Did anyone hear the Conyers "not seating Ohio electors" moment?

[DancingBear]

When Jesse Jackson Jr. wondered if anyone on the committee was considering rising up in objection to the seating of the Ohio electoral delegates, Conyers replied (paraphrasing) "We are now."

I almost drove the car off the road when I heard it - I thought it was a HUGE statement.

Does anyone else here agree, or am I reading too much into it?

Couple this with the fact that a Congressional delegation WILL be going to Ohio, and I thought this was a very productive day.

Thoughts??

(apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere - I didn't see it, but I just got back)

[nashville_brook]

1. i thought the same thing!

[ClarkUSA]

5. go to thread #2 concerning the hearings...

it's mentioned there

[proud patriot]

13. Here are the links to the two big threads on the hearings

thread 1 here :

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

thread 2 here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=127992&mesg_id=127992

[DancingBear]

16. Thanks pp!

I've just finished reading them and found similar responses to the Conyers statement as the ones I posted here.

It's been a good day so far.

[proud patriot]

23. You are most Welcome

:hug:

[kuozzman]

Me too, I just really hope that they are serious about alll of this

they need to take major action. I'm worried that that won't happen.

[kuozzman]

7. Me too, I just really hope that they are serious about alll of this

they need to take major action. I'm worried that that won't happen.

[Eurobabe]

2. hey DB you RE mogul you!!

j/k :hi:

[imenja]

3. What are the legislative requirements for refusing to seat electors?

How many votes, etc...? Does it require a senator's support?

[bearfan454]

15. Yes

One Senator has to oppose the results, just one.

[madfloridian]

4. I heard someone say they might send congress two sets of electors.

Didn't catch it all.

[imenja]

8. That would require the Ohio legislature to authorize another

I assume that is a Republican controlled legislature. Am I correct?
Remember that scene with the FL state legislature back in 2000? They voted to seat a Republican slate if Gore won the recount. They would have done it too.

[bones_7672]

22. Repubs control both houses by wide margins. n/t

[crispini]

6. Yeppers, it made me yelp at the screen.

If they stick to it, we're going to be in for an interesting few weeks.

I'm a happy camper right now.

[AmyCrat]

9. yup, I heard it and applauded at my TV! n/t

[SpiralHawk]

10. Lighting a candle for Conyers, et al.

and the US of A.

Light one up yourself...

Link to "light a candle for Conyers and ohio electors" thread in the DU Lounge:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x2170986

[DARE to HOPE]

11. Me, too. But they do need US as the "wind beneath their wings"

Can't get to DC Saturday--weekends are our work time. Will anybody else be there?

[CornField]

12. They've been burning

non-stop since Nov. 1. I don't see any reason to put them out yet.

[bearfan454]

14. That was VERY BIG

One Senator is all we need, just one.

[Peace Patriot]

17. Yup,

Conyers said that: "We are now."

And it was re: House members again approaching the Senate, as in '00, needing ONE Senator to sign their petition NOT to certify Ohio--the famous scene in "F9/11." It looks like they may well going to do it AGAIN!

Someone asked: Is this committe considering challenging the Ohio Electors in the Senate (as was done before re: FLA)? And Conyers said very clearly and firmly: "We are now."

It would really put Kerry and Edwards and the other Dems on the spot. Maybe K and E want to be, maybe not--I don't know. But if the Dems fail once again to protect our right to vote--especially that of black citizens who were so abused this election AGAIN--after all those promises they made about "counting every vote"--I think the Democratic Party will be committing suicide.

It was David Cobb who talked about two sets of Ohio electors. Clearly, he thinks the recount could result in Kerry winning Ohio. He said that, if that happend, the Kerry Electors WILL meet and vote, even if the Bush Electors have already met and voted, and WILL present Congress with TWO sets of Electors--"one certified by Secretary of State Blackwell, and the other certified by the people of Ohio." (his exact words)

He described how Blackwell has stonewalled and delayed, to keep the recount from happening before the official date for the Electors to meet, 12/13. His statements were aimed at Blackwell's obstruction, as if to say: You think you can protect your Godfather Bush with these tactics? Think again!

Both were great moments.

[Peace Patriot]

21. Oops! It was Bonifaz not Cobb...

It wasn't Cobb (the Green party candidate himself), but John Bonifaz, of the National Voting Institute, one of the attorneys representing the Greens, Cobb and Libertarians, who said that the Kerry Electors WILL meet and vote, if the recount shows that Kerry was elected--even if Blackwell awards the election to Bush--and that they WILL, in that case, present Congress with TWO sets of Electors.

I thought that was a really fine statement--and said with much confidence. He sure gave the impression of a man who KNOWS something.

[mdb]

18. What would happen if Conyers objected to the seating of the Ohio Electors?

t r u t h o u t | Conyers Hearings on Ohio Vote Fraud Coverage
By William Rivers Pitt

Wednesday 08 December 2004
12:20PM

An interesting exchange. Nadler asked how fraud can be proven on electronic machines. Cliff Arnebeck said his lawsuit would employ the best experts in court to make the case. One such expert, Bob Fitrakis, is on the panel, and reeled off a slew of specific problems with specific machines. Nadler's eyes got real big.

Conyers then hinted that he might officially object to seating the Ohio Electors. Wow.

http://www.truthout.org/cblog.shtml

[skids]

19. The other two drastic suggestions...

Rogue electors was one, that was pretty radical.

Reducing representation of the states that suppressed votes via constitutional language, that was *extremely* radical, and would be funny as all hell.

[garybeck]

20. YES that was "THE" moment of the hearings n/t

[SharifromOregon]

24. If you go to the Judiciary Democratic website, there is a link

to today's "voting forum" with a listing of the speakers and opening statements by Conyers:

http://www.house.gov/judiciary_democrats/voteforum.html

-------

[Wordie]

25. I think I've got the C-Span video link here...

I can't tell for sure because I've got a really old computer and video is too much for it to handle, but here it is for anyone who might want it:
http://www.c-span.org/homepage.asp?Cat=Current_Event&Code=Vote_2004&ShowVidNum=9&Rot_Cat_CD=Vote_2004&Rot_HT=&Rot_WD=&ShowVidDays=15&ShowVidDesc=&ArchiveDays=720

If anyone finds a text-based transcript, please let me know. Thanks.

[greenmutha]

26. Yes, this is a link to the video. Thanks Wordie! n/t