Most Expeditious Kerry Victory Via Congressional Challenge

[corbett]

If you have followed this section of DU for the past month or so, you know that Representative Conyers' challenge on January 6 is but one of three angles being pursued to inaugurate the man who actually received the most electoral and popular votes. I firmly believe that the other angles are valid on their own merits and should be pursued doggedly. However, they may prove unnecessary for purposes of installing Senator Kerry as the 44th President if the January 6 challenge is handled correctly.

In short, all we need to do is have Ohio recounted by hand and Kerry wins. Sure, Cheney and Hastert will try to find a way around recognizing a second set of Ohio electors but when the evidence of fraud is as strong as Congressman Conyers will present, they'll have no choice but to accede.

It's just that simple. Keep Representative Conyers in your thoughts and prayers between now and Thursday afternoon and we all will have a very happy new year!

[molly]

1. I am praying for it all with every ounce of my body and soul

the world depends on it.

[Aviation Pro]

2. Like 2000....

...ya need a Senator to endorse a challenge. Hopefully, one will grow a pair and do so.

[emlev]

27. I wouldn't wish that on Barbara Boxer

A pair, that is.
But thanks anyway.

[s-cubed]

3. what are the three angle?

[corbett]

21. The Other 2 Angles

The other 2 angles are:

1) Massive civil rights violations, which brings fraud into the mix. The constitution forbids upholding an election in which there was stuffing of ballot boxes, or the 21st century equivalent. Check out:

http://www.redefeatbush.com/briefing

and

http://www.chuckherrin.com/hackthevote.htm

2) National criminal conspiracy by ESS and Triad to build into their machines remote access provisions and prepunched ballots to default votes to Bush and skew the numbers after the polls closed.

[Doctor O]

42. In order for Number 1 to be in play

There would have to be two other items in place.

1. We know that voters were unable to vote for a number of reasons, but we would also have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that it was intentional and coordinated. To date while there have been indications that something happened, there has been no hard evidence given to prove it was fraud. Simply because it happened does not mean it is fraud.

2. That the number of votes affected would be enough to overturn the election. And this would be extremely hard to prove. Statistics gathered are not enough to provide Hard proof to a court of law or Congress.

A

[shraby]

63. Hard to prove fraud

when the thing we call Blackwell has blocked every effort to investigate the matter isn't it?
There is enough circumstantial evidence to indicate massive fraud and open an investigation designed to uncover the proof.

[Nothing Without Hope]

4. Hoping for it, but if it doesn't happen, we need to keep fighting

...anyway. Democracy in this country is hanging by a thread. Even if on Jan 6 and Jan 20 events don't go as we believe they should in a just and lawful society, we can't be so brokenhearted that we lose faith if they don't. We need to be in for the long haul.

When you think about it, there really wasnt much time -- two months! -- to gather and organize evidence after the fraudulent Nov 2 election. More time may be required. But we can't let up!

[IStriker]

5. If this is correct, then why doesn't Kerry pay for a hand recount?

[femme.democratique]

13. How do you know thats not what he was saving the money for?

Kerry ain't no fool...

[IStriker]

19. I don't know what he was saving his money for, but that's not what I asked

Why hasn't he paid (already) for a hand count of the state of Ohio?

[femme.democratique]

47. because they cannot yet legally DO a hand count!

makes sense to lil ol moi.

[corbett]

23. That's Right

Kerry already asked for a hand recount of the entire state of Ohio. It was denied. He now has to allow the Ohio court system to rule first before he can press the issue.

[Doctor O]

41. Kerry has never asked for a hand recount or even a recount

period. He has submitted a letter requesting certain procedures in the recount, but that was not a request for a recount.

He has submitted two motions in support of Cobb, but he has not filed a lawsuit for a recount, nor has he requested one from the SOS.

His first motion in support of the Glib lawsuit was specifically regarding the Delaware County revote.

His second motion in support of the Glibs was to impound all the machines and do a limited number of depositions (<7) in an expedited manner.

[Stand and Fight]

74. Exactly.

Seems that you have actually been paying attention to the matters at hand. Nothing is worse than supposition at the expense of well established and known facts. Thanks for setting the record straight -- there are a lot of people who are coming on to this site and they don't need to be mislead by those who misrepresent the facts for whatever reason(s).

[IStriker]

54. Why would they deny Kerry a hand count and allow the Greens & Libs...

to have one? Kerry is the only person whose status could be changed by a hand count, the only person that the courts would grant standing, so this doesn't sound right to me. Are you sure? If so, what reason did they give?

[bemis12]

55. I don't believe he asked for a hand count

I'm willing to be wrong if someone can show differently.

[IStriker]

58. If you are correct, then how can there be any proof of fraud?

Wouldn't uncovering fraud come by first requesting a recount? If you can prove that somebody sent satelite signals to Ohio to hack into their e-voting machines or something, that's one thing, (and I heard that no touch screen machines were used in Ohio.) If the election was stolen by plain old garden variety ballot stuffing, too many votes for the number of registered voters, etc. then I would think that the very first thing you would do if you wanted to prove that would be to request a recount.

[bemis12]

59. Kerry's campaign

has said there's no evidence of fraud. Hence no request for recount by them. Hand or otherwise.

[corbett]

71. Read This

You're too literal! Kerry has expressed his doubt of the election quite strongly but indirectly.

http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/TeflonKerry.htm

[IStriker]

78. I'm completely confused on the fraud stuff...

If Kerry's campaign doesn't think fraud occurred and you know they have access to everything anybody on DU has plus tons of other stuff we don't, how did all this business of his losing due to fraud get started?

I remain open to the idea of fraud IF somebody comes up with evidence that a court of law and Kerry's campaign agrees with; otherwise, this appears to be nothing but a hoax started by somebody and pushed along by wishful thinking.

[On Par]

6. It's Just That Simple....

...in theory. Pracitcal application is a whole other ball game.

I'd like to see it as much as anyone. But I'm not holding my breath.

OP

[corbett]

25. Keep Those Senate Emails And Faxes Coming!

Nothing worthwhile is easy! It's an uphill battle, to be sure, but justice and righteousness are on our side.

[Quakerfriend]

7. corbett

do you know something we don't??? An inside scoop perhaps!?

[corbett]

28. National ESS/Triad Conspiracy

It's not that I'm keeping a secret but no one has put it out there bluntly just yet: the trump card (over and above the smoking gun which Mr. Conyers supposedly has) is that ESS and Triad built into their systems a method of skewing numbers nationwide.

The importance of this is the fact that if they had changed the numbers in every state, * would have won by a landslide, which no one would have believed. Instead, they needed a way of siphoning votes in a believable way. Through the Florida and Ohio recounts, we've learned how ESS and Triad accessed the machines (in person and by remote) and can prove that the entire election was in jeopardy, not just a handful of key states.

The way I see this playing is that, if the predictions are correct and Congress ignores the Ohio evidence, this cannon may have to be fired in order to halt the inauguration. Fortunately, all we really need is for House Judiciary Chair Sensenbrenner to show some leadership. Convincing him will be a whole lot easier than convincing Hastert or Delay and Frist in the Senate because Sensenbrenner used to be something of a moderate!

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[New Earth]

9. uh, that's pessimistic

:hi:

[bunny planet]

10. oh boy, do I want to believe you are right.

[sepia_steel]

11. PLease don't use that term

"Installing." Kerry won, after all. :)

[corbett]

29. No Constitutional Scholar

I use, "Installing" in the classical sense. I wouldn't be here if I didn't believe that Kerry won.

[madison2000]

12. Most Excellent Kerry Victory Via Recount

That's what we should hope for. That's what we should have been entitled to in 2000.

[Last Lemming]

14. I'm a might dim

but I have been reading the posts and missed this. the other two ways?

[corbett]

31. Not Laid Out A-B-C

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=224160&mesg_id=224360&page=

[FreepFryer]

15. not 'install' - 'elect'.

And you are correct procedurally, in point of fact of Law.

It is important to say, that the extreme likelihood of partisan maneuvering in Congress, despite a successful objection, make this particular angle a real 'Hail Mary'. And an opportunity to focus our belief and faith in our values as Liberals and Democrats.

I do believe that, based on the cases I've seen, the most likely 'angle' is that after a formal challenge that leads to investigations with subpoena power, fraud will ultimately be proven, that it will be shown to lead up to the Office of the President, and Bush will leave office following an extended impeachment struggle, in which many more dirty tactics are used (and ultimately, exposed).

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake" -- Sun Tsu

[liam97]

16. But Corbett

The challenge first has to be accepted in the floor and for that we need Rupublicans to vote to reject the Ohio vote, no? How do you reckon that can happen?

[FreepFryer]

18. Yep, That is the point I am making.

The 'partisan maneuvering' I spoke of is the majority voting on the objection by Republican House and Senate members along party lines, regardless of the evidence under active investigation.

[corbett]

34. Preponderance Of Evidence

It's my understanding that, given the weight of the fraud evidence, in combination with the fact that Ohio's electors were seated illegally, the House and Senate can adjourn to their respective houses without a floor ruling. Besides, they'd look like fair weather proponents of democracy if they rejected the whole thing summarily.

If you're right, though, the other two angles become even more important:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=224160&mesg_id=224360&page=

[corbett]

32. Good Reply!

I agree that your scenario is more likely, which is why it's so gratifying that Bush and Cheney have been named personally in one of the Kerry lawsuits.

[Doctor O]

43. Kerry has filed NO lawsuits.

Arnebeck filed one o n behalf if the NVRI and 30+ clients none of which is Kerry. Cobb has filed one, but Kerry is not a party.

Cobb filed one Yost vs. Deleaware County , Kerry has filed a motion is suport of, but has not joined the lawsuit.

He has filed a motion, but that is not a suit.

[FreepFryer]

45. A comment at once irrelevant and erroneous.

[Doctor O]

46. Cite the lawsuits please. There are none which Kerry is party to.

And here is the list of lawsuits for you to look through.
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/key-litigation.html

[FreepFryer]

48. not required. Kerry is a named participant in active suits (as you know).

Well-versed. End of line.

[Doctor O]

51. Please show me where he is a participant.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/key-recounts.html#moss

None of these list him as an participant.

[saracat]

57. Since you are so good at anaylyzing this stuff what are your suggestions

at how we get rid of this bastard? Four more years is unexceptable. What is the best and quickest route to be rid of him?

[Doctor O]

64. I wish I had an answer to this. I have believed since Nov 2nd that

without Kerry being directly and publicly involved in the investigations and recounts, that we had a long uphill battle in front of us. This was highlighted by several times during the past few weeks , when the ones doing the leg work could not prove irreparable harm. Court decisions were made based on this. If Kerry had been active, the recount and many other things would have occurred in a timely manner.

Many have talked about Kerry's grand plan and how he was gathering his forces, but it he is taking off for Iraq, how does he execute a grand plan.

I am also afraid that unless Kerry gives his blessing to a challenge, and is in the joint meeting when the certification takes place no senator, even if they are predisposed to, is going to challenge.

After Jan 6th the only way to dump * is by impeachment,because he certainly won't resign.

So to answer your question, 7 weeks ago there was a chance. Now we will have to rely on a Republican House and senate to overturn the election and unless Conyers has solid proof that:

1. Fraud has occurred on a large scale.
2. Solid Proof That it would have been enough to change the results of the election. The statistical work done will not hold legs, because Mitofsky warned his clients against using the exit polls as an indicator of who won, and since in 2000 the networks fired their exit pollers due to its inaccuracy and created NEP, the exit polls will not be much use.

[corbett]

70. Start With This

http://www.breakfornews.com/articles/MoyerDeniesKnowingElectionPlot.htm

I'll check back tomorrow. If you aren't satisfied, I'll send the link for the actual scans of his latest suits.

[noclonyofthechimp]

17. It's in my thoughts constantly. There isn't a day that goes by that I

don't ask our higher powers to reverse this painful mess.

[Botany]

20. Good Luck

The recount in Ohio was as dirty as the election....

In short, all we need to do is have Ohio recounted by hand and Kerry wins. Sure, Cheney and Hastert will try to find a way around recognizing a second set of Ohio electors but when the evidence of fraud is as strong as Congressman Conyers will present, they'll have no choice but to accede.

:kick:

[righteous1]

22. How could a recount (hand) possibly be accomplished in 4 days?

[cookies7]

26. Does the recount

absolutely have to be done by the 6th?

[corbett]

38. No

The recount does not need to be complete by the 6th. What Blackwell has tried to do is complete a flawed recount by the 6th but his flunkies have been so sloppy that they've left a smoking trail of fraud in their path.

[Doctor O]

53. You are right the recount did not need to be completed by the 6th. It has

the last date for electoral votes to be submitted to Congress by the 13th of december. This is what is refferred to as Safe Harbor which some lawyers here have claimed was December 13th and the last date the Electoral Votes could be submitted by Congress.

The laws concerning Electoral Votes is very specific as has been discussed in great detail by lawyers with election law experience including Read The Law First, Truman 01, and others. While they have had some debates on minor points, they have been remarkably consistent with their opinions.

The one thing that they have been consistent about is that after Jan 6th, it is all moot, that is the final date when the results could change.

[corbett]

68. Unless There's Fraud

That's why the challenge and lawsuits are so important. Our constitution does not allow ballot box stuffing to go without redress.

[corbett]

35. It Doesn't Have To Be

The Ohio recount does not have to be completed within 4 days. In fact, when the evidence of fraud in Florida and New Mexico is added, what the House ought to do is delay the inauguration. We know that they won't do that without a gun to their head which is why the other 2 angles are so important:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=224160&mesg_id=224360&page=

Lastly, the constitution says that challenges in individual states need not be complete in order for Congress to entertain a national challenge.

[bemis12]

44. Where?

Lastly, the constitution says that challenges in individual states need not be complete in order for Congress to entertain a national challenge.


Where is this in the constitution?


They do, in fact, have to certify on the 6th. I know of no provision that allows anything else.

[Doctor O]

52. he only exception would be when there is challenges to multiple

states and then they also have to follow the 2 hour per state rule, and there are strict specifications on the total time line.

[corbett]

69. Unless There's Fraud

The whole point of why House Judiciary Chair Sensenbrenner needs to be lobbied is that the constitution does not allow fraud to go without redress. We dealt with stuffing of ballot boxes long ago! We're moving into federal criminality here. Sensenbrenner has the authority to delay the inauguration, as does Renquist.

[Stand and Fight]

75. 2 hour per state rule?

Get your facts straight. There is a limited two-hour debate after a challenge is brought forward in writing by one Senator and one Representative. The two-hour debate comes about under that condition, and upon it being fulfilled the two Houses of Congress separate to debate the challenge for two hours. Then they vote.

[k8conant]

77. Yes, 2 hour PER state...eom

[bones_7672]

24. No way on God's green earth will there be a 2nd recount in Ohio. n/t

[SicTransit]

33. You're wrong - there can be a second, hand-recount

in Ohio. After a while the ballots become available for public inspection. Anyone can come and count as much and as carefully as he/she cares. If I thought there was serious fraud in Ohio, I'd go and spend a few hundred bucks recounting a few precincts to prove it. If I found serious discrepancies, I am sure there would be more people jumping on the bandwagon.

[corbett]

39. Just Like In Washington State

The Ohio recount was a joke. The fraud it contained in some ways was worse than the election!

What's more, the best part of all of this for us is that Blackwell really has stepped in it in recent weeks. He blatantly violated Ohio's recount laws. Beyond that, 86 of 88 county recounts were done improperly – either the 3% were not chosen at random or when they were and didn't equal the machine recount of the same 3%, they were run again and again, sometimes after new machines were ordered from the manufacturer!

Talk about rigging!

All of this is well documented, either with sworn affidavits, video testimony or both. If Congress tries to steamroll over this, Mr. Conyers and Reverend Jackson simply need to involve the MSM and all hell will break loose.

They've painted themselves into a corner. All we have to do is cage them into that corner so that they have no choice but to follow the Constitution. I'm not saying that it will be easy but nothing worthwhile ever is!

We'll have our full hand count of Ohio just like Washington State did for governor except that 70,000+ votes in Ohio which originally registered for Bush will be shown to have been for Kerry!

[bobbieinok]

61. 'involve the MSM'......yeah, sure....

[ISUGRADIA]

49. What Ohio law allows public inspection?

Source please. I've worked in another state's election office (and I know laws vary) and the only way someone is able to look at individual ballots is by a court order. They are sealed at the precinct then destroyed in 18 mths.

[SicTransit]

62. Ohio Revised Code Title XXXV Elections, Sec. 3503.26

requires all election records to be made available for public inspection and copying. This has to be done after "canvassing period" is over, which should be 10 days after the recount is done.

[corbett]

67. Thanks!

I'd add just one thing which is that it's the national standard that all voting records are public domain after the canvassing period.

[Stand and Fight]

76. Ouch!

I'd say you've been served!

:evilgrin:

[bones_7672]

65. While that may happen, it cannot be considered an "official" recount

[SicTransit]

66. You are right, but if that is done and a

hundred thousand extra votes for Kerry are found, then there would certainly be grounds for demanding a second official recount. Hell, even 20,000 extra votes would be.

[O.M.B.inOhio]

56. There wasn't yet a first procedurally correct recount

Blackwell and certain BoE officials have not complied with statute, making the 3% of precincts to hand-count by non-random process. It's also questionable how valuable a recount is when provisional ballots were not open to inspection, as I think was the case with "spoiled" ballots. The Triad tampering of the recount also complicates the question of whether the first recount was really completed.\

Recount also won't bring back illegally disenfranchised voters not subtract double or fraudulent votes.

[corbett]

79. Somebody's Going To Jail

You are exactly right and the malfeasance of civil servants is one of the assertions of the Kerry lawsuit. A hand recount of the whole state is the only way to go and all of the recount fraud only stokes the fire.

[super simian]

30. Thoughts and prayers...

... for an exceptional champion of democracy.

:kick:

[merh]

36. Positive thoughts, positive energy, prayers, everything

conceivable I have been trying and sending out to the higher power and all the good folks involved in this.

Thanks for the post corbett! A belated welcome to DU! :hi:

[emlev]

37. kick

[fooj]

40. I believe!!!!!!!

"A nation that is afraid to let its own people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of their own people."-JFK

So, I say to the suppressors and the advocates of voter fraud:

Be afraid...be very afraid!!!
Your days of deceit and betrayal may soon be over!!!


WHAT ARE THEY HIDING???
:think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think: :think:

[politicasista]

50. I am praying for this to happen too

but the GOP controls congress, so they are going to be loyal to Smirky, right? If there is a hand recount, what about the machine error that gave * all those votes? I am new at this.

[berniew1]

60. Case Kerry won is getting stronger; If Cong. investigates it will come out

Widespread vote machine fraud has been documented in Florida in the big touchscreen counties, as well as voter suppression of minorities. Similar to the widespread voter suppression and fraud that has been documented in Ohio and New Mexico.
The problems appear large enough to swing all 3 states, as implied by the exit poll data- for which a new version is circulating today with strong evidence Kerry won the election. Exit poll data on voting groups.

Documentation for Ohio is at: http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19

and http://northnet.org/minstrel/alpage.htm

Documentation of the widespread Florida vote machine fraud is at: http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html


Newly released Media Exit Poll:

1) 59% of the 17% who did NOT vote in 2000 but who did in 2004 voted for Kerry. Just 39% for Bush.

2) 65% of those who did NOT vote for Bush or Gore in 2000 voted for Kerry. Just 13% for Bush and 16% for Nader.

3) 91% of those who voted for Gore, voted for Kerry.

4) 90% of those who voted for Bush in 2000, voted for Bush in 2004.

5) 20% (approx) of all voters are new voters. Of these voters according to the exit polls 65% voted Kerry and 35% voted Bush

6)The exit poll from the South shows Kerry won 64% of the Hispanic Vote.


7) Kerry's margin of victory was INCREASING, not decreasing as the day grew later


Some common myths regarding need tor adjustment dispelled by the Newly Released poll data:

1. The earlier exit poll numbers oversampled women.

Wrong. The 7:30 p.m. exit poll numbers consisted of 54% women and 46% men. The final exit poll numbers included the exact same percentages.

2. The earlier exit poll numbers oversampled minorities.

Wrong. The 7:30 p.m. exit poll numbers consisted of 11% blacks and 9% hispanics. The final exit poll numbers included 11% blacks and 8% hispanics.

3. The earlier exit poll numbers oversampled democrats (i.e., republicans voted later in the day).

Wrong. The 7:30 p.m. exit poll numbers consisted of 38% democrats, the final exit poll numbers consisted of 37%.

4. The earlier exit poll numbers undersampled rural voters.

Wrong. The 7:30 p.m. exit poll numbers consisted of 16% rural voters, same as the final exit poll numbers.

[corbett]

80. Thanks For The Numbers!

Kicking for the truth!

[zapped 1]

72. kick

[Walt Starr]

73. REALITY CHECK: It ain't happening!

Seriously, your scenario requires Republicans get on board and that just will not happen!

[corbett]

81. It Only Takes One

The evidence of fraud is so damning that the moderate Republicans will sit up and take notice.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=223846&mesg_id=224212