It won't matter what the Electoral College is doing because

[texpatriot2004]

the lawsuit makes their gathering illegal. I know it's more complicated than that but this is what I understood Susan Truitt to say today at the forum. They will do whatever they do but the litigation can change it.

[JoMama49]

1. Gosh, I hope that's right ....

And I hope the Ohio court has a sense of integrity somehow somewhere and accepts the lawsuit!

[pointsoflight]

2. Here's the scoop.

There are still many possibilities.

The lawsuit asked for an injunction. If granted, today's electoral votes could be set aside.

If the recount shows Kerry won, a new set of electoral votes could be case.

If fraud is proven, pretty much anything can happen, even a re-vote.

[renaissanceguy]

4. But if a recount shows Kerry won

and a new set of electors are placed....doesn't Congress have to approve those electors? How unlikely that would be.

[texpatriot2004]

5. Thanks pointsoflight that's what I thought...it's pretty wide open

The good news is there are several options on the table. It's kind of nerve wrecking but definitely much to be optimistic about.

[understandinglife]

13. Yes, and, as much as many folk who post here....

....so desperately are trying to obscure, the fact is we are a long, long way from knowing what will happen on 6 Jan 2005. Statements being made today by Mr Arnebeck, Mr Cobb and colleagues are extraordinary in their implications.

And, be sure to check the letter from Congressman Conyers and his colleagues:

http://www.buzzflash.com/alerts/04/12/ale04100.html

That letter was submitted before Congressman Conyers' "forum" had even begun, today.

Peace.

"When Did Bush Know?"

[SueZhope]

3. "We are not whining... we are litigating" -Cliff Arnebeck. n/t

[Kellis]

22. HA!

Love that Man.

[mostly_lurking]

6. Filing a lawsuit doesn't make the EC gathering illegal

That would take an injunction from the court (and that injuction must happen before the event).

[electropop]

10. Not illegal but invalid

The electoral vote can be invalidated even after the deed is done. Now, the events leading up to the vote seems to contain many illegalities, and probably a lot of people will end up in jail for those crimes.

[mostly_lurking]

14. I don't think so.

Again, anyone can file a lawsuit for any reason. Thousands are filed everyday and get absolutely nowhere. Unless a judge (with jurisdiction) decides to intervene, the lawsuit means absolutely nothing and has no force of law whatsoever.

I am not an expert on situations such as this, but I very much doubt that any court in Ohio has any jurisdiction in this matter any longer. The next step, if taken, would be to appeal for some sort of relief through the District Court. I do not know if any basis exists for such a request... we will see.

[electropop]

23. I was sloppy in my wording

Obviously, the mere filing of a suit has no effect on the legality or validity of anything. However, the discovery process which follows will bring to light many irregularities and probably enough information to convict some Repub felons. If the suit is successful, the court's ruling could invalidate the electoral vote after the fact.

[mostly_lurking]

25. I still doubt that any state court could undo a process

defined in the Constitution. I think the best you could hope for at this point is that Ohio may submit a second set of EC votes. It would be up to Congress to decide which set to accept.

If I'm not mistaken, this has actually happened before (2 sets of EC votes from the same state).

[texpatriot2004]

32. Thank you, that's what I understood too n/t

[weeve]

7. I hope you're right Tex !

I need a sliver of hope. Watching C-Span just now was perhaps one of the most depressing sights I've ever seen on TV. How about all those "jokes" about paper trails, etc. Really funny.

Will C-Span repeat the Conyers press conference ?

[jamboi]

9. I believe they will at 4:30 is what I heard. n/t

[righteous1]

8. My understanding is

that at this point the "courts" are out of it. The Judiciary cannot invalidate that which was done in accordance with state and federal law. The Ohio Supreme Court possibly could have stopped the vote but they did not. Once the electors have voted the only body that can effect change is the US Congress

[Wordie]

12. That's how I understood it too. I hope I am wrong. I wish there was more

accurate information available about what can or will happen from this point forward.

[Truman01]

16. You are right, it is effectively over.... nt

[Kellis]

21. ahhhh

Truman I always look to you for the true over all feeling of DU.Its always so right on the money!

[Truman01]

28. Thanks, look to me to not blow sunshine up your skirt....

with false reading of the law and fanciful theory. I hate to say I'm not going to rah rah the troops when I know it's over. Even in out best case we can not now end the Jan 20 coronation of *.

If you don't like that, then make me a bet. I'll take up to 10,000 on whether or not this is over.

I wish it were different but it isn't. Reality is ugly sometimes. Now is one of those times.

TC

[Kellis]

29. LOL

Good Ol' Truman!Never said a word on DU except "Its Over" or "Get Over it".

[Truman01]

30. It's that cyncial law crap, I look at things the way the are not...

the way I want them to be. Reality is reality regardless of your hopes and dreams.

TC

[Peace Patriot]

34. You would have told Paul Revere...

...just leave the horse in the barn, you nut! Can't fight the whole British Empire!...???

[Peace Patriot]

35. removed duplicate n/t

[weeve]

11. Blackwell now saying...

...we join with John Kerry , in not disputing/contesting the results of the Election, on C-Span right now ( talking w/ a reporter ). "No matter how many lawsuits...checks and balances...transparency..."

Kerry and Blackwell..together again.

[wildflower]

15. He can say that, but it doesn't carry any legal weight, I don't think.

Unless he is speaking under oath. And even then, he can't speak for Kerry; it's hearsay, isn't it?

[texpatriot2004]

17. He's taking liberty with Kerry's name. Kerry is obviously

taking actions. Blackwell is playing to the fact that Kerry has not to date "Unconceded." Blackwell is talking out his ass...again.

[WilliamPitt]

18. "Kerry and Blackwell..together again"

WTF does that mean?

[Senator]

19. Stop worrying so much about "deadlines" and legalisms.

Congress (as always) has the final word.

Even to the point that they can choose to provide for an acting president (yes, really) should they want to do so.

This is why we're so focussed on getting congress to face their own consciences:

www.thedeanpeople.org

.

[righteous1]

20. Yea, but for the life of me I can't understand why Arnebeck

waited so long to submit the suit. The Ohio Spreme Court could have acted to stop this thing had they the time to look at it

[Senator]

24. I have no inside info but...

...my guess is that they've been building and editing the case right up to the last.

There was some mention of Triad chicanery just on Friday. They may well have included it.

Mr. Curtis went public rather late in the game. Perhaps his information opened up new avenues even in Ohio.

Also, some of their earlier evidence may not have panned out well enough. Or was simply disinformation foisted on them.

As there is no "hard" deadline, more time to prepare makes for a stronger case.

--

[seito]

39. I agree n/t

[dweller]

44. perhaps in the big picture, they did not want

the Ohio Supreme Court to intervene.
:shrug:

not that i would expect much from Congress, but then who knows?
Kerry is a smart guy, he may have some 'political capital' yet to spend.

dp

[Truman01]

37. Congress has the last word on certifying the vote....

They wouldn't chose and "acting President" They would chose a President, and how do you think that would make us feel better?

TC

[Senator]

40. They might well...

...appoint an acting president if the bushkid in behind in public opinion polls and they need time to make a case for the popular vote trumping the electoral college.

This was a possible outcome in 2000 and they already had their media campaign in the can to take the WH that way.

[ntwkgirl]

26. Blackwell speaks after Electors convene

He was pretty much cornered. Here's what he said before going to sip on tea and cookies or whatever.

"No matter how much they protest...no matter how many law suits they file, I have the fullest of confidence in the integrity of our system, that is run by BOTH major parties, and is FULL of checks and balances, and has a transparency, a system that has a transparency to produce a result that Ohioans feel actually reflect their will."

He then talked for a couple seconds about the "divergence in assessments in what went right and what went wrong"

and then CSPAN cut him off (interview still in progress) big surprise.

Every Ohioan must hear what he said and stand up and speak out if they disagree.

New words you will hear when referring to Democrats (you heard it here first)

Divergence

Dissenter (that will be a big one because people will also associate it with hell)

Non-conformists (which really speaks volumes...we don't just go along..lah dee dah)

We should do a google and keep track of how many stories using these words are printed/aired/etc.

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. Only illegal if the court says that it is

I am far from convinced that the court will do that.

[texpatriot2004]

31. Hey, this got "flamed" how do you flame a thread and why?

[seito]

41. I t has to do with the number of responses in a tread n/t

[Amaryllis]

33. Anyone know how and when we get a transcript of Arnebeck suit, or any news

[formernaderite]

36. In the end...even if the lawsuit pushes forward...the congress...

which is still Republican would vote Bush in. I admire all of you for your faith, but the energy is misplaced.

[Senator]

38. Not necessarily

I know it's hard to imagine any Reps doing the right thing. But it's one thing to stand by while someone else is having their crony friends put a fix in that affords you plausible deniability (even to your own conscience).

It's quite another to stare down the barrel of 70% negative public opinion and become complicit with treason.

Remember the failed impeachment. The Reps in the Senate were beside themselves trying to ditch that tar baby. And this time it wouldn't just be 70% thinking they should Moveon. It would be 70% of the public thinking that there's treason afoot.

And they thought they had an image problem with Gingrich around.

[Quakerfriend]

42. Very well put, Senator!

;)

[KerryDownUnder]

43. I don't see how we stop a Bush win

Even if another set of electors is enpaneled and votes for Kerry I just don't see how they recall the ones that have already voted according to OH law. You could take the issue to the Supremes, but I doubt they would intercede because a) we already know their partisan leanings and b) there is already a mechanism for handling such an issue in the Constitution (the House votes on which to recognize).

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I have no faith in the Supremes or the Repugs in the House to do the right thing even if the results show Kerry winning. I don't want to sound resigned to this fate, but I just don't see where we get the leverage we need to win.