Kerry Lawyers: "Outcome of Ohio vote cannot possibly change."

and "they have discouraged speculation that voting irregularities caused Kerry's loss."

I also saw a similar announcement on CNN last night. I certainly don't want to discourage the good efforts of those feretting out the truth, but it sure looks like the campaign has rolled.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_04/111004B.shtml

Get out those asbestos undies ... :evilgrin:

Peace,
Hippie

I'm giving a hearty ovation to those who continue to wade through the complexities and won't back down from the name-calling. I'm just saying it would be nice if the candidates had the same tenacity.

The longer Kerry stays out of this, the better off we are. As soon as, Kerry shows any sign of involvement, the Rove attack machine will go into high gear. In the meantime, Rove and Bush are too busy getting drunk on their new found power, while the rest of us begin to compile a solid case for fraud.

Maybe some folks around here didn't watch enough Perry Mason when they were little?

I would be delighted if that is the case. I'll be surprised too.

and if you watched a lot of shows, as my then husband and I did, it became clear that usually the psychological pressure caused the criminal to cave.....often the case itself wasn't all that strong for proof in a court of law

since bushco have no heart, soul, or psyche they would never cave....probably even with the cops standing at their side with cuffs

Betsy R. Vasquez: 'Think Kerry is not involved in this fight? Think again'
Posted on Thursday, November 11 @ 10:27:13 EST

---------------------------------------------------------------------

By Betsy R. Vasquez, Moderate Independent

When Senator John Kerry (D-MA) talked about how his policy would be
different in Iraq, he kept saying, in effect, "It's the how, stupid." He said repeatedly he would fight a "smarter" war.

Flash forward to today. Following the election, there was a problem
apparent. The exit polling didn't match the ballot count, and many reasons for that began to become apparent. John Kerry was faced with three options. One, fight on publicly rather than conceding and put the nation into a media frenzied limbo. Two, concede and go on with his life, turning his back on his promise to his supporters to ensure that "every vote will be counted."

Most people are assuming that John Kerry opted for the second of these while John Edwards, his running mate, opted for the first, and since Kerry was the big dog, he won out. But people who think this are thinking in Bush terms, all or nothing, either you are for the war or against it, that either Senator Kerry was for recounting the votes or he was against it.

The reality is, John Kerry has chosen a third, much smarter course - just as he said he would all along. John Kerry realized that to launch a public campaign calling the vote into question would be disastrous. In fact, he likely realized he would we walking right into a Bush-set boobytrap.

In particular, during our election coverage we talked about the pending battle of Fallujah, about the timing of it being an election ploy, about how it was following in the constant Bush pattern of creating a media event to sway the election, as he did last time by making the run up to the Iraq invasion come to a head exactly on election week.

Well, the battle in Fallujah began hitting the media hard in the week before the election, right on cue. Of course it was billed as the solution, the battle that - if you just keep Bush in office - will wipe out those insurgents and solve the problems over there. This was yet another obvious use of our nation's troops by President Bush as if they were campaign volunteers rather than nonpartisan volunteers to defend our nation.

But Fallujah, it turns out, seems to be even more than that. Fallujah, in effect, was the getaway car for an election heist.
Following the fiasco in Florida in 2000, Gore was able to battle on for 30 days to try and get a fair accounting. All the while, the Bush camp claimed he should just stop and give up because his delaying of what they were saying was the inevitable end was threatening the nation's security and stability. They said the stock market was suffering, the nation was unstable, and so Gore should just give up and accept the result as is.

This time, John Kerry had made clear he was prepared to fight 100 times as hard and long as Gore did if necessary. In fact, he had solicited funds just for that eventuality so he could battle all over the nation if necessary to ensure that every vote was properly counted.

Enter Fallujah. As we know - and saw on election night, as Bush's people began calling networks and demanding they call Ohio for their camp - the Bush team's strategy was to try and force all questions to be closed ASAP. Last time, they weren't prepared for that part. This time, they were.Picture if John Kerry had chosen to call the election into question. Immediately, the Bush camp would talk about how 50,000 of our troops are just about to launch the biggest military operation since the invasion of Baghdad. And, just a couple of days after the election, it was launched.

You can imagine the arguments from the Bushies: "How could Senator Kerry undermine our security while our troops are in the midst of battle." Fallujah was to be the pressure point that would, if not stop Kerry from uncovering all the dirt and getting a fair election count, would at least tarnish his name with much of the nation and, as importantly, create something for the right-wing dominated media to hammer away at him on, making it seem as if he is only caring about himself and not the nation. It was quite a well-crafted plan. Completely amoral, but smart.

Unfortunately for them, John Kerry was smarter.

As Keith Olbermann of MSNBC, who has been about the only mainstream
journalist to actually follow up on the many serious problems with regard to the integrity of the election, has pointed out, a concession speech, in effect, means nothing. It is not legally binding.

So, if you were thinking like a Bush goon, you would expect that either Kerry would stand up to the mischief that went on, not conceding in the meantime, and so your booby trap would work perfectly, or that he would just give up and let it go, as wimpy Democrats are prone to do.But John Kerry chose a smarter course. Ask yourself the question: what if John Kerry were to do both, concede publicly but, at the same time, look into every instance of mischief, and see if in fact the election was fair or fixed?

This would be a no lose situation for him. The booby trap set up for him would become irrelevant, as he would have done the right thing for the nation, not putting it into turmoil while its troops are in battle.

But at the same time, he is still just as free to look into any voting irregularities as he would have been had he not conceded. Even better, he could do it without the press going insane and the nation being kept on tension-creating edge. All of the lawyers he could have sent to look into things still could be sent to look into things, and if the election is truly called into question, he could then, with ample justification so as to make it legitimate, come out publicly and retract his concession. It is the prosecutor, also one of Kerry's previous jobs, who knows well enough to thoroughly prepare and investigate his case before leveling charges. You may have a real hunch that someone is responsible for a murder, but until you believe you can win that case in court, you do not make the allegation.

This is called fighting smart. And the Bushies, in the same way they failed to plan for the subtleties of doing battle in Iraq, haven't even caught on yet that this is what is occurring, that they are, in fact, being outflanked and attacked after being tricked into looking the other way. And just in case you don't quite believe John Kerry is on the case, and instead think he just turned out to be a wimp who didn't live up to his word, take a look at this letter from his brother, released privately to his supporters:
CAM KERRY'S LETTER

I am grateful to the many people who have contacted me to express their deep concern about questions of miscounting, fraud, vote suppression, and other problems on election day, especially in Florida and Ohio. Their concern reflects how much people care about the outcome of this election. I want to you to know we are not ignoring it. Election protection lawyers are still on the job in Ohio and Florida and in DC making sure all the votes are counted accurately. I have been conferring with lawyers involved and have made them aware of the information and concerns people have given me. Even if the facts don't provide a basis to change the outcome, the information will inform the continuing effort to protect the integrity of our elections. If you have specific factual information about voting problems that could be helpful to the lawyers doing their job, please send it to (e-mail removed for the story) rather than to me. The election protection effort has been important to me personally, and I am proud of the 17,000 lawyers around the country who helped. It's obvious that we have a way to go still, but their efforts helped make a difference. Their work goes on. Thank you, Cam Kerry Notice that he chose to have his brother, who is not well-known to the public, sign the letter. As far as the public is concerned, John Kerry has conceded at that is that.

But now you know that that is not truly the case.

Make no mistake, he will never publicly call the election into question unless enough fraud turns out to truly challenge the end result. And so, in effect, he is not at this point contesting the election. But in reality, he is like the DA who says, "At this time we are not charging President Bush with anything." Evidence first. It is the best strategy for him personally, the best strategy politically, and the best strategy for the nation.

And now stepping in to help is the man who was supposed to be the spoiler, Ralph Nader. As the Washington Post reports (see article: Losing by 335,000 in N.H., Nader Demands a Recount), Nader is using New Hampshire as a staging ground to call the Diebold machine-recorded electronic votes into question. Why is he doing it in New Hampshire, which Kerry won? Does this mean he is going after Kerry?

Not at all. It is tactically brilliant. In New Hampshire, any candidate can call for a recount as long as he offers to pay for it. And that cost in this small state is only $2,000 dollars. So Nader is choosing to challenge the results there, but only to make the case that, if there turns out to be a problem with the machines there, the votes must be challenged everywhere.

As the WashPost reports, "We have received reports of irregularities in the vote reported on the AccuVote Diebold Machines in comparison to exit polls and trends in voting in New Hampshire," Nader wrote Secretary of State William M. Gardner. "These irregularities favor President George W. Bush by 5% to 15% over what was expected."

So you see clearly he is charging that the machines skewed in favor of President Bush. New Hampshire was just the easiest, smartest, and cheapest place to get a first crack at making the case, and so opening a Pandora's Box that will spread out across the nation.

So enjoy the non-Moderate Independent media's coverage of Fallujah and ignoring of the recount. But rest assured that people are on the case, and that Kerry is taking the fight to them - in such a smart matter they don't even know what's hitting them. And remember, Watergate didn't break the week after the election. No one knew anything was even fishy, but in the end, the devil go his due.

And on another note, the non-M/I media should be given some credit. As one Washington Post reporter told me, you can bet they are looking into all of this. And, as you see with the above Washington Post story, when they get something concrete they are going to print.
But it is the new media - the blogs - that are powering this one as much as the mainstream media.

So rest assured, and feel free to help out in anyway you can. We are the eyes, ears, and analysts of our nation. Support Olbermann at MSNBC, and rest assured, Kerry is on the case.And lest you not realize what exactly is going on, this today from Olbermann: "With news this morning that the computerized balloting in North Carolina is so thoroughly messed up that all statewide voting may be thrown out and a second election day scheduled, the story continues."And, even better, this from a firsthand witness' e-mail being circulated among Kerry supporters:
Subject: Basic report from Columbus

I worked for 3 days, including Election Day, on the statewide voter
protection hotline run by the Ohio Democratic Party in Columbus, Ohio. I am writing this because the media is inexplicablywhitewashing what happened in Ohio, and Kerry's concession was likewise inexplicable.

Hundreds of thousands of people were disenfranchised in Ohio. People waited on line for as long as 10 hours. It appears to have only happened in Democratic-leaning precincts, principally (a) precincts where many African Americans lived, and (b) precincts near colleges.

I spoke to a young man who got on line at 11:30 am and voted at 7 pm. When he left at 7 pm, the line was about 150 voters longer than when he'd arrived, which meant those people were going to wait even longer. In fact they waited for as much as 10 hours, and their voting was concluded at about 3 am. The reason this occurred was that they had 1 voting station per 1000 voters, while the adjacent precinct had 1 voting station per 184. Both precincts were within the same county, and managed by the same county board of elections. The difference between them is that the privileged polling place was in a rural, solidly republican, area, while the one with long lines was in the college town of Gambier, OH. Lines of 4 and 5 hours were the order of the day in many African-American neighborhoods. Touch screen voting machines in Youngstown OH were registering "George W. Bush" when people pressed "John F. Kerry" ALL DAY LONG. This was reported immediately after the polls opened, and reported over and over again throughout the day, and yet the bogus machines were inexplicably kept in use

THROUGHOUT THE DAY.

Countless other frauds occurred, such as postcards advising people of incorrect polling places, registered Democrats not receiving absentee ballots, duly registered young voters being forced to file provisional ballots even though their names and signatures appeared in the voting rolls, longtime active voting registered voters being told they weren't registered, bad faith challenges by Republican "challengers" in Democratic precincts, and on and on and on.

I was very proud of the way so many Ohioans fought so valiantly for their right to vote, and would not be turned away. Many, however, could not spend the entire day and were afraid of losing their jobs, due to the severe economic depression hitting Ohio.

I do not understand why Kerry conceded and did not fight to ensure that all ohioans would have a chance to vote, and for their vote to be counted.

If he is an M/I reader, now he will know.

Reprinted Moderate Independent:
<http://www.moderateindependent.com/v2i21election.htm>

"Attorneys for the Kerry campaign said Monday that they did not believe the outcome of the Ohio vote - which gave President Bush the electoral votes needed to win - could possibly change; they have discouraged speculation that voting irregularities caused Kerry's loss." ;)

:hi:

This is about voter confidence more than anything. We can't afford NOT to pursue this.

A subtle difference with little distinction, but you're correct. I've edited the subject line to now say "Outcome of Ohio vote...," instead of "Ohio vote..." Thank you.

is different than "I don't believe it can possibly rain tomorrow" ;)

The attorneys have to be cautious how they proceed. They can't say ... WERE GONNA PROVE FRAUD DAMNIT! or ... WERE GONNA WIN YEEE HAW!

They are cautious as they should be. And, if I come out of this with more confidence in our democracy/the system ... it's a good thing.

when the election was rigged in Florida and God knows where else. If it proves to be right, this has been going on (the fix) since at least 1996 when Chuck Hagel got elected in Nebraska. He, by the way, part owner of the voting machines newly installed prior to election.

every time this is brought up.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A43630-2004Nov11?language=printer

snip
Is anyone surprised that accusations of voter disenfranchisement and irregularities abound after the most passionately contested presidential campaign in memory? Is anybody stunned that the mainstream media appear largely unconcerned?

To many people's thinking, too few citizens were discouraged from voting to matter. Those people would suggest that not nearly enough votes for John Kerry were missed or siphoned away to overturn President Bush's win. To which I'd respond:

Excuse me -- I thought this was America.

much more...

kicking and screaming.

This isn't about HIM.
It's about US, all of US, even the rightwingers who don't know any better.

Democracy must be fought for.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

enjoy your stay, However long it may be...;)

The Secretary of State certifies the vote, right? We all know that Blackwell is following in Kathy Harris's footsteps. Did she let logic and the facts deter her in Florida 2000? And her successor in Florida is another one of the same. Both governors are likewise Republican, as are majorities in their legislatures. And the courts and the media are stacked against us as well. So even if we find a smoking gun, what are we gonna do with it?

In my mind, the recount of Ohio (with democrat lawyers watching the counting) will be what:

1) proves fraud, even though we may not know WHO
2) if it is true that fraud was used to tip Ohio to Bush then the proof of that will be that the recount shows that Kerry WON! Isn't it true that Ohio uses mostly punch cards? If the election was stolen in the central tabulator, the cards should reveal the truth (unless they tamper with them @%$%)

if the cost in credibility becomes too exhorbitant, it's possible that some rats would start jumping ship; or powerful people behind the scenes would demand a change.

Making the public less naiive is a worthy goal all on its own.

And the public isn't watching. It's just us.

I don't think the campaign has rolled . What else could they have said while they investigate the apparent voting irregularities in OH and elsewhere? It has been mentioned by writers far more effective than I that allegations of irregularities made without evidence would have caused the GOP spin machine to dial up the intensity from its current 1 or 2 to an ear-blasting 9 or 10.

I think if the investigations are done correctly the possibility MUST exist for the results of the presidential election to be overturned. I'm not a famous mathematician (although I DID stay at a Holiday Inn last night...) but if TYROT (aka, The Yellow Rogue of Texas) won Ohio by 138,000 votes and more than that number of votes remain to be validated, counted, adjudicated or whatever, the possibility certainly exists. Probabilities are a different matter.

Watch them like attorney-hawks while the process plays out. If something good comes of it then, as the drill sergeants used to say, out-effin'-standing! If not, the process itself will facilitate our moving from the denial stage, where I'm sure I'll be for some time, through the requisite steps to achieve acceptance.

They "know" how the election turned out - popular vote and electoral vote, both for Bush. Our local paper, not particularly Republican, headlined the results, "No Dispute This Time." What kind of a smoking gun do they think they're going to come up with, that the media can't pooh-pooh and the courts can't take away from them? We could have argued this out - is democracy important any more or not? But now we have ceded the argument, as far as the public is concerned, and anyone who reopens it is automatically a conspiracy theory nut.

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Prior to the elections was supposed to be a "current events" board. Since the elections..it have been a fascist feast..so I don't feel the need to post there much anymore. However...it has been strangely silent about BBV and I certainly wasn't taking the subject there because it would only be fresh meat for them. One of the fascists took it there today--even to the point of saying that "the leftists" in the forum had been discussing it at length..etc--when in fact, the subject hasn't been approached at all. Of note is that one of the fascists on this board bragged about throwing away (Democratic)voter registrations in Ohio and also being one of the goons at the polling places. One of our friendly posters tried to find evidence of this and was unsuccessful.
So--if what he says (in his post) is true, then all of MSM is debunking this theory.
If you want to see his post...go to www.igl.net ...then click on "messages" on the left menu...then current events at the top.
I warn you..it is a fascist board.

Another couple of hundred people switch to the Green party. For good.

Mark my words, the Green Party is going to be much more of a factor next election. For better or for worse.

They are insisting the votes be counted, they are watching over the count to find irregularities. Let the votes fall where they may. If they are legitimate votes for Bush so be it. If they are legit votes for Kerry, it will dealt with when the time comes.

However you seem to want them to make grandiose headline-making Rush Limbaugh Hannity attracting statements which would IMMEDIATELY RAMP UP THE MURDOCH SLIME MACHINE. Probably not the best strategy if we want the votes counted.

Even if what you are saying is true, I'm talking about impressions. From what I'm hearing among local Democrats (which admittedly already tend to lean Green around here), they feel like Cobb is one of the only parties standing up for the vote count. The damage is done there, and only gets deeper.

I'm not hearing anything about Kerry 'secretly' requesting a recount. I don't think you can do that 'secretly'. In fact, I don't think you can do much of any consequence secretly as far as a vote audit is concerned.

In addition, given that the issue is that we apparently can't trust our elections, isn't publicity exactly what's required to fix it? Do you think we'll be able to standardize our elections 'secretly'?

And if Kerry can't stand up against Hannity and crew for something as important as a vote count, how would he deal with them if he took office? What's he afraid of? Embarrassment? How is THAT standing up for us?

Ohio Votes haven't been counted.

If they are close, there will be a recount.

Of course Kerry can stand up to Hannity et al. But first there has to be something to stand up about. . . .after the votes have been counted fairly. . .

PS there is no "secret" that Kerry's lawyers are in Ohio.

Each statement they make seems to reinforce the public impression that Bush has won the election.

This is how the republicans played it last time around. No matter when it happens or how strong the case, they will say the the democrats are trying to steal the election and the media whores will spread the message as before. They will also play the Kerry flip-flop card.

At this time most people don't even consider the election outcome an issue. It is taken for granted that it's all over and the democrats at the top strengthen this world view.

Meanwhile they will go to Ohio to make sure the votes are counted and COUNTED FAIRLY. . .isn't that what we want?

If the vote totals were legit for Bush, so be it. . .we will have had a fair count.
If the vote totals weren't legit, we'll deal with it when it happens. . .

This is good progress and I am happy w thier approach.

For some holy-stricken, crazed moment of sanity, the Ohio electors, seeing such a close vote percentage-wise anyway, decide in an 11th hour pow-pow to give all their electoral votes to Kerry! Makes international news! Changes the world overnight!

Whew! What a great fantasy, eh?

Maybe if we all send those thoughts to Ohio for the next few weeks on a bright white beam of thought and energy...who knows, some New Age turn of events might happen....

(okay, so it's a desperate move, but I love indulging in these thoughts anyway)

Onward....

If the margin is Bush up 130,000 and Kerry nets .72 x 300k = 216,000, then Bush nets the remianing 84,000, bringing his margin up to 214,000 and Kerry's 216,000 is better by 2,000.

these counties?

It bugs me this roll over attitude....For the integrity of all those voters who committed to voting Democratic, I am offended that no one in leadership is committed to insuring that all Dem votes were counted.

"Representation without Verification" -- Let's thorw some Diebold machines in Boston harbor.

And the voting systems be repaired, so this doesn't happen again.

From now on, let's only nominate progressives who will really fight for the integrity of the vote! No Yale Skull and Bones members allowed!

AND BLACK BOX VOTING

DONATE!!!!!

www.helpAmericarecount.org

www.blackboxvoting.org

http://web.greens.org/c/cobb/supporters.cgi?function=donate

So the margin is 136,000.

If there are 155,000 provisional ballots, and 90 percent of them are accepted, then there are 139,000 ballots to play with. Now, assuming that most of these ballots were given to minority voters in an attempt to disenfranchise them, Kerry would need to get 80 percent of the remaining ballots for a net gain of around 83,000.

Now, here's the question: If a recount is done, will the 92,000 spoiled votes be counted? And how many of those will be for Kerry?

Say 90 percent are counted, then Kerry needs 80 percent of those to get within 3000 votes of Bush. If they're all good votes, and Kerry gets 80 percent, then he wins by a about 1000 votes.

These are very optimistic numbers, but if the demographics hold up, then there is a good chance that Kerry could be headed to the White house.

Of course, all this doesn't include the fraud that could be exposed in a manual recount and the various investigations underway. That could change the numbers dramatically.

Kerry doesn't need to make back the entire deficit on the provisional ballots, nor is he expected to.

In addition to the 136,000 provisional ballots, there are also around 92,000 "spoiled" ballots where the presidential vote cannot be determined. Yep, we're talking hanging chads again. Many if not most of these ballots cannot have a presidential choice "read" by machine, but can be easily determined by a hand count, which Ohio allows for. Furthermore, the vast majority of these ballots come from inner-city, lower-income (they get the cheapest, most error-prone punch-card machines) precincts that would be likely to have high Kerry majorities.

As was posted on DailyKos, the main question would be whether or not the provisional ballots got the margin down to 40,000 or under. If not, requesting a recount of those "spoiled" ballots likely would make no difference. If it was under that margin, though, the Kerry campaign or someone acting in their stead would have a good reason to request a recount.

As it appears, now, that recount has already been requested by the Green Party. Events move apace...

And if Kerry were spearheading the whole time, he'd be under direct nuclear attack the whole time.

Regardless of Kerry, our efforts are critical--we must do all we can to uncover the truth, in order to get the system fixed.

How do whe know that a majority of the provisional ballots were given to minorites? Do you have an exact figure, or is this just an assumption?

...based on what I've read on this site and around the web.

It could be much closer to the actual percantage of minorities in the general populatuion. If that were the case, your numbers would be way off.