HorsesAss.Org

Do you live in Bellevue? Are you a progressive Democrat? Are you interested in running for Bellevue City Council? Financial and technical assistance is available for qualified candidates, no prior political experience required. Please contact Dean Nielsen at Progressive Majority of Washington for more information.

(This is no joke. There are seven Republicans and no Democrats on the Bellevue City Council… and yet John Kerry won nearly every precinct in 2004! This is a city that’s turned Democrat, and doesn’t know it. Three council members are up for reelection in 2005, and as of yet there are no progressive challengers. So if you’re a Bellevue Democrat with political aspirations, now’s the time to serve your city and your party.)

[NWPT52]I was listening to a report on NPR this morning about yesterday’s meeting between British Prime Minister Tony Blair and President George Bush. Blair was asking the US to join major initiatives on global warming and aid for Africa. Of course, in appreciation for Blair’s toadying support for the Iraq war, Bush gave Blair a “cold shoulder.”

But what really stood out in the report, was the footnote on the “Downing Street Memo.”

I wrote about this secret memo way back on May 2, and the story is only now beginning to filter its way into the mainstream US media. Originally leaked to the British press just days before parliamentary elections, the memo reveals that the White House had already decided to invade Iraq as early as July of 2002, and that “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”

Had this been a Democratic administration, impeachment hearings would already be under way, but so far the Republicans and their corporate media patrons have managed to keep this issue below the radar. However I’m beginning to see parallels between this story and the way the Watergate scandal slowly built to a media crescendo that brought down a corrupt presidency. The news media is a business, and at some point they simply can’t ignore a story the competition is running with.

Congress needs to investigate this memo so that Americans can learn the truth… and you can help. Rep. John Conyers is asking citizens to sign on to his letter to President Bush asking for full disclosure — over 110,000 have signed thus far. And Sen. Ted Kennedy is urging you to write your Senators and urge them to speak out on the Downing Street Memo.

The Bush White House sent American soldiers to die in the deserts of Iraq, based on a lie. There were no WMDs and there was no tie to 9/11 or Osama bin Laden. And Bush knew it.

[NWPT48]

Mr. Michael Pieper
Executive Director
Republican Governors Association
555 11 th Street, NW, Suite 700
Washington ,D.C. 20004
(202) 662-4140

June 7, 2005

Dear Mr. Pieper,

Eat me.

No really… eat me.

Maybe you were drunk when you issued a press release asking for Governor Gregoire’s resignation. After all, you had just watched almost-member Dino Rossi getting his ass whooped by a cherry-picked judge in a conservative county… so I’m guessing beer-thirty came a little early yesterday. But whether you were drunk or just plain stupid, you know what…? This is none of your fucking business.

See, here in the other Washington, we have something we call “laws,” which are written by democratically elected legislators, not half-witted, cirrhotic PR hacks like you. And according to our laws, Christine Gregoire was duly elected governor. So rather than cynically laboring to undermine the electoral process of a state no Republican governor has called home for over twenty years, why don’t you just focus on something you’re good at… like helping your members devise new and exciting ways to deny poor children health care.

Either that, or eat me.

Respectfully yours,

David Goldstein
HorsesAss.org

[PS: eat me.]

The Seattle chapter of Drinking Liberally meets tonight (and every Tuesday), 8PM at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. I invite you all to join me as I raise a toast to Judge Bridges, Gov. Gregoire, and an end to Rossi’s stunningly cynical election contest. And if you buy me a beer, I’ll toast you too!

I’ll be on the Kirby Wilbur Show (KVI-570) at 8:30 am, wrapping up our election contest discussion. Say what you want about KVI (four-letter words are often aptly descriptive,) but both Kirby and John have been very gracious in inviting me to air my liberal perspective.

And while we’re on the subject of wrap-ups, Evergreen Politics reminds us that not only did Rossi lose, but that Christine Gregoire won. Lynn Allen has posted a brief interview with our duly elected Governor, in which she talks about her first five months in office, and her plans for the rest of her term.

UPDATE:
For those introduced in abusing me for an embarrassing slip of the tongue, here’s the audio from my somewhat jet-lagged appearance with Kirby this morning.

[NWPT48]Judge Bridges bitch-slapped Dino Rossi.

There’s really no other way to interpret the decision he issued today in the election contest lawsuit. Apart from a few lines at the start, criticizing the “culture” of King County Elections, about the only positive note Republicans can take out of the Judge’s ruling is that he didn’t impose Rule 11 sanctions on the Rossi camp for bringing a frivolous lawsuit. I’m guessing Timothy Borders et al were a bit nervous there for a few moments, waiting for Judge Bridges to order them to reimburse the Dems for legal costs.

“Dismissed with prejudice.”

No… the Democrats didn’t get off on some technicality. The Judge ruled that the Republicans resoundingly failed to prove their case. He ruled that there was no evidence ballots were changed or that ballot boxes were stuffed or that legal votes were removed from one candidate or the other. There was no evidence that Gregoire engaged in wrongdoing, or that election officials committed fraud… no evidence of intentional misconduct, partisan bias or an attempt to manipulate the election… and no evidence to question ballot security, or that reconciliation errors were anything more than just that. There was no evidence presented as to how felons and mishandled provisionals might have voted, or even if they had marked a ballot for governor at all. Indeed: “There is no evidence in this record that Ms. Gregoire received any illegal votes.”

And after rejecting the Republicans’ proposed “proportional deduction” methodology as “unscientific”, Judge Bridges twisted the knife:

“An election such as this should not be overturned because one judge picks a number and applies a proportional deduction analysis. To do so within the context of the facts of this case would constitute the ultimate act of judicial egotism and judicial activism.”

This was an elected judge from a heavily Republican county, speaking directly to Republicans in words he knew they would understand. “Judicial activism” is a phrase that resonates with conservative Republicans, and he made a point of explaining to voters that this was exactly what Rossi’s attorneys had asked him to exercise.

Judge Bridges had clearly laid down in pre-trial rulings the standard of evidence and burden of proof he would require, but for many of their claims, Rossi’s attorneys failed to even try to meet them. Thus no one should be surprised by the overwhelmingly one-sided nature of today’s decision.

No one except perhaps for the Rossi faithful who chose to get their “news” and “analysis” exclusively from right-wing talk radio and blogs like (un)Sound Politics. Oh, I don’t expect conservative Republicans to rely on an unabashedly liberal blog like HA for their election contest coverage (though I think it’s fair to immodestly point out that I was proven absolutely right on almost every single legal point.) But you would have had to have totally dismissed the extensive coverage in the MSM to go into this morning’s ruling with more than the tiniest shred of hope that Rossi might prevail in court. He had no case… and Judge Bridges wasn’t shy about pointing that out.

And that is why it is no surprise that Rossi has decided not to appeal the decision to the state Supreme Court, for to do so would have invited a judicial smack down that would have made Judge Bridges’ legal kick-in-the-groin look like a tap on the tuchus from my 87-year-old bubbie. As I had previously predicted, the cherry-picked judge from conservative Chelan County was careful to structure his ruling to make it virtually appeal proof. He admitted nearly every piece of evidence proffered by either side, and then made his decision by applying established precedent to findings of fact. Appellate courts nearly always accept the lower courts’ evidentiary findings, and by limiting the universe of illegal votes to a number more or less split between the two sides, the Supremes would have been as hamstrung by the evidence as Judge Bridges’ was by the statute.

So Rossi has ended his dishonest contest, not out of some desire to heal the state or personally move on, or even out of grudging respect for the rule of law — he ended his contest because he had no choice. Given the magnitude of his legal loss, and the manner in which the ruling was structured, he not only had no hope of prevailing on appeal, he had no hope of convincing anybody but the most ardently blind true-believer that even he believed he had any hope of prevailing in court.

Shortly before I boarded my plane, I called Andrew at Northwest Progressive Institute, and asked him to post an update to HA if Rossi conceded. The Republicans had always promised to appeal, and I had no advance knowledge to the contrary, but the Rossi folk had always shown a knack for savvy PR moves, and it seemed clear to me that quickly ending this hopeless fight was the savvy move to make in light of their lopsided legal loss. But while I somewhat expected a concession, when I read the quotes from his news conference, I was disappointed.

Rossi said because the “political makeup of the Washington Supreme Court” makes it “almost impossible to overturn this ruling, I am ending this election contest.”

To blame his concession on a partisan court strikes me as both insolent and ungracious, at a time when a true statesman would have been more… well… statesmanlike (think Al Gore’s concession in 2000,) whatever the personal sacrifice and disappointment. I expect some of his faithful supporters to refuse to accept the facts — and perhaps Rossi himself really does believe that this was a stolen election — but a true leader must be bigger than partisan politics or personal ambition… and today, Rossi’s statements made him look very, very small indeed.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: I empathize with the disappointment and frustration and cynicism many Rossi supporters must feel. If the shoe were on the other foot I might have been skeptical myself… although I hope that in the end I would have accepted that the facts of this case simply did not bear out the suspicions. But what really disturbs me about the angry rhetoric that continues to flow from the state GOP and its surrogates, is the complete and utter lack of empathy coming from their ranks.

As a Democrat, I am offended by the assumption that I am somehow less moral, less ethical, less honest and less capable than my Republican counterparts. I resent the oft-repeated notion that Democrats are more likely to cheat, and that we cannot win elections without doing so. I am in fact angry that Republicans would accuse Democrats in a court of law, of “stealing” an election… without even bothering to present any direct evidence to support their claim.

The contest statute is intended to remedy those rare elections where it is clear that the wrong candidate was declared the winner. It is not intended to be used merely as a vehicle for running a six-month PR campaign designed to extract a political price from the opposition for crimes they did not commit.

Yes, the Republicans had every right to pursue an election contest, but in dismissing their claims “with prejudice,” Judge Bridges made it clear that it was a right the Republicans cynically abused. Dino Rossi owes Christine Gregoire, Democratic voters, and the people of Washington an apology.

[NWPT48]Rossi claims “dismissed with prejudice”…! (More coming….)

UPDATE:
Oh my God this could not have gone an worse for Dino Rossi and the Republicans. After knocking down the Republican case, point by point, Judge Bridges gave the ultimate editorial comment:

“An election such as this should not be overturned because one judge picks a number and applies a proportional deduction analysis. To do so within the context of the facts of this case would constitute the ultimate act of judicial egotism and judicial activism.”

That’s right… Republicans were demanding an act of judicial activism.

Judge Bridges rejected “proportional deduction” as “unscientific”, ruling in favor of the Democrats in the Frye hearing. He also rejected the notion that voter crediting could be used as evidence of illegal votes. He said that there was no evidence that Gregoire received any illegal votes, but accepted the Democrats felon testimony giving 4 to Rossi. So at the end of the day, Gregoire expanded her margin from 129 to 133.

Rossi is screwed. The best thing he can do now is figure out a way to back out, and decline to appeal.

[NWPT48]Just a few notes, thoughts and observations this morning, as we await Judge Bridges’ ruling. I’ll update this post as/if things occur to me.

Kirby Wilbur at 8 am
Um… I’ll be on Kirby Wilbur at 8 am, KVI-570. We’ll be sharing cherished family recipes discussing this election contest thing.

Watch/listen to the ruling live on TVW
Tune in to Judge Bridges’s ruling live, streaming on the internet at TVW.org. I’m sure your boss won’t mind.

Am I a liar or fool? (6:23 am)
David Postman in the Seattle Times reprinted this quote from an editorial in the Wenatchee World:

“We do not know how Judge John Bridges will rule Monday,” the paper wrote. “Anyone who says they know is, as they say, a liar or a fool or both.”

Hmm. I’ve made my prediction. If I had to choose between the two, I’d say I’m a fool.

Why am I so foolishly confident? (7:17 am)
Judge Bridges issued three pre-trial rulings that made it exceedingly difficult for Rossi to prevail based on the evidence presented: 1) Rossi needs to prove that he would have won, but for illegal votes and other irregularities, 2) the standard of proof is “clear and convincing,” and 3) voter crediting will not be accepted as evidence of illegal votes.

Unless Judge Bridges reverses himself on the first ruling, he would have to reverse himself on the other two to give Rossi a fighting chance. I saw no indication (and little argument) that he might reverse himself on any of these rulings.

Post-ruling coverage (7:46 am)
FYI, I’m in Philadelphia, heading back to Seattle this afternoon. The Judge is scheduled to give his ruling at 9 am Pacific, and I must leave for the airport by 11 am. Assuming the TVW feed isn’t overloaded, I plan to be listening in, post a news bulletin live, then post a brief, knee jerk analysis before heading out. I’ll post a more in depth piece later tonight, after I’ve had a chance to read the MSM and other blogs.

I’m all a titter (8:55 am)
Five minutes until D-Day (the “D” stands for “Democrat”.) Perhaps I’ll post some comments here, as the Judge delivers his decision, depending how suspenseful he makes it.

Ruling in progress… (9:15 am)
Judge sends a message by saying he will not send a message:

“I have been asked in closing arguments to send a message. I’m going to decline that invitation. This court is not in a position to fix deficiencies in the election process that this court heard about over the past nine days.”

Judge rejecting proportional deduction? (9:22 am)
Says neither side demonstrated felons voted for a gubernatorial candidate.

No evidence that errors were result of bias (9:33 am)
And no evidence of ballot stuffing.

Judge rejects proportional deduction! (9:36 am)
Unscientific. Rossi lost Frye hearing.

[NWPT48]I was planning to post a detailed analysis of the election contest trial in advance of tomorrow’s ruling, but really… why bother? We all know Dino Rossi is going to lose, and we’ll all have plenty of time to hash and rehash the Judge’s written opinion between now and the Supreme Court’s inevitable decision to uphold it. So I just want to focus on a couple of legal points that I believe will play strongly into Judge Bridges’ ruling.

Throughout the proceedings the Republicans have relied heavily on Foulkes v. Hays, a case where an election was tossed out due to altered ballots. I have written extensively on Foulkes (for example, here, here, and here,) so I do not need to readdress it again, except to reiterate that it simply does not apply to this case in the way Rossi’s attorneys wish it would. And even if it did (and Becker v. Pierce County strongly suggests that it does not,) the Republicans have failed to prove that any fraud occurred.

Instead, after offsetting illegal votes and a few hundred mishandled provisional ballots, the Republicans have been forced to settle on their “total mess” theory… that official neglect and other irregularities — mostly in King County — has made the true winner unascertainable. Much of their focus has been on the failure of King and other counties to accurately reconcile the number of ballots cast with the number of voters credited. Republicans argue that King County failed to follow the law in reconciling the election and reporting the results to the canvassing board… and that this alone is reason enough to set aside the election.

But I’m guessing that in addressing this issue, Judge Bridges might cite McCormick v. Okanogan County:

In MURPHY v. SPOKANE, SUPRA at 684, we quoted with approval the statement of the rule found in McCrary on Elections 225:

” “If the statute expressly declares any particular act to be essential to the validity of the election, or that its omission shall render the election void, all courts whose duty it is to enforce such statute, must so hold, whether the particular act in question goes to the merits or affects the result of the election, or not.

Such a statute is imperative, and all considerations touching its policy or impolicy must be addressed to the legislature.

But if, as in most cases, that statute simply provides that certain acts or things shall be done within a particular time or in a particular manner, and does not declare that their performance is essential to the validity of the election, then they will be regarded as mandatory if they do, and directory if they do not, affect the actual merits of the election.”

The point is that even if King County Elections failed to follow the law — a point I am not conceding — these technical violations do not amount to grounds for setting aside the election unless it can be proven that they materially contributed to swaying the results. Since these alleged violations all occurred during reconciliation and voter crediting, they could not have directly impacted the vote count.

What Rossi has asked the court to do is set aside an election due to official error or neglect, even though there is no evidence that these errors actually affected the outcome. If he were to succeed it would set a precedent in which all extremely close elections would end up in court… indeed, most would be set aside because the number of errors will almost always exceed the margin of victory.

As I have stated before, implicit in our election statutes is both an acknowledgment that elections are imperfect, and a pragmatic preference of finality over certainty. The recount statute defines an endgame for close elections, and the contest statute makes overturning the final result extremely difficult. This is not only intentional, it is necessary to assuring a stabile government.

Reading through Judge Bridges’ previous rulings it is clear that he understands the legislative intent. There is nothing clear or convincing about Rossi’s claims. And there is no way the Judge can rule in his favor.

Two weeks ago, after Newsweek bowed to pressure and retracted a story that U.S. interrogators at Guantanamo had flushed a copy of the Koran in a toilet, White House press secretary Scott McClellan continued his offensive against the media, demanding that Newsweek attempt to “repair the damage” it caused to the reputation of the United States.

“I think Newsweek can do that by talking about the way they got this wrong, and pointing out what the policies and practices of the United States military are when it comes to the handling of the Holy Koran. The military put in place policies and procedures to make sure that the Koran was handled — or is handled with the utmost care and respect.”

So then I suppose McClellan would encourage Newsweek to accurately explain our military’s “policies and procedures”… by covering a Pentagon report quietly issued late Friday, that documents similar such desecration of the Islamic holy book.

The latest confirmed abuses are contained in a report put together by Brig. Gen. Jay Hood, the commander of the detention center in Cuba.

They include: splashing urine on a prisoner and his Qur’an, stepping on and kicking the Qur’an, throwing water on it, and scratching an obscenity on the inside cover.

Oh. So they didn’t actually desecrate a Koran in the toilet, but they did splash pee and water on it. Well that’s entirely different. Man those moslems are touchy.

Or maybe I’m just taking all this out of context. Better ask McClellan.

On Saturday, a day after the Pentagon described a series of cases of U.S. personnel mishandling the Qur’an, the White House downplayed the issue.

“It is unfortunate that some have chosen to take out of context a few isolated incidents by a few individuals,” presidential spokesman Scott McClellan said in a statement.

Yeah. Um… eat me, Scott. I think former Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart has you pegged on this one:

“I think on this issue, they fell into a trap,” Lockhart said. “They saw a way to push back on a damaging story by making it look like it was just out-of-control journalists, and now they’ve had to admit that it has happened.”

McClellan’s statements after the Newsweek report left an impression that no desecration at all had occurred at Guantanamo, Lockhart said.

“While the news organization got an example wrong, they got the practice right,” he said. “I think certainly the public is within their right, in this case, to believe they were misled.”

Misled by the White House, that is, not Newsweek.

In response to a request from the St. Petersburg Times, the Florida Department of Children and Families released 70 pages of documents in the Terri Schiavo case, that discredit Gov. Jeb Bush’s attempt to reinsert a feeding tube based on “new” allegations of abuse.

As the day approached in which Terri Schiavo’s feeding tube was to be removed, Gov. Jeb Bush claimed there were new and compelling allegations of abuse or neglect that the state Department of Children and Families had to investigate.

That effort led to a dramatic showdown between the governor and the Pinellas-Pasco circuit judge who ordered Schiavo’s feeding tube removed on March 18. Bush and DCF continued to seek its reinsertion, claiming the 30 or so new complaints had to be probed.

But documents released by DCF Friday reveal few fresh allegations that Schiavo was abused or neglected. Investigators wrote that there were “no indicators” of abuse in any of the cases.

According to documents, the only new complaint involved a nursing assistant “abusing” Schiavo with aromatherapy.

Apparently, Jeb Bush is just as big an unprincipled liar as his brother, and there should be a price to pay for the way he and other Republicans attempted to exploit the Schiavo tragedy for partisan political gain.

After our last joint appearance on the John Carlson Show, our good friend Stefan graciously visited HA and contributed the following comment:

Please do put up the complete clip, David. [assuming you don’t edit out my actual words, as you did in your post]. My disappointment with having you speak on behalf of King County Elections is that you’re not an expert on their procedures and you’re not accountable for simply making stuff up, which you were doing today. I specifically told John that I’d prefer to confront an actual elections official. I only want to pick on someone who’s bigger than I am, not just some insignificant fool who doesn’t know what they’re talking about and just makes stuff up.

Well, I’m always happy to oblige such a polite request, and thanks to Andrew at Northwest Progressive Institute, you can listen to the entire audio clip here. Hmm. Listening to the interview, I’m beginning to think Stefan doesn’t respect me.

“This is frankly one of the problems with having David Goldstein on, because he can say, he can make up all kinds of stuff and is not accountable.”

(I think he may have been attempting to make another one of his puns on my last name, but I can’t really tell from the clip.)

As Stefan helpfully points out, I am not an expert on election procedures or the law. And you know what? Neither is he.

What Stefan really objects to is having an opponent who is actually willing and able to fight back. He’d rather talk to election officials, fearful for their jobs, barred from taking partisan positions, and unschooled in the art of rhetoric, because his arguments simply don’t hold up to vigorous debate.

And quite frankly, I find his protestations rather cowardly. But listen to the clip and decide for yourself.

[NWPT48]Monday morning Judge Bridges will deliver a ruling denying Dino Rossi’s petition to set aside the results of the gubernatorial election. I say this with unwavering confidence, secure in the knowledge that both statute and case law are firmly on Governor Gregoire’s side.

The only real suspense is over the character of the editorial comments in which he will couch his decision. Will he admonish elections officials for sloppy work? Will he scold Rossi’s attorneys for making unsubstantiated claims? Will he defend his ruling by pleading he was handcuffed by the statute, or will he defend the legislative pragmatism, embodied in statute, that prefers finality over certainty?

Or will he merely apply the law to the evidence and leave the editorializing to editorialists like me?

I plan to do a more complete trial wrap-up, but jet-lagged and TVW-feed-addled, I’m afraid those thoughts will have to wait until later this weekend to find their words. In the meanwhile, I’d just like to express the sincere sentiment that whatever the ruling, I can’t wait for the day this goddamn election contest is over and done with. And unfortunately, I’m guessing Monday ain’t it.

Man… I can’t imagine what people might want to talk about. Go at it.

Yesterday was a bad day for Feisty, my petulant little puppy. We awoke at 6 am to empty her young bladder, but on our way to the backdoor she took a shortcut on the living room rug. Later, annoyed with me for paying more attention to Kirby Wilbur than to her, she made every effort to voice her opinion on the air. The difficult behavior continued. She chased the cat. She dug a hole in the backyard, caking herself with mud. And when not chewing on my hands, ankles and feet, she destructively masticated whatever piece of furniture or household object was most convenient.

Finally, at the end of this long, tiring day, I returned Feisty to the family from whom we had adopted her, locked her in the kennel with her last remaining litter mates, got back in the car, and drove off.

Assuming dogs have the ability to reason (and for rhetorical purposes we’ll leave that assumption unchallenged,) one could hardly blame her for having the impression that, angry and exasperated, I had abandoned her. That would be a logical conclusion… at least, for a dog.

Likewise, one can hardly blame ardent Dino Rossi supporters for believing that Democrats stole the gubernatorial election. After twenty years of Democratic governors, it looked like the GOP had finally found their champion. Rossi came out ahead in the first two counts, only to lose a heartbreaker of a hand recount by the tiniest of margins. And in the aftermath of the election it was revealed that there were hundreds of errors and illegal votes statewide, including felons voting, mishandled provisional ballots, uncounted valid ballots, and an inability to entirely reconcile ballots cast with voters credited.

To be honest, if the shoe were on the other foot, I’d be suspicious too. Just like poor, abandoned Feisty.

But what the unhappy puppy doesn’t realize, is that I had long planned to be out of town this weekend to attend my niece Ariel’s Bat Mitzvah, and had arranged to return Feisty for a few days as a condition of the adoption. Tuesday morning she will be back at home, happily peeing on the rug and chewing my limbs and furniture.

I think you all know where I’m going. My dog’s conclusion, however logical, was misguided. Likewise, so is the fervor of Rossi’s dogs of war. Whatever empathy I might have for them, their suspicions have simply not been proven by six months of investigations and two weeks of courtroom non-drama. There were errors. There were illegal votes. But there is absolutely no evidence that any of these advantaged one candidate or the other.

That the margin of victory was too far within the error rate to confidently determine the winner was never in doubt — that is true of all extremely close elections. What is lost in all the rhetoric is that the legal question at stake in this trial was never about whether errors occurred in King County or elsewhere… it is about whether these errors demonstrably changed the outcome. Dino Rossi lost the election by the rules in place… rules that anticipate that no election is perfect. And as in all elections, the winner was determined by the ballots counted, not the ballots cast.

That may strike some as unfair, but that is reality.

My guess is, that whatever her current state of mind (again, assuming she has one,) upon my return Feisty’s understandable suspicions will be quickly forgotten. And that, I’m afraid, is where my admittedly tortured analogy ends.