During and after a brief review of some of the most suspicious facts in the companion critique, I will proceed to further detailed evidence and implications.

For a Secretary of State to falsely inform County officials of what they can and can not do in order to stall them until it is too late for them to do what they legally could and should have done, and to have so lied with full knowledge that she was misinforming public officials in her capacity as Secretary of State in such a way as to result in many votes not being counted in contravention of the State Constitution and election laws, is a degree of fraud that crossed far over the bar.

Her actions were also fool-hearty since such unplanned, desperate and impulsive measures were always more likely to be revealed. As the BBC discovered of the current recount: "They are carefully going through the 179,855 uncounted ballots that Harris did not want tallied. They'll know the winner next month. Sources tell Newsnight that Gore's ahead by 20,000 votes.

But that is only in regard to the votes that Harris tried to cover up. That is nothing compared to what BBC presented as even better evidence of her having colluded with the Bushes to do, to cleanse the voting rolls of over 20,000 black Democrats in Florida likely to vote en mass for Gore.

Those were an extra 20,000 or so votes that would likely have been cast for Gore that can't be counted only because they were never allowed to be cast. Don't take my word for it. The thrust of the impartial BBC investigation concerned the 22,000 voters fraudulently cleansed from the voting roles in Florida. The BBC said: "We want to know whether George W Bush won the election or did brother Jeb steal it for him?"

The BBC discovered that the 22,000 mainly black Gore voters were turned away from the Florida polls by errors in "…a very expensive contract between Governor Jeb's division of elections and a private company named DBT that contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Republican party. DBT claims to have only "…accidentally wiped off the voter rolls thousands of Democratic voters,"

Greg Palast of the BBC and The London Observer found damning evidence that suggests that CLAYTON ROBERTS, Florida Director of Elections, was right when he said of DBT: "They do what we contract them to do." But when BBC began to ask more specific questions Roberts canceled to interview and called the police to get rid of the questioners. Fortunately for us, he could not so easily get rid of the questions--and of evidence of the real answers.

Mr. Roberts called out the police when the BBC investigator pointed to a copy of the contract: "It says here in the contract that the verification is supposed to be done by DBT….'It could look [like] you paid $4 million to purchase this election for the Republican party. 95% wrong on the felon list. That was when Mr. Roberts called the police before the BBC got to the "…difficult questions:"

Did Governor Jeb Bush, his Secretary of State Katherine Harris, and her Director of Elections, Clayton Roberts, know they had wrongly barred 22,000 black, Democrat voters before the elections? After the elections did they use their powers to prevent the count of 20,000 votes for the Democrats?

The overwhelming evidence is that either they didn't only accidentally cover up the answers. "COMMISSIONER: In any other country in the world, if this had occurred, there probably would have been riots or military troops throughout the streets."

Jeb wanted to deliver the election to his brother in the worst way despite the will of the voters. That is exactly what he did: "LEGISLATOR: I believe the Republicans strategy was at all costs we deliver Florida."

"Were people taken out of polls and stopped from voting? Yes, I think that was not right. I smell a rat!" another said. BBC found one of those rats at Database Technologies. They were not merely hired to remove the names of people who committed serious crimes from the voter lists. BBC obtained a document marked "confidential and trade secret" that says that the company ostensibly "'…was paid millions of dollars to make telephone calls to verify they got the right names' - but they didn't."

The BBC says: "So the question remains, why did the Republican leaders of this state pay millions for a list that stopped thousands of innocent Democrats from voting?"

The evidence for the answer they found is astounding: "The first list from DBT included 8,000 names from Texas supplied by George Bush's state officials. They said they were all felons, serious criminals barred from voting. As it turns out, almost none were. Local officials raised a ruckus and DBT issued a new list naming 58,000 felons. But the one county which went through the whole expensive process of checking the new list name by name found it was still 95% wrong."

Among those fraudulently removed from the voter lists after DBT wrongly labeled him a serious criminal was Reverend Willie Whiting who had neither ever spent a night in jail or been busted for anything but a speeding ticket a quarter century before.

BBC discovered that the way DBT generated the list, every genuine felon in the United States could knock out every black voter in Florida with the same surname and similar date of birth. That's why the NAACP is suing Florida for violating voters' civil rights:

LARRY OTTINGER, Lawyer for NAACP: "Governor Bush,…Katherine Harris, Clayton Roberts…all knew or should have known in advance that certain election policies and practices would disproportionately impact low-income areas, and in particular black citizens and other minority citizens, and that this would disproportionately impact Democratic voters, based on historical voting trends."

Consequently the BBC pointed out that, "The US civil rights commission is also on the trail. They called in Bush, Harris and Roberts. Bush did not convince his critics." As an unnamed man told them: "'You screwed up this state. You stealed the ballot.'" And as the BBC said several days ago: Commissioner Edley and his colleagues will be in Miami tomorrow to hear from voters wrongly disqualified.

As BBC pointed out: "…this [DBT list] cost the Democrats about 22,000 votes in Florida." That is in addition to the other 22,000 votes cheated by not counting "over votes" and all the votes cheated from the democrats by the failure to count the undervotes which alone would have given Gore a 20,000 vote margin.

U. S. Civil Rights Commissioner, DR CHRISTOPHER EDLEY, admits: "…we have been disappointed by the…lack of explanation provided by the state officials. When we spoke with the Governor and the Secretary of State and even with the Director of the Bureau of Elections underneath the Secretary of State, they were pointing fingers at everybody else, saying 'look it wasn't our responsibility'…."

For instance, Clayton Roberts says his job was just to pass on the list. He claims he didn't… check with DBT, if innocent people were on it. He claims that "We did not call and say did you check the list again.…"

But as Edley noted: "they were in charge, which is a disheartening disquieting thing for us to hear - who should be held accountable." EDLEY, US Civil Rights Commissioner pointed out that "There is a lot of public concern that the contractor selected is a firm that seems to have ties to the Republican party .

According to Greg Palast in The London Observer back in early November, Investigator Solomon Hughes informed Palast that the source of this poisonous blacklist, "Database Technologies (DBT) is a division of ChoicePoint and was actually hired by Governor Jeb Bush's frothingly partisan Secretary of State, Katherine Harris."

But the cover-up continues even as the Civil Rights Commissioner prepares to confront Database Technologies with the BBC evidence that DBT called the police to prevent being asked. DBT's vice-president told BBC that "manual verification by telephone calls" does not mean ringing people up to check they have got the right person. So the BBC wondered if DBT was paid to produce a list which they knew would name thousands of innocent black people and would have them disenfranchised?

But DBT told the BBC that Clayton Roberts and the State of Florida: "... wanted there to be more names than were actually verified as being a convicted felon."

Was it just "a system that broke down" through incredible incompetence and playing politics, or was it as the BBC suggests, something more: In spite of having paid four million dollars to a company that the contract said should call to verify a list of true felons, State officials point the finger at the counties and say it was their responsibility to check if the names on the list were real felons before disqualifying them. Why would they seek to keep DBT off the hook?

Why Bush not hang them out to dry? Does DBT know something state officials don't want revealed? Normally when you see someone inordinately protecting another for no good reason, investigators know who knows what we need to know. There are clues to why the Bush operatives are protecting DBT.

But DBT told the BBC that Clayton Roberts and the State of Florida: "... wanted there to be more names than were actually verified as being a convicted felon."

Was that just "a system that broke down" through incredible incompetence and playing politics, or was it as the BBC suggests, something more: In spite of having paid four million dollars to a company that the contract said should call to verify a list of true felons, State officials point the finger at the counties and say it was their responsibility to check if the names on the list were real felons before disqualifying them. Why would they seek to keep DBT off the hook?

Why would Bush not hang them out to dry? Does DBT know something state officials don't want revealed? Normally when you see someone inordinately protecting another for no good reason, investigators know who knows what we need to know. There are clues to why the Bush operatives are protecting DBT.

Investigator Solomon Hughes seems to have found that ChoicePoint founder, Rick Rozar, was under fire for misuse of personal data in state computers. Rather than risk prosecution, Rick Rozar apparently made a strategic six-figure soft cash donation to the Republican Party to avoidprosecution. Or was that to assure that his allied company, DBT, received the contract for $4,000,000 to clear the voter lists of convicted felons with the names of Democratic voters, but not by accident? The arrangement was made orally. But that does not mean it was not recorded, or that such evidence or just potential testimony has not bought protection.

But the apparent cover-up continues even as the Civil Rights Commissioner prepares to confront Database Technologies with the BBC evidence that DBT called the police to prevent Palast from asking. DBT's vice-president told BBC that "manual verification by telephone calls" does not mean ringing people up to check they have got the right person. So the BBC wondered if DBT was paid to produce a list which they knew would name thousands of innocent black people, and would have them disenfranchised?

What remains to be seen is which of the Bush or DBT officials will refuse to answer on grounds that it will incriminate them. Who will be the first to refuse to be the fall guy and turn state's evidence rather than take the fall alone? There seems to be no question that a momentous theft of votes occurred, the main question is how many of them participated, knew of and covered up that crime against the people.

DBT is beginning to crack. DBT told the BBC that Clayton Roberts and the State of Florida: "... wanted there to be more names than were actually verified as being a convicted felon." Who is next to cover her ass? The most obvious culprit seems to be Ms. Harris. In charge of Florida's vote count and co-chair of Bush's presidential campaign, Harris did not appear to the BBC to be unbiased.

Lois Frankel who represents Palm Beach in the State legislature wondered in the BBC account: "Wouldn't the appropriate actions for [Harris] be to say - let's really get to the bottom of this election and let's make sure every vote is counted…. She wanted George Bush to win. She interpreted every rule, every law in a way to help George Bush."

That seems to be graft and corruption, not mere political tricks. And if it involved paying four million dollars of state money to a firm on a clear understanding that they create a list designed to disenfranchise Democratic voters for which they would be protected, her head will roll. Then the only question will be whether or not she takes Jeb and his brother down with her.

The BBC was not amused: "In Britain, you count the votes, then announce the winner. In Florida they declare the winner first and here we are, still counting the votes [3 months later]." They observed that "All fingers point to the Jeb Bush crew in Tallahassee. Investigators want to breakthrough the iron shutters."

BBC became disgusted, saying "…the whole tenor of [Robert's] testimony is like OK you screwed up, you didn't check with DBT and if you want to hang this on me that's fine. It is certainly fine for George W. Bush.

But the BBC did not know our Constitutional law when they went on to wrongly observe: "Even if investigators conclude that Jeb Bush and the Republicans conspired to steal this election, the man in that house for the next four years will be George W. Bush." That is just one more mistake that ignores the facts: Bush can be impeached and removed from office for his complicity in stealing the election,

In addition to those 44,000 vote discrepancies already discussed, the BBC also questioned whether Roberts and the State of Florida [Bush, Harris, et. al.] "…did use their powers to prevent the count of 20,000 votes for the Democrats?" As they added: You don't have to be black. In Palm Beach, America's privileged nurse their tans and their anger. They quote a unnamed representative of them as well:

"I thought I voted for Al Gore but unfortunately I voted for Pat Buchanan, and I wasn't happy about that, because I am a Jewish voter and he would have been the last person in the world I would have voted for.

Granted, one might take perverse pleasure in the irony, but for the sobering facts noted by the BBC:

"Whacky butterfly ballots caused thousands in this Democrat town to accidentally mess up and they were refused replacement ballots promised them by state law: "I came across hundreds of people who made a mistake and I saw over 13,000 complaints filed by people who live in Palm Beach county." "Political tricks" might be forgiven for the former, but it was illegal dirty tricks to unlawfully refuse replacement ballots to voters.

As the BBC discovered, "In all, Palm Beach voting machines misread 27,000 ballots. Jeb Bush's Secretary of State, Katharine Harris, stopped them counting these votes by hand. She did the same to Gadstone, one of Florida's blackest, poorest and most Democrat counties, where machines failed to count one in eight ballots. Again Harris stopped the hand count. This alone cost Gore another 700 votes.

In charge of Florida's vote count and co-chair of Bush's presidential campaign, Harris did not appear to the BBC to be unbiased. Lois Frankel who represents Palm Beach, in the State legislature wondered in the BBC account: "Wouldn't the appropriate actions for [Harris] be to say - let's really get to the bottom of this election and let's make sure every vote is counted…. She wanted George Bush to win. She interpreted every rule, every law in a way to help George Bush." That is graft and corruption, not mere political tricks.

Nor is it the Roberts and the BBC alone who misunderstand our Constitutional law. Mr. Hopkins' is also mistaken in his "common sense" claim that the Florida recounts were in illegal because they violated the 14^th amendment. Hopkins claimed that "…it has been [a] ridiculous charge that the Supreme Court was fraudulent. It is not even necessary to be a lawyer to see the plain common sense of ruling. If a state wants to recount votes, they must have some procedure to make sure that all the votes are counted by the same standard."

Maybe Hopkins should have checked with a lawyer after all, since even the Supreme Court Justices who finally gave the selection to Duh?bya gave up their earlier misdirection to the Florida Supreme Court (that the Florida Supreme Court should make the election comply with the standards of equality of the 14^th Amendment). Finally, they stole the election only on grounds resulting from their intentional misdirection to the Florida Supreme Court that that court should also recount votes which had not been challenged. The Supreme Injustices knew at that time that no votes can be recounted by Florida law if they have not been challenged).

As the Supreme Court finally admitted, federal law gives the responsibility to choose electors in any way chosen by the state law to the legislatures of the states. The Supreme Court finally refused to interfere on the grounds of the 14^th Amendment's requirement of equality. Their ruling did not set aside the Florida vote no matter how little equality existed within that state--and all others--and between all states. To have applied the 14^th amendment would have thrown out the whole election in the whole nation. Had they so ruled citizens could have gotten judges to throw out every case by citing the violation of the 14^th Amendment.

That would have thrown the election into the Florida Legislature--and all others into state legislators too if they all had to be equal in processes. Rather, the bottom line by which Herr Rhinequest and his right wing cronies, fraudulently stole the election and imposed their selection was that there would no longer be time to count the votes that were challenged (after the Supreme Court, like the Florida officials, had stalled, inflated and, finally admitted should have been counted according to state law.

So, while Hopkins is right about the common sense need to have equality of processes for counting votes, that unruled suggestion was not what finally carried this case, it is what set up the theft. Looking to that as a potential appeal problem, even the Florida Supreme Court caved in to order a statewide recount of all precinct according to the state standards (which are formally equal (in leaving it up to each county)--just as federal law is formally equal (in leaving it up to each state legislature) but which are in fact quite unequal in all cases when the election is conducted and votes are counted in million different ways.

So while it is true that the Florida precincts which should have been recounted by state law according to Gore's right to challenge them and have them recounted after a statistically significant error had in fact been shown that could have affected the outcome would have violated the 14^th amendment. Every precinct in the country would have been equally in error.

All that could and should have been done, short of having thrown the election out and starting from scratch (which was not possible while meeting other Constitutional requirements), was for the Suprem Court to have ordered Florida's Suprejme Court follow the letter of their law to recount challenged votes (which we now know would have certified Gore electors). That have been done even after the Supreme Court's final stall made they Supreme Court made a simple and clear ruling that the counting should be completed according to the county rules only where the votes had been challenged according to Florida law.

The bottom line is that that was not done because to have ordered that that be done rather than that counting cease would have given Al Gore's selection in the election he had won. It had nothing to do with the claim that we weren't prepared for an election so close. We just were not prepared for traitors so gross, so obvious, so disrespectful of the people, traitors who had no respect for the voice of the people that they would go far beyond dirty politics as usual to use the power of their public offices to prevent the expression of the voice of the people from being effective even when it became clear that they could not prevent it from being heard.

Had it not been for Florida's strong Sunshine Laws, the BBC would never have discovered the contract with DBT that disenfranchised 22000 Gore voters, and makes it clear that, if they had all voted, Gore would have won the state by between 40,000 to over 60,000 votes. But even without them, Gore apparently won it by above 40,000 votes.

George Bush now pretends to be my president but I will not give him the respect the office deserves. He didn't earn it. In fact, His actions deserve our wholehearted condemnation. We need to be ready to take him out of office in two years. That opportunity is the beauty of our system.

Go back to my homepage