It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ATS: Diebold Whistle Blower Faces Felony Charges

page: 5
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 06:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1

People are jumping on you and shots because you are more concerned with Heller than you are with Diebold which has disenfranchised every voter in the stinking country.


Not only is it Impossible that is a very lame excuse to use in an attempt to win your point simply because, Diebold is not the only one that makes voting machines.

Companies that make voting Machines

Better luck next time.


[edit on 3/2/2006 by shots]




posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by LazarusTheLong
I think personally that the person who did this, knew they might get in trouble, but it was neccessary... I feel the same.

Your feelings are not supported by the legal authorities. From the source article:

Sandi Gibbons, spokeswoman for the Los Angeles County district attorney's office, refused to call Heller a "whistle-blower."

"We call him a defendant," she said. "He's accused of breaking the law…. If we feel that the evidence shows beyond a reasonable doubt in our minds that a crime has been committed, it's our job as a criminal prosecutor to file a case."

Although state law protects whistle-blowers from retaliation by their employers, they can still be criminally prosecuted, said Tom Devine, legal director at the Washington, D.C.-based Government Accountability Project.


df1

posted on Mar, 2 2006 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Diebold is not the only one that makes voting machines.

Better luck next time.


Diebold does not need to control all voting machines to corrupt the outcome of elections. Your attempt to muddy the waters by bringing more voting machine manufacturers into the discussion does not exonerate Diebold of anything.

No luck required.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 09:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by df1
Diebold does not need to control all voting machines to corrupt the outcome of elections. Your attempt to muddy the waters by bringing more voting machine manufacturers into the discussion does not exonerate Diebold of anything.



It sure does exonerate them. You said they disenfranchised every voter which they do not.

Here are your exact words which one can only assume you forgot. :shk:


People are jumping on you and shots because you are more concerned with Heller than you are with Diebold which has disenfranchised every voter in the stinking country.


Now I ask you, how can they possibly disenfranchise every voter when their machines are not the only ones used



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 09:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Now I ask you, how can they possibly disenfranchise every voter when their machines are not the only ones used


By invalidating the proportional relevance of all of the remaining legitimate votes. Get it?


You're actually supporting voter fraud?


:shk:



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 09:19 AM
link   
if the security of enough voting machines is compromised that interfers with anaccurate count of the votes then every voter is disenfranchised!!
the integrity of my vote relies on your vote and everyone elses to be just as uncorrupted as my own!


df1

posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 09:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Now I ask you, how can they possibly disenfranchise every voter when their machines are not the only ones used

It is pretty damn clear that if Diebold gear was used to steal the vote in Ohio which resulted in giving the presidential election to Bush that Diebold ripped off the voters of the other 49 states, even if Ohio was the only state to use Diebold voting gear.

Do I need to use smaller words?

Do you require visual aides?

Are you any relation to Forest Gump?



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   
This is the News Network folks, decorum please.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by df1
It is pretty damn clear that if Diebold gear was used to steal the vote in Ohio which resulted in giving the presidential election to Bush that Diebold ripped off the voters of the other 49 states, even if Ohio was the only state to use Diebold voting gear.


Really are you sure those machines you refer to in Ohio were all Diebold's?



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 02:47 PM
link   
since when is a lawyer an expert in programming, computer hardware and voting systems?

Sounds like a democratic partisan hack trying to take down the Republicans for obvious reasons.

What I have found interesting about the past two federal elections was that there was never a hint by media, government or critics as to the potential of cheating by Democrats and their supporters. Wide spread cheating by the left around the world in elections is routinely reported and accepted fact but for some reason the party on the left in the US is perfectly clean. I doubt it myself.



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 04:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Really are you sure those machines you refer to in Ohio were all Diebold's?



Not getting the point shots, are you saying they weren't? If so, why?



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by denythestatusquo
since when is a lawyer an expert in programming, computer hardware and voting systems?

Sounds like a democratic partisan hack trying to take down the Republicans for obvious reasons.

What I have found interesting about the past two federal elections was that there was never a hint by media, government or critics as to the potential of cheating by Democrats and their supporters. Wide spread cheating by the left around the world in elections is routinely reported and accepted fact but for some reason the party on the left in the US is perfectly clean. I doubt it myself.


Please, this is the News Network, where we discuss pertainant topics.

The kiddies table is over there---------------------->



posted on Mar, 3 2006 @ 04:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by shots
Really are you sure those machines you refer to in Ohio were all Diebold's?



Not getting the point shots, are you saying they weren't? If so, why?


Correct they weren't at least not in Franklin country where the alleged fraud took place according to MSNBC.


Franklin is the only Ohio county to use Danaher Controls Inc.’s ELECTronic 1242, an older-style touch-screen voting system. Danaher did not immediately return a message for comment.

Machine glitch gave Bush extra Ohio votes

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


It would appear all these activist and blogs ranting and raving it was Diebolds never did their homework, they just assumed it was based on comments made by someone alledging it was Diebold. I say that assuming that MSNBC checked to see who made the machines, hence the reason they named Danaher and not Diebold.

[edit on 3/3/2006 by shots]


df1

posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 12:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by shots
Really are you sure those machines you refer to in Ohio were all Diebold's?

Diebold gear did not need to be used in all precincts in ohio for Diebold to control the outcome of the election. Your representation that such is required is pure unadulterated poppycock.

[edit on 4-3-2006 by df1]



posted on Mar, 4 2006 @ 09:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by df1

Diebold gear did not need to be used in all precincts in ohio for Diebold to control the outcome of the election. Your representation that such is required is pure unadulterated poppycock.


The fraud or alleged fraud took place in Franklin county perhaps somthing you were not aware of. :shk: Franklin County is the only county that Does Not Use Diebold Machines.
One can only assume you read far too many bloggs and activist Voting sites who distored the facts by assuming they were Diebold machines. :shk:

Check the post above your last it has all the proof you need.



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 01:52 AM
link   
Can't believe I missed this thread. Thanks SO. Nice work. I sent a friendly "lawyer to lawyer" email too, so thanks Regenmacher.

This is but one example of what the new order is willing to do to us. And while I often refer to them as neocons (they chose this term), it really goes beyond left-right issues. If any Repub's worth their salt step out of line they get taken down too. It's truly non-partisan.

But speaking of chilling govt. whistle blowers, I wanted to point you all in the direction of the Supreme Court decision today which rejected another attorney's 42 USC 1983 claim of employment retaliation in violation of his First Amendment rights. He wrote a memo to his superiors recommending dismissal of a criminal case when he was informed by defense counsel that the affidavit supporting the search warrant was crap.

The case proceeded to trial and the ADA was reassigned and transferred in obvious retaliation. The Supreme Court was split along party lines when it rejected his lawsuit. So potential government whistleblowers can take notice that if they blow the whistle on wrong doing in the course of their duties they will have no protection from the courts regardless of the gravity of the unlawful governent activity.

Isn't that great?



www.law.cornell.edu...

[edit on 1-6-2006 by seattlelaw]



posted on Jun, 1 2006 @ 06:32 AM
link   
Did not read every single post on this but isn't it now mandatory that new machines be put in place to replace the older machines used effectively for years. So you manufacture a problems such as unreliable machines and then replace them with the fixed ones. So the cure is more lethal than the alledged disease, but the Republicans want us to think they are coming to the rescue. It is becoming a familiar move. Terrorists are in our midst so we need a patriot act, we need to surveil all americans to see if we can discern a pattern etc. etc. Rather than replace the machines we should replace the politicians.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join