The Government Accountability Office puts it like this:
Among other things, the GAO confirms that:
1. Some electronic voting machines “did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it was possible to alter both without being detected.” In other words, the GAO now confirms that electronic voting machines provided an open door to flip an entire vote count. More than 800,000 votes were cast in Ohio on electronic voting machines, some seven times Bush’s official margin of victory.
2. “It was possible to alter the files that define how a ballot looks and works so that the votes for one candidate could be recorded for a different candidate.” Numerous sworn statements and affidavits assert that this did happen in Ohio 2004.
3. “Vendors installed uncertified versions of voting system software at the local level.” 3. Falsifying election results without leaving any evidence of such an action by using altered memory cards can easily be done, according to the GAO.
4. The GAO also confirms that access to the voting network was easily compromised because not all digital recording electronic voting systems (DREs) had supervisory functions password-protected, so access to one machine provided access to the whole network. This critical finding confirms that rigging the 2004 vote did not require a “widespread conspiracy” but rather the cooperation of a very small number of operatives with the power to tap into the networked machines and thus change large numbers of votes at will. With 800,000 votes cast on electronic machines in Ohio, flipping the number needed to give Bush 118,775 could be easily done by just one programmer.
5. Access to the voting network was also compromised by repeated use of the same user IDs combined with easily guessed passwords. So even relatively amateur hackers could have gained access to and altered the Ohio vote tallies.
6. The locks protecting access to the system were easily picked and keys were simple to copy, meaning, again, getting into the system was an easy matter.
7. One DRE model was shown to have been networked in such a rudimentary fashion that a power failure on one machine would cause the entire network to fail, re-emphasizing the fragility of the system on which the Presidency of the United States was decided.
8. GAO identified further problems with the security protocols and background screening practices for vendor personnel, confirming still more easy access to the system.
In essence, the GAO study makes it clear that no bank, grocery store or mom & pop chop shop would dare operate its business on a computer system as flimsy, fragile and easily manipulated as the one on which the 2004 election turned.
The GAO findings are particularly damning when set in the context of an election run in Ohio by a Secretary of State simultaneously working as co-chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign. Far from what election theft skeptics have long asserted, the GAO findings confirm that the electronic network on which 800,000 Ohio votes were cast was vulnerable enough to allow a a tiny handful of operatives — or less — to turn the whole vote count using personal computers operating on relatively simple software.
The GAO documentation flows alongside other crucial realities surrounding the 2004 vote count. For example:
The exit polls showed Kerry winning in Ohio, until an unexplained last minute shift gave the election to Bush. Similar definitive shifts also occurred in Iowa, Nevada and New Mexico, a virtual statistical impossibility.
A few weeks prior to the election, an unauthorized former ES&S voting machine company employee, was caught on the ballot-making machine in Auglaize County
Election officials in Mahoning County now concede that at least 18 machines visibly transferred votes for Kerry to Bush. Voters who pushed Kerry’s name saw Bush’s name light up, again and again, all day long. Officials claim the problems were quickly solved, but sworn statements and affidavits say otherwise. They confirm similar problems inFranklin County (Columbus). Kerry’s margins in both counties were suspiciously low.
A voting machine in Mahoning County recorded a negative 25 million votes for Kerry. The problem was allegedly fixed.
In Gahanna Ward 1B, at a fundamentalist church, a so-called “electronic transfer glitch” gave Bush nearly 4000 extra votes when only 638 people voted at that polling place. The tally was allegedly corrected, but remains infamous as the “loaves and fishes” vote count.
In Franklin County, dozens of voters swore under oath that their vote for Kerry faded away on the DRE without a paper trail.
In Miami County, at 1:43am after Election Day, with the county’s central tabulator reporting 100% of the vote – 19,000 more votes mysteriously arrived; 13,000 were for Bush at the same percentage as prior to the additional votes, a virtual statistical impossibility.
In Cleveland, large, entirely implausible vote totals turned up for obscure third party candidates in traditional Democratic African-American wards. Vote counts in neighboring wards showed virtually no votes for those candidates, with 90% going instead for Kerry.
Prior to one of Blackwell’s illegitimate “show recounts,” technicians from Triad voting machine company showed up unannounced at the Hocking County Board of Elections and removed the computer hard drive.
In response to official information requests, Shelby and other counties admit to having discarded key records and equipment before any recount could take place.
In a conference call with Rev. Jackson, Attorney Cliff Arnebeck, Attorney Bob Fitrakis and others, John Kerry confirmed that he lost every precinct in New Mexico that had a touchscreen voting machine. The losses had no correlation with ethnicity, social class or traditional party affiliation—only with the fact that touchscreen machines were used.
In a public letter, Rep. Conyers has stated that “by and large, when it comes to a voting machine, the average voter is getting a lemon – the Ford Pinto of voting technology. We must demand better.”
But the GAO report now confirms that electronic voting machines as deployed in 2004 were in fact perfectly engineered to allow a very small number of partisans with minimal computer skills and equipment to shift enough votes to put George W. Bush back in the White House.
Given the growing body of evidence, it appears increasingly clear
that’s exactly what happened.GAO Report
Revised 10/27/05
This sounds like sour grapes to me. Do I smell “conspiracy theory” coming Chris?
It’s not like the Government Accountability Office is a bastion of partisanship Paul.
These voting machines failed horribly in testing done in California. One user from a remote location can get in there and change the vote count.
Obviously we’re not going to have a ‘do-over’…the weakness of these3 machines’ security should alarm us all!
One citizen, one vote. If that’s not the case, this isn’t a democracy…it’s Egypt!
1. Some electronic voting machines “did not encrypt cast ballots or system audit logs, and it was possible to alter both without being detected.”
POSSIBLE in a very small number of machines, btw, liberals know how to commit computer/voter fraud too. I like the word Pioneers.
2. “It was possible to alter the files that define how a ballot looks and works so that the votes for one candidate could be recorded for a different candidate.”
It is also possible that some day I could wake up next to Jennifer Aniston, but very unlikely (Fricken Brat Pitt!!!)
“Vendors installed uncertified versions of voting system software at the local level.”
And it works differently from the certified versions how? How does a paper certificate make two copies of the same thing work differently?
This critical finding confirms that rigging the 2004 vote did not require a “widespread conspiracy” but rather the cooperation of a very small number of operatives with the power to tap into the networked machines and thus change large numbers of votes at will.
And they would have to know when and where to strike. What are the odds some hacker discovered this on the 1 day of voting and had the time to fully explore the system? Billion to 1? Liberal hackers could have done this also.
5. Again, they needed a lot of forewarning and preparation to have everything ready for the election. Again, possible, like it’s possible Ted Kennedy will get sober, but very, very unlikely.
6. Like no one would notice a James Bond wannabe picking a pad lock for 10 minutes in the middle of the voting room with all those Democrat “observers” standing around?
7. I see, so fragile yet a cabal of hackers all acting independantly could to the hacker tango on they system but one slight power glitch and the whole thing crashes down.
8. Easy access with planning, people and skill. As a first run on a national scale, it worked pretty well and, naturally, there are a few things to fix. A passenger died in one of the earlt Wright Brothers flights but they still made the airplane.
Given the growing body of evidence, it appears increasingly clear
that’s exactly what happened.
There is no evidence, there never was and there still isn’t. Plastic Man couldn’t stretch this much!!!!
George Bush won because the Democrats ran a fraud as their candidate, plain and simple, and we are all very lucky it was George Bush that won because, otherwise, we’d all be praising Allah in French right now.
Chris please! Take an exedrin or go visit Egypt and come back home and see how good we really have it !!! Instead of running down your country build it up. Legitimate criticism is fine,but you take it to the extreme !
Right-Paul, Chevy doesn’t sell a new car without extensively testing it. Am I wrong?
Priority #1 if you’re developing voting machines should be to ensure the system is inpenetrable. Because there are companies out there who CAN get that done!
And there are still recalls. NASA is a great one, the test everything thousands of time and yet a few bad tiles destroyed a shuttle on re-entry.
Nothing is perfect, especially if Microsoft had anything to do with it. And what about President Johnson ballot stuffing? Box 13? He got to be president through fraud on a paper based system.
There’s a big difference between a space shuttle and a voting machine Right.
You know it, I know it. If they can make an ATM machine that doesn’t get ripped off, they can make a voting machine.
The fact that these were used in so many states with the problems they had is criminal negligence.
There’s a big difference between a space shuttle and a voting machine Right.
But your expecting the new technology that is the voting machine to be as perfect as the NASA program that has decades of experience, tons more money and a cra load of scientists.
The voting machine is new technology and there will be some bugs. It’s not like you can stage a national election when ever you want to test out the equipment.
The fact that these were used in so many states with the problems they had is criminal negligence.
It’s using a new system for the very first time. Look at Social Security, talk about criminal negligence, that still isn’t fixed and everyone relys on that(not for much longer though)
This is fascinating!!!!
This is fascinating!!!!
RIGHT’S LINK – CLick Here
Missed it last time, sorry.
This is fascinating!!!!
RIGHT’S LINK – CLick Here
When is he planning on actually saying something? I’m amazed sometimes by right-wing bloggers…how they can say the same thing in four different ways – citing no examples to qualify the context of their rants – and there I am, a page or two into it and it occurs to me that this writer really has nothing new to add on the topic.
Democrats are Communists who have nothing but blind hatred of Bush that isn’t based in reality…no, in fact, they’re all suffering from a neurlogical disorder of some kind. Yea, that makes sence…
The thing reads like the opening monologue of the Michael Savage show! Why is it so difficult to produce facts and pontificate on from there? Is it because there are none to refer to that could possibly back up anything the writer wants write about?
But that’s not the fault of Bush…no, it’s clearly a case of millions here in America…over 50% who think he’s a loser…they’re all suffering from mental retardation.
Oh yea, that’s the stuff. I’m sure that piece is going to convince all of us Democrats to see our doctors first thing tomorrow!
Hey, how did you do that thing with the link?
When you post a comment, you can go back in through the ‘EDIT’ link at the bottom to the right of the date/time stamp. When you get into the edit screen you can type out what you want to call the link, highlight what you typed, click on the ‘Link’ button and a little screen will appear. Paste in the webaddress there.
Let me know if it doesn’t work for you.
I don’t see where the EDIT link is. Don’t I just type ?
Try now. I just bumped up your access level. See if the edit option shows up now.
Hmmm…no I don’t see it. I’ll do a screen capture and e-mail it to you. Do you know how to code XHTML so I can do it in the comment box?