So, what does this mean Election Fraud pros?

[TayTay]

State drops court fight to try to show 2004 election was fair

By JOHN McCARTHY
Associated Press Writer

Date: February 02, 2006

COLUMBUS, Ohio_The state has dropped its appeal of a lawsuit originally filed by
Democrats to alleviate long voting lines in the 2004 presidential election.

The state had tried to keep the lawsuit going to try to prove Ohio conducted a
legal election.

The case, dismissed Monday at the state's request, was brought by the Ohio
Democratic Party against Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell, a Republican, and
two county boards of election on Election Day. The party sought to alleviate
long lines at polling places in two counties.

Two lawsuits still are pending from the 2004 election in Ohio, whose 20
electoral votes gave Bush all he needed to win the presidency.

At the Democrats' request, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley ordered
Blackwell's office and the Knox and Franklin county officials to provide
alternative methods of voting the night of the election.

The polls remained open past their 7:30 p.m. closing time to accommodate anyone
who was in line at that time. Some voters waited in line more than seven hours
and the last ballots were not cast until early the next day.

Democrat John Kerry conceded to President Bush the day after the election when
his campaign determined he could not significantly cut into Bush's Ohio lead,
which wound up being 118,000 votes.

After Kerry conceded, the Democrats asked Marbley to dismiss the case. However,
the Ohio attorney general's office, representing Blackwell, tried to keep it
alive. Marbley dismissed the case in August and Attorney General Jim Petro
appealed to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Blackwell spokesman Carlo
LoParo said his office chose to remove itself from the case.

Petro asked the appeals court to dismiss the case on Jan. 12.

Petro spokeswoman Kim Norris said Thursday that passage of a new law that allows
absentee voting by any registered voter and new federal guidelines that will
increase the number of voting machines available should end the problem of long
lines at polling places.

"The specific argument we were making is now moot," Norris said.

In one of the remaining lawsuits, the National Voting Rights Institute alleges
irregularities in the recount of the 2004 election. Libertarian Party candidate
Michael Badnarik and Green Party candidate David Cobb paid for the recount,
despite collecting less than 0.3 percent of the vote. The recount cut into
Bush's lead, but not enough to change the result.

The other lawsuit, filed by the League of Women Voters of Ohio, says an
inadequate statewide elections system has violated the equal protection and due
process of some Ohio voters. While it does not challenge the 2004 election
results, the lawsuit says the system treats voters differently based on where
they vote.

The state believes the lawsuit is frivolous and should be dismissed, LoParo
said. Many of the goals the suit seeks have been met, LoParo said.

Both lawsuits are to be heard this summer by U.S. District Judge James Carr in
Toledo.

___

On the Net:

Ohio attorney general: http://www.ag.state.oh.us

Ohio secretary of state: http://www.sos.state.oh.us

National Voting Rights Institute: http://www.nvri.org

Ohio League of Women Voters: http://www.lwvohio.org
***************************

Also see this post in Elections Forums: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x411724

[ProSense]

1. It means the elections weren't fair.

I mean, all we have are Conyers' and the GAO's reports and a bunch of lawsuits and motions loaded with similar evidence that have been thrown out on technicalities. Stonewalling is a good crooked Republican tactic in Ohio.

Here is an article from March 2, 2005 about the suit mentioned in the OP:

Ohio Lawmakers Squabble Over Polls

32 minutes ago U.S. National - AP

By JOHN McCARTHY, Associated Press Writer

COLUMBUS, Ohio - In an odd trailing note to Ohio's presidential election, the state argued Wednesday that a lawsuit challenging how it runs the polls should stay alive, while the Democrats who filed it said it should be thrown out as moot.

The Ohio Democratic Party brought the case against Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell and two county election boards on Election Day, saying long lines in Franklin and Knox counties violated constitutional guarantees of the right to vote. People in line at the 7:30 p.m. closing time were allowed to cast their ballots, but it took until after midnight for some of them to do so.

The day of the election, U.S. District Judge Algenon Marbley ordered Blackwell's office and the central Ohio counties, which use electronic voting machines, to provide alternative methods of voting.

State officials, however, say Ohio law prohibits them from offering voters paper ballots or absentee ballots as an alternative, and want Marbley to rule that the election did not violate federal law, in case similar court actions are filed in future elections.

"Unless everybody has a personally assigned voting machine, they are going to wait in line," Richard Coglianese, the state's attorney, told Marbley on Wednesday.

After Democrat John Kerry (news - web sites) conceded the election to President Bush (news - web sites) on Nov. 3, Democrats asked Marbley to dismiss the case.

Kathleen Trafford, an attorney representing the Ohio Democratic Party, said Wednesday the case is moot.

"Our action expired when the court's order expired," Trafford said. "The election is over. The votes have been counted. The president has been inaugurated. ... The state's counterclaim does not present a live controversy."

Marbley said he would issue a ruling within a week.

Bush defeated Kerry by 118,000 votes in Ohio, which gave him enough electoral votes to win re-election.

There should be a thorough investigation of everything that went on in Ohio pertaining to the 2004 election.

[FreedomAngel82]

2. I agree

So do they still have the suits going on or nothing anymore?

[TayTay]

3. 2 suits are on-going.

That's what the article says.

[zann725]

4. Anyone see Jimmy Carter on CNN two days ago FIRMLY stating no E.F. in '04

here. "Definitely no E.F." Someone who's spent such a large amount of time worldwide overseeing and insuring "legit" elections abroad, turns a 'blind eye' here in his good ol' U.S.

Gotta give credit to those attorneys still pursuing certain of the cases, but the Powers-That-Be are squelching the Truth right out of this issue. Truly dismaying.