The burden of proof is on them, not us

[nmoliver]

Dear Mr. Arnebeck,

...

My understanding is that your court case is trying to prove fraud. The right wing can just throw out doubts about anything you say, and any doubts are at risk of invalidating your case.

I'd like to suggest that the burden of proof is on the State of Ohio and on the manufacturers and owners of the machines to demonstrate convincingly that their tallies are accurate and that election laws have been obeyed.

Just a few cases like the one adding 3,000 votes to Bush where 630 were cast, in my opinion, is proof that the machine manufacturers, and the election officials who certified the machines, have failed to demonstrate that their machines have provided accurate tallies of the election results.

Furthermore, the State of Ohio has not demonstrated in any way that the right to vote was operational on November 2 in Ohio.

It seems to me that the election has to be voided because there is no proof that the figures spewed out of the machines correspond to the votes cast.

Thank you,
...

[DireStrike]

1. Excellent point.

This will get immediately into the point of whether the machines (and companies) are suitable. Which is the real goal at this point IMO. If there was significant fraud, the evidence has been erased by now.

[enough]

2. Absolutely the central point.

I don't expect this point to make much headway in the recount-runup to the innauguration, but it is THE main point about our current election system.

There is NO WAY anyone can prove or even demonstrate to a reasonable standard that the "results" of this presidential election are valid.

We must pound and pound on this point for as many years as it takes.

[bones_7672]

3. Actually, come Monday ...

Blackwell will say that he's certifying the totals given to him by the individual county BOEs and, after that, it will be up to the 'losers' to prove fraud. That may be harsh, but that is the way the game is played.

Just because people think there was fraud will not be enough to stop Bush's inaugaration.

[nmoliver]

4. then the individual counties ...

will have to demonstrate that the tallies they have submitted are a reflection of the votes cast. I'm not a lawyer, but it seems to me that we are guaranteed to lose unless we turn the tables.

From a PR point of view, dealing with the public, we should DEFINITELY approach it this way.