J.A.I.L. News Journal
Los Angeles, California                              December 22, 2006
The Inherent Right of ALL People to Alter or Reform Government.
The Right Upon Which All Other Rights Depend
FAQs              What?MeWarden?

J.A.I.L. Blocked By Lack of Integrity
of the Voting System
By Barbie, National J.A.I.L.
We thank everyone who is rolling up their sleeves and doing what they can to clear this new roadblock for J.A.I.L., i.e., the lack of integrity of the voting system. In order for the People to carry out their inherent duty to alter or reform their
government, they must be assured of an honest voting system. Obviously if it is left to the same government that the People are seeking to reform, it can't happen.
Our special thanks goes to Neil McIver for his informative editorial published on December 14th in our J.A.I.L. News Journal Editorializing on a State Ballot at its Worst. An excerpt from that editorial states:
According to state figures, on November 7th the amendment was defeated by about 295,000 to 35,600. If this count is correct, then it means 11,000 fewer people voted for the amendment than had signed the petition to put it on the ballot in the first place!!! 
Results: 67% in favor, 20% opposed with the balance undecided -- well over the landslide benchmark in “favor” and also in line with the extraordinary petition support for the amendment (6% of all South Dakotans).  
Subsequent polls showed favor dropping marginally in the days before the election, but still in the 55% favorable range. So how did it drop from 55/67% in favor to 90% opposed? Logically, one of two things must have happened. Either the loaded ballot wording carried a huge amount of weight among voters, OR the vote was stolen. Is ‘stolen' too conspiratorial a term? Mind you, this was not a relatively
narrow 55-45 defeat, but a 90-10 defeat.
While Mr. McIver states that only one of two things happened, I strongly suggest that BOTH of them happened.
1. The vote was stolen.
The first thing I urge everyone to do is listen to the video at
That is an excellent expose` of the fraud involved in the voting system throughout the country. It reveals specific names and companies with plenty of evidence. The video features a well-narrated article called "Invisible Ballots" by G. Edward Griffin, whom we know personally and greatly respect.
It also features Bev Harris, the Founder of "Black Box Voting" from which website we cite:
11-20-06: Black Box Voting receives new legal threats from ES&S
This is the fourth time Black Box Voting and/or its founder, Bev Harris, have received legal threats from voting machine vendors who believe they have the right to sell secret software that miscounts elections.
A system that is dishonest doesn't like exposure. Like cockroaches, the evildoers like to be left alone, in the dark, undisturbed. The judicial system defines it as "judicial independence" --just leave us alone to do our thing without interference by the People. "Judicial independence" has come to mean keeping the shades drawn on the judiciary so they can remain in the darkness and independently continue their despotic actions against the People without accountability and exposure to the light.
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
John 3:19-20
Mr. Branson wrote a letter to Bev Harris which is on the Vote Fraud in South Dakota page on our national website:
Beverly Harris:

I am Ron Branson, founder of the organization www.jail4judges.org. I am sure you are familiar with our effort to bring judicial accountability to South Dakota, and what happened as a result.

Basically, we were ahead in the polls approximately 3 to 1 throughout the campaign, and a poll taken after being barraged with false and misleading information, four days prior to the November 7 election revealed that we remained still ahead by eleven points, i.e. 51% to 40.

On election day, the reported outcome of the election was 89% against with 11% for. There being no reasonable explanation, many are shocked.

We are taking independent polls of the voters in South Dakota, which has resulted in only a 1% change in our support base from that of the poll taken just four days prior to the election, i.e. 50%.

I am encouraging the seeking of both a criminal and a civil remedy, the latter being in Federal Court outside of the State of South Dakota.

I am currently viewing a video tape moderated by Edward Griffin, a friend and acquaintance of mine. I find this video very interesting. Inasmuch as this matter in South Dakota involves criminal acts of the entire government of South Dakota, the implications of this matter is earth shaking and beyond imagination.

Prior to the South Dakota vote, I documented all that was going on in this election on our website, www.sd-jail4judges.org. Not one word has been changed or altered in any manner on this website, which website now stands as evidence of the facts known prior to the election.

You may reach me at VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org, or on the phone at (605) 214-1301. Bill Stegmeier in South Dakota, who sponsored Amendment E, is spearheading an effort of taking our next course of action. He may be reached at (605) 940-0354, or at his email, billstegmeier@yahoo.com.

Because of the implications, I think this matter is worthy of blowing wide open this issue of manipulation of the voting process, using South Dakota Amendment E as an example. At issue here also involves the judiciary throughout this entire nation, as the Chief Justices of several of the various states have spoken out in the newspapers and media condemning our effort of bringing about judicial accountability to this nation, starting with South Dakota.

 Please do get back with me on this.  God bless.

-Ron Branson-
National Founder of JAIL4Judges
Mr. Stegmeier of South Dakota is in touch with Bev Harris and we hope to be able to give a progress report on what is happening there to investigate the election. If you have questions, contact Bill at the email address shown in Ron's letter above.
Ms. Harris also states on her website:
When you document 18,000 votes lost in Sarasota County, Florida, and more anomalies in several other states (which we are working on right now!) at some point it's a good idea to see for ourselves how the programmers think.
The votes in South Dakota were counted using Diebold machines.
In 2006 Diebold decided to remove its name from the front of the voting machines for strategic reasons. CEO Thomas Swidarski will decide in the beginning of 2007 if Diebold stays in the election business.
Does that suggest that something "stinks" in the South Dakota election process? Unlike the fraud of the South Dakota Attorney General (discussed below), the California Attorney General sued Diebold in 2004 resulting in a settlement:
December 17, 2004
Diebold to Settle with California

By Clint Boulton

A California court has approved a $2.6 million settlement between Diebold and the State of California and Alameda County. The state and county had sued Diebold for fraudulent claims about the security of its electronic voting machines.

Diebold, whose subsidiary Diebold Election Systems manufactures the voting machines at the heart of the suit, will pay the state $2.6 million, and Alameda County another $100,000.

The court ordered that $500,000 of the lump sum be used to help form a voter education and poll worker training program in California, coordinated through the University of California Institute of Governmental Studies.

Diebold has also agreed to certain technology and reporting obligations that will provide election officials with a better understanding of how to use its voting machines.

The settlement is the fruit of a suit filed in September by California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, who argued that Diebold was not truthful about the security and reliability of its electronic voting machines.

Lockyer, who earlier dropped a criminal probe into Diebold, claimed that Diebold provided Alameda County with software that was not certified by the government. Researchers earlier determined the machines contained dangerous flaws.

Researchers said the voting system could easily allow someone to cast multiple votes in the same election. Last April, California set stringent standards for electronic voting by ordering new security measures for e-voting machines.

Does that suggest that the People of South Dakota should also sue Diebold? Obviously that task cannot be left to their Attorney General who is a criminal.
2. The loaded ballot wording carried a huge amount of weight among voters.
The other factor contributing heavily to the so-called "defeat" of J.A.I.L. was the fraudulent misrepresentation of Amendment E (the J.A.I.L. Amendment) by South Dakota Attorney General Larry Long. We reported this in our JNJ two days before the election South Dakota 2006 Ballot Contaminated giving full details. The South Dakota voters were not provided the text of Amendment E with their ballots for them to be able to read it for themselves before voting. They had only the Attorney General's fraudulent "explanation" to go by in deciding how to vote.
The State Attorney General is the legal counsel for the judiciary of the State. Why, therefore, was he permitted to write an "explanation" on the ballot for a People's measure regarding judicial accountability? He should have been disqualified from doing so for obvious reasons! However, the entire South Dakota Legislature, that would design an appropriate provision to avoid this conflict of interest, is itself involved in nefarious acts regarding interference with the election process which I will explain below.
One of our readers offered the following advice:
The entire reason for your lopsided defeat was the ballot language.  I have seen other measures described honestly poll as passing, but on election day with the ballot language sabotaged get ten percent or so.  The ballot title you had was as sabotaged as I have seen. 
This used to happen to me.  I responded by going to the legislature and working with honest legislators getting all of the ballot title laws changed.  Trust me.  I have done this 30 or so times and you were dead the moment Long was allowed to write what he wrote.  Your next step ought to be to write a measure that says that ballot language must be written absent of bias or commentary and then spell out the process.
 ...  Fix the ballot title process and then go after your other goals. 
Notice he mentions working with "honest legislators" which do not exist in South Dakota. This is fully explained in South Dakota Government's Criminal
Interference With The People. More specifically is the following excerpt:
Criminal Violation of Election Laws by South Dakota Legislature
An additional serious violation regarding its influence on Amendment E was also reported before the election in South Dakota Legislature Forfeits Their Public Trust showing that the entire Legislature--not two or three-- all of them, unlawfully used public facilities at taxpayers' expense to write a resolution against a People's initiative! More pre-election information on this subject is found in Rogue Miscreant LegislatorsBe sure to view our South Dakota website at www.sd-jail4judges.org.
Yes, the ballot title process must be "fixed" --but how can it be done with a rogue legislature? We face a real challenge in South Dakota, but we have no doubt that it will be met. At least we know what the problem is, which is half the battle!

J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - href="../../State_Chapters/dc/DC_initiative.doc">www.jail4judges.org
Our South Dakota site: www.SD-JAIL4Judges.org
Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
See our active flash, http://www.jail4judges.org/Flash.htm
JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
E-Group sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
Get involved at
To be added or removed, write to VictoryUSA@jail4judges.org

"..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
striking at the root." -- Henry David Thoreau

Return To JNJ 2006

Return To JNJ Library Index for All Years