Sworn Affidavits Signed By Voters Aren't Evidence???

Am I missing something or is that what the House Administrative Committee stated regarding the election challenge filed by Clint Curtis who ran for Congress against Republican incumbent Tom Feeney in Florida’s 24th District?

Yep, that is exactly what they said. Strangely enough in the Ukraine exit polls are all that is needed to challenge an election but in America not only are exit polls not considered evidence but now sworn affidavits signed by voters are thrown out as well.

Clint began Walking For Democracy shortly after the November 7, 2006 General election. He canvassed dozens of precincts in all four counties, obtaining sworn affidavits signed by voters under the penalty of perjury which very clearly showed that the machines did not count accurately and that votes were stolen. Now the House Administrative Committee is saying that affidavits aren’t evidence and they are scrapping his challenge May 9, 2007 if we don’t do something.

As a long distance volunteer for Curtis for Congress and having done data analysis for Clint, I have been granted permission to post the following message.

Please let the House Administration Committee know that in America as a nation of laws Sworn Affidavits are a legal document punishable under perjury and should be accepted as evidence in an election challenge the same as they would in any court of law.

To recap what happened: In Oct of 2000, Mr. Curtis was requested by Congressman Tom Feeney, soon to be Speaker of the House of Florida, head lobbyist and chief council for Yang Enterprise in Oviedo, Florida to create a prototype of a program that could manipulate the vote. Since both Mr. Feeney and Mr. Curtis were Republicans, Mr. Curtis created the prototype thinking he was protecting the vote from tampering by the Democrats. When he presented his program to Mr. Feeney and Mrs. Yang and explained that to stop anyone from stealing an election you would need to be able to look at the source code, have random independently verifiable audits, and a paper ballot that could be counted, he was told that the program was not for protecting the vote but to manipulate the vote in south Florida.

Realizing how ethically challenged Yang Enterprises and Congressman Feeney were, Mr. Curtis resigned from Yang Enterprises and became a Democrat. He believed that if they used the program that they would be caught because no country would be careless enough to allow a partisan company to go unchecked and keep the source code of its voting machines proprietary or accept unverifiable results. Well, as we have seen, the machines have manipulated the vote and switched the results to the candidate of someone’s choosing and the software IS now proprietary. Mr. Curtis has passed a Lie Detector Test to the accuracy of these facts.

For more details, please go to www.Bradblog.com. Go to the right hand side of the Homepage. Go to Bradblog Special Coverage Clint Curtis/Tom Feeney Vote Rigging Scandal and go to www.clintcurtis.com.

See the following message and House Adiminstration Committee contact information below:


May 8th, 2007

Dear Member of the House Administration Committee:

I understand that Clint Curtis’ Contest will be addressed by the House Administration Committee Tuesday of this week. I have heard that you believe that we do not have enough evidence. What we did not have is mainstream media coverage. What we do have is hard evidence that there is a discrepancy between the official count and the affidavits that were gathered from actual voters. I also understand that the committee doesn’t think that sworn affidavits are enough evidence. In the past, it was exit polls that were considered not good enough because they did not connect the vote with the voter. Our system does exactly that. It is like having a paper ballots to count except even better. It is signed. Affidavits and eye witness testimony are the corner stone of our legal system. If you are not willing to accept what every court in the country requires as evidence, what level of proof are you willing to accept? If you would require the errors in the code to be found, we must be allowed access to the code and the machines. We are aware of hundreds of experts willing to independently examine and blueprint those proprietary systems should that opportunity become available. In the meantime, an Independent Investigation will determine once and for all if the machines in District 24 counted accurately.

Attached please find documentation that briefly describe our Walk for Democracy and the results. You will see that unlike Jennings whose 18,000 votes can never be found, Mr. Curtis’s votes can easily be found. I trust your Committee will have the willingness review the information attached and to seriously consider the evidence. We have spoken with over 40 representatives offices that have been impressed with our data. I have sent the attached documentation to them as well so they will have time to review it before tomorrow’s meeting.

An Independent Investigation can be conducted easily and inexpensively and the results verified. Hundreds of thousands of dollars have been spent on Jennings’s race chasing votes that unfortunately can never be found. For under $30,000 you could know for sure what happened in District 24. This is not about partisan politics. It is about our Democracy. Every vote needs to be counted.

Thank you for being willing to take a stand – a stand for the American people and their right to get their vote counted.

 1  |  2

Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
ALLOW AFFIDAVITS SIGNED BY VOTERS TO BE ADMISSIBLE AS EVIDENCE FOR THE BASIS OF AN ELECTION CHALLENGE THE SAME AS THEY WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE IN ANY COURT OF LAW.

Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author

Contact Editor

View Authors' Articles