So Fraud Must Be Proven Before It 's Investigated By Congress?

[KittyWampus]

Conyers doesn't have subpeona power. It'd take a Congressional Committe to get that.

How is Conyers or Election Activists supposed to have incontrovertible proof of fraud if they haven't got the power to collect all the necessary evidence and information.

Are you supposed to be able to prove a criminal is guilty before investigating a crime?

There already is proof of criminal activity by the GOP before, during and after the election.

[Straight Shooter]

1. That's like asking a woman to have her baby to prove she's pregnant.

They can't see what's developing right before their eyes. Congress gives democracy a bad name.

[IndyPriest]

2. It's going to be VERY interesting to see what Conyers

drops in the laps of the Senators next week! What a court needs for "proof" and what the Senators and the public will understand is "proof" may be different!

[Quakerfriend]

3. You said it perfectly, Indy!

Conyers seems very certain of his proof, that's for sure!

[Nothing Without Hope]

4. Catch-22, 21st century Murkin-style

Corollary: there must be widely publicized, preferably televised in 5 minutes or less, incontrovertible proof of election fraud, vouched for by all major Republican political figures, before the possibility can be mentioned at all.

[KerryReallyWon]

5. The GAO is doing its own investigation...

They are there for that.

[The Backlash Cometh]

6. Think very hard about the Clinton Witchhunts. The Repubs are stacking

the deck to avoid the same thing from happening to them. The more they close the door, the more they open the window for civil disobedience. Just a matter of time for some computer geek to figure out how to bug them and put on their conspiracies on live t.v.

[KittyWampus]

7. Now THAT Would Be 'Must See TV'

:D