It is good journalism. It reports a "sworn affidavit in federal court" with substantial background information. It is not as balanced as it could be by the inclusion of statements by the possible offenders. Of course if this is a matter of pending litigation, the "no comment" reply would most likely prevail. It relies on the "competence and "authority" of Mr. Spoonamore. I have extensive personal experience in the application, use and maintenance of computers. In my opinion his credentials warrant his acceptance as a reliable source. That the voting systems of 2004 (and also 2006 mid-terms) were, in several key precincts, manipulated is no longer a matter of conjecture, nor is the destruction of evidence which seem to be a pattern in this administration's operatives. Facts are that what boils down to being a "tabulation" system for the most basic right of our democracy should not be a PRIVATIZED system. And most certainly the relatively simple "tabulation" function should not be claimed as "Company proprietary" code not subject to audit, which Diebold has claimed. The non-partisan watchdog Common Cause is putting great effort into the disclosure of potential voter fraud on several fronts including hijacked machines. Sadly there are many reports of "no progress" in addressing the shortfalls and fraud of the past recent elections. That the fraud occurred is recognized, this article clarifies the "how". It's a fine srticle and we need more credible whistleblowers. It takes guts. There are checks and balances that could help deter fraud but the basic statement that it is impossible to eliminate the possibilities is TRUE.