Means, Motive, Opportunity
The Crisis Papers
April 12, 2005
The 2006 mid-term election -- a scenario:
By late summer, 2006, the United States is in a desperate condition.
Following the collapse of the dollar in international currency markets,
there has been a cascade of business failures and mortgage foreclosures, and
a precipitous rise in unemployment, as the US economy slides inexorably into
a depression. Meanwhile, the June 2005 American attack on Iran and the
continuing war in Iraq has made the United States an international pariah
state; thus the community of nations shows no inclination whatever to rescue
the United States from its economic collapse.
In the run-up to the 2006 election, the mainstream media has once again
fallen in line behind the Republicans, blaming the depression on the Clinton
Administration, al Qaeda, and/or betrayal by “the Old Europe.” The crimes
and outrages of the Bush/GOP syndicate have been unreported by the media, as
Democratic war veterans running for office against GOP draft dodgers have
once again been castigated as “unpatriotic.”
For their part, Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson, and the religious right have
proclaimed that these economic and diplomatic catastrophes manifest God’s
judgment on the American people for their toleration of gays, abortion, the
ACLU, the teaching of evolution, and independent judges.
This time, the public is unconvinced by the GOP propaganda, as massive
protest demonstrations erupt throughout the country. Finally fed up with the
lies and greed of the GOP, and finally aware of just how much their
livelihood and their future has been plundered by Bushenomics, more than
two-thirds of the voters are about to go to the polls determined to throw
out the Republican Congress.
While a few honest polls forecast a landslide victory for the Democrats,
most of these polls have not been published.
The Republican-owned and Republican-coded “black-box” voting machines once
again perform as intended, and the Republicans retain control of Congress.
The astonished and disappointed public is once again told to “get over it.”
Beyond that, my crystal ball becomes cloudy.
The implied question in this scenario is clear: If GOP partisans own the
voting machines, count the votes, refuse to allow independent validation of
the tallies, and if the Republicans choose to take advantage of this
opportunity for fraud, is there any way – any way at all – that the
Democrats could win the 2006 election and regain control of Congress?
If not, then why do the Democrats persist in looking hopefully to 2006 -
“the next time.” After all, 2002 and 2004 were “the next time,” and there is
abundant evidence that in both cases, the peoples’ will was reversed by the
Diebold and ES&S black boxes.
Clearly, the Democratic Party and its allies look forward to “victory” in
2006 because they are in denial: they simply cannot bring themselves to face
the compelling evidence that in the United States today, the electoral
process is rigged, thus the will of the people is irrelevant to the
governance of the nation, and thus the United States has ceased to be a
Neither the 2004 Democratic Party candidate, John Kerry, nor the Party’s
Chairman, Howard Dean, will publicly entertain the very notion that “the fix
is in.” The issue of electoral fraud is simply not on the agenda of the
Democratic National Committee. Prominent progressives such as Vermont’s
Bernie Sanders, Al Franken, Paul Begala, and Arianna Huffington insist that
Bush won the election, “fair and square,” and that the “anomalies” in
Florida and Ohio were not sufficient to have determined the outcome. As for
the media, actor and
activist Peter Coyote reports that there is a “lock-down” order
throughout the mainstream media that the issue of electoral integrity is
simply not to be mentioned. Violation of the order can be a career-ender.
And in fact, with the exception of Keith Olbermann, one is hard-pressed to
identify anyone in the MSM who has mentioned the issue.
And so today, political discourse is captivated by the assumption that in
2004 George Bush won a majority of both the popular and the electoral votes,
and thus, unlike 2000, is now the indisputably legitimate President of the
United States. In addition, it is assumed without debate that the
Republicans have legitimate control of the Congress. The “success” of the
Republicans and the “failure” of the Democrats is now the “frame” within
which all political discussion resides.
Suppose instead that in 2002 and 2004 every intended vote had been correctly
counted, and as a result John Kerry was now the President, and the Democrats
controlled the Senate and quite possibly the House as well. The pundits
would now be writing about the resurgence of liberalism and the Democratic
Party, and, at the same time, speculating as to the causes of the “failure”
of The Right, and the public’s rejection of George Bush.
The evidence of massive election fraud in 2004 is compelling, and continues
to accumulate, despite the media “lock-down.” Just last week,
a group of university
statisticians released a report which calculates at a million to one the
probability that the discrepancy between the exit polls (indicating a Kerry
victory) and the final results was due to random error. Because
discussed at length the evidence for fraud in the 2004 election, I will
not repeat it here. But for those who wish to have yet another look at the
evidence, see The Crisis Papers page,
Election 2004 a Fraud?” Suffice to say that as the evidence
accumulates, the media remains mute and the public remains unconcerned.
Clear, contrary evidence that the election returns were accurate and the
outcome legitimate is simply non-existent. This is so, because the election
procedure was designed not to provide validation. The software source-codes
were secret, there was no paper record, and there was no parallel validation
procedure for the centralized compilation of voting totals. To the repeated
plea for validation, all that the voting-machine technicians could say is
“trust us” – “us” being partisan Republicans who built, coded, and operated
the “black box” voting machines.
Aside from the now-familiar GOP retorts of “get over it!” and “don’t be
paranoid,” the crux of the case of electoral legitimacy is “they wouldn’t
dare rig the election,” or alternatively, “the Republicans have too much
respect for our democracy to do such a thing.”
With much less provocation than this, the citizens of Ukraine and the
Republic of Georgia demanded, and got, new elections, which reversed the
outcomes of the corrupted elections.
As most “CSI” and “Law and Order” viewers are well aware, in their search
for suspects, detectives look first of all for “means, motive and opportunity.”
The “means” for election fraud are so obvious and indisputable that even the
Republicans will not dispute them. The “means,” of course, are the machines
and secret software of the Diebold and ES&S corporations that recorded more
than 30% of the votes cast, and 80% of the votes centrally compiled, in the
2004 Presidential election.
The lack of an independent paper record or any other mode of verification,
the minuscule chance of discovery, and the accommodating silence of the
media provides the “opportunity.”
There remains the question of motive.
Remember, first of all, that 2004 was not an ordinary Presidential
re-election contest whereby the incumbent, should he lose, graciously
concedes to the winner and then retires to play golf, give speeches at
one-hundred grand a pop, or even do sufficient good deeds to eventually win
a Nobel Peace Prize.
In this election, the stakes were much higher. The Republicans gathered and
invested a half billion dollars in order to win, and they did so for good
reason. In Bush’s first term, billions of dollars were transferred from the
poor, the middle class, the federal treasury, and future generations, to the
super-wealthy, with many billions more to come in a second Bush term. Many
of Bush’s friends and benefactors, possibly including his Vice President,
have engaged in massive graft and bribery – for example, hundreds of
millions of dollars of Iraq reconstruction funds “lost” by Halliburton, and
billions of dollars of California utility bills swindled by Enron. Still
more crimes: Condi Rice’s perjury before the 9/11 commission, the “outing”of
CIA agent Valerie Plame, Tom DeLay’s attempted bribery of Congressman Nick
Smith, and the worst crime of all, the theft of the national elections of
2000, 2002, and now 2004. God only knows what else a Democratic Attorney General and Democratic
Congressional investigations might uncover.
The Bush syndicate did not simply wish to stay in office. They had
an even greater motive to stay out of the Federal slammer.
So it comes down to this: In the 2004 election, the Bush team and the
Republican party had a treasure trove of means and opportunity dropped in
their laps. They could, if they chose, “key in” any election result they
wanted; for example, they could “swing” a Senate race by nine points or a
Governor’s race by fifteen points (as it appears they did in Georgia, 2002).
And, if the 2004 early exit polls were in fact accurate, in the Presidential
race it now appears that they could drop the Democrat’s percentage by five
points, and boost the Republican’s total by the same amount. Thanks to the
secret codes and “back-door access” to the voting machines, and thanks in
addition to the cooperation of the corporate media, they could do all this
without fear of detection.
Mindful of the record of this Administration during the past four years, the
enormous personal and financial consequences, as noted above, of an election
defeat, and the likelihood of that defeat as indicated by the polls, can we
really expect them to have said, in effect, “yes, we could steal this
election without consequence, but it wouldn’t be right, so we choose to be
If you believe this, then I have a stack of Enron stock that I’d like to
Clearly, the Bush syndicate had abundant means, motive and opportunity to
commit a crime against the state, in a word treason, and there is
compelling evidence that they have done just that. Neither the enforced
silence of the media nor the cowardly inaction of the Democrats mitigate
this evidence by one iota.
The over-arching question, then, is “when will the public wake up to this
silent coup d’etat?”
For the issue before us is no longer the protection of American democracy.
It’s too late for that. The issue instead is the restoration of American
And at the moment, that issue is very much in doubt.
Copyright 2005, by Ernest Partridge
Ernest Partridge's Internet Publications
Conscience of a Progressive:
Partridge's Scholarly Publications. (The Online Gadfly)
Dr. Ernest Partridge is a consultant, writer and lecturer in the field
of Environmental Ethics and Public Policy. He has taught Philosophy at
the University of California, and in Utah, Colorado and Wisconsin. He
publishes the website, "The Online
Gadfly" and co-edits the progressive website,
"The Crisis Papers".