Now what?

Bush has always been a resident of the WH, not a president.

He was not elected on '00 or in '04.

How long will Congress continue to sit on their tushes and watch this charlatan destroy our country and make a mess of the whole world before our eyes? Bush has the approval of just 28 percent of Americans -- if you can believe the latest polls. It may even be lower.

The rest of us are hostages.

by Kathlyn Stone (33 articles, 208 quicklinks, 20 diaries, 569 comments) on Thursday, January 25, 2007 at 8:01:30 AM
 

She's right...

"It has all been very stressful," said Grier, 54. "Yes, I'm very relieved. But, none of us should have been in this courtroom today. These charges should not have been brought against any of us."

On this she is absolutely correct. She and her co-horts should have been tried for SEDITION and TREASON for violating their oaths of office and performing acts against the Constitution and their country.

They should have been tried, found guilty, and EXECUTED IN THE TOWN SQUARE (fully televised to the world).

That might put a little sense of RESPONSIBILITY into other election workers to care more about an honest election than the victory of their party.

Please note, that even though the MSM refuses to mention it, these three were two rigid Republicans and one Republican-turned-Democrat-in-name-only.

This was not "an honest mistake" or trying to avoid a recount because of "all the trouble." This was a FIXED recount because the election theft would have come out otherwise and messed up the whole little SCAM.

Charlie L
Portland, OR

by Charlie L (2 articles, 2 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 626 comments) on Thursday, January 25, 2007 at 10:31:16 AM
 

Note the NONPARTISAN reason to rig recounts: avoiding work

and avoiding accountability and the media fishbowl that would result from revealing errors in the secretive machine counts reported as official (where no human being, unless a rigger, actually has personal knowledge the count is correct because it's all flashed through a machine) are among the motives. That's before you even add in partisan motives.

But here in Cuyahoga county, it's important to note that Democratic counties could not be trusted to count democratic votes for President -- because of the above conflicts of interest. Amazing, isn't it? The human urge to cover one's butt trumps any belief in maximally correct counts or even a wish that Kerry might win (if any such wish was even present)

Also posted at opednews are the comments of three election attorneys including myself with extensive analysis on this very subject. (see link below) I think it's very very significant that these are apparently elections officials working for dems in a dem county who are criminally neglectful of their legal duties to do a proper recount. Of course, these officials intuitively know that the FIRST count is even more lackadaisacal, so in their public comments they apparently still don't get it!

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/link.php?id=29786

by Paul Lehto (26 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 35 comments) on Thursday, January 25, 2007 at 10:44:44 AM
 

bush is not our president if the votes were not counted

GOOD GRAVY MARIE
THIS IS THE SECOND TIME WE HAVE SAT BY AND ALLOWED A FALSE KING TAKE THE CHAIR OF THE OVAL OFFICE WITHOUT THE VOTES BEING COUNTED!

what in the world is wrong with America? I would say it isn't the Country I grew up in, but it is! considering being a female & we had to fight to vote & I mean fight!!! until 1920... the FOREFATHERS only allowed landowners vote.. so how fair is that?

No wonder the world thinks we are all a bunch of liars & hypocrites.... Thugs hosed down African Americans.. sent dogs on them.. and this was in 1960's... They kill those they don't want to deal with..
The American Tribes are in concentration camps.. O but they don't call them that.. they soften the words..

This Government sent off 18 year old children to die in wars but these kids could not drink a beer or vote.. so we here at home.. US HIPPIES.. we marched in the late 60's so they could vote if they could die for our country... the drinking thing did not work out.. as they blew it by acting like fools by drinking & driving. so that got pulled off the record.. but the voting still stands.

VOTE STEALING has been going on since the day it was created. In the days of old.. they would close the saloons and not allow drinking.. that is where they held the voting.. the voters would gather at the saloons waiting until 7pm when all the votes were in.. and it was drinks on he house... by the winner!!!
VOTE STEALING at its best!

I think the Americans who have suffered the most in America over voting obstruction are the African Americans & all poor Caucasians & Mexicans.

I don't include the Cubans as they vote GOP every time as they were promised by the GOP that they would get CASTRO KILLED & they would get their little island back.

BTW: why is it OK for them to fly their flags & Mexicans can't fly theirs during marches?

Considering all this voting fraud and the way this came down in Fl. & OH ... I say lets just go with the popular vote and forget about this kind of counting votes.
some of these people in these voting stations have been in place for 20 plus years and you can't get rid of them but for death or serious illness, then a family member takes their place.

It is time to clean it up! or we are just living in a false world a dictatorship ... pretending to be a democracy.. no wonder Iraq says screw America!

by chil420 (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 19 comments) on Friday, January 26, 2007 at 7:16:25 AM
 

Is everyone still overlooking Kerry-Bush vote-switching?

Steven Leser writes, "... in all history books, Bush's 2004 'win' should have an asterisk along with his 2000 'win'. The asterisk should be explained at the bottom of the page as "There is a good chance he didn't really win the election..."

There is no reason to believe the recount in Ohio was going to change the election outome by more than a few votes, at the most. Votes cast wrong (or ballots moved to a precinct where they count wrong) recount the same! Any such asterisk has to go elsewhere, not in discussion of the Ohio recount.

Steven Leser writes that Congress "should begin a thorough investigation into the conduct of the 2004 Ohio Election with particular focus on the recount."

Indeed, except the recount remains a (possibly useful) sideshow detracting from the irregularities. The Conyers Report outlines the Ohio situation very well, with one major oversight. They mention Kerry votes counting as third-party votes while overlooking Kerry votes switched to Bush--not even a mention! That remains the missing primary focus and one that impacted the election outcome. When Kerry votes counted for Bush, the margin shifted two votes for every switched-vote.

SWITCHED VOTES COUNT TWICE.

Steven Leser writes, "...when Special Prosecutor Baxter interviews the convicted Ohio election officials prior to sentencing, he needs to put the fear of God in them so to speak ...."

They are citizens with rights under the law. And, they are probably innocent (if not set up as part of the smoke screen), and also probably without knowledge of the irregularities that altered the vote count. This prosecution targeted these individuals for reasons unrelated to what happened on Election Day and before.

Steven Leser writes, "...why is it that Cuyahoga and many other Ohio county election officials refused to perform a complete and thorough recount as specifically prescribed by Ohio state law? If they had nothing to hide, why didn't they do this? It is a very simple type of question, one with which every person familiar with conducting any kind of investigation is familiar."

Okay, we are on the same page now. However, we may have very different answers to the question. My first question is, "Is it because ballots were moved to the wrong precinct for counting." Part of the answer may be found in this article:

The 2004 Ohio Presidential Election: Cuyahoga County Analysis
How Kerry Votes Were Switched to Bush Votes

http://jqjacobs.net/politics/ohio.html

by James Q. Jacobs (1 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 6 comments) on Tuesday, February 20, 2007 at 1:11:49 PM