Could this be Y DEMS who spoke in support of BOXER then voted "NO"

[KatieB]

Because the Constitution requires them to base their decision only on the evidence at hand...read Byrd's remarks from Congressional Record below...

www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=203&topic_id=264489#264622

BYRD:...There are several groups and organizations that are investigating the reported irregularities in the Ohio election. That is important work and it should and will continue. When the investigations conclude, should there be solid evidence of criminal activity, those responsible should be prosecuted, no matter how high that responsibility may reach. But the Senate should not prejudge the results of those investigations.

I applaud the efforts of the Senator from California, Mrs. Boxer, and the Congressional Black Caucus to defend the integrity of the electoral process. But the question before us today is whether we uphold the objection to the certification of Ohio's electors in the count of the electoral vote. The Senate must vote, based on the information available to us at this moment, and absent the clear conclusions of the ongoing investigations into reported irregularities in Ohio, I shall vote to allow the electoral count to proceed

[Pacifist Patriot]

1. Possibly

I do so looovveee this sentence.


When the investigations conclude, should there be solid evidence of criminal activity, those responsible should be prosecuted, no matter how high that responsibility may reach.

[PROGRESSIVE1]

3. Byrd is a genious! He left that great big loop hole open for us!

[Eye_on_prize]

24. Yes. "ongoing investigations" operative phrase. Conyers made this point..

..at every opportunity during press conference too. Byrd is just reinforcing and highlighting this very embarrassing (to Rethugs) reality.

[k8conant]

32. He simply recognizes the loopholes we already know about n/t

[lancdem]

11. That is a great sentence

[FreepFryer]

2. Precisely! I'm glad I asked him to 'exercise his own judgment' re Conyers.

And he did just that.

[Child_Of_Isis]

4. But didn't Boxer vote yes?

[SnoopDog]

9. Boxer indeed voted yes - she signed on with...

Tubbs-Jones. It would have been disastrous for her not to vote yes. It would have given the regressives (repubs) more ammunition to come back at us with.

[Child_Of_Isis]

13. Well, if she could vote yes, then so could the others.

Am I right?

[mzmolly]

30. No, your wrong. Senator Boxer knew what she was doing, she suggested

that we not get hung up on how many Yea/Nay votes. She knew she was taking a stand that others could not take at this time.

[Child_Of_Isis]

37. What would be the reason?

Do they fear for their lives, or their careers or something?

[mzmolly]

41. They fear trying to usurp democracy and the will of the people.

They fear doing the very thing we accuse Republicans of doing.

Senator Byrd stated the case rather well if you read his words above.

[Child_Of_Isis]

44. Well, this makes sense...

(They fear trying to usurp democracy and the will of the people) if one believes in voting irregularities but not fraud. See, I believe that it was right out fraud and that Kerry won the election. And if so, Kerry being President would be the will of the people. Voting for shrubs certification seems to counter that.

[mzmolly]

46. I see your point. But as Senator Byrd stated they had to act on the info

they had that day.

:hi:

[SnoopDog]

31. You are right... I felt let down. Although there are behind..

the scenes political dealings, this would have sent a clear message.

Jeez - the regressives control all branches of government - they are walking all over the Dems in Congress.

I really feel that it will be up to 'we the people' to take back America.

[spooked911]

5. Yes-- that makes sense. Thank you.

[buddysmellgood]

6. That's fine, but there is plenty of evidence now.

I think the vote has more to do with honoring deals cut with repuklicans.

[stpalm]

7. Ah, Mr. Byrd

He is such a dixiecrat...

[Career Prole]

12. Senator Byrd has more democratic fire in him

than the rest of 'em lumped together.

[Petrushka]

16. Byrd --- "...is such a dixiecrat..."? ? ? Thanks for the chuckle . . .

. . . goes to show that some folks really don't know much about WEST (by gawd!) Virginia. I mean: The landmass known as "West Virginia" hasn't been situate in Dixie since 1835!

:spank:

[stpalm]

18. I knew that.

AP US History- you learn a lot. West Virginia's break away from Virginia wasn't even contitutional...

Dixiecrat is a term I use to describe certain southern democratics... particularly ones who were in the KKK *coughcough*

[Career Prole]

35. He's renounced it, denounced it, and has

more than redeemed himself.
Anyone who knows "democratics" knows that.
*coughcough*

[Petrushka]

39. Yep! Some of today's oldsters were dumb shits when . . .

. . . they were 18 years old---including Byrd.

We knew that, too! Right?

Edited to add that I wonder why ya di'n't notice the incorrect year (1835) for you-know-what!? ;)

[stpalm]

47. so I made a spelling error. so what? people are mean (reply to prole, too)

And I noticed the year was wrong, but I didn't want to be flamed in this sometimes HOSTILE environment for correcting a more senior member of the boards. I want to tread lightly, I certainly don't feel welcome here right now.

[Petrushka]

48. Welcome to DU, stpalm, from a [cough-cough]"...more senior member...."

:hi:

[stpalm]

49. people seem high strung here

but thanks! I am glad to be here

:hi:

[Career Prole]

57. Substituting an adjective for a noun isn't a spelling mistake.

"Dixiecrat is a term I use to describe certain southern democratics... particularly ones who were in the KKK *coughcough*"

Republicans may belong to the Republican party, but Democrats belong to the Democratic party. See the difference? Subtle, yet important.

Perhaps when you've been one longer you'll get the hang of it, and you'll also discover that the Byrd/KKK thing is a typically invalid right-wing talking point.

Zell Miller is a dixiecrat. Senator Byrd is a capital "D" Democrat.

Welcome to DU!

[LoZoccolo]

8. NO! NO! YOU DENY THE DLC'S ROLE IN ONE PARTY RULE

YOU provide this EXCUSE for the right wing COUP of power in this country, and DENY that there was DENIAL by the senators of Roves role in putting the votes in from a computer in the white house

OPEN YORU EYES FOR A CHANGE

_{NOTE: This post is sarcastic.}

[lancdem]

10. LOL

You had me going there for a minute.

[Helga Scow Stern]

14. Did Byrd speak? Or just submit this to the record? n/t

[nmoliver]

15. It's reasoned, but deeply flawed

It's reasoned, but deeply flawed. We need to explain to the senators that the Republicans had no trouble stalling the investigations, the recount, the court case, et al., until after certification. This means that fraud can be proved eventually, but the beneficiaries of the fraud cannot be blocked from assuming power. All they need to do is stall for time. This is their expertise, of course.

And, after the investigation, if fraud is proved, so what? You can hear them saying: "Sticks and stones will break my bones ..."

[Carolab]

17. Yes, and this is why Mark Dayton didn't object either

They are afraid of setting a dangerous precedent of overturning an election based on anything less than an indisputable body of evidence.

[katinmn]

19. that is interesting

and would help explain Mark's vote.

I was rather confused by what he said yesterday.

[loudsue]

20. Dayton sounded like someone I would like to see replaced

with a progressive person. He sounded like a bush asskisser in his speech, and I didn't think much of it.

If he wanted to back off the Boxer Rebellion, he could have done it more like Byrd did.

...but that's just me....

:kick:

[katinmn]

22. he came out HARD on the admin on Iraq today

Dayton says Congress is being deceived
Military's upbeat reports on Iraq don't match reality, senator says
BY TOM WEBB
Washington Correspondent

WASHINGTON — A week after returning from Iraq, U.S. Sen. Mark Dayton, D-Minn., is angry at being presented with what he calls deliberate misinformation about the military situation there.

"It's just disgraceful that they're intentionally and repeatedly misinforming members of Congress about the facts and the truth there," Dayton said Thursday.

On his recent visit to Iraq, Dayton was told that U.S. forces have trained some 9,500 Iraqi Army troops. Dayton considers that "an indefensibly poor outcome for all this money and all this effort," he told Congressional Quarterly.

Dayton said he was given a far sunnier estimate of Iraqi troop strength at a classified hearing Wednesday, which bore little resemblance to what he heard in Iraq. In addition, Dayton said he was given an upbeat assessment of the situation in post-war Fallujah, which also differed from what he'd heard in Iraq.

--more--
http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/news/politics/10584960.htm

[nmoliver]

23. PRECEDENTS?

I suspect that from now on the Republicans will challenge any election they don't win - should we actually get past the electronic vote rigging and the fraud, and really win one.

With their support in Congress, they will be able to stop any Democrat from taking power that way.

I don't think the caution of Byrd, Dayton or the others will matter one bit.

[Carolab]

36. Not if there are clean elections

They were only able to object and force the debate because of the suppression and strong indications of fraud.

[rumpel]

21. That is also what Schumer commented, as I posted yesterday

[ClarkUSA]

27. Too bad other Democrats like Dayton and Durbin didn't applaud...

our efforts nor the efforts of their colleagues who did step forward.

In fact, I wanted to slap Dayton and Durbin for tsk-tsking their colleagues efforts
to bring the discussion to the floor of Congress.

Byrd's comments are classier and not one hint of a scold there.

[ClarkUSA]

28. IMO, it's a CYA statement

Whatever <shrug>...I am disappointed in Bryd. He sure as heck didn't have evidence when he accused the Bush administration of all manner of things prior to this. Byrd and Ted Kennedy are all talk, no action.

[shawcomm]

25. It's bullshit

The time for action has come and past. As someone reminded me yesterday, it will take the House to impeach the SOB and do you think a repug house will do it? Hell no. We're stuck because only a few people, including only one senator, had the balls to act.

These others were just trying to jerk us around to keep their public images intact. Whatever investigations go on, it won't amount to removal of the POS boy king. "However high up" my ass...

[nashville_brook]

26. holy crap -- that's the whole transcript... i've been looking for that!

[mzmolly]

29. Yes. This is EXACTLY why.

Thanks for posting this. :hi:

[Stephanie]

42. I agree

The door is still open, and no Dem can get slammed for what they said.

[k8conant]

33. The Constitution says nothing at all about "the evidence at hand"...

that's just what Byrd and others felt. And we disagree with.

[bush_is_wacko]

34. Yes, I caught this statement. That is why I'm still open to

DU's wonderful and insightful investigations. Many of them are NOT conspiracy theories. I heard MANY DU comments in the words of our Senators and Representatives. I also believe the thugs had plenty of advanced warning of yesterday's events and quite frankly think it had some bearing on their ethics rule changes. I don't think THAT is a conspiracy theory. They are running a little scared right now. I noticed an awful lot of them did not show their faces yesterday. It was quite conspicuous in the Senate.

[peacetalksforall]

38. Yes and No. Re ethics; re running scared....

Rethugs made it sound as though they had second thoughts about the ethics rule reversal and had found god and that DeLie would not be protected, but from what I heard yesterday, they have now come up with something more sinister - sorry, can't quote it because I didn't fully hear it all or understand what I heard, because I was too upset about the electoral vote.

Running scared? I don't think anything scares them because they have inhuman qualities and determination. They lack conscious. They have no emotional make-up other than getcha, gotcha, revenge, betrayal layered over me-to greed and a love of lies, theft, and control.

Public relations? See how many lies you can get away with. Accuse, ridicule, stampede, and let a marionette play cowboy-dim.

[bush_is_wacko]

52. I heard the ethics rule changes

They proposed that if a majority didn't vote to indict the accusing party would have 45 days to either indict or drop it. That is very sneaky. What they have done is make it impossible to disclose to the public any investigations until they have investigated to the fullest extent and come up with the smoking gun. Furthermore they are going to have a real hard time investigating someone (and that includes Blackwell, Rove, Cheney, Bush, etc.) without access to the funds that would be made available to them if they did announce their intentions to indict. It is a sticky mess. the Thugs thought they were mucking up the issue enough that the public couldn't understand it's implications. From what I can tell the minute Conyers calls for an investigation the clock starts ticking for them to come up wit the smoking gun. That is why the thugs started harping on about conspiracy theories and bad mouthing everyone that had the nerve to speak up.

The fact that all these Senators and Reps were willing to stand up yesterday tells me they either think they have enough to find the smoking gun, HAVE the smoking gun, or just thought they'd rattle a few thugs into submission over something more important. The Thugs are scared and I think they ought to be.

I am trying to make this explanation as simple as possible, I'm sure I've missed a few nuances here and there but I think my interpretation is fairly accurate.

[kitkat65]

54. It also makes me wonder about the timing of recent news stories

regarding Clinton (campaign fund raising) and Conyers (uh, Turkeygate?). Seems like the startup of a smear campaign to me to discredit their intentions. I'm not worried though.

[bush_is_wacko]

56. I agree

and that is something Grassroots is uniquely qualified to counteract. We need to use the list of the Rethuglican "crazies" that stood up and told the nation it believes it's constituents are nutcases. Those speeches SHOULD be powerful ammunition to use against them. It was clear to me that they all got together in advance to smear "We the People" and those in the White House that are trying to represent us.

[KatieB]

64. So it sounds like the Delay indictment effected Thursday event

because both are linked to investigations?

[bush_is_wacko]

Yeah, that's the way I see it

I could be wrong but the Dem's know they have to tread lightly here, with those new ethics rules they are screwed unless they have THE smoking gun. Proof that NO judge or political spin master could deny. That is a very hard call to make.

[bush_is_wacko]

69. Yeah, that's the way I see it

I could be wrong but the Dem's know they have to tread lightly here, with those new ethics rules they are screwed unless they have THE smoking gun. Proof that NO judge or political spin master could deny. That is a very hard call to make.

Sorry about the double post please delete

[sunnystarr]

65. I just wanted to add that with 3 Dem and 3 Repug members on the

Ethics Committee getting a majority anytime at all would be next to impossible. Which protects them from any investigation. Plus, in the old rules after 45 days it was an automatic investigation, now it can just fade away into obscurity. So in essence, in a highly charged partisan arena, the Ethics Committee has castrated itself from any viabilty.

[kitkat65]

51. Of course, they had warning. Half of them were reading their replies.

I hope the dems of some brilliant smoking gun over the reps heads that keeps them from totally detroying the checks and balances system

[bush_is_wacko]

53. See post # 52 (? above)

I think they may have something. The ethics rule changes gave them 45 days to bring it forward. I have not seen anyone else interpret the ruling this way, but this is what I got from that ruling. The fact that there were Senators willing to speak publicly about this makes me think they are pretty close to finding that smoking gun.

[Philly Buster]

67. No one is running scared

They don't have to. The election is settled and there isn't a thing anyone can do about it. It's time to work toward the '06 elections, especially the Senate.

[Straight Shooter]

40. "But the Senate should not prejudge the results of those investigations."

Which of course means the results could land on either side of the scales, honest or dishonest.

"... absent the clear conclusions of the ongoing investigations into reported irregularities in Ohio, I shall vote to allow the electoral count to proceed."

I interpret this to mean the evidence is still being weighed, and the final verdict will be returned when all the evidence and conclusions from the investigations are in. This is a clear signal that fraud is not being ruled out, nor have attempts at tampering or manipulation of the vote been ruled out either.

Don't look back, bush, something's gaining.

[davidgmills]

43. What Byrd should realize is that proof of fraud

Is way beyond what the courts are capable of. What if there was fraud in every precinct of the Country? Could the courts handle this?

[Bill MI]

45. Don't get mad, get LOUD!!!

We need to flood the Judiciary Repuglicans with e-mails, letters, and phone calls in order to get them to understand how important this is. They MUST hold FULL investigations with subpeona powers.

<http://judiciary.house.gov/contact.aspx>

The idiots have megaphones, but we have numbers!

The Senate Democrats were cowed, this time by their constituents, into doing what they should have done in 2000. We can't stop now. The Fight has only begun!

[Democrat Dragon]

50. But...

What about the CALL for an investigation? What about the guys tampering with the recount?

[BamaBecky]

62. Good Point! eom

[Ira]

55. Republican votes

The thing that was of most interest to me about the vote in both the Senate and the House was the number of Republicans who abstained and were unwilling to record a vote against the Ohio vote challenge. Based on the Republican speakers in the debate, you would think that all of the Republicans would have jumped on the bandwagon to record their loyalty vote for Bush, but that did not happen. They may be afraid that today's election fraud smoke may actually break out into a firestorm of criminal actions, and they wish to avoid the negative fallout with their own electorate.

[bush_is_wacko]

70. It was clear that MANY Republicans and Dem's wanted to steer

away from this at all costs. There was even mention of this the day before the vote. I think it was C-span that mentioned this.

[Last Lemming]

58. Another point

the Repubs had canned speeches--they knew what they would need to give a speech--but they went way over the top defending Bush against centralized vote snatching via modem and computer etc--the Dems said nothing about that--in fact--they didn't say much at all--you'd think if the Repugs had better info they would have known they didn't have to go all out as they did-

Maybe they don't know what the Dems know

[ClintCooper2003]

59. Also, lots of Dems didn't even vote. Boxer's effort was defeated by only

77 to 1. That means 22 Senators didn't vote on the matter, right?

[KatieB]

60. I think we need to help push these investigations and also

support those senators (I think I counted at least 4 separate comments) who will be introducing legislation to FIX these so called "weaknesses" in the system.

[Dancing_Dave]

61. But there is plenty of evidence about Ohio already...

For instance, look at all the evidence posted on this great site done by a New York lawyer who was in Ohio to monitor the election and immediately smelled a fish:
http://fairnessbybeckerman.blogspot.com

Obviously, Senator Byrd was trying to keep a door open, while going along with the Republican majority in Congress at this point when we couldn't possibly win the vote.

A number of Senators must have agreed on this tactic. Only one Senator was needed to open the discussion, and Barbara Boxer bravely volunteered to do it!

:loveya:

[KatieB]

63. Fantastic compilation - thank you-wonder what standard of evidence was for

Byrd?

[GetTheRightVote]

66. looking for excuse for them now, oh please they are weak spineless

and will no longer represent me or waste my vote.
I will no long give them excuses for abusing me.

:mad:

I am Green all over now because they had my back.

[myschkin]

68. kick!