John Conyers on Paul Krugman’s OP/ED & The Kerry/Edwards Ohio Rumors

[kerrygoddess]

John Conyers on Paul Krugman’s OP/ED
August 19th, 2005

Yesterday I posted a copy of John Conyers’ letter to Kerry/Edwards regarding the Ohio Voter Fraud cases. Unfortunately Conyers’ letter started a firestorm. Anyone on PDA’s email list or frequents DU, knows what I am talking about. Today John Conyers’ posted a piece on his blog about Paul Krugman’s OP/ED, which Ron posted about earlier today. I found that post from John Conyers’ to be particularly helpful in sorting this mess out (more on that below).

I tried to get clarification on this issue yesterday from Kerry’s Senate office, after posting the letter and was directed to Kerry’s PAC, who I have been told, handle all correspondence regarding the Kerry/Edwards campaign. John Kerry was in Seattle today for a fundraiser for the 2006 cycle, so I hope to hear more soon on this subject.

Other concerned friends of Kerry/Edwards stepped up to the plate as well, to try to quell the firestorm. Please see this post from Karen on Democracy Cell Project: “Posted by: karen at August 19, 2005 05:38 PM (scroll down to the timestamp linked to the thread)” Here’s part of Karen’s post:


There were, apparently, three lawsuits in Ohio. The one that PDA is asking people to complain about is the first–the Badnarik-Green lawsuit. It is not a strong case. Lawyers have advised that this one is not winnable.

There are TWO MORE LAWSUITS and THEY are going forward. The second and third lawsuits are, according to my sources, based more on the civil rights issues and Kerry-Edwards are indeed part of these suits

What I got from reading John Conyers’ letter yesterday was that he was trying to verify some rumors. Unfortunately his letter was blown out of proportion and in my opinion, he as much as says so in his post today regarding Paul Krugman’s column.

The problem with answering my fellow progressives’ challenge for numbers is that so much of what happened in Ohio centered on unquantifiable events that makes counting the number of disenfranchised voters impossible. How can we determine exactly how many Kerry voters turned around and went home facing hopelessly long lines at the polls? Or how many voters were never registered, and were turned away on election day, because of bizarre and conflicting Ken Blackwell edits about the weight of voter registration forms? Or how many votes were lost because of machine defects or manipulation?

What I can say is what the House Judiciary Committee Democratic Staff said best in the Conyers report: “We have found numerous, serious election irregularities in the Ohio presidential election, which resulted in a significant disenfranchisement of voters. Cumulatively, these irregularities, which affected hundreds of thousand of votes and voters in Ohio, raise grave doubts regarding whether it can be said the Ohio electors selected on December 13, 2004, were chosen in a manner that conforms to Ohio law, let alone federal requirements and constitutional standards.”* Is there an exact number? No. Was it potentially a net loss of more than 100,000 Democratic votes? I think so. I continue to investigate what happened in Ohio and in the rest of the nation in the 2004 election and maybe someday the evidence will be sufficiently irrefutable to convince every fair-minded person of the extent and effect of electoral wrongdoing in 2004.

In the meantime, my fellow progressives and I, agreeing with each other on so many things, could go back and forth arguing with one another — not about whether the GOP played dirty — but about whether there was ENOUGH fraud to shift the outcome of the election. I see this happen over and over between progressives, sometimes in a civil tone and sometimes not.^ In doing so, however, we would be losing sight of the fact that we actually disagree about very little. Krugman’s column brings that home.

Most telling of all from John Conyers today was his final comment about this subject which has been blown out of proportion on many blogs…

On some blogs, my staff advises me that the critique of allegations of irregularities has been so angry and accusatory, and allegations of irregularities so wild and unsubstantiated, that I could be banned for posting this entry — the topic itself is forbidden.

In a nutshell, friends, we need to all come to the table and work together for the future. Something else that John Conyers stressed in his post today and something that John Kerry has stressed over and over again since the election. Squabbling over this or any subject or issue is more harmful to the Democratic Party, than helpful.

Sure we can all disagree on things, but there comes a time when we all need to put our disagreements aside and work towards the greater good. This is one of those times. The 2006 elections are critical to the Democratic Party.

Rest assured that Kerry/Edwards and John Conyers are STILL investigating the voter fraud issue and as John Conyers said “maybe someday the evidence will be sufficiently irrefutable to convince every fair-minded person of the extent and effect of electoral wrongdoing in 2004.”

SEE POST FOR LINKS - http://blog.thedemocraticdaily.com/?p=287

[wli]

1. they're dropping the Diebold/Sequoia/ES&S suit

And prosecuting only the voter suppression.

[kerrygoddess]

2. They were never officially involved in one lawsuit

They are following through on the 2 civil rights cases that they feel they can win. Conyers says as much today in his blog post. It is not Kerry/Edwards fault if there is not enough solid evidence. Again something that Conyers backs up.

[ray of light]

3. Good points, Kerrygoddess.

[kerrygoddess]

5. Glad to get some clarification on this

PDA made it sound as though K/E were totally pulling out which is not the case. Misconstrue of Conyers original letter.

[kerrygoddess]

17. More evidence it appears. N/T

[NVMojo]

4. Kerry is not a wimp, I knew he was not going to stop. He's taken

on the Bush Evil Family Empire before.

[Chicago1]

6. I think Kerry/Edwards/Conyers ARE NOT telling us everything either

I think that there's ALOT of information that is PROSECUTABLE that they are not sharing with us that's going to come out and spark the revolution. I don't think that this is the end AT ALL. I'm sure they have the smoking gun and ARE NOT going to show all of their cards.

KKKarl sure wouldn't and these guys aren't going to either.

[globalvillage]

7. .

Nice star.
:hi:

[kerrygoddess]

9. Brilliant points...

Wish more peeps would get that.

[Dynasty_At_Passes]

10. If that's actually true....

It will certainly be interesting to watch it all.......With Rove backed into a corner over possible espionage, and leaking CIA information he's bound to do everything possible to try to disrupt or counter any investigations to election fraud.

[kerrygoddess]

14. Exactly.

Another reason why Kerry doesn't discuss this. Thanks ...

[Mass]

8. Great post and once again, Conyers is a heroe and an honest man.

[OzarkDem]

12. I agree with you

He has an unerring instinct for what is right and appropropriate for the best interests of the public.

[politicasista]

11. Thanks KG.

Thanks Kerry and Conyers.

[kerrygoddess]

16. Thank you PS.

:kick:

[reprehensor]

13. I say keep fighting.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4369575

[kerrygoddess]

15. Good stuff there...

Thanks! Keep fighting is right. And we are.

[radio4progressives]

18. I passionately DISAGREE with this rediculous statement

You said:

"I tried to get clarification on this issue yesterday from Kerry’s Senate office, after posting the letter and was directed to Kerry’s PAC, who I have been told, handle all correspondence regarding the Kerry/Edwards campaign. John Kerry was in Seattle today for a fundraiser for the 2006 cycle, so I hope to hear more soon on this subject"

My reply: I guarantee you, that you will NOT receive any substantive response on this matter. Not soon, or ever. (Boiler plates do not apply)

You said:

"There were, apparently, three lawsuits in Ohio. The one that PDA is asking people to complain about is the first–the Badnarik-Green lawsuit. It is not a strong case. Lawyers have advised that this one is not winnable."

My reply: This was, in my opinion a very important case. The Lawyers advise may have been 'good' for Kerry on a personal level - but it was very bad advise for the voters, for our democracy and for the Democratic Party.


You said:

"Squabbling over this or any subject or issue is more harmful to the Democratic Party, than helpful."

and you also said:

"Sure we can all disagree on things, but there comes a time when we all need to put our disagreements aside and work towards the greater good. This is one of those times. The 2006 elections are critical to the Democratic Party. "


How dare you diminish this matter as merely as one of "squabbling"?
How dare you suggest (by implication) that ignoring the matter of election fraud and elections fixing is somehow going to benefit the DP in any way, on any level? Indeed, how dare you assert (by implication)that what is "good for the party" is more important than what is good for our democracy?

How utterly naive of you to assert that the 2006 elections are more critical than what happened in 2004, and indeed what happened in 2000. Putting 2000 aside for the purpose of this discussion, let's just say that ignoring 2004 does not help the Party succeed in 2006 elections if the wrong doing in 2004 is ignored or allowed to quitely be put aside.

Indeed, positing such a rediculous assertion is a harmful disservice to the party and to our country's future.

In so far as Kerry is concerned, he should step aside as he is wasting precious DP funds by this early campaigning as the extremely low polling within the party illustrates - arguably attributed as much to his 2004 campaign as is his betrayal (broken promise in pre-maturely conceding the election) it begs the question, who is Kerry reaching out to? Disillusioned Republicans?

(Is that the future of the Democratic Party that you support?)

I do agree that "we can all disagree on things" and that we should put those aside our disagreements to work on the greater good.

So the challenge is to YOU. Please put aside your disagreement with the pda, and work together to expose ALL the fraud of the 2004 elections in order to prevent it from happening all over again in 2006.

For the benefit of our democracy.

[kerrygoddess]

19. FYI

1) I reiterated points that John Conyers made. You are welcome to disagree.

2) Kerry is NOT doing early campaigning. Yesterday he spoke at a fundraiser for the DLCC. He was there to raise money for the DLCC and the DP and he attended on his dime not the DP's dime.

3) I have no disagreement with PDA. They are doing a lot of good stuff.

[wisteria]

20. As usually, mention Kerry and certain small amount of people

are ready to make a lot of noise. Typical, bash first and don't bother asking questions or verifying facts. What a shame, John Kerry doesn't deserve such treatment.
Anyway, I want to thank you for keeping me updated. I appreciate it.