HALF-TRUTH: AP Fails to Report Diebold Vote-Tampering Testimony & Moyers Conflict of Interest
AP is reporting the refiling of the case to contest the Ohio presidential election results.
COLUMBUS, Ohio A voter group challenging the results of the November second election in Ohio has refiled its complaint with the state's highest court.They've had another day to review everything from the previous story, but alas, again no report about the conflict of interest or the Diebold vote-tampering testimony. Tsk-tsk.
Well, plastered all over the mainstream media today is the story that the Supreme Court of Ohio has thrown out the Arnebeck case (joined with the Rev. Jesse Jackson), contesting the Ohio presidential election results. Why? Because in their suit, they also contested the Ohio Supreme Court election results as well. Judge Moyers threw out this important case because of a technicality.
Ohio Justice Throws Out Election ChallengeWhat the AP report fails to mention is that Chief Justice Thomas Moyer is in an egregious CONFLICT OF INTEREST here. You see, the "Supreme Court election results challege" involves Moyer himself and another municipal judge. AP even states this, but fails to take interest in the "conflict of interest" issue.
COLUMBUS, Ohio - The Ohio Supreme Court's chief justice on Thursday threw out a challenge to the state's presidential election results...
...Chief Justice Thomas Moyer ruled that the request improperly challenged two separate election results. Ohio law only allows one race to be challenged in a single complaint, he said.
...The allegations are based on an analysis comparing the presidential race to Moyer's Supreme Court race against a Cleveland municipal judge.
But nothing in state law or any previous court decision allows challenges to be combined, Moyer said...AP also makes another bold assertion (bold type added by Newsclip Autopsy):
...Without listing specific evidence, the complaint alleges that 130,656 votes for Kerry and John Edwards in 36 counties were somehow switched to count for the Bush-Cheney ticket...What AP fails to mention is that the "somehow" part is clearly indicated in the papers filed for an emergency motion in this lawsuit.
Furthermore, a report by RAW STORY has found that this emergency motion was made to "...prevent voting companies and Ohio officials from further tampering with voting machines in the state during the recount". In this motion, an alleged witness, Catherine Buchanan, has given sworn testimony that she was told that Diebold had reprogrammed computer voting machines during the recount procedures.
"They told us that Diebolt [sic] was coming to reprogram the computer, which doesn't make any sense. I mean, if you're going to calibrate a machine, you calibrate it before you're going to do testing to make sure it's going to be okay," Buchanan asserts.Again, AP fails to mention the whole story -- printed in thousands of news publications across the world. I encourage everyone to check out the papers filed by Arnebeck to the Supreme Court here and here.
(from RAW STORY - December 17, 2004)