Does anyone know where Arenbeck stands in this?

[Imagevision]

Ok so The Republicans did what we expected --

Question I have is where does Arenbeck stand in this? -- can we expect something from his efforts?

[corbett]

1. That's The Seminal Question

For my part, I believe him to be a fighter. Few attorneys who do the kind of pro bono and reduced-fee work that he does are quitters. The evidence of Florida, Ohio, Nevada, New Mexico and South Dakota fraud are overwhelming and more than enough to put Kerry in the White House. At this juncture, what needs to happen is for the inauguration to be stayed. That's asking a lot but it's possible. Keep your fingers crossed!

[emlev]

2. I'd like to know, too

and it's "Arnebeck," not "Arenbeck," FYI.

[IndyPriest]

3. Corbett, you rascal: do you have info that something's up??

[corbett]

5. 2 Two Hunches Rolled Into 1

The first one is that, given how vociferous Kerry was during the campaign that every vote would count and that every vote would be counted, there's no way he can leave this lying out there. The Conyers report alone is proof enough for any level-headed person.

The second is that we're starting to hear about Kerry's wide-net request to his colleagues not to contest the election.

http://www.redefeatbush.com/modules.php?name=News&new_topic=6

That smells like another tactic to me (he knew that he didn't have the votes so why attract undue attention to his real plan).

Now, I've believed that he has a political bomb up his sleeve since before his trip to the Middle East. However, his actions there only have added to my belief. He has met with several of the foreign leaders whom he hinted during the campaign wanted him to win and his rhetoric while visiting our heroic troops has been very, very similar to his stump speeches and addresses during the campaign. He hasn't downshifted on bit!

Add to that the fact that Kerry already has seen what the second term has in store (Gonzales nomination, weakening of Endangered Species Act, privatization of Social Security, further cuts in Pell Grants, drilling in ANWR, elimination of all Pentagon environmental rules, wholesale housecleaning at CIA under Goss) and I refuse to believe that he's doing anything other than pulling off an expert game of opossum right now.

As a prosecutor, he took on tough opponents. He helped reshape a languishing office and scored a big promotion in record time. John Kerry is the real deal and too much of a patriot to allow this travesty to go unanswered. He has until January 20th to pull a rabbit out of his hat and I believe that he can do it!

[bemis12]

6. Re the Secret Plan

Insomuch as a Plan may be no more than conceding an election, then making continual statements that "I lost", while doing nothing, there could indeed be a Plan.

There was a time where the courts could have intervened and stopped the Bush 2nd term from occurring. That date ended on December 13, when the electoral college voted.

There was a time when the legislature could have intervened and stopped the Bush 2nd term from occurring. That date ended on January 6, when both houses accepted the electoral votes, as cast.

There is now no procedure available to prevent Bush from being inaugurated on January 20. The courts don't have that power, it cannot be "stayed". The only remaining method is impeachment, and under the most optimistic of scenarios, that can't happen before January 20.

Running from reality does not change reality.

[corbett]

8. Fleeing Nothing But Fraud

Your facts are correct except for one oversight: no Supreme Court justice will swear in a man up on felony charges. The shrub is named personally in the Ohio lawsuits. All we need to do is move them far enough along to delay the inauguration by showing his direct connection to the fraud. It's a long shot but the evidence is overwhelming. As soon as we delay it, there will be time to expose the evidence to the world.

[bemis12]

9. Sure they will

It's their duty to do so, and they'll do it.

[nmoliver]

10. NO Supreme Court justice?

People like Rehnquist and Scalia are capable of anything. They are beyond the rule of law.

No law-abiding Supreme Court justice would accept bribes from a plaintiff 3 weeks before a case comes up, but that didn't stop the duck hunt, it didn't create a recusal, and it didn't change who Scalia voted for.

No law-abiding Supreme Court justice, for that matter, would have sided with * in * v. Gore, or even allowed Cheney to run on *'s ticket when they were both inhabitants of Texas.

So what?

[corbett]

11. That Was Uncharted Territory

The 2000 vote of 5-4 in the Supreme Court was uncharted territory for the nation. Not enough of the general populace knew of the illegality of Scalia's vote because it was rather obscure. The duck hunt happened because KKKarl already had a stranglehold on the MSM. The difference in this case is that if the Ohio lawsuits move forward and the shrub is indicted, the MSM will have no choice but to cover it and even the most apathetic voter can understand the concept of stuffing the ballot box.

[Amaryllis]

4. See his letter from Jan. 6. Kerry's statement about not enough

evidence to change outcome may have taken the teeth out of moving his suit? Any of you lawyers have an opinion?

http://www.freepress.org/departments/display/19/2005/1068

[eowyn_of_rohan]

12. I think the key word is EVIDENCE

He knew criminal fraud had occured but didn't believe they could find the rock-solid evidence needed to un-do the election in time for the inauguration.

[GetTheRightVote]

7. Kerry sucks, more on from this loser now,

:mad: