Kudos to David Postman of the Seattle Times for interviewing Kenny Foulkes, of Foulkes v. Hays fame, the Supreme Court case that Rossi relies upon to argue that the gubernatorial election should be set aside.
In a 1974 Adams County Commissioner race, the court determined that a number of ballots had been fraudulently altered between counts. The election was set aside due to fraud, even though the number of known, altered ballots was less than the margin of victory. The court wrote, “the irregularity was such that the actual result of the voting could not be ascertained.”
Democrats argue that Rossi’s attorneys have failed to provide any evidence of fraud, making the Foulkes standard irrelevant. And apparently, Foulkes himself agrees.
Foulkes wishes his case would make the difference. He’s a Rossi supporter, but thinks his precedent may not help.
“It’s a tough one to prove because they may not be able to prove fraud like me,” Foulkes said.
Yup… fraud is a helluva lot tougher to prove than it is to allege.
whistling past the graveyard again goldy? keep whistling….i am enjoying the tune……and it may change any day now.
Yup… fraud is a helluva lot tougher to prove than it is to allege.
Ahh yes, but incompetence leading to willfull negligence is considered fraud under our laws. So, what’s important here is not your semantic interpretation of the word fraud (that it implies malice, forethought, and an intent to decieve – i agree this is not fraud in that sense), but that the laws which are applicable here do deem what has transpired as “fraudulent” under case law.
Argue semantics all you want, I agree… there was no forethought by those who committed the sloppy actions that being sloppy could help Gregoire. However, sloppiness did cause a number of mistakes such that we cannot be certain of who obtained the largest number of legal votes. Because of this, the election result should be nullified, and we should work together to ensure that what has occurred in this race is a rare if non-existant future occurrence.
It’s a tough one to prove because they may not be able to prove fraud like me,” Foulkes said.
Yup… fraud is a helluva lot tougher to prove than it is to allege.
Yes. True. But it’s even worse than that for the Rossi team.
It is not even an issue of which witness to believe or not. No witness has testified to date has alleged that they observed any fraudulent conduct occur from any of the counties. Without even submitting any evidence of alleged fraud, the case fails completely on this count.
The only issue left is the felon voting issue which falls short on numerous counts, even Vance does not seem to be very confident on prevailing on this issue.
Rossi’s team better come up with something new fast. Maybe they will in their rebuttal case.
I think Goldy is right…this was never a winnable case — but rather a case for the PR aspects and for raising $$$ and attention for future Washington state races. Time will tell whether the millions they spent on lawyers will pay off with election victories.
Are any of you leftist loons gettin’ dizzy from all that “spinning” yet?? Good grief!! Most people would’ve tossed their lunch along time ago.
Ohh… my bad!! I guess that’s what Goldy’s posts really are!!
;~)
I guess Logan admitting UNDER OATH that he filed ballot reports that he KNEW had discrepancies was just an “honest mistake”, and not outright FRAUD.
Moral relativism must work so wonderfully for you brain-damaged left-wingers. The end ALWAYS justifies the means. Hence the reason there are VERY FEW demonrats I would trust any farther than I could throw them…
Goldy—
How many times did we discuss the use of the F—- word the past 6 months? I agree with you that Fraud in Washington is difficult to prove in the criminal sense according to our Fraud statute.
However, sometimes you need to have the ability to look a bit beyond the end of your nose. You have eyes…yet do not see. You have a nose but do not smell. You have ears…but do not hear. You have touch…but do not feel. You have a brain…but do not think.
Your problem Goldy is that you have a mouth….and it appears your mouth is the only device God gave you that you are capable of using in assessing this case.
I doubt many of us will be around to pick up the pieces when you find this out for yourself.
Whistle while you work
CG is a Jerk
When Bridges rules
and republicans druels
she’ll be packing up her tools
We’ll get a break today
No more huge tax hikes to pay
From the person who said
More Taxation I dread
will make this economy dead
So Whistle while you work
CG is still a jerk
Judge Bridges is not
And he’s seen a lot
And will fix it all today! Heh Heh
Hey, you guys forgot today’s talking point (from SEa Times)
After court, Hamilton said Republicans are “just picking on a bunch of senior citizens who are the heartbeat of our democracy and run these polling places.”
The word MAY miss you all. I thought so, too. There was fraud in this election, you all. Marummy says so.
Oh, that’s right – maybe I need to do ANOTHER Top 10 list like I posted on my blog.
Comment by righton— 6/2/05 @ 6:51 am
Good catch. I added that to my Top 10 list in honour of Dean Logan…
Is today the day that the GOP is gonna prove ballot stuffing? They are going to prove that right? Right?
Lawsuits like this will be more and more the wave of the future. Wo benefits? “Follow the money.”
Running provisional ballotts thru the Acuvote before verification is against the law…..
Signing a false Certification of Election is against the law…..
What am I not getting?
Bian at 5:
Moral relativism must work so wonderfully for you brain-damaged left-wingers. The end ALWAYS justifies the means.
can you say Iraq war?
Scott @ 11:
No, not today, not ever. They will repeat, ad inifinitum the baseless, slanderous charge hoping that because they say it people will believe it.
It’s really funny given they had the perfect, highly covered, opportunity to actually prove what they said.
You think they would have learned after the WMD allegations…..
And a profitable enterprise always foists the cost of its collateral damage onto the public. Oh, that’s from the conservative handbook.
MEMO TO GOLDY: STOP TRYING TO BE MARUMMY!
On second thought, Kerry On!
At least you just said there were illegal votes cast!
Since you’re all so quick to site Times and other liberal rags on your arguments, here’s one in the Times which I believe clearly shows the disgust the judge is feeling about this case:
Elections chief Logan put on hot seat — by judge
http://seattletimes.nwsource.c.....al02m.html
A few quotes from that article
If the Republicans’ goal in the governor’s-election lawsuit was to convince Judge John Bridges there were serious problems in King County’s election division, they have made their case.
Bridges told Logan that when he was in the Army, there was an expression about “taking names … and kicking tush.”
“Is there any sense of urgency in King County about fixing some of these problems?” Bridges asked.
Bridges was clearly skeptical about the claim.
Bridges doesn’t often ask witnesses questions and even less often shows a point of view, as he did with Logan.
“it is impossible” to say which candidate benefited.
———————————————————
A Model Election? – Bullshit
CG Won? – Bullshit
No matter what happens here, the King County Elections department will never get away with this crap again!
Bad Bob @ 13
“Running provisional ballotts thru the Acuvote before verification is against the law…..” Signing a false Certification of Election is against the law”
“What am I not getting?”
For starters, both of these would have happened whether or not Gregoire won. Are you suggesting that the election would have to be tossed out if Rossi had won?
Provisionals: shit happens. There is no evidence that poll workers were feeding the provisionals through the accuvote machines. It appears that voters mistakenly fed them through. Most such provisionals were from otherwise legal voters.
Certification: We heard at the trial that Mrs. Way took the number from the KC web site and thought the number was correct when she put it down. Even so, how did this administrate report affect the vote count? It didn’t.
Reply to 2
“incompetence leading to willfull negligence is considered fraud under our laws”
Cite to relevant legal authority, please? I’m fascinated by this assertion, because I haven’t seen this theory before.
Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. Fraud.
Well, I guess we proved that.
Flat earth. Flat earth. Flat earth. Flat earth …
Also, bmvaughn, you are misstating the effect of King County’s
Clarification for #22
Goldy’s software trashed my post. The words “quote” and “unquote” were typed around the word “negligence.” In other words, I put the word “negligence” in quote marks because that’s vaughn’s characterization; it’s certainly not mine. I think the correct term is “mistakes.” I disagree with the use of the word “negligence” in this context. I just want to clarify that.
Josef @17,
Hey… I heard you call in to Kirby this morning before I was on. Your radio voice is even worse than mine!
Can you say Bosnia?
At least this time, we’re on the right side. We’re responsible for far less death and dismemberment in 2 years of war, than Saddam was responsible for in less than 6 months. You would prefer he (and his animal sons) were still in power, continuing to rape, torture, maim, and murder.
This war didn’t fit your agenda, and it gives you cause to rail against your government and your country. It ain’t the 60’s any more. Get over it. MOVE ON!!
Reply to 6
Nice try, Cynical, but what happened to the “clear and convincing” standard of proof in your analysis? You seem to have gone off the rails.
Test…
Comment on 8
It’s about time the Democrats started spinning some PR. If Hamilton actually said that, it’s bullshit, but hey the Pukes spew bullshit every day and ya gotta fight fire with fire. Good job, Kevin!
Reply to 13
What you’re not getting, Baghdad Bob (is that really you? welcome back), is those provisional ballots were fed through the AccuVote machines by individual voters acting on their own volition, not by or at behest of a party or candidate. Big difference. This makes it “voter error,” not “organized fraud.”
And oh yes, Baghdad Bob, “fraud” requires intent, and unless you can prove that each and every one of those voters knew what he was doing and did it intentionally, intent is lacking. Can you spell M-I-S-T-A-K-E? The point is, voter mistakes are not fraud, and are not legal grounds for overturning an election — THAT is what you’re not getting.
bmvaughn @ 2
Thanks for posting that.
what you had to say was probably the most sound argument I have heard on this message board, ever.
Good Morning @ all
You can just feel the luuvv from the right this good morning.
Re: provisionals. I recall one polling place that ran out of envelopes for the provisionals. So the polling workers let the voters run them through the machines to protect their privacy. Not the swiftest move on their part for sure but I wouldn’t call it fraud or ballot box stuffing.
The mistake was caught and the majority of those provisionals were verified as legitimate by checking against the information the voters left behind in the poll books.
The election was a victim of it’s own success. The high turnout meant more “good enough for government work” type things happening. Can things be improved? Absolutely. I’d like to see higher and higher turnout elections but high turnout doesn’t mean much if it is processed sloppily. Higher turnout means people are engaged unlike the 80,000 R’s that sat home in King County last November probably because they were so bummed that John Kerry would take this state in a walk – and not only that would take Patty Murray, the State legislature and thank God, Christine Gregoire on his coat-tails.
You LEFTIST PINHEADS ought to take a look at the SOS Training Manual for County Auditors re: The Canvassing Process.
This will be the area that allows Bridges to set aside this election. Watch.
Comment on 18
I’m sure Frank Blethen will be surprised to learn he’s publishing a “liberal rag” … wait a minute, we’ve had this conversation before, in past threads, so why am I wasting my time on this … you’re one of those willfully ignorant, bullshit-spewing, impervious-to-reality right wing blockheads with concrete behind his ears who never learns anything no matter how many times you burn your fingers on the hot stove. Might as well talk to a fence post, why bother?
Nick Handy tried to lead a misinformation campaign to lead people and the media away from the SOS’s own training manual on Canvassing and specifically reconiling absentees.
Handy is busted!!
Goldy,
Nice Job on Kirby’s show today!
I have to say, though, the callers’ level of knowledge about the election issues was rather lacking. The GOP PR effort of “keep ’em in the dark and angry” is working. The Dems have a little work to do on the PR front.
Mr. Cynical @ 35
Handy and the SoS office disagreed with the GOP on the issue of using the post-election voter crediting records as evidence in the trial. That is not misinformation, it is just a difference of opinion.
On the other hand, the SoS office has supported many of the GOP’s positions in this case. Even when I dislike the SoS position in this case (i.e. when their positions favor the GOP case), I find their arguments well thought out and reasonable.
More details here: http://www.horsesass.org/my-co.....ment-33963
Comment on 19
Oh yeah, a couple other things Baghdad Bob —
(1) We don’t know who those provisional ballots were FOR. Theoretically, they could have ALL been for Rossi.
(2) Over 80% of them were valid votes anyway, so you’re talking about approximately 200 or so provisional votes that shouldn’t have been counted, and if they split proportionately to the rest of King County, Gregoire got only 34 illegitimate votes that way — less than the 129 vote margin of victory.
(3) As long as we’re mentioning improperly handled provisional ballots, let’s not forget the 1,900 provisionals in Rossi counties that were counted without checking signatures. Let’s also not forget that in KC Gregoire led by only 17% whereas in most of the Rossi counties, Rossi led by 30% to 35%, so illegal votes in those Rossi counties had twice as much impact on the outcome as illegal votes in KC.
“The only way to fight a knave is with more knavery.” N. Machiavelli
Reply to 25
“We’re responsible for far less death and dismemberment in 2 years of war, than Saddam was responsible for in less than 6 months.”
You just can’t get ANYTHING right, can you Brian?
Right wingers OPPOSED the Bosnia intervention and CRITICIZED Clinton for it, even though it was successful in stopping a genocide without a single American combat death.
As for Saddam, it depends on which 6 months you’re talking about. Most of the killing under Saddam took place in the 1980’s, and in the immediate aftermath of the Gulf War in 1990 when Saddam brutally suppressed a Shiite uprising in the south. And what were presidents Reagan and Bush doing while this was happening on their watch? Arming Saddam.
Although it’s technically true that Saddam killed more Iraqis than we have (so far), the U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq is killing so many Iraqi civilians so rapidly that if our occupation continues for more than another year or two, as seems likely, it’s highly likely that the death toll on the Iraqi population from the U.S. intervention eventually will exceed that of Saddam’s brutal regime.
How come there’s not lots of blue writing in my posts.
By the way, Brian, the poison gas Saddam used against the Kurds was made of ingredients with “Made in USA” stamped on them.
Reply to 31
Where, in 9th grade debate class? It wouldn’t hold up in a court room.
33 and 35
Mr. Cynical, are you the stooped little man with the stolen shopping cart full of big binders the security guards wouldn’t let near the courthouse that I saw on TV? Is that you?
My son’s PRIVATE high school is dissecting various and asundry species in biology class…they’ve been through a worm, a caterpillar, are closing in on a frog ….
I think a pithed Patrick would make a good study in a species with a non-working brain…
Oh wait – don’t liberals put the braindead to death?
Comment on 39
We won’t have to. Their own lies will destroy them. Watch and see.
thatPrick@44–
Naaah…that’s my Dad!
Reply to 45
Why don’t you try pithing me, catshit? Just remember the old saying, don’t bring a pithing instrument to a gunfight.
Its sssssshooooowwwwwtime!!!!!
Reply to 47
Oh. I wondered where you got your inspiration from. Now I know — it runs in the family. Well, I hope your father is well, and you have him for many years to come. Even if he IS daffy in the head. Been there, feel your pain.
Ah yes, a threat to be shot from Mr Nonviolence, Mr No Guns!
It really doesn’t take long for them to show their true colors.
Is your gun legal babe?
Mine are.
Reply to 51
When did I ever say (a) I’m nonviolent (b) don’t have a gun? Are you really that (c) stupid, (d) willfully ignorant?
Of course my guns are legal. I didn’t even file off the serial numbers, because self defense is legal too. Having read up on Washington law a little bit, I can assure you that if you come at me with a pithing instrument with the apparent intention of scrambling my brains with it, you are a dead man and I won’t do more than three days in jail.
Come on pattycakes – live up to your oh-so-predictably typical I’m-lame-and-have-no-argument behaviour…start cussing me and telling me to F myself…
you know you will…
and WE know it, too.
Darlin, I don’t need to scramble your brains – just to put you out of your apparent misery.
More threats from the nonviolent.
Dear Patrick and Stop Caterwauling:
Why can’t you present a logical, rational, coherent argument WITHOUT name-calling and not-too-veiled threats of violence? Failure to do so completely undercuts your case. Or is that your goal — to utterly undermine the right wing’s side?
OK, now you respond with names and threats.
Reply to 55
How can you have a logical, rational, coherent argument with someone who wants to pith you? How many frogs survived by singing opera? What frogs need is .357’s.
Reply to 53
For once you’re right. Fuck yourself.
In AZ if someone who is known to be a violent person threatens you, you can shoot them. The Supreme Court said it’s unreasonable to force someone to wait for the violence before defending themselves. It’s not a route most people want to go, but most Arizonans are surprisingly friendly and hospitible now.
Once upon a time
there was a man name Rossy
whose election he lossy
so he spewed the slime
said the election was a crime
but his complaints the judge tossy.
Comment by Goldy— 6/2/05 @ 8:15 am
I agree :-(. Got too hyper :-(.
I suggest your read a few posts, tehn try to figure out which post authors from which HA preferred ideology are the folks that threaten, swear prolifically and accuse…
Pay very close attention to posts by Patrick (post 57 is a prime example), Headless Lucy, Don (in any or all his incarnations).
Why are the righty people on here so hung up on the swearing anyways? Its like I’m living in a time-warp
Hey Patrick,
Can I join in on the fun?
Hey Eugenics @ 61: Go fuck yourself!
(A special thanks to Dick Cheney for his inspiration in this effort).
comment on 52,
For talking about self defense Patrick, you have a very aggressive attitude. And what would gun control advocates know
about gun ownership?
dj@63–
WTF!!!? You are losing it! (But it is kind of theraputic, isn’t it!)
I think the fact that this trial is about to closure after 6 months of us venturing opinions, spouting RCW’s, playing Perry Mason and Dick Tracy (or Dickless Tracy in your case Lucy)….
I think normally rational, clear-thinking people from both sides have serious doubts about how this is going to turn out. Neither side will come out unscathed…but I think the Dems clearly have the biggest uphill PR struggle…even if they win.
The key for both sides is going to be how they handle and react to the Judge’s decision….no matter what it is. The R’s can seriously damage the political gains they have reaped the past 6 months if they start ripping on Judge Bridges if they lose. The Dems can basically sink themselves for 2006 and beyond if they lose and start screeching about some goofy “conspiracy theory”.
I said many months ago I was prepared to accept Judge Bridges decision. PERIOD. If the R’s lose here…they may want to seriously think about whether or not to go the the Supreme Court. The same with the Dems. Even if the Dems got the Supreme Court to reverse Bridges decision….I think their gooses would be cooked for years to come.
Attesting under oath on an elections report that the numebrs are true, when you know they are not, isn’t fraud? Only if it is a Republican that does it – according to Democrats.
There was a good point made on KVI this morning and it was referring to a point made by the Democrat’s “expert”. He said there is no scientific way to know for certain who the illegal votes were for. And I agree. Consequently, we do not know who really won the election.
The Democrats may successfully steal the election but they will never win back the trust on our system of government that they have destroyed.
Reply@62,
No it is because not everyone’s vocabulary is limited to four letter swear words.
reply@55,
That is how Patrick gets his way. That is how all tyrants work. If they don’t like another person’s argument they resort to violence – the the language of thugs and tyrants without any ability for reasoning.
Reply@52,
Perfect example of liberal hypocrisy! They want to take everyone else’s guns away but not their own. Patrick, didn;’t you know that a child was killed recently by a handgun? Oh that’s right – YOU were the one that posted the story!!!!
Hypocrit, thy name is Patrick!
67. Destroyed? You mean by filing frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit? By spreading lie after lie, McCarthy-like, about good people trying to do their best in the imperfect world of democratic elections? By intemperate vitriol directed at anyone who respectfully disagrees with you? pbj … well, we’re praying for you.
68. You know swear words that are more than four letters? Cool.
69. Unlike the kinder, gentler right wing, eh, pbj?
Mr. Cynical @ 65
“WTF!!!? You are losing it! (But it is kind of theraputic, isn’t it!)”
Just good “clean” fun. :-) Indirectly, I was trying to make the same point as windie @ 62.
“I think normally rational, clear-thinking people from both sides have serious doubts about how this is going to turn out. Neither side will come out unscathed…but I think the Dems clearly have the biggest uphill PR struggle…even if they win.”
Agreed! I have been concerned about this all along. The Dems may come out looking slippery and the GOP looking like they have been screwed.
“The key for both sides is going to be how they handle and react to the Judge’s decision….no matter what it is. The R’s can seriously damage the political gains they have reaped the past 6 months if they start ripping on Judge Bridges if they lose.”
Indeed. There seems to be two ways for the Republicans to capitalize on this if they lose: either accept what they have gotten with dignity and gain sympathy from the center, or scream “earring conspiracy” and stir up anger on the right. If they are not careful, though, the two will cancel each other.
‘The Dems can basically sink themselves for 2006 and beyond if they lose and start screeching about some goofy “conspiracy theory”.’
Indeed . . . it did not work for them in Florida, did it?
“I said many months ago I was prepared to accept Judge Bridges decision. PERIOD. If the R’s lose here…they may want to seriously think about whether or not to go the the Supreme Court. The same with the Dems. Even if the Dems got the Supreme Court to reverse Bridges decision….I think their gooses would be cooked for years to come.”
I can respect you for accepting Judge Bridges decision. I think the reality is that the losing side will go to the Supreme Court no matter what. Even so, you are correct that whoever takes it to the Supreme Court loses a bit in the PR battle. The GOP would come off smelling like a rose if they declined an appeal. It won’t happen, though.
re# 61: I suggest you sit on your thumb and spin, and then tell us all about your joy.
Wow, lucy, just about the level of intellectually pithy comments we’ve all come to expect from you.
Thanks so much for not letting us all down.
Reply to 64
The “gun control” I advocate is getting the job done with one bullet so you don’t have to spend 20 cents on another one.
There’s not a swear word in my post, Stop being a Rep limp wick and visit my valley of heaven with your spongy appendage.
Question re 67
“Consequently, we do not know who really won the election. The Democrats may successfully steal the election …”
Hey jackass, if you don’t know who really won the election, how can you know if the Democrats stole the election?
Reply to 69
Do you like it? Works good for you guys, so I decided to try it. It’s fun to see the wingos squirm when they have to swallow their own castor oil. Here, have another spoonful, you nazi pigs!
Reply to 70
Unlike the yay-hoo gun nuts who read SOF magazine and listen to Rush, I know better than to target practice where little kids run around, and I don’t miss.
Reply to 61
Fuck yourself, too!
We always know when we’ve won the arguement with lucy and Patrick – thanks guys for proving it so aptly.
You know what they say, ‘everyone has to be good at something’.
Question@70,
“Hey jackass, if you don’t know who really won the election, how can you know if the Democrats stole the election?”
Who is in the Governor’s mansion?
lucy–@76
“valley of heaven”?????????
I find that mighty hard to believe….unless the Mojave Desert is your idea of Heaven!
Nope cyn – it’s what she calls that canyon between her ears… where she hears the sound of rushing water, howling winds and the voices of her “friends”.
You should see it in the Spring!
Thanks for that offer, but no, I’ll pass on that.
Reply@78,
Small minded little Patrick,
Are you angry because of your teeny wick?
Does a gun compensate for your small manhood
when your brain doesn’t work as it should?
With a mind that is small and is senile
and a shortage of all things penile,
you curse every day
to get your own way
even though your own words are quite anile.
Cat prefers raw liver.
Mr. Cynicle why R U posting here when your sapposed to be cranking your washing machine? Rossy needs more money!
Mr. Cynicle makes you wanna cry
when he takes money from LNI
from the injured workers
and gives it to Republican smirkers
but the judge told them it wont do you no good
because your lawsuit is a lie.
Reply to 75
Yes, we can see how well schooled you are in personal protection
knowledge. Bet you dont have a CPL do you? (for you and your other lib freinds out there that stands for “Concealed Pistol License”).
Lucy? You seem nice, do men actually have to have sex with you?
Betcha I do.
@91, raw liver is always an option.
Pricilla? Thank you for letting us know how you “get off”…raw liver.
Girls don’t need raw liver. It’s for you. (wink wink)
Rossy is frosty
because the election he losty
and his lawsuit
the judge tosty.
Priscilla,
tosty and losty aren’t even words!
Priscilla write poor poetry,
the worst that I’ve heard,
Someone should tell her,
‘tosty’ isn’t even a word.
Will she continue
with her horrible prose?
I cannot tell you
heaven only knows!
I writes my proseys
so’sys
to step on your toseys.
Fraud in our election,
Oh my can it be?
Their shredding the evidence,
at elections KC.
From Logan to Way,
and Garth Fell to Ron Simms,
They’ll steal the election,
and do it with grins.
In court their big take,
is it’s all a mistake,
Their practices they’ll laud,
and deny obvious fraud.
When the dust is all settled,
And settle it must,
They may win the court case,
but lose people’s trust.
In Priscilla’s mind we will delve,
Tosty? Losty?
What? Is she twelve??
She repeats those lame words,
as if they were real,
but for liberals correctness matters not,
it’s all how she “feels”.
There once was a TROLL named pbj
From the things that he posted we knew he be gay
He dissed all the females
cause he prefered shemales
And each weekend at the disco he’d DJ
It’s time for more bad hemingway!
They had been bad. He knew it. He knew all about it. They had been bad and in the end there was nothing anybody could do about it. He yelled at them and yelled at them and yelled at them, in that terrible screaming high pitched Italian voice of his, in that way Italian men do when the woman they trusted went to the police after all, and there was nothing he could do about it. And they were bad. They had made a mess of the election and they even admitted they made a mess of the election and in the end there wasn’t a fucking thing anybody could do about it.
And the tune has changed…….told you so Goldy.
But ,come on….now you are reaching so far out as to say this whole case has really been about discrediting Ron Sims?
That’s rich……
Doesn’t he do that for himself all the time????
The dems whole case has been it’s about discrediting poll workers (they made lots of mistakes), discrediting voters (they’re too stupid to know where to put a ballot, where to sign a poll book, how to mark an oval), discrediting the military (they’re too dumb to mail ballots back on time) and today, discrediting the folks at the jails the dem election workers relied on for reports (they’re so stupid they don’t match their codes with court records).
They
Them
Him
Her
Anybody but US, say the dems.
And that’s just in the last 2 days.
And we wonder why the libs here just don’t get the whole personal responsibility concept.
So you feel comfortable with apparently more than 1,000 illegal votes cast in an election decided by less than 200 votes?
Mmm, another example of where the term “Democratic Party” is apparently meant ironically.
A.W. @ 105
“So you feel comfortable with apparently more than 1,000 illegal votes cast in an election decided by less than 200 votes?”
I would prefer that illegal votes not be in there regardless of the margin of victory, and it is clear that the number of disenfranchised felon votes will be reduced in later elections.
The number of illegal votes relative to the margin of victory doesn’t bother me too much. From all indications, neither candidate got an advantage out of the illegal votes.