What's with all this "absolutely no evidence" bullshit....

[Webster Green]

There is plenty of evidence. Maybe no proof yet, but lots of circumstantial evidence.

Scott Peterson was convicted of murder on circumstantial evidence.

[darkism]

1. kick because it's so true

:kick:

[eaprez]

2. What else are they going to say?

There's plenty of evidence but too bad, so sad? If they admit the evidence then they are compelled to act - acting is not in their interest - so they have to dismiss the evidence.

[Vincardog]

3. It is the BIG LIE. Keep repeating it often enough and it will be accepted.

Aren't you tired of hearing it?

[MnFats]

4. Tommy DeLay and his conspirators MUST cling to that big lie.

they MUST sell that crap to hang on to their melting credibility.

somewhere there IS a smoking gun.

[Vincardog]

5. It is the BIG LIE. Keep repeating it often enough and it will be accepted.

Aren't you tired of hearing it?

[Mike Niendorff]

6. They're Republicans. They lie frequently and loudly.

Seriously: if they were honest people, they wouldn't be involved with that party. Seeing them lie their asses off is not only unsurprising, it is completely predictable. Don't sweat it.


MDN

[EFerrari]

7. Notice that Dreier blew it by repeating "sowing seeds of

discontent" over and over. The same dynamic applies. I hope he now goes on tv and repeats it a few more hundred times.

[euler]

8. You can't bring down a president on circumstantial evidence

[No Exit]

9. Direct evidence = eyewitness evidence....

... and arguably, some might say a confession/admission is direct evidence. ALL OTHER EVIDENCE IS CIRCUMSTANTIAL (including, incidentally, DNA evidence, for example.)

We can't see into the inside of computerized voting or counting machines: we can't "watch" a computer's insides at work.

Therefore, this matter is not susceptible to proof by direct evidence. Therefore, all evidence of it will be circumstantial.

Example: Scott Peterson was just convicted and sentenced to death on a case whose evidence was 100% circumstantial.

In the case at hand, there is plenty of evidence. We've been reading about it for 60+ days now!

[IndyOp]

10. You answered your own question - IT IS BULLSHIT. That's all. (n/t)

[myschkin]

11. kick

[E_Smith]

12. i agree there is evidence

but I don't understand why no democratic election board supervisors (i think thats what they are called) objected to the vote in any of the counties in Ohio. if the Democrats in Ohio supervising the election don't object how can we expect the Dems in congress to object? Are they purely trying to save their own asses or are they intimidated by Blackwell, why?

[scottxyz]

13. There is evidence

Conyers has a 101 page document on a web page.

It's going to be entered into the Congressional Record.

[dlaliberte]

14. "But Bush won anyway", according to Congressional democrats

While the Republicans claimed that the challengers were saying there was fraud, the Democrats seem to be (mostly) unified in saying only that there were many questions. The Democrats were politically prudent to not publically claim fraud without proof, although it strikes us as overly cautious given what we know. I also wish they didn't say so blatently that Bush won, but left that as an open question as well, due to the question of fraud.

The good thing for us is that when evidence is eventually exposed, and reported by the media, then the lie of the Republicans about the lack of evidence will be more obvious to the public.

[imenja]

15. in the post-modern world, evidence is only that which you agree with

or so it seems.

[Amaryllis]

16. See this letter Arnebeck wrote to congress yesterday telling them fraud

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=247010&mesg_id=247010

[Pacifist Patriot]

17. You didn't recognize that tactic?

Say it enough times and hope it becomes the truth.

[Old Mouse]

18. ABSOLUTELY!

Testimony IS evidence

[SammyWinstonJack]

19. Careful there!

You don't want to be labeled as a "whining asshole" now do you? :eyes: