Ohio Supreme Court - nothing but an obstacle

[garybeck]

There's no way the OSC is going to change anything about the presidential election.

the sooner this gets to the nation level - US Supreme Court, the House and Senate, the better.

OSC is a roadblock. Stop worrying about Moyer and start worrying about how to get around him.

[forgethell]

1. It's not going to change

at the national level, either. We need to look forward, not back. make sure there is no fraud possible next time, by either Republicans or Democrats (frankly, I don't trust them,either.)

But don't hold your breath until John Kerry is inaugurated, 'cause it ain't gonna happen.

[New Earth]

2. thank you for your righteous prediction

oh psychic person that you are :hi: :eyes:

[forgethell]

6. Just intelligent analysis

of the facts. But hey, I would rejoice if I were wrong.

[garybeck]

3. you fight the battle that is in front of you

until inauguration day, we fight for Kerry. anything is possible.

after that, we fight for election reform.

[Merlot]

4. It's all the same fight

Fighting for JK is sowing the seeds for election reform.

[garybeck]

5. yes it is all the same fight

I'm just saying that right now i'm not giving up on this election because it's not over

[Merlot]

7. Good for you!

[Chimpanzee]

17. I'm fighting to get rid of * one way or another

That is the best way to fight for election reform, IMO.

[No Exit]

8. Okay, so maybe Kerry

won't quite, um, be inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2005, but:

Let's fight to make sure Bush's inauguration (coronation) is seen as the SHAM it is. Here's a hypothetical, and a question or 2: Suppose a president, presumed by many to have been voted in, is inaugurated. Suppose, however, that a lot of smart, dedicated people who sincerely believe that the election was not legally conducted, continue to work to investigate all the circumstances of said election. Suppose those people find proof after proof after proof of illegality and out-and-out fraud.

Suppose the findings of those dedicated people are, finally, accepted as the truth. Suppose what they find comes to be common knowledge.

We then have a country full of people who KNOW darn well that their "president" wasn't legally elected. How long before the federal government, especially the Executive branch, has a bit of trouble getting these people to accept its orders/directives/proclamations, etc.? Does the term "lame duck" mean anything to you?

Why didn't that happen in 2001? Guess what--it was starting to happen! But, then came 9/11. But he's already played that card, so what's an illegitimate dictator to do now?

[politicasista]

9. Yes, we have to fight for our voting rights also

I don't care what anyone says. Smirky is not my president period.

[No Exit]

12. You're right--

If we don't even know if our votes count, NO leader will be able to lead us. Does any person REALLY want to be the leader of 200+ million people who don't accept him/her as leader? Hell no. If the powers-that-be don't help us fix the broken elections system, they are doing themselves an even greater disservice than they are doing to us.

[forgethell]

10. Suppose those people find proof ... of illegality...?

Let's get it. But I think you are living in a dream world. He has all the powers of the Presidency, and there is always another crisis to bring the American people together.

But go ahead and try, I've been wrong before.

[No Exit]

11. Would you have wanted to be in Clinton's shoes at the

height of the impeachment scandal? On the day of the impeachment?

I'm sure you know what anti-Clinton people were saying: "Oh, well, even if he's impeached and convicted, it just means we're stuck with Gore..." And they were disgusted when it was (of course) the Senate which didn't go along with the whole thing.

But it left a mark. You can tell, if you just watch that recent interview of Clinton. I think it was an interview by Tom Brokaw, or maybe it was Peter Jennings. Clinton, IMO, is not over it yet.

Now, how could I wish anything less for Our Current Leader? No, I realize his own thugs won't vote to impeach him. But he can still become a "lame duck". All it takes is for the proof to be found, disseminated, and for as many people to KNOW that the election was stolen, as KNEW that Monica gave Clinton a BJ.

Georgie boy, your legacy awaits you. Ha ha. (The new anti-election-theft laws will be known informally as "the Rove Laws".)

[SharonRB]

20. Bush's wrongs...

...are so much worse and more numerous than getting a BJ in the WH! It still hurts so much that Clinton could have been considered an even greater president than he was without all the BS the Repubs gave him -- manufactured and not. I do feel good now, however, that whenever the MSM talks about him it's usually in a good way and most people use him as an example of a president who truly connected with the American people.

[No Exit]

22. Yes, Clinton's pecadilloes were child's play

compared to the crimes of the person currently in the Oval Office.

And incidentally, part of Clinton's mistakes consisted of trying to put the kibosh on a lawsuit (Jones')... Republicans say that was so terrible, yet they completely ignore the fact that Ken "Katherine" Blackwell is doing the exact same thing, right now, in Ohio. He's refusing to be deposed even though the law says he can be deposed by Arnebeck et al. Ignoring/subverting the law.

If you ask a diehard Republican (I like the word "repuke" better) what was the "worst" thing Clinton did, they will strike a "serious" pose and say, "He sold our secrets to the Chinese". But the funny thing is, they never know the details of this. There never seems to have been any documentation of this. Yet now we hear of a company called Yang Enterprises in Florida, which is/was in bed with a REPUBLICAN congressman (Feeney) and which apparently also was instrumental in passing certain secret info to the Chinese... and Feeney is very close to Jeb Bush. So WHO is really the one who seems to be passing "our secrets" to the Chinese? The Bushes very often do business in China.

Whatever Clinton "did", we had peace and prosperity for 8 years. Now look at us. How much clearer can it get that the real criminal is the one in the White House NOW?

[SharonRB]

33. Welcome to DU, No Exit

I agree with you wholeheartedly.

[No Exit]

34. Thank you, and Happy New Year!

Here's hoping something gets jarred loose on Jan. 6--or at least, soon!

[Chimpanzee]

18. 9/11 part II ??

[No Exit]

23. Just let them try it!

Not enough people are onto the 9/11 ploy, but the numbers are growing.

I firmly believe that 9/11 was not what it is purported to have been. Read some of the stuff at OnlineJournal, if you haven't already! This is not kook stuff--the majority of it is logical reasoning, connecting the dots.

No one can deny this: there is/was a concern about oil pipelines in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Both countries are geographically pivotal when it comes to oil pipelines.

Regarding Afghanistan, what are the odds that the country Unocal wanted to build the pipeline in just HAPPENS to also be the country which is harboring the Bogey Man of the hour, osama bin laden? There's plenty more authority for the Unocal pipeline doings in Afghanistan than just "Fahrenheit 911".

Just let them try it again! How many Americans would they kill just to make their emperor appear legitimate? If people won't stand up to murderers, then we have nothing worth saving anyway.

[googly]

28. You can't do it without MSM cooperating.

Don't you get it, MSM thinks of us as wearing tin hats and
the lunatic fringe. So it is time to stop beating a dead
horse and march ahead. We can't win next time unless we
recognize that our platform of 2004 did not win a landslide
vote. With overwhelming majority of voters earning below
100k per year, there is no reason why we can't win a landslide
if our agenda is in sync with what those people want. Screw
the rich, most of them vote repug.

[No Exit]

35. But what did people do before there was this MSM?

Before there were huge conglomerate-owned newspapers, and TV and cable and syndicated radio shows?

They had rebellions (not necessarily talking about violent ones, just rebelliousness in general) back then, too.

Pick any group of Americans, doesn't matter what their political beliefs are, and say, "TV is just a joke." Almost always, the majority of them will nod and agree. As for the newspapers, it's an oft-repeated cliche that "newspapers are written at a 6th-grade level". These things are said among "conservatives" as much as they are said among liberals. So I don't necessarily see blind faith in the MSM. Hell, the right wing lunatics think the MSM is "LIBERAL", for Chrissake! Neither side seems to trust the MSM.

About tin-foil hats and the lunatic fringe: I don't underestimate the power of the election fraud findings to convince many people who are NOT liberals or democrats. Who do you think were the main people saving water and food for the Y2K scare? Most of them were right wingnuts. There are plenty of people in this country who might well admit to themselves that Bush cheated. These people are not quick to holler "conspiracy theory!" Some of these people may even have supported Bush. It's a start.

[buddysmellgood]

13. This is next time.

[anamandujano]

14. That's right!

Anyone asking us to think about yet another "next time" is in distraction mode.

[DoYouEverWonder]

15. There will be no next time

it seems a lot of people don't understand that concept yet.

[forgethell]

26. Oh, I think you're wrong.

Even Augustus Caesar felt the need to observe the Republican forms of the Roman government.

Anyway, many oon this boaard were in doubt that this election would be held. Politics ebbs and flows. We'll get our turn, again.

Happy New Year.

[googly]

27. Thank you for being a realist and not burying your head in sand

It is a total waste of effort to keep 2004 alive. It is time
to move on. It is time to rethink strategies for 2008 & 2006.
It is time to revise the losing dem platform for 2004. It is
time to dump repug lite democrats. It is time to get back to
the winning democratic idea's of past.

[loudsue]

32. Googly, that is absolutely DELUSIONAL. They stole votes in 2000, 2002,

and the Ca. Governor's recall election, and they stole the vote in 2004.

WTF is it with you and "It is time to get back (???) to the winning (????) democratic ideas of past".

What utter frikkin' bullshit. What part of THEY COUNT THE VOTES and THEY OWN THE VOTING MACHINES don't you understand????


:kick::kick::kick:

[Truman01]

16. You don't have to wait to get to the federal court.

The feds aren't going to review what the Ohio Supreme Court is doing. That isn't how it works. It worked that way in Florida because there was a significant federal question. There is nothing remotely like that here.

TC

[TripleD]

19. Equal Protection

is a federal question.

That is how Bush got the USSC to review FSL's decision in 2000. They argued that the recount wasn't preformed uniformly throughout the entire state, it therefore violated the equal protection clause of the 14th amendment.

That exact same arguement can be made in Ohio as it was in Florida.

[Truman01]

21. That is what we argued in Florida, what would you see

as the basis for saying the recount wasn't done uniformly? And did that non-uniformity have some substantial effect?

TC

[TripleD]

25. According to Cobb's website

http://www.votecobb.org/

Cobb Calls for New Recount

Friday, December 31, 2004
Congress Urged to Reject Ohio Electoral Votes

On December 30th, two days after the conclusion of the flawed recount of Ohio's presidential vote, attorneys for Green Party presidential candidate David Cobb filed an amended complaint in federal court demanding that the recount of Ohio's presidential vote be done again, this time in conformance with state and federal law. more

"The people of Ohio deserve to have their votes counted fairly and accurately. The initial recount of Ohio's presidential vote was conducted inconsistently, haphazardly and in clear violation of even Mr. Blackwell's minimal standards. with the Ohio results still not final, it would be inappropriate for Congress to certify the presidential vote, especially while it is the subject of pending litigation in federal court," said Cobb.

"There's clearly a legitimate basis for a new recount. In a previous hearing, the judge indicated that if the recount was not conducted in accordance with uniform standards that we could petition the court for a new recount," said Cobb-LaMarche Media Director Blair Bobier.

//



It's my understanding that the inconsistancies included not doing a hand count in Fairfield County, even though the inital 3% hand count didn't match the machine count. Some counties allowed access to their pollbooks, others didn't.

An arguement cound be made that hand counting some counties while machine counting others led to inconsistant standards since undervotes and overvotes would be counted in a hand count and not in a machine count.

*disclaimer - I'm not a lawyer

[Truman01]

29. That's interesting, do you know this...

If the judge "indicated" that there were irregularities with the recount, why didn't he order a recount?

Your paragraph is the type of things I was looking for, the particularity of fraud that the court looks for. Cobb's paragraph is generality and simple allegation. He says is was "haphazard," "inconsistant" and in "violation of .... minimum standards" but doesn't offer any specifics.

If these things are followed up upon and we can prove what happened, then i can see the court ordering a hand count in places. I can't see him invalidating the election, but ordering a recount would be in line.

Your comment about hand counting some counties while machine counting others probably isn't valid but could be argued. The 14th amendment protect us from arbitrary application of the laws among other things. The execution of the Ohio law isn't a violation, but it is possible the Ohio law itself that allows such discrepancy may be a violation.

TC

[googly]

30. Don't mean shit unless MSM pays attention to Cobb n/t

[mulethree]

24. The greens second recount?

I was wondering why they don't put more emphasis on
the ohio laws that were violated in the recounts and seem to
emphasize instead that the recounts were not uniform.


Any way, if the shenanigans in Ohio and other states, violated the
rights of all the people in all the states; are the only recourses
forcing an equal recount or a congressional action? Or are all other
logical recourses ruled out by the 'no right to vote for president'
deal?


"But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of
electors for President and Vice President of the United States"

I see it - "right to vote", why can't a court act on that?

[googly]

31. Speaking of equal protection, Washington state has bigger

problems with that issue. With only 142 votes separating the
candidates out of 5 million cast, there has been all different
methods used in determining what constitutes a legitimate vote.
If Washington state reaches SCOTUS, then Ohio may have a chance
since 142 is hell of a lot smaller than 112,000 in Ohio.