Understanding The Real "2000 Election" Scam


by Jim Condit Jr.
Director, Citizens for a Fair Vote Count

(Originally appeared in 2003; updated April 26, 2004)
 

“When millions of people use a money machine and trust it, when millions pump gas with a credit card and don’t even ask for a receipt anymore, it’s time Americans vote with the same ease and trust, and that we get voting technology where people can vote with ease and get the results right after the vote."
                                        Newt Gingrich, December 24, 2000 on "Meet the Press" with the late Tim Russert.
(Editor's note: This quote from former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich illustrates the main tactic of those pushing for totally unverifiable machine, computer, or internet voting: emphasize EASE to the exclusion of verifiability, transparency, and accuracy. Full analysis of this sinister statement near the end of this article.)

Introduction: What's Happening Right Now
(If you have not read the above introduction link, it is short; you may want to read it and then come back to Section 1 immediately below)

Section 1: Books that didn't quite hit the Mark

There have been a flurry of Major Media-backed books issued about the contrived event known as "Presidential Election 2000".

Among these books are the diversionary book by the BBC's Greg Palast, "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy." (This is not to pass judgement here on Palast's frame of mind or motives, -- or any of the other authors I am about to name -- but his book diverts the reader from the main issues -- which are dealt with here.)

On this page you can learn how to understand what happened during Presidential Election 2000 -- and in the 45 day aftermath which followed.

Other books that just don't seem to be able to work up the mental energy to hit anywhere near the mark are:

* Supreme Injustice by Harvard lawyer Alan Dershowitz;

* At Any Cost: How Al Gore Tried to Steal the Election by Bill Sammons, FOX News Commentator;

* The Betrayal of America: How the Supreme Court Undermined The Constitution and Chose Our President by Vincent Bugliosi, famed prosecutor of cult leader and murder-mastermind, Charles Manson;

* Bush vs. Gore: The Court Cases and the Commentary by E.J. Dionne, Washington Post columnist, and William Kristol of the Weekly Standard;

* Election 2000: Reports and Interpretations by E.J. Dionne;

*  The Perfect Tie by James W. Ceasar;

* Overtime! The Election 2000 Thriller by Larry Sabato, frequent commentator on cable TV networks;

* 36 Days: The Complete Chronicle of the 2000 Election Crisis, compiled by the New York Times;

* When Elections go bad: The Law of Democracy and the Presidential Election of 2000 by Samuel Issacharoff;

* Deadlock: The Inside Story of America’s Closest Election, by Washington Post;

* The Miami Herald Report: Democracy Held Hostage;

* Down and Dirty: The Plot to Steal the Presidency by Jake Tapper;

* Smashmouth: Two Years in the Gutter with George Bush and Al Gore by Dana Milbank; 

* Divided We Stand: How Al Gore beat George Bush and Lost the Presidency by Roger Simon; and --

*  Oh Waiter! One Order of Crow! Inside the Strangest Presidential Election Finish in American History, by Jeff Greenfield, CNN commentator;

And I'm sure there are others of this variety.

The above books can provide an invaluable record of details and a chronology of "what happened when" -- but you will only be able to "read between the lines" and get the real understanding you need to have about the elections crisis we face in the USA and the world -- after digesting the information presented on this page, and the links provided.

A report that almost hits the mark is from Cal Tech and MIT: Voting Technology Report (What is, What could be). But --

Section 2: Oh, What a Relief It Is: votefraud.org

It's only here -- only at votefraud.org -- that you find the information and analysis you need to see through ALL ASPECTS the Big Media created fog surrounding computerized elections as found in the USA from about 1973 to the present.
 

Section 3: The 5 Big TV Networks Coordinate Their News EVERYDAY

The first reality to understand is this: The five Big TV Networks coordinate their news EVERYDAY. About 30 people behind the scenes at ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, and FOX -- decide what most Americans will see, will not see, which news items which sneaked through to the public once or twice are to be quietly dropped out of sight, -- and -- what to EMPHASIZE.

The five Big TV Networks cover the same major stories EVERYDAY -- and they ALL cover these chosen "major stories" from EXACLTY the same angle EVERYDAY. If you do not grasp this reality, -- which you can verify by your own observation, -- you will remain forever in "current events" kindergarten.

You will find some examples of Big TV Media news coordination by clicking here -- but this list is -- and even if expanded 100 times would be -- only a tiny fraction of the examples that have been documented and can be demonstrated. A book is crying to be done on this subject, documenting, day by day, the major stories carried on the three major TV network evening newscasts each night (ABC, CBS, NBC), as well as the stories carried on the news breaks and news segments of the three major TV cable news networks (CNN, FOX, and MSNBC).

In fact, sometimes a member of the Ruling Elite gets a bit cocky, and almost gives the game away:

March 27, 2001 Network America Ewire
Look Who’s Suggesting ABC, CBS, and NBC Combine NIghtly Newscasts!

So, armed with this knowledge of how the 5 Big TV Networks coordinate their news EVERYDAY, your writer was able to tell -- from big media clues -- that the Presidential Election of 2000 was going to go into overtime. 

More specifically, armed with the knowledge that the 5 Big TV Networks not only coordinate their news everyday, -- but also that the 5 Big TV Networks work together everyday to bring psychological warfare to bear against the collective American mind on two or three main points, on October 19, 2000 -- I was able to become the only person on planet earth, as far as we know, to put into writing -- in advance --  the "prediction" that we would not know the results of the 2000 Presidential election until November 8th, 2000, Wednesday morning -- i.e., that we would not know the results on Tuesday night, the night of the Presidential Election.  Now --

Now, believe me, I am NOT part of the psychic friends network. The Network America e-wire was able to be the only place in the world that put this prediction in writing, in advance -- because I was watching to see what the 5 Big TV networks were telegraphing, and all 5 Big TV Networks telegraphed their punches on this point, in unison (as they do on so many points). In this case, they were telegraphing that the Presidential Election of 2000 was PLANNED to go into overtime. Now, notice, I had no clue that the election would not be "decided" until December 12, 2000 -- 35 days later. Why did I have no clue on this point? Because the 5 Big TV Networks did not telegraph anything about this; what they had telegraphed was that the election was going to be so close that the winner would not be known on Election Night, 2000.

Now, if you understand that the 5 Big TV Networks coordinate their key messages and news everyday, then you will realize that I made no prediction at all, but merely reported to my e-wire subscribers what the 5 Big TV Networks were telegraphing about WHEN  the results of the 2000 Presidential election would be known.

On the other hand, if you believe that the 5 Big TV Networks do not coordinate their news everyday, then you will (erroneously) be forced to conclude that I made an absolutely astounding prediction, posted on topica.com early on the morning of October 19, 2000, -- namely, that we would not know the winner of the 2000 Presidential election until the next morning, Wednesday, November 8, 2000.

Read the original version of this "astounding prediction" here:

October 18, 2000 Network America Ewire
Again: Bush-Cheney Will Win the Computer Count

Incidentally, we are very grateful to topica.com for independently time stamping all of our e-wires on the day they come out, thus providing independent verification of the actual dates these e-wires were written and sent out over the internet. You can examine Topica's cataloging of our Network America ewires here. You will notice that another prediction (about Bush-Cheney winning) was in that e-wire as well. Actually, this "prediction" was made on August 2, 2000, and you can read that e-wire here:

August 02, 2000 Network America Ewire
They Want Bush and Cheney

On the morning following election day 2000 -- this e-wire was filed --

November 11, 2000 Network America Ewire
Election 2000 Overnight Report: “The Roller Coaster”: A Made for TV Movie

And here is a related e-wire to tip you off as to what the Big TV Networks were up to:

November 13, 2000 Network America Ewire
Smoking Guns! . . . And the “Ransom” Scenario

So even then we recognized that a "made for TV" movie was in progress. How did we know this? We knew it because the type of computer voting irregularities that were at that point -- right after election day 2000 --  being widely reported -- had been maliciously and treasonously suppressed by the major news media for the previous 25 years. (See The Dan Smoot Report, November, 1968; How Elections Are Stolen, by Dr. Susan L.M. Huck, American Opinion Magazine, 1977; Votescam: The Stealing of America, by the Collier brothers, 1993, covering 1970 through 1992; The Dangers of Computerized Voting by Ronnie Dugger, New Yorker magazine, 1988; many, many editions of The Spotlight newsweekly in the 1980s and 1990s; Pandora's Box: Did It Really Count Your Vote?, by Dr. Phillip O'Halloran, Relevance Magazine, November, 1996; The Greatest Cover-up of All: Votefraud in America, by this author, 1992; A House Without Doors, by this writer, November 1996 in Chronicles Magazine; and many other sources as well.)

One example of Big Media cover-up, dishonesty, and criminal contrivance would be the phenomenon of "chad" or "hanging chad." The Collier brothers and I became independently familiar with this term and phenomenon more than 20 years ago. Furthermore, the Collier brothers captured videotape footage in 1982 in Miami, Florida of women punching votes out of punch card ballots with sharp styluses at the Dade County Board of Elections on ELECTION NIGHT after the polls were closed.  This was a clear violation of the law. Shortly thereafter the crooks running the Dade County Board of Elections had security police just about DRAG the Colliers out of the Board of Elections, in a very rough manner.

These women who were filmed by the Colliers were in a room off limits to the public at the Board of Elections, and -- when asked by Ken Collier -- identified themselves on camera as members of the League of Women Voters. On the table in the film are thousands of little pieces of cardboard -- or "chad" -- which came out of the little holes in the punch card ballots as the women were punching the holes with sharp styluses.

In 1985, under a court order obtained by my father, James J. Condit Sr. -- the Colliers filmed women in Cincinnati, Ohio doing the same thing on election night (after the polls were closed) using common household tweezers to  pull votes -- or "chad" -- out of the ballots. That night, we presented that videotape to the news director at Channel 12 (WKRC-TV). The News Director, or, better said, the censor on duty, was a character using the name Don North -- who didn't find a film of women pulling votes out of punchcard ballots at the Board of Elections after the polls were closed interesting or newsworthy. (!)

This scenario has played itself out hundreds and hundreds of times since 1973 as citizen investigators brought evidence of irregularities or proof outright wrongdoing to news directors, who have invariably brutally censored the information from the televisions screens upon which so many Americans still foolishly rely for their "news." When a reporter, such as Randy Ludlow writes an excellent opening article at the Cincinnati Post in 1987,  -- the editors and news directors treasonously declare the blockbuster investigation underway "not newsworthy" -- and assign the street reporter to a different story, under strict orders to leave the "not newsworthy" story alone.

When I called Randy Ludlow a few days later in 1987, he told me that "there wasn't much interest in it." That's, I suppose, what he was told by his editor. There WOULD have been interest if the Cincinnati Post had a run a screaming front page headline: "Board of Elections Refuses to Answer Charges of VoteFraud" -- with appropriate follow up headlines, day after day, like the Big Press outlets run when they are doing one of their (far less important) investigations.

In Votescam: The Stealing of America, the Colliers tell how they brought their videotaped evidence of ballot tampering and the resulting "chad" to numerous national media outlets -- always to find that no one would carry it. Pat Robertson of CBN bought the tape and showed it once, with no follow up. Right now, Susan Marie Weber in California, Lotus in Colorado, Brent Beleskey in Canada and others in widely dispersed locations are fighting to bring the truth about the absurd computerized voting systems to light before the public and the press, often in hard fought court cases, 

Veteran reporter Ronnie Dugger wrote a cover story (The Dangers of Computerized Voting) for The New Yorker magazine for the November 1988 issue-- and in the article he explained, among many other things, about the absurdity of chad. This excellently written article broke the taboo against in-depth coverage in "major media publications." In a kind of response to this article, on the Monday night before Election Day 1988, Dan Rather did a superb five minute report at the end of that night's newscast explaining the dire dangers of computerized voting systems to honest elections. (Thanks to a tip from the Colliers who called me from Washington D.C. on Sunday night, I was able to preserve this newscast on videotape, and it is on our "Friday Night at the Movies" segment on the videotapes of the Citizens for a Fair Vote Count Convention which took place in August 2000.)

In that CBS Evening news report, Professor Howard J. Strauss of Princeton university said in response to one of Rather's questions: "When it comes to computerized elections, there are no safeguards. It's not a door without locks, it's a house without doors." Professor Strauss, a computer scientist, went on to say that if someone could get him a job with the company that is now calling itself Election Systems and Software (ES & S) -- then called Business Records Corporation (BRC), he would have a good chance of being able to fix the next Presidential election in whichever direction he wished. Dan Rather ended his report by saying, "Something to think about", as the majestic CBS music used at that time began to play, signaling the end of the newscast. Yet, there was no follow up by any of the five Big TV Networks, nor by the New York Times, nor by the Justice Department. They all decided to keep the American people in the dark. The Big TV Networks, as usual and as always, essentially acted in unison.

Section 4: For 25 Years the 5 Big TV Networks ignored the scandal of "Hanging Chad" -- in unison; Then -- in November, 2000 -- the 5 Big TV Networks all DISCOVERED "hanging chad" -- and again, they "discovered" chad in unison!

I had been on numerous 50,000 watt radio stations in 1996 telling the story of "chad" and the crooked "punch card" balloting systems that were in use in CIncinnati, Miami, and HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of other cities across the nation. And I mentioned on those radio shows that we had videotape of the women punching and tweezing votes out of voters' ballots -- all because of the alleged chad and "hanging chad" problem.

Since the Big TV Networks and all the major city daily newspapers suddenly blew a gasket about "hanging chad" in year 2000 -- it's important to understand that there was no chad problem, unless the Board of Elections messed up the little punching devices on purpose. I have never met anyone who used the punch card system -- as I did -- who ever had a hanging chad problem when punching their ballot. Here are some e-wires we carried about the "chad" scam:

November 18, 2000 Network America Ewire
Follow The Chad

November 20, 2000 Network America Ewire
Follow The Chad – Part II

So -- when we heard and saw ALL 5 BIG TV NETWORKS waxing eloquent and frantic about "chad" and "hanging chad" right after Presidential Election Day 2000 -- we knew that is was a calculated "exposure" to discredit the crooked computerized systems that had been in use all over the USA since the early 1970s,  -- in order to pave the way for even more easily rigged (and more easily controlled from one central location) computerized vote "counting" systems which were now ready to be implemented, as explained below.

Section 5: The New, even worse Votefraud Technology was READY by year 2000 -- so The 5 Big TV Networks "Suddenly" Discovered Flaws in the Systems They had Treasonously Protected for 25 years
 

It is known that, by election day 2000, new technology was waiting in the wings. The Ruling Elite was ready to try to move the entire nation to touch screen voting machines without a paper trail (if they can get away with it), and, in any case, to systems totally lacking in citizen administered checks and balances. As Dr. Philip O'Halloran first exposed in his 1996 piece in Relevance magazine, the new computerized machines come complete with two way modems, and therefore are able to be accessed via wireless technology (like the wireless internet or your cell phone), and therefore can be easily rigged from a central location -- without the knowledge of the honest citizens who are working at the polls a few steps away from the voting machines themselves.

Armed with this information, every loyal American's blood should boil when it dawns that the Votefraud Syndicate makes fools of all the underpaid elderly citizens who spend grueling 12 hour days every election day, believing that their efforts are ensuring honest elections. The reality is that the good faith efforts of these dedicated citizens are lending CREDIBILITY to the easily rigged computerized voting process. The Votefraud Syndicate is cynically using this credibility (the efforts of tens of thousands of polling workers across America) to silently steal America through computerized votescam.

The "new technology" was pushed right after the 2000 election "debacle" by the computerized votefraud syndicate led in public by Senator Charles Schumer of New York. Of course, the 5 Big TV Networks continued to provide cover for the computer-votefraud crooks, as well as work in tandem with them to impose these sham vote-"counting" systems on the nation. That's why we carried this ewire:

Here are some more indicators of the Stalin-esque vice-grip we find ourselves in -- with regard to our precious right of voting:

February 22, 2000 Network America Ewire
Columbus, Ohio = Worst Voting System

April 24, 2001 Network America Ewire
Bad News from Georgia on Touch Screen Voting  

The situation is so outrageous, that we should now hear from votefraud investigator and honest elections crusader, Chuck Geshlider:

July 25, 2000 Network America Ewire
The Kitchen Analogy

And from Brent Beleskey, director of the Canadian based International Voters Coalition:

April 14, 2000 Network America Ewire
A Zinger from Our Neighbor to the North

June 23, 2000 Network America Ewire
Transparent Process,  Private Ballot, “Light Bulb Moment”

And from Adam Osborne, the man credited with inventing the first personal computer:

April 13, 2000 Network America Ewire
Running Wild, by Adam Osborne

April 16, 2000 Network America Ewire
Wonders of the Internet, More on Osborne

And from Howard Phillips of the Constitution Party and the Conservative Caucus:

March 16, 2000 Network America Ewire
The Purpose of an Election

February 07, 2000 Network America Ewire
One National Party Has is Right!

And from commentator and former Presidential candidate, Patrick J. Buchanan:

November 01, 2000 Network America Ewire
PJB Endorses Votefraud Investigation

November 10, 2000 Network America Ewire
Buchanan To National Press Club
(Wednesday Morning, November 8^th, 2000: Buchanan states that Supporters Want Paper Ballots.)

Section 11: The Direct Democracy movement talks with slippery tongue -- but would have the American people crawling on all fours like beasts (having completely lost control of their destiny to HOAX elections "counted" by the Ruling Elite's computer wizards)

And there are powerful groups, sometimes under the umbrella of the "Direct Democracy" movement, who have been meeting regularly for decades to make sure that every election is easily riggable, and totally devoid of citizen checks and balances. Take a look at this e-wire to learn about one of the most important of these meetings:

December 24, 2000 Network America Ewire
The Gingrich who Stole Christmas

Let's review one thing that Gingrich said in that December 24, 2000 "Meet the Press" interview:

“When millions of people use a money machine and trust it, when millions pump gas with a credit card and don’t even ask for a receipt anymore, it’s time Americans vote with the same ease and trust, and that we get voting technology where people can vote with ease and get the results right after the vote."

 The problems with Mr. Gingrich's analysis are many. If you pump gas with a credit card -- even if you don't get a receipt on the spot -- you do get a credit card statement or bank statement at the end of the month. You know about how many times you pumped gas -- and where. There are checks and balances with regard to such a transaction. The same goes for using a money machine. You get a bank statement -- and you know where you used a money machine.

But how about when you vote? Even if you get a paper receipt -- which is not the case with the new touch screen systems -- so what? You know how you voted with or without a paper receipt. But even if the voter is given a paper receipt, that does absolutely no good with regard to the overall election count.

You, the voter, KNOW how you voted. But how do you know how the 10,000 other voters in your city voted? or the 5 million voters in your state? or the 90 million voters in your nation? You cannot know it -- unless there has been a verified, open hand count at each precinct, as specified in our model legislation proposal. If such a neighborhood precinct by neighborhood precinct count is not done, then ONLY the people who programmed the computer and/or who have access to all the codes -- are in a position to view the results in secret -- and alter them, if such insiders so desire, before they are published for the public to see.

Of course, if there is no paper trail -- as is the case with the new voting machines as in Columbus, Ohio, -- and Riverside California, -- and the state of Georgia, and many other places -- then there is absolutely no way for any voter to catch the crooks, however deep suspicions may run. See Bev Harris's article entitled, "Inside a US Election Vote Counting Program", to review how this works.

Section 12: We could easily Fund an open, honest hand count BY CITIZENS -- and it should be the very first priority of the American People !!!

In that last e-wire link concerning Newt Gingrich, we reported that Gingrich said on "Meet the Press" that if they need to "attach money" to the new technology --  to induce the states and counties to start using it -- then so be it. Note that whenever the Ruling Elite wants to advance their agenda -- money is no object.

At Citizens for a Fair Vote Count, we have estimated that it would take no more than 400 million dollars per election to hand count every vote on every ballot in the United States. Because the Ruling Elite and their Big Media insist on easily riggable elections -- all you hear is how we "can't possibly" afford the expenses of the hand count.

Well, how wrong is anyone who falls for this line or malarkey.

For just as national defense is necessary to protect us from foreign enemies, honest, open, verifiable elections are necessary to protect us from domestic enemies. Whatever expense is needed to safeguard the nation from foreign and domestic enemies -- must be allocated.  But ---

The truth is that $400 million per election day is QUITE inexpensive to safeguard our elections. Let me explain:

In July of 2003, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld confirmed that the US occupation of Iraq would cost $4 Billion dollars per month. PER MONTH! In numerous other official pronouncements, the American people are being told that we "must" expect to be in Iraq for 5 to 10 years. But let's just consider the cost of occupying Iraq for only one year: $48 BILLION dollars. (In fact -- by April, 2004 -- the cost had been ratcheted up to over $250 billion dollars! When the Ruling Elite wants something -- the money is readily available!

Now, since we have two major election days each year -- the primary election (usually held in May or thereabouts in most states) and the general election (held in November) -- then it would cost 2 x $400 million to count every last ballot by hand in any given year. That's $800 million per year to insure honest elections.

Let's take a moment why we say it will cost $400 million per election to count every last vote. The average precinct has between 200 and 300 ballots cast. 4 teams of two people would have to count between 50 and 75 ballots each, and that should take no more than 4 hours, at the very most. (These 8 people in each neighborhood precinct, ideally, have been chosen in advance in a public gathering when the names of all registered voters in that precinct, were put in a hat, and 8 of them were drawn out to be the official counters, as well as 4 more local registered votes to be back ups in case someone gets sick, and observers even if all 8 of the designated counters show up.)

So, at each precinct we would have 12 neighborhood voters chosen for a solemn duty right as the polls close in their precinct. But here's the good news: all 8 counters and all 4 back ups would be paid $100 for their efforts to count the votes in public. This would be a nice reward for helping to ensure the continuing freedom of your country, and would amount in most cases to more than $25 per hour, thus making these coveted positions.

Since there are about 300,000 neighborhood precincts in the USA, then we must multiply 300,000 precincts x 12 people, and we come up with 3,600,000 people. Then we multiply 3,600,000 people times $100 for their work counting the votes on election night -- and we come up with a total cost of $360,000,000 dollars. Factoring a few other costs that will be involved in supporting these people, let's throw in another $40 million nationwide, although it's difficult to imagine what this would be for, as everything else about the election would remain the same. So that brings us to a total of $400 million dollars for the primary election, $400 million for the November election, or $800 million per year.

So, what the US government is going to spend on occupying Iraq for one year ($48 billion) -- would pay for honest elections in the United States for 60 years. We could also simply deduct $800 million from the $5 billion plus in aid we give the "state of Israel" each year, and use that to ensure honest elections.

Do you see how mendacious and criminal it is for any of our public officials to cry "no money" when we ask them to count our votes in the open -- with citizen checks and balances?

Another important reform that needs to be made: in Europe, most nations isolate the decisive national and state elections from the local elections.

This is a good idea -- and it would take away the major objection advanced by the Big TV Networks as to why we can't have citizens count their own paper ballots at the neighborhood precinct right as the polls close.

In other words, there would be two general election days in October/November OR all the other local races and issues and all the other state offices and issues would be moved to the odd numbered year following the national and (3 most important offices in your) state election day.

What is now election day in November would become national and (top 3) state election day in the USA. The only races on the ballot would be the races for President, US Senate, US Congress (national), and Governor, State Senate, and State Legislature (most important state offices).

From these six positions emanate 99% of the decisions and laws which determine the destiny of our country (yes, I know that Judges have usurped much of the key decision making power -- but, with a more honest executive and legislative branch, truly elected by the people, judicial tyrants could be impeached or defunded).

The rest of the races, -- from issues to state attorney general to local coroner -- would be held on a second election day a few weeks earlier, or a few weeks later -- or moved to the next odd numbered year. Simple. That would mean that when we elect a President or a US Senator or a US Congressman -- or a Governor, or State Senator, or State Legislator -- there would only be six decisions to make for the voters.

And -- there would be only six items on each ballot for the counters or scrutineers at each neighborhood precinct to tabulate. That would mean that 8 citizen-scrutineers in each neighborhood precinct would have only 250 ballots with six items on each ballot to count. Simple

Since the 8 scrutineers would be working in teams of two -- that means each of the four teams would have about 60 ballots to count, with only 6 items on each ballot. This would take only two or three hours at most. And election night would not be "just another computer game" anymore.

Elections would be exciting and REAL again. What are the Democratic and Republican Election officials -- and the 5 big TV networks -- and all the major Daily newspapers -- going to say to THAT? Let's find out.

AND one more important and logical reform:  Election Day AND the day AFTER election day should also become a national holiday.

That way everybody who wants to -- can really concentrate on last minute study of the candidate and issues, last minute information gathering the night before and on election day, last minute lobbying of their neighbors, friends, and circles of influence -- if they so choose.

ALSO, the scutineers, if for some reason they had to stay up late on election night counting the ballots -- would be able to catch up on sleep the next morning.

To repeat -- in truth, NATIONAL ELECTIONS are more important than national defense. National Elections determine who will DIRECT our nation's military. And then, just as national defense should protect us from foreign enemies, HONEST and OPEN elections will protect us from DOMESTIC ENEMIES.

We will be in control of our national destiny again.

Section 13: The Entire Future is in the Balance

The FUTURE is in the balance in many ways. And that's exactly why the Ruling Elite behind the 5 Big TV Networks and the national Republican and Democratic leaderships, and the three major computerized "vote-counting" companies --- do NOT want honest, verifiable elections.

This evil crowd wants easily rigged elections so that, while the trusting voters provide cover and window dressing for their vote-scam by going to the polls to "vote" on election day -- they can determine the outcome of all key elections through silent computer fraud, which will be dutifully and uncritically announced by the Info "ladies of the evening" at the television networks -- and thus warp the destiny of the nation, and the world.

Let's continue: