Power of Story Send a Tweet        
- Advertisement -
OpEdNews Op Eds

Election Fraud 2004 - The Case Heats Up

By   Follow Me on Twitter     Message Michael Collins       (Page 1 of 5 pages)     Permalink

Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; , Add Tags  (less...)  Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com

Author 3863
Become a Fan
  (124 fans)
- Advertisement -

Ohio citizen sending a message right after 2004 election Image

"Letters from the Edge" Part 2

Michael Collins
"Scoop" Independent News
Washington, DC (Part 1)

- Advertisement -

April, 2007. Columbus, Ohio. 56 of 88 Ohio counties defied a federal court order and failed to return some or all of the 2004 presidential ballots that they were ordered to retain indefinitely. Over 1.5 million ballots were destroyed or lost, key evidence for major federal law suit charging election fraud and voter suppression in the 2004 presidential contest. For example: "fraudulent votes … cast for George W. Bush; inflating of vote tabulations in areas that tended to vote for George Bush."

What impact will the massive destruction of evidence by Ohio counties have on the federal case charging criminal election fraud in the 2004 presidential election? Some, but the case is still viable. Devastating findings by researchers for the plaintiffs are reviewed and a motive the destruction is provided. But first here are two more outstanding "Letters from the Edge" courtesy of Ohio elections officials trying to explain the mishandling and destruction of evidence.

Chaos and Outright Defiance after Losing and Destroying Evidence

- Advertisement -

Montgomery County Ohio was the scene of numerous election problems in 2004. The home of Dayton, this county was positively defiant when it reported deliberate destruction of all 2004 ballots. Why?

Election records were requested by the Secretary of State on April 9, 2007. Elections director Steven Harsman took until May 15, 2007 to produce this letter (Page 172)

"…we contacted our county prosecutor for further authorization.

In addition, we experienced an extra ordinary situation having 4 elections during a 90 day period. We literally ran out of space to prepare, stage, and retain material for those elections. It was imperative we process the 2004 materials for destruction under the guidelines of the 22 month retention.

Therefore, all materials were properly destroyed in a timely manner and we are unable to comply due to those circumstances.

We did not receive formal notice from the courts prior to preparing the certificate of destruction."

- Advertisement -

How often does a county executives contact the DA to get approval for shredding?

A prosperous county with a $750 million budget and an "A1" Moody's credit rating couldn't rent some storage space for vital records? Harsman should have used Google to find storage in Dayton.

Why is space even an issue if Montgomery was in full compliance with the law, as Harsman and the DA say they were?

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5

 

- Advertisement -

View Ratings | Rate It

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon Share Author on Social Media   Go To Commenting

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

Follow Me on Twitter

Writers Guidelines

Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Ukraine President Once Agent for U.S. State Department

Worst President Ever - Barack H. Obama

It's official! You're on your own

Rigged Elections for Romney?

Real Unemployment at 23% - Dampening the Excitement

Humiliation And Death As A Tool Of National Policy