Wake Up America! What Went Wrong In Ohio – A Summary
Advice from Rep. John Conyers, D, MI
By DU Poster Autorank
John Conyers, D, MI is a legendary figure in the Democratic Party. He served on the Judiciary Committee since 1964 (and
was on that committee during the Nixon impeachment hearings); he is a founding member of the Congressional Black Caucus;
has sponsored critical legislation; recently called for President Bush to explain the pre-war Bush-Blair memo; and
investigated election fraud in Ohio right after the election.
Why is this important: because fraud occurred in Ohio; and that fraud is a paradigm for what we can expect in the 2006/2008 elections. If we can’t get fair elections, including a fair vote count, we Democrats will never regain control of congress and the
White House. As a party, we are doing very little.
Here is a summary of “What Went Wrong In Ohio” by Rep. John Conyers (Book Website & Original Report in PDF format.). It is vital that we realize the scope of theft in just that state and get angry and motivated. .
The excerpts are followed by some excellent links showing how Bush stole Ohio and the national election. The very best
election fraud work around takes place right here on the Democratic Underground in the Elections Forum.
*********
Excerpts:
We have found numerous serious election irregularities in the Ohio presidential election…Cumulatively, these
irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousands of voters…raise grave doubts about whiter it can e said that the
Ohio electors…were chosen in a manner conforming to Ohio law, let alone Federal requirements and constitutional
standards.
PRE ELECTION
I …the following actions by Mr. Blackwell (Ohio Republican Secretary of State), the Republican Party, and elections
officials disenfranchised HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of Ohio citizens, predominantly Minority and Democratic voters.
A. …misallocation of voting machines led to unprecedented long lines that disenfranchised scores, if not hundreds of
thousands, of predominantly Minority and Democratic Voters.
B. Mr. Blackwell’s decision to restrict provisional ballots resulted in the disenfranchisement of tens, if not hundreds
of thousands of voters, predominantly Minority and Democratic voters.
C. Mr. Blackwell’s widely reviled decision to reject voter registration applications…may have resulted in thousands of
new voters not being registered in timer for the 2004 election.
D. “caging: tactics” (voter intimidation through threatening letters, etc.) targeted 35,000 predominantly minority
voters for intimidation, had a negative impact on voter turnout.
E. The Ohio Republican Party’s decision to utilize thousands of partisan challengers contradicted concentrated in
minority and Democratic areas probably disenfranchised tens of thousands of legal voters…
F. Mr. Blackwell’s decision to prevent voters who requested absentee ballots, but did not receive them on a timely
basis, from being able to receive provisional ballotsprobably disenfranchised thousands, if not tens of thousands of
voters, particularly seniors.
II. On Election Day
A. …widespread instances of intimidation and misinformation in violation of the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act
of 1968, the Equal Protection Due Process and Ohio right to vote.
B. …improper purging and other registration errors by election officials that probably disenfranchised tens of thousands
of voters statewide.
C. There were 93,000 spoiled ballots where no vote was cast for president, the vast majority of which (were not
inspected at the time of his report).
D. …numerous significant unexplained irregularities.
1. Mahonig county…at least twenty-five electronic machines transferred an unknown number of Kerry votes to the Bush
column;
2. Warren County locked out public observers from vote counting citing a FBI warning about terrorist threat…(no FBI
threat issues);
3. Perry County...signifiantly more votes than voters in some precincts…
4. Butler County, down ballot…Democratic Supreme Court candidate (out polls) Kerry;
III. …post election period…numerous irregularities in tallying provisional ballots and conducting and completing the
recount that disenfranchised thousands of voters and called the entire recount procedure into question:
A. …failure to articulate clear and consistent standards for counting of provisional ballots.
B…failure to issue specific standards for the recount contributed to a lack of uniformity in violating of both the Due
Process clause and the Equal Protection clause…including:
1. Counties that did not randomly select precinct samples;
2. Counties which did not conduct a full hand count after the 3% hand and machine count did not match;
3. Counties which allowed irregular marking of ballots and failed to secure and store allots and machinery; and
4. Counties which prevented witnesses for candidates from observing various aspects of the recount.
C. The voting computer company Triad has essentially admitted that it engaged in a course of behavior during the recount
in numerous counties to provide “cheat sheets” to those counting the ballot. …how many votes they should find for each
candidate, and how many over and under-votes they should calculate to match the machine count. In that way, they could
avoid doing a full county-wide recount mandated by law.
REFERENCES:
ENDS