Follow up to the email:
Paper Ballots -- Our Last Chance
Dan Gutenkauf, with observations from Victoria Collier (her website is www.votescam.com)
Dan Gutenkauf responds: (you can email Dan at
dGutenkauf@msn.com )
Hi again Victoria,
Thank you so much for your nice comments. You are certainly welcome to post my
comments on your website. I apologize for the length, and I trust your
journalistic instincts to know how to condense and edit it down to best effect.
I have no residual hard feelings about our passionate exchange of ideas in
Cincinnati in 2000. The whole atmosphere was surrounded with a lot of passionate
emotions from many of the participants, who had a variety of experiences and
persuasions. But there was still an underlying foundation of unity on the vote
fraud issue, in spite of the diversity of political and religious persuasions. I
really commend Jim Condit Jr. for the monumental effort he made to pull off that
Vote Fraud Convention.
I think the important thing is that you and I were able to meet personally,
subsequent to having telephone communication after Jim's passing. We
communicated our feelings on a variety of issues, and yet are still able to
respect each other's right to their opinion and experience. Hopefully we can
agree to disagree on some issues, without being disagreeable.
I was so pleased that your Dad and Ken finally received an expression of
recognition that they so richly deserved, even if it was posthumous. I was
pleased to meet you and Phyllis, and pleased that you were there to accept Jim's
award personally on his behalf. It was a very emotionally moving experience for
me. I doubt that I would have ever gotten involved in this battle, if it were
not for seeing Jim's passion and dedication on this issue.
As you have correctly stated previously, the vote fraud issue transcends
personal political and religious positions. As you can see from my last email, I
am trying to stay on point and focus on what we share in common, without getting
into emotional issues that could divide us.
I will add a couple items that I forgot to include in the last email.
One of the reasons I focus on getting information to the decision makers in
public office is that the Supreme Court has ruled that "It is the function of
the citizen to keep the government from falling into error."
I agree with you that in some cases, the decision makers in government will not
help because they are in on the game, or that they don't feel the issue has
enough popular support or interest. I experienced the latter in my several
meetings with the previous Sec. of State. But I don't feel that we can afford to
completely dismiss the decision makers either. If we automatically assume that
they will not be sympathetic to our position, then it becomes a self-fulfilling
prophecy. It may be a lost opportunity. The seed may fall on rocky ground or it
may fall on fertile ground. Our job is just to be faithful to plant the seed.
I feel blessed that my choice for Sec. of State was elected. I cultivated a
relationship prior to her election. Her Democratic opponent was "Mr. Digital
Democracy", who wanted to go full speed ahead with internet voting.
But I certainly agree with you that an educated citizenry is also vital to this
battle. That is why I spoken to many local groups over the last few years, and
have done talk radio interviews, because it is essential to disseminate this
info to the common man on the street. Like you, I have also seen a lot of
apathy, but we both understand that apathy is not an acceptable solution. We
can't allow the apathetic and intellectually lazy citizens to discourage us from
getting the message out. The stakes are too high when it comes to our freedom.
One of the significant items I forgot to include in my last email was the most
recent discovery that Dennis and I made during the overtime processing of the
ballot count for the 2002 Governor's race. As we toured the central counting
center with video camera, we discovered and documented three instances of
violation of election law. We found solo election workers reading AND
duplicating the "bleed -through ink ballots".
The statute for ballot duplication, Arizona Revised Statutes Title 16, section
621 (A) requires that the ballot duplication process is done "in the presence of
witnesses." Maricopa County Elections Department's own press release to the
Tribune newspaper on election day contained a flow chart which specified that
each "team" of ballot duplicators is required to be composed of a member from
each political party. So having solo duplicators, reading the original ballot
AND copying the duplicate ballots, was clearly illegal, without "witnesses" to
verify an accurate and unbiased ballot duplication process.
It is interesting to note that the margin of victory for Democrat Janet
Napolitano was less than 20,000 votes. That fell within the margin of total
mail- in ballots (23,000) that had to be duplicated. So in my mind, the result
was highly open to question. There is no discretion on the part of the election
department to deviate from their mandatory, ministerial duties. I did report
this violation to the press, and two subsequent news articles were printed.
So I really think, Vicki, that spreading our information involves a 4-prong
attack. . . . educating the decision makers, the legislators, the citizenry, and
the media. I know often times the media is simply the 4th branch of government
and will not expose these issues of fraud. Again, I think it is important to
cultivate personal relationships with public officials in both Elections and the
Legislature, as well as the media. Seven years ago we couldn't get any
sympathetic media attention. After 2000, it seemed like the rest of the country
finally started to catch on to the validity of Jim's message and to the
importance of our battle.
Dennis and I have had numerous adversarial encounters with County election
officials over the last 7 years. It is not my job to make friends with those
arrogant officials who don't and won't do their duty properly. I make a point of
reminding those individuals that they work for me and the public. We are the
master, they are the "public servant". According to Arizona's Administrative
Procedures Act, they can be removed for malfeasance and dishonesty. That is a
powerful tool of accountability over the public servant. I let them know that I
know the law, and that I will hold them accountable. At times, it is amazing to
see the results of their attitude adjustment.
Another point: As Jim and Ken understood from their experiences, we can't count
on the judiciary to do the right thing. Jim told us we had an excellent lawsuit
and didn't see how we could lose, UNLESS we got a corrupt judge. His words were
prophetic! But even if are chances are slim for victory in the courts, we can
always go to the court of public opinion. We still have to litigate if possible,
even if we lose, sometimes just to get the issue into the public arena. I am so
pleased and proud of Susan Marie Weber's courage and efforts to step up to the
plate with filing her lawsuit concerning use of the Touch Screens.
I know that you and I both have other interests and activities to pursue. I
appreciate that you took an entire day to write on this issue, just as I took an
entire late evening to write my thoughts. We don't get paid for this stuff. We
do it because we are both patriots at our own level and degree of passion. We
have no other choice but to raise our voice and spend our personal resources of
time and energy. If we don't, who will? If not now, when ? When we re-examine
the sacrifice that our forefathers made to secure our freedoms, how can we not
step up to the challenge to keep our democratic republic from being stolen?
I really appreciate you, Victoria, for your intelligence, your passion, and your
dedication. I know your Dad is watching and is very proud of you, too! Please
let me know if there is ever any way that I can assist you.
Best regards,
Dan Gutenkauf
dGutenkauf@msn.com
And then from Victoria Collier victoria@laplaza.org :
I hope everyone takes the time to read Dan Gutenkauf's
email. Dan, I would like to post it on my website. It's long
and could be edited down to article length, but I think you
state the problem clearly, and I know you have done meticulous
work in this field for years. I agree -- almost completely -- with your
position (though I know we don't agree on other subjects, if I correctly
recall our heated debates in Ohio!), and I have much respect for all
you've done in the area of election law.
I think the only point I would raise is that
if you
focus on educating the decision makers -- people already in positions
of power-- to the exclusion of the citizenry, you find yourself
in the position Jim and Ken found themselves in for 25 years.
Most of the decision makers will not help you --either because
they are in on the game, or they don't feel the issue has enough
popular support or interest, or they're scared of opposing those
who have more power than they do. It seems to me that we
need-- and have always needed-- an awakened populace who
understand how their elections are being subverted and demand
a safe, accurate, verifiable, system.
Unfortunately, the ignorance and apathy and lack of political interest of
the American people has reached near-mythic proportions, which is
what has allowed the corruption to grow such deep roots. In the end, we
need to work on all levels to combat what is nothing less than the
destruction of this country -- and I know that you are a true patriot, Dan,
probably moreso than I.
(Editor's note: see
Victoria Collier's website here)