Reply #16: NYT Final 3 paragraphs shows the contrast between two factions of Dems: [View All]

Conyers truth seekers and the others who wish to sweep it under the perverbial rug:

"In January 2005, the Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee issued a report finding “massive and unprecedented voter irregularities and anomalies” in the election.

In March 2005, the Democratic National Committee issued a report that said 2 percent of the Ohio electorate, or “approximately 129,543 voters,” had intended to vote but did not do so because of long lines and other problems at polling stations.

But the report said those and other frustrated voters “would not have erased Bush’s 118,000 vote margin in the state.”"

***
The DNC Report was a disappointing whitewash without a thorough review of the affidavits and other evidence collected by Fitrakis et al, while the Conyers/House Judiciary Dem Staff did. I don't understand why the other Dems didn't support Conyers' investigation. I will say those who take the time to thoroughly look at the collected evidence (Conyers, CBC, Boxer, RFK Jr, Mike Pap, Bob Koehler, Jim Lampley, and others,) come away with a fighting attitude. The MSM and the DLC, on the other hand, are quick to dismiss the evidence without a thorough review. Why not let them have their day in court to present all the evidence-isn't that the American way?