California Attourny General Says He'll Sue Diebold
SkulkBait
Join Date: 2003-02-11 Member: 13423Members
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Secretary of State Kevin Shelley has said Diebold deceived California with aggressive marketing that led to the installation of touch-screen voting systems that were not tested or approved nationally or in California.
Lockyer's office issued a statement noting he has authority to intervene in and take over false claims cases involving vendors to state.
"Lockyer determined sufficient evidence existed to go forward with a false claims lawsuit against Diebold," the statement said. The state's top lawyer earlier had dropped a criminal investigation of Diebold.
Diebold Vice President Thomas Swidarski said in a statement that the company was pleased Lockyer dropped the probe. Despite Lockyer's decision to sue, the company is "confident that the state's decision to intervene will aid in a fair and dispassionate examination of the issues raised in the case," Swidarski said.
California in April set tough new standards for electronic voting by ordering new security measures for e-voting machines, and California's Secretary of State called for a criminal probe into Diebold, the state's largest e-voting machine supplier. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
--http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=738&e=1&u=/nm/20040907/tc_nm/tech_diebold_dc
So tell me this, if this company has <a href='http://www.blackboxvoting.org/?q=node/view/78' target='_blank'>rigged their machines with backdoors</a> isn't being charged with something more serious than a false claims lawsuit? Isn't this considered conspiracy to commit voting fraud, a felony?
Annother interesting link: <a href='http://www.equalccw.com/deandemo.html' target='_blank'>http://www.equalccw.com/deandemo.html</a>
Secretary of State Kevin Shelley has said Diebold deceived California with aggressive marketing that led to the installation of touch-screen voting systems that were not tested or approved nationally or in California.
Lockyer's office issued a statement noting he has authority to intervene in and take over false claims cases involving vendors to state.
"Lockyer determined sufficient evidence existed to go forward with a false claims lawsuit against Diebold," the statement said. The state's top lawyer earlier had dropped a criminal investigation of Diebold.
Diebold Vice President Thomas Swidarski said in a statement that the company was pleased Lockyer dropped the probe. Despite Lockyer's decision to sue, the company is "confident that the state's decision to intervene will aid in a fair and dispassionate examination of the issues raised in the case," Swidarski said.
California in April set tough new standards for electronic voting by ordering new security measures for e-voting machines, and California's Secretary of State called for a criminal probe into Diebold, the state's largest e-voting machine supplier. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
--http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=738&e=1&u=/nm/20040907/tc_nm/tech_diebold_dc
So tell me this, if this company has <a href='http://www.blackboxvoting.org/?q=node/view/78' target='_blank'>rigged their machines with backdoors</a> isn't being charged with something more serious than a false claims lawsuit? Isn't this considered conspiracy to commit voting fraud, a felony?
Annother interesting link: <a href='http://www.equalccw.com/deandemo.html' target='_blank'>http://www.equalccw.com/deandemo.html</a>
Comments
if they actually did this then they need to get the S sued out of them, thats just not cool, I want my vote to count and I live in California, I'm going to write some snail mail to important people pointing this out.
Its not a rumor, many Democrats asked the UN to monitor the US election. Naturally this infuriated the conservatives so it could never happen (the UN needs the host country's government's approval), but just to be sure an amendment was made to a bill banning the spending of government funds on a such a venture. I find it odd that conservatives are so against the idea myself, especially since it would also help keep Dem shinanigans in line too.
Anyway it doesn't much matter. Its not the point of this topic anyway.
<a href='http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/08/international.observers/index.html' target='_blank'>http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/08/08/...vers/index.html</a>