issues while at RAW and over at WtW. He is most definitely *not* Steven Hertzberg. Jason Liepold did not report that "Bush and Cheney were indicted," as you mentioned. He reported that a source told him that a sealed (vs. sealed) indictment had been filed for Karl Rove. Despite the smears against Jason, I've found nothing to prove that he was wrong in his reporting. To this case, that file (which had been from Fitzgerald's grand jury and was unusual for having both sides sealed) has never been unsealed. I would not link up to Wayne Madsen in anyway, as I find him to be exceedingly irresponsible, frequently wrong, and almost always working from unnamed "sources". The fact that an editor at RAW did so recently (don't know what story), is hardly a reason to suspect "something funny going on at RAW". Again, I know most of the folks who run the site *very* well, and they are all aces. It's fine to have suspicions, to be skeptical, or whatever. That, as a matter of fact, is what I am "for a living". But it's also nice to check what facts you can before offering random doubts about someone into the blogosphere. At least when some of those doubts could likely be cleared up very quickly with a moderate amount of effort prior to posting unsubstantiated "questions". Now if you have questions about *me*, as I've seen you post before, well, there's little I can do to ease your worries. If I'm a "bad guy" then no matter what I say won't change your mind about that. As you know, you are always welcome to touch base with me privately *first* (as you have done before) before risking smearing someone unwarranted here. It's always appreciated. As is avoiding hijacking threads, which I presume is the reason 99 removed your post. NOTE: I might not have done so, but she has clearance to monitor and moderate the comments section as she feels necessary and useful, and I support her in her volunteer efforts to do so. She even takes unwarranted personal attacks from commenters (which would not be allowed against other commenters), since she has that slight "bully pulpit". Though I commend her for taking it as well as she does, as many times as such attacks come at her completely unwarranted, and without substance in my opinion. Hope that clears up your concerns, Soc. If not, let me know via email if you wish. Though please note I'm on the road and not much online for the next couple weeks, so missing a lot of incoming mail of late.

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... socrates said on 6/27/2008 @ 4:35 pm PT...





Hi Brad, thanks for the information. I don't think I was making any accusations. Some questions do remain. What was that fifty state voting irregularity study? Why does ~A refer to election fraud as vote fraud? Why is Raw Story linking to Madsen? Sorry for getting that indictment story wrong. Wow. So it's true that there were sealed indictments against Karl Rove? Where is the proof? I don't see anything except truthout.org as a source. Sorry for any excessive "tweaking."

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... Jim March said on 6/27/2008 @ 6:13 pm PT...





Just wanted to say I was there as well . Clint did a fine job of focusing on how machines could be rigged on both a theoretical and practical basis. What the legislators seemed unable to wrap their heads around was the unbelievable number of ways a system could be pre-rigged for disaster by vendors or semi-competent geeks within the the elections offices. They kept wanting to know specific ways of rigging systems so that loopholes could be closed...which is much like asked how to prevent a master mechanic from screwing with your car late at night while it's parked out in front of your house. I focused on how the certification processes had broken. As one example, paragraph 77c of the William Singer complaint contains specific, verifiable claims as to a major Hart software module being withheld from cert. The Hart people spent had spent some time disparaging Singer as "disgruntled" and the like; one of my opening points was that regardless of Singer's motives or anything else, the objective claims he made should have been looked at either by the TX SecState's office or the EAC. The raw fact that they hadn't is evidence of major negligence. I then showed how two other vendors gamed cert by withholding software modules: Diebold's WinCE touchscreen software and Sequoia's "BPS". I discussed how AVS had withheld serious hardware modifications in the "Winvote", the EAC had ignored my complaints (complete with pictures that had been posted to BBV by AVS employees) and how the EAC had blown me off until months later the new iBeta test lab blew the whistle on AVS over the same issue, destroying the company. It's nice that this blatant fraud was finally caught, it's a fiasco that a citizen complaint to this effect was ignored. Finally, I explained how public records reviews in Wharton County TX is showing that ES&S iVotronic machines aren't doing basic math correctly - I had reviewed audit logs for Debra Medina, party chair in Wharton County (oh yeah: REPUBLICAN party chair!). And lest they think this was conspiracy theory material, you should have seen them groan when I pulled up the cert report by one of the TX state examiners of the ES&S system in Jan. '07: Katherine Cole (lawyer for the TX AG's office) had noticed all the way back then that the machine couldn't add right in a fashion real similar to Wharton County more recently. Oooops. The TX SOS office had rigged the state-level examination such that no one official observer (six total) saw the whole process...each saw parts. So the vote went down 4 to 2 to certify, when two reported problems that should have barred the machine. Yeah. They didn't like that . I had laid out each company's documents I'd be citing on one of each face of a Compiz cube in Linux and spun the cube to get to each. Freaked 'em out good . It was also a way of establishing my "geek cred" without having to say anything. If you don't know what Compiz and "the cube" are, see also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a0QEySMTtII It's a way of having multiple "virtual desktops" and a way of rotating between them with a mouse-drag. Looks seriously cool. They needed a good shake-up and that helped. Jim

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 6/27/2008 @ 8:39 pm PT...





Jim - Thanks for that report! Much appreciated. When I learned that you and Clint and Bruce Funk and others would be there, I felt much better about my not being able to! Socrates - To answer your questions, which again, would be better appreciated via private email, so as not to hijack threads: I don't think I was making any accusations. Some questions do remain. When you toss around names of perfectly innocent, decent, hard working folks, suggesting they might somehow be bad guys (even though no evidence, other than your suspicions, exist) you end up making accusations and smearing folks who shouldn't be. If you've got the goods, that's one thing. If you're merely curious and have yet to do full due-dilligence, that's another matter entirely. What was that fifty state voting irregularity study? I don't recall specifically, but as he was doing a lot of coverage of all of the problems that occured in '04, right after the election (when almost everyone else in the world was ignoring what had happened!) he was probably referring to exactly that. Thank god he and RAW were there to join me in covering what almost nobody else at the time would dare! Why does ~A refer to election fraud as vote fraud? For one: "Vote fraud" is technically correct, unlike "voter fraud". Eg. Clint uses "vote fraud" all the time, even though it drives me crazy since it's so close to "voter fraud". For another, the GOP's phony "voter fraud" strategy had not become clearly known until Spring of '05, or so, when I outed Thor Hearne and the ACVR scam. It took some time thereafter before people began to understand the diff between "voter fraud" and "election fraud". Even now, many well-meaning folks don't know the difference, which is what makes the GOP scam so effective. In and of itself, references to "vote fraud" (or even "voter fraud") way back then mean absolutely nothing. Which I would have explained to you via email before you smeared ~A by inference. Why is Raw Story linking to Madsen? I already spoke to that. I guess whoever the editor was who linked up to it, didn't understand that he's a bad source. They have many editors there, hire new ones all the time, and many learn things as they go. Many who don't know better believe Madsen to be credible. So again, linking to him, in and of itself, means nothing as far as I'm concerned. So it's true that there were sealed indictments against Karl Rove? Where is the proof? I don't see anything except truthout.org as a source. No, it's true that there was an unusual Sealed v. Sealed case from Fitzgerald's grand jury, and it's true that Leopold's source told him that it was a Rove indictment. That's about all there was to the story at the time, and as Fitzgerald couldn't speak about the sealed case, and as it became unsealed (right around the moment that Rove was said to have cut a deal with Fitzgerald), the names of that indictment remain unknown. Leopold, in my opinion, was inappropriately smeared in the bargain by both the Right and a huge portion of the supposedly-Progressive blogosphere. There is still no evidence one way or another if he had the story right or wrong, and yet, the tarring has been very damaging to his work and reputation. Hope that helps to clarify. Please note: I'm traveling so can't read every comment. Even when I'm home I can't always do so, but it's even worse now. Thus, please forgive any unanswered comments as I simply can't read and/or reply to every one of them.

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... socrates said on 6/28/2008 @ 11:18 am PT...





I'm sorry I "hijacked" your thread. ~A actually did use the phrase "voter fraud." I sell a support our troops ribbon and some others, including a "voter fraud" ribbon. I haven't smeared anyone. By making blanket statements that I did, you are smearing me. I don't think you are doing it on purpose, but that's the way it's coming across, imho. "fifty state voting irregularity study" Who refers to covering election fraud in those terms? Where are the results of his "study?" Which I would have explained to you via email before you smeared ~A by inference. I did email you and got nothing back. Bev Harris gets smeared all the time. You don't seem too worried about that. I now see BradBlog for what it is. There is only free speech here if you post at the end of threads or leave just a few sentences. And where did I smear Jason Leopold? It's simply the truth that his story was utilized by astroturfers to portray the blogosphere as unreliable. That's the same kind of thing that is being done to yourself and others, yes me and many others included, that we are "annoying citizens who get on hobby horses." Thank god he and RAW were there to join me in covering what almost nobody else at the time would dare! Funny how ~A is given credit while Bev Harris, the person he attacked, gets no mention. This is a no-win situation for me. If I try to comment in depth, I am hijacking threads. If I don't, then newbies and fence-sitters will continue to have no clue about the excessive convolution to be found on the internet, a portion of which is the noise that's been planted on election fraud forums. I get the hint. I'll go away like Dredd did. The cards are stacked here. I should have taken the hint when you showed zero interest in Steven Hertzberg posting at "Fintan Dunne's" forum or with the deliberate aerosol dispersals going on over our heads. "Dunne" is the one who called you out as a fake. He also called Bev Harris a 9/11 CIA rat. And Steven Hertzberg was his #1 poster for quite a while. If this post can remain, I'd appreciate it. You'll never have to deal with me again. I'm sorry, but there is something missing at BradBlog. And with you making apologies for Raw Story publishing Madsen, that is a sign to me to leave this place.

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 6/28/2008 @ 12:05 pm PT...





Don't know how "the cards are stacked here", when you've commented on almost every thread for months on just about any topic you've wanted to. But if you want to make me, us (BRAD BLOG) into a "bad guy" too, I can't stop you any more than I could stop crazy Fintan Dunne, or answer to every nut case and/or actual bad guy out there on the Internet who wants to take shots at me or Bev or anybody else. If I did, or if I tried, I'd never have a moment to report on things that actually matter which, as you may or may not realize, takes an *extraordinary* amount of time and focus. And even then, I fail miserably to cover all that I would like to, in the depth that I would like to. All while bringing in almost no money to pay rent and buy food each month. Not sure what else you'd like from me, Soc, but I continue to do the best that I can. And where it's not enough, I apologize, even if it's all I have to give.

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... socrates said on 6/29/2008 @ 6:37 am PT...





For what it's worth, I think you're for real. I am not out to slander anyone. I wish only to throw people under the bus who deserve it. I believe in sunshine. When I've noticed odd things on the internet, I've taken screenshots and put it out in public for consideration. Thanks for letting me post on your blog. It enabled me to back John Dean's {not the famous one} uncovering of a sophisticated campaign to turn election integrity activists into "tinfoil hatters" and "grifters." I realise there are limitations to the internet as regards to communication. There is also an existential element to our individual perspectives. It can be very difficult, if not impossible at times, to reach consensus. I don't think "Fintan Dunne" is crazy. I think he is a paid disinfo agent. I doubt there is even a person with that name. I will just say one last time that Fintan Dunne has called Beverly Harris a CIA 9/11 rat. He also had an "article" in which he smeared you as being propped up as a leading election integrity voice solely because of your exclusive Clint Curtis coverage around the time when his dog got killed. Strangely enough, AnonymousArmy at DailyKos ran with the same schtick. The reason I ended up at your place was because I found out about Steven Hertzberg. As folks are probably aware of by now, he was a prolific poster with Dunne and even did interviews with him, albeit anonymously. He was exposed and proven to be "Navari" by a few others, then I took the ball and ran with it. People like myself and Dredd, imho, simply get frustrated by our inability to get feedback on our amateur sleuth findings. I think it is quite telling that Robert Hertzberg was one of the first politicians to push for funding of the electronic machines after the 2000 debacle. Another reason why I am feeling especially down of late is because Keith Olbermann appears to be just another poser. Folks are probably aware by now of his beatdown by Glenn Greenwald. Finally, I am very bitter that no action is being taken concerning the deliberate tampering of our troposphere by "weather mitigation" aircraft. You gave me the impression that I might be able to guest blog on it. I thought it would be a good thing for accountability and exposure to have a "chemtrails" article on your forum. Chemtrails have been proven real, just like the stealing of elections has also been established as being more likely than not the truth. I think the one thing that bonds all the BradBlog people, from yourself to even the good lurkers, is that we all have a deep aversion to injustice. I believe that the primary goal of the disinfo astroturf on the net is to make us all feel helpless and incapable of making a difference. Everything gets turned into noise and enigmas. I apologise for any discomfort I may have caused. That was not my intention. Perhaps I am a bit in over my head. Take care and peace.

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... Michael Dean said on 6/30/2008 @ 2:58 pm PT...

