Some problems I see about the Curtis Affidavit

[karlrschneider]

First, let's, for the sake of argument, assume everything he says is true (or 99% is, when is anything absolutely correct?)...the only potential corroboration for his meetings and efforts would have to come from the other principals, the Yang/Wong woman, Feeney and/or the "1 or 2 other people who drifted in and out of the room" The chances of any of those people affirming his story are, well, very slim to zilch. I'm not a lawyer but I've been through dozens of legal proceedings the past 40 years, and one affidavit from one guy isn't enough to convene a Grand Jury or an official accusation, let alone an indictment.

And as far as the MSM is concerned, forget it. There is no way in hell that any of the major newspapers or TV networks will touch this with a 10 meter pole after the drubbing Dan Rather took (of course it was undeserved but we know how that crap works these days.)

We like to say "Google is our friend", but some of the stuff they have cached from Curtis' website makes him look a little loopy (thanks to rog and monkie for finding this stuff...see other threads) and you can bet your butt it will be used against him when the RW spinbastards get wind of it (anybody doubt they haven't already?)

Anyway, I think we ought to soft-pedal this 'sensational' stuff and not let it distract us from something that's probably more potentially productive, like the upcoming recount in Ohio.

JMO

[berni_mccoy]

1. Excellent level-headed post all-around!

Great points. I believe we are all too 'hungry' for such a silver bullet that we are likely to fall for another memo-gate if we aren't careful.

I'm very interested in the outcome of the work that Cliff Arnebeck is doing. I think our best chance is with this law suit. If, what they claim to have found, is indeed true, hard evidence of fraud, this would invalidate the election in Ohio and give the victory to Kerry.

[jamboi]

58. Right, no silver bullets. But in law an affadavit is extremely powerful.

Maybe yes, maybe no in the "court of public opinion", but we are dealing with felony crimes here and in court Curtis' affadaavit is enormous! Just huge.

Also I agree that Arnebeck is the most immediate hope for Kerry and for justice in general. That is the wedge that will open up the whole can of worms. Have y'all ever seen JFK? Just remember that just one lowly DA with affadavits (ie. sworn testimony) can break the whole thing open.

[Old and In the Way]

2. We need corroboration, no question.

It's a valuable piece to the puzzle, but we can't build a case around this, IMHO. Would love to get one of those machines that were confirming Bush when the voter punched Kerry, though.

[karlrschneider]

5. That would be great, but I have no idea how one would get their hands on

one...and even if they did, how to know whether the soft/firmware had been 'diddled' since 11/2? Wottafukinmess...

[NVMojo]

3. yeah, well, I've been involved in countless proceedings myself ...

including "whistle-blowing" and there are plenty of open ends for a real law enforcement agency or investigative arm to proceed with. It is not the whistle-blowers job to solve the total crime. Or haven't you been involved in that?


What really chaps my ass right now is how they threw such a huge book at Martha Stewart when the good old boys continue on with their bullcrap.

I really liked Madsen's last article from today. Before the election, I figured Bush had pissed the CIA off big time and they were going to fry his butt with more than just the leak about about the explosives left behind in Iraq. There was too much of a pattern. Makes sense to me now why he shoved that idiot, Goss, over there and has been trying to downsize and consolidate the many investigative arms of the feds. Less work to control them, the damn "liberal" CIA employees.

[Skink]

4. Who exactly recieves the afidavit?

[jamboi]

61. The court will when these crims are indicted, convicted and put away.

[karlrschneider]

6. Not involved in "whistle blowing" mostly general tort stuff

I agree with your Martha comment for sure. As we all know, Kenny-boy is still footloose & fancy free. :grr:

(My 87 year old mom lost $200K on Enron stock)

And you're right about Goss too, I actually 'sort of' knew him when I lived in FL. He and Junior are Punch & Judy.

[TexasChick]

8. OMG!!! $200K, for real? Those bastards!!!! n/t

[karlrschneider]

11. Yep, but she has plenty of dough so it wasn't catastrophic like for so man

so many other folks who had all their eggs in one basket. But she was mighty pissed and said so in as many words (and worse :D)
I don't remember her ever uttering the phrase "fucking bastards" before a couple years ago. ;-)

[TexasChick]

12. I guess I would have been uttering more than that, Karl. But, thank God

she's okay and wasn't totally wiped out! WHEN I had a job (thanks for nothing, Chimp!), the HR lady, who was helping me with my retirement plan, always told me to never put all your eggs in one basket.

[karlrschneider]

15. Thanks for the kind word, and hope you can find a job soon!

:hug:

[TexasChick]

19. Thank you! I have had two consecutive interviews last Friday and today.

The one from today looks very promising! Keep your fingers crossed for me! Send good vibes! ;)


:hug:

[KatieB]

39. Nice post

[pleiku52cab]

7. Reading the affidavit

I couldn't help but think about the CBS 'affair'. Let the programmers argue about the process he describes on the rigging of the machines, but who is to say whether this is just not a KKKKarl plant or another well intended but flawed attempt to show how the election was a FRAUD. Just give enough general, but provably wrong, information, blow it out of proportion, and shoot it down. Just like earlier, 'kill the messenger' becomes the story, and the real allegations get left in the dust. Besides, by the time any authorities even try to look at the machines in question, I still think (with very limited knowledge but lots of cynicism) that they would be reprogrammed.

[ExCiber]

9. Just like the CBS affair

This story is too easy to shoot down.

The program that is offered up as PROOF is just a simple demo that hidden buttons can be placed in an application. To do that in the REAL applications would require Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia all giving their source to Yang to modify and then a TON of people in the field to "do the swap".

[jsamuel]

10. Haha, that is sooo not true

You don't have to build it into the program. A separate program can run concurrently and do what is needed. So, no "code swaping" would be needed.

[ExCiber]

14. How does the demo do that?

What is on that site does nothing like that it's just a stand alone program.

Show me a demo that stands between ANY application, uses hidden touch points and modifies ANY vote system DB and then I'll say you're on to something.

I'm sorry but as a professional with 26 years in the field this application doesn't show me anything.

[karlrschneider]

20. Are these the files you found?

Volume in drive C is KS
Volume Serial Number is 12EE-3F0A
Directory of C:\temp3

. <DIR> 12-13-03 10:03a .
.. <DIR> 12-13-03 10:03a ..
FRMSETUP FRM 1,671 11-03-04 9:48p frmSetup.frm
SETUP MDB 73,728 11-22-04 8:33p Setup.mdb
VOTEFR~1 VBP 854 11-03-04 9:48p VoteFraud.vbp
4 file(s) 76,253 bytes
2 dir(s) 31,487.75 MB free


I can't make any sense out of the .mdb one......
??

[ExCiber]

23. I didn't have

the VB form in mine.

Just the exe, installs and dll's. When did you download yours?

[karlrschneider]

25. A couple hours ago but just poked through them about 2030 CST,

and only just now noticed the dates on them are all from last month.....
hmmmmmm

If you want, I can attach the zip I got to you, pm or email me
[e-mail]

[mostly_lurking]

31. The MDB file is an Access database file

The ZIP file I downloaded did not include the actual VB source.

[karlrschneider]

37. Ah, thanks. I didn't recognize it. I have a computer somewhere around

here that has Access on it, maybe I can get a clue if I copy it over to there and see what's in it.
;-)

[Faun Otter]

43. I'm not sure if this sheds any light

Diebold touchscreens already include hidden buttons. Roxanne found this in Diebold's user manual and posted it over at Bartcop's forum:

From page 19 of the Diebold Pollworker's Training Manual (http://www.countthevote.org/dbd_docs/pwtraining.pdf)

CANCELING A VOTER’S BALLOT
There may be times when it is necessary to cancel a voter’s ballot. This is most commonly done when a voter has been issued a voter card with the wrong ballot style encoded on it.
To cancel a voter’s ballot, take the following steps.
1. Ask the voter to advance to the summary page.
2. Touch the screen just below the word “Precinct” in the upper left corner.
3. The “Cancel Ballot” button will then appear on the bottom of the screen.
4. Touch the “Cancel Ballot” button.
5. The voter’s card will be ejected and the following message will appear on
the screen.

The voter should then return their voter card to the poll worker to have it encoded correctly.

When a ballot is canceled, the returned voter card will still contain ballot style information. The information was not erased because “Cast Ballot” was not touched.


If there are already hidden buttons, it becomes less of a stretch to believe there might be some more added to manipulate the system as suggested. I remain skeptical but this fact seems pertinent.

Faun

[Shalom]

55. It Is Pertinent: Every Fact Might Be A Clue n/t

[jamboi]

59. Very significant! Thanks for pointing that out! n/t

[karlrschneider]

13. Well, I tend to disbelieve it but not for the reason you posit:

He claims to have only written a 'demo' or 'simulation' to show how it -could- be done, I see no claim in his document that he did any coding that would interface with the actual Diebold (or whatever company was in mind, if any) software. I downloaded what was purported to be the source from a Google cached page from his website and it's all gibberish so I don't know what that's all about (I don't do VB but am pretty fluent in C, Pascal, Fortran and 1 or 2 others, but one thing I do know is that source for a high level language has to be some kind of readable text)

[ExCiber]

17. The ZIP I got

from the site didn't include any source. Only the install, executable and required VB5 dll's.

Like I said, I'm not impressed.

[karlrschneider]

22. AHH....we crossed each other, I see now.

Thanks. Like I said, I don't know jackshit about VB & didn't recognize the file extensions.
:eyes:

[mostly_lurking]

33. I agree

A totally amateur job. As I have said in other threads, a 10th grader could build this in study hall.

[zeemike]

26. I know nothing about code

And just barley smart enough to use a computer but I have a question.

Would it be possible to put some kind of virus in a computer that would lay dormant until Nov 2 activate itself and change some of the data, then disappear?

Because if I were going to commit a crime i would think that to be the perfect one.

I know that I have had viruses and spy ware on my computer and I have no idea how they got there.

[ExCiber]

27. YES

If I were going to do the vote rigging that is exactly how I would do it.

This would be something I would implement to run at the central tabulators.

I would implement it a a service with a common Microsoft name and sign the application as Microsoft. Very few people know what many of the applicaions and services are and what ones should be running so this is quite easy to hide.

Assuming I have DB access I could then do what ever I like and destroy myself after election day.

[zeemike]

28. Well that says it for me

E-voting is dangerous without a paper trail, and then only safe if the paper is checked to confirm the vote.

[karlrschneider]

29. If ur still up, "you've got mail"

:D

[mostly_lurking]

32. You certainly could do that, however

It would fail to work is an electronic recount was done after November 2.

[Monkie]

67. the program issue is bogus..

i'm taking him at face value for the moment..
he says he was a technical consultant advising non-technical people.
if you have ever done anything like that you will know what that involves, they are clueless and you have to show them pretty things quickly that often have nothing to do with the real program to be developed later,
i dont see that software on his site as having anything to do with the actual votestealing.
his proof of concept (as i see it),and the meetings he was in where this was discussed,that shows intent,and his affidavit is important
the actual diebold machines/tabulators and the software used,THAT is where the evidence will be,and in machine logs.
his testimony could be important because it shows people conspiring before the fact,and people directly connected to jeb bush.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ExCiber]

18. Sorry

I'm just trying to a realistic about what I see.

The place to HACK the system is at the TABULATORS, NOT at the polling booth.

[AntiFascist]

30. Welcome ExCiber,

Did you happen to see Bev Harris' demo of the Diebold GEMS central tabulator PC which is included in the video posted at www.votergate.tv? Whatever becomes of Bev Harris and her reputation, you should still check this out. It shows how a buried database file (which is apparently a DAO, Microsoft Jet database file) can be opened in MS Access and the voting results for candidates swapped. Conceivably someone could run a simple VB script, possibly even over one of the modem connections, to do this.

[ExCiber]

36. I have looked at that

And that is where I would crack the system.

Her approach assumes external access to the Central tabulator and my approach would be from the inside.

External access would require that the machines be available via the INTERNET(s) or POTS (plain old telephone system). External has the vulnerability of detection via INTERNET logging and a POTS connection would leave a trace at the phone company. The upside to external access is that NO internal access to the machine is required and no programs have to be installed.

My approach requires access to the machine via the install program, the INTERNET or pots and if caught early would leave a trace of the actual manipulation program.

Of course both approaches require access to the DB. Assuming that the DB is Microsoft access, that would be rather easy.

In either case it CAN BE DONE.

[LiberalAndProud]

34. And make precinct totals match how?

At first I was thinking just as you are, but the precinct totals are reviewed and posted. Just thinking out loud.

[AntiFascist]

42. My understanding of the Central tabulator....

is there are two sets of books maintained in the GEMS central tabulator. The first set of books is left alone, and this is what generates the reports precinct by precinct. The second set of books is what gets modified and this is what generates the totals for the candidates.

This is why it is important to manually go from polling machine to polling machine and verify the grand totals of the central tabulator, but who can do this? This would cost money and require manpower. Also, in large counties there are too many precincts to keep track of all the totals.

[jsamuel]

46. Why just do the tabulators? Why not both so there is no trail?

[karlrschneider]

24. Uh, you might want to read the forum rules...

.

[karlrschneider]

35. I'm in email correspondence with the person you're referencing, NOT a

freeper. We're trying to figure out why the downloadable files on that site keep changing. Stay tuned.

[mostly_lurking]

41. Lots of members are skeptical about the Curtis affidavit

You don't have to be a "freeper" to be cautious. I have been openly skeptical of both Madsen and Curtis because (in my opinion) they are both off the deep end. They have been spewing their "claims" for years to no avail and with no convincing proof.

I believe that they actually hurt honest efforts here by seriously degrading the credibility of everyone else. Again my opinion, but I haven't seen anything to convince me I'm wrong in my feeling.

[Dolphyn]

63. But Clinton Curtis is a real person ...

The mainstream media probably wouldn't air the story based on the affidavit alone, but investigative reporters should be able to contact Curtis to answer any questions they may have. In that sense, it is different from the CBS/Rather incident ... right?

[americanwhothinks]

21. I agree. Stick with the basics, remain wary of the sensational !!

[karlrschneider]

50. Good advice & welcome to DU!

:toast:

[americanwhothinks]

64. thanks, karlshneider, and i appreciate your contribs to DU!! n/t

[s-cubed]

38. I agree with your points about skepticism, and wish Madsen

were not going to be at the Conyers forum.

If I were interested in fixing an election, I'd have a variety of tactics, in part because there are a variety of machines out there.

I would want to try to do something to the touch screens w/ no paper trail. The fact that the repugs refused to insist on machines with paper trails leads me to think that was part of the strategy. From what we've learned so far, technicians had almost free access to machines to install "updates", so they wouldn't have to be in on the fix, and we know the certification is a joke. Also, the many reports of votes on touch screens jumping from Kerry to Bush sounds like a buggy program.

I'd also want to fix the optical scanners and punch card readers. Anything like that can have "calibration" problems, which would lead to large numbers of undervotes in certain areas.

But then I'd also want to do something at the tabulating machine level. Question for those more knowledgable: how many levels are we talking about for tabulating machines: county, or only at state level? Tabulating machine level is the only way I could be assured of really being able to fine tune the results to what I wanted. And that seems consistent with the exit poll anomolies.

Someone, here or elsewhere, raised the question of the feeds to AP on election night. If all the states are feeding into the AP, is it possible that some talented hacker could go the opposite direction and tamper with the machines reporting the data? Could a virus like program be spread to all tabularing programs making it easy to get to the data & change it?

Continue to question, don't dismiss Curtis out of hand, but also don't focus solely on touch screens as the point of the fix. I think there were mutiple hacks, just as there were multiple tactics to suppress the vote.

[MRKARNO]

40. I believe Curtis more than Madsen's whole story

Why? Because unlike Madsen, he's subjected himself to the possibility of jail time if what he says is true. Also, Madsen's story is more complicated, which makes it less likely, but not false. Curtis's story taken by itself is much more plausible on the whole than Madsen's whole story.

[karlrschneider]

48. Actually, he is in some jeopardy whether his story is -true- OR -false-!

Think about that...
:eyes:

[anamandujano]

54. complicated=less likely-------disagree

"Madsen's story is more complicated, which makes it less likely, but not false."

Maybe I've seen too many movies but, I would say that anyone engaging in this type of criminal actiity would want it to be complicated. This would make it difficult to explain in soundbites and relatively "unbelievable". Did anyone watch the BCCI hearings?--labyrinthian.com and same cast of characters. I rest my case.

edit to add--I do, however, think that a great deal of scepticism should be brought to bear on everything.

[Blue in the face]

44. Why is it Wong and then Yang?

I've been out all day and haven't had time to read through all the Curtis threads tonight. Can someone tell me why his www.justaflyonthewall.com address has him working for a company by the name of Wong Enterprises, but the affidavit says Yang Enterprises? Doesn't that seem like a huge discrepancy to anyone?

[IndyPriest]

45. Name switch was purposeful to protect sources. n/t

[Blue in the face]

47. But he was the source, so who was he protecting?

[karlrschneider]

49. Supposedly a pseudonym...remember the Wang "computers"?

There's an old joke which is probably very inappropriate here, but what the hell:

Computers are thousands of years old. Eve had an Apple, Adam had a Wang.

I am going to my room now.
:evilgrin:

[Blue in the face]

51. I still don't get it

Why deliberately misdirect with a fake company name? I pointed out two days ago when someone brought this guy's website up that the Freepers had moved to debunk this guy years ago. I'm all for finding the missing link. But it had better be something that we can sell to the sheeple and the mainstream media without making them think too hard. And this stuff that I've been hearing about for the last few days makes my head hurt.

First it was the Bev/Keith shit. Then it was the Cybernet/Auditors expose. After that it's Madsen believing and disseminating misinformation. And now it's a whistleblower who's dog was just shot today that has an affidavit which conflicts with the info given on his own website?!?

What am I supposed to believe again?

I know this- this election was stolen. I know I'm marching on Saturday in DC. And know that I hope that we can focus on what we can do to audit this election and not chase our tails with stories that sould like movie plots. Why am I not hearing about everyone making a show of support this weekend? Ohio gets somewhere between 400-2000 people and CNN mentions it and starts talking about fraud. What would 10,000 people marching to expose fraud do in DC this weekend?

Let's talk about what the rest of us can do, not just the theory of the day. Rally in DC on Saturday and nationwide rallies in each state capital on Sunday!!!

[karlrschneider]

52. The problem is that the sheeple don't think. It hurts too much.

:eyes:

[IndyPriest]

56. Wong and Yang from Madsen, not Curtis

Blue, if I got your question correctly, it was Madsen, not Curtis, who made up the Wong/Yang thing. He did it to protect Curtis.

Yes, it's a long story, and the truth will out.

And I'm thrilled you're going to the march! Hot damn! I remember marching in the old days. Wish I could join you, but I work weekends! But do me a favor, write down "IndyPriest" on a piece of paper and take it with you. I'd love to know I was there somehow.

[Blue in the face]

57. Wong was on Curtis's website

Yang was on Brad's affidafit. Why did he put a false name in his own website when he was posting all of the other names in his website? Why protect that one and not any of the other names?

I don't want to sound like I'm belaboring the point, but I just don't get this, and to me it could make people doubt the story. I would like to debunk this question and right now, I'm the one asking it...

[Cronus Protagonist]

60. FYI Wang is the name of his boss

Mrs. Wang allegedly owns the company.




http://brainbuttons.com/home.asp?stashid=13
Buttons for brainy people - educate your local freepers today!

[FloridaCrat]

65. LOL - I never heard that before in my 30 yrs in the biz

thanks for the laugh.

[ClintCooper2003]

53. Have we heard any more from Wayne Madsen on this?

[Dolphyn]

62. Here's the most recent article (today)

http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/120604Madsen/120604madsen.html

[DubyaSux]

66. As a programmer, here's my take...

....on his affidavit..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x121760#123241

[garybeck]

68. let's not forget the context of all this

in previous Rove dealings...

we've seen fake documents that were based on fact

we've seen people speak publically, do interviews, and in some cases they thought they were telling the truth

we've seen entire books written about blatant lies (swift boats)

Now with Curtis and Madsen, the pattern is errily similar.

Curtis has a new book out. We've seen a fake check, several interviews (don't shoot the messenger...)

We have to be very careful here. We don't want to get Roved again. Let's just play it all slowly and preface it all with "if these allegations are true". That keeps us safe.

Having said that I"m not very confident about this information right now. I hope it pans out but I'm becoming more skeptical.

-g