And she leaves out the best evidence of all, and well proven evidence:
John Lott's study of the disqualified (double-punched) Florida ballots showed that, in inner-city districts, the republican ballots (there are between 5-10% registered repubs in the inner cities, i.e., black republicans) were fifty to sixty times more likely to be double-punched than were the democratic ballots!!
To put that in perspective, if you assume that 95% of black voters are democrats and 5% republicans, then for every democrat ballot that was double-voted, there were TWO republican ballots that were double-voted, even though the dems outnumbered repubs by a 19-to-1 ratio.
Seems to me that this is the ultimate smoking gun of voter fraud, but the press has IGNORED his findings.
And Lott's research USED, as its raw data, the information collected by none other than the "USA Today" consortium of press organizations. Yes, this is the very press group that investigated the Florida ballots in a failed attempt to 'prove' that Gore would have won if the votes were recounted -- and their OWN DATA reveals the fraud.
Lott's investigation ties the high repub invalidated ballots to voting precincts controlled by democrat voting officials. The clear inference is that the ballots are collected and segregated by-party, and that someone took the republican pile and spoiled the ballots by "double-voting" them, i.e., punching something through the pile.
The notion that black republicans are fifty times more incompetent at basic voting skills than democratic voters (even though mean incomes, education level, etc, are much higher) is too ludicrous to contemplate.
The only rational explanation for that is voter fraud. Assume a democrat operative took a stack of ballots, and ran a skewer through them in the Al Gore hole. Since the vast majority of these inner-city voters were voting for Gore anyway, they would have merely pushed the entire hanging chad out of the hole. The degree of chad "hanging-ness" would depend upon whether the specific ballot had been at the top, middle, or bottom of the stack when the skewer went through.
Now, let's look at the 5% or so of minorities who wanted to vote for Bush. Perhaps the skewer hole was created so as to be small enough to escape detection, but large enough to "spoil" the ballot of a Bush voter, particularly if it is subsequently "analyzed" by a democrat operative election official. So, a prospective Bush voter might not pay attention to the small hole in the Gore chad, particularly if he is concentrating on punching out the hole in the Bush chad. Voila! This results in a large number of double punched Republican ballots, and very few Democrat ones. Double punching in the same hole doesn't show up as a voter error. It shows up as a Gore vote, which, in fact, it was intended to be.
Of course, the double-punching could have been done even more easily after the voters made their choices, since there would be no chance of a voter noticing a pre-punched hole. It would seem to be more difficult, security-wise, to mess with ballots that had already been cast, but, the democrats are capable of anything, except honesty and integrity.