Re: Election Fraud 2000

"False Document" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Strider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
>
> > On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 19:33:37 GMT, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > (Desertphile) wrote:
> >
> >>On 1 Dec 2003 17:33:04 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Steve) wrote:
> >>
> >>> You are afraid of Democracy. You would rather close your eyes
> >>> and pretend it's not happening. You have no argument against this
> >>> exposure. Do you benefit from the fraud? Maybe that's the answer.
> >>> Remember voter fraud works both ways.
> >>
> >>Some people, for whatever reasons, wish to ignore the fact that voting
> >>machines in Florida were tampered with during the year 2000 elections.
> >>After _The_Washington_Post_ published its findings, the Diebold memos
> >>were "hacked" and published widely across the internet. The memos show
> >>the company's bewilderment concerning how easily their machines were
> >>fooled into subtracting 16,022 votes from Gore in one precinct, and
> >>subtracting 5,000 votes from Gore in another. It is the job of Bush2-
> >>appointed law enforcement to investigate the voting fraud, so it is
> >>very unlikely anything will be done until Bush2 is out of the Oval
> >>Office and competent people take over.
> >>
> >>I've read that Diebold has dropped most of its law suits against the
> >>people who posted Diebold's memos. They will likely never find the
> >>person who hacked into their computers and stole the memos.
> >>
> >>> Stevel
> >
> > Q.: Why didn't Gore want to count all the ballots of the State?
> >
> First of all, he did. During the contest phase, you can only request full
> state-wide recounts. So PZZZZT! Just another right-wing lie.

I sorry, but it is a "right-wing" truth. If you read Gore's complaint filed
on 11/27/2000, under Fla. Code 102.168, contest of the election, you will
see that he only ask for a few counties to be recounted. Link to it at:
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/election/CV-00-2808a.pdf

Further, Gore's attorneys argued before the FSC that he was NOT required to
ask for a full recount, even though two lower courts said that he was.

Judge Sauls wrote (discussing Fladell vs. Palm Beach County Canvassing
Board) in Gore vs. Harris (12/03/2000)

"......Section 102.168 provides in Subsection(1) that the certification of
elections may be contested for presidential elections. Section 103.011
provides that, "The Department of State shall certify as elected the
presidential electors of the candidates for President and Vice President who
receive the highest number of votes." There is in this type of election, one
statewide election, and one certification. Palm Beach County did not elect
any person as a presidential elector, but, rather, the election with the
winner-take-all proposition, dependent on the statewide vote."

In this case, Gore went into court asking for the judge to order a partial
recount of ballots in counties that ONLY favored himself. Instead that Judge
said that Gore did not prove that a recount would change the outcome.
Further, he told Gore that under Florida code, he was required to ask of a
recount on a statewide basis.

Link to it at:  Link:
http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/election/00-2431_transcript.pdf

In the hearing before the FSC on 12/7/2000, i.e. the appeal of Judge Sauls
ruling, Boies argued that Judge Sauls had made an ERROR when he said that a
recount would have to be STATEWIDE.

"Boies: It is, Your Honor, but here the court expressly based its conclusion
on three errors of law:

"First, that you have to do a statewide recount, which we think there is no
support for it in this or any other state."

"Second, that under one 168, it's an abuse of the discretion standard.
Again, we don't think there's any case that says, in terms of what a ballot
means, whether a ballot does or does not reflect the voter's intent, that is
something that, in the judicial proceeding of a contest, discretion resides
in the canvassing board."

"And third, that in order to even look at the ballots, which are already
admitted into evidence in the case, you have to show a reasonable
probability that you will change the election, before you even look at the
ballots. And again, we think that is inconsistent, first, with the standard
in 168, which says "or place in doubt," and is inconsistent with the way a
trial goes, which is that you look at the evidence before you reach that
conclusion."

Boies is saying that all the voters need NOT BE HEARD. He says the is no
legal support for a statewide recount. Yet, this was a challenge to the
certification of a statewide vote.

Link to it at:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections/courttext120700.ht
m

In Gore vs. Harris, Florida Supreme Court, 12/8/2000....."Appellees contend
that even if a count of the undervotes in Miami-Dade were appropriate,
section 102.168, Florida Statute (2000), require a count of all votes in
Miami-Dade County and the entire state as opposed to a selected number of
votes challenged. However, the plain language of section 102.168 refutes
Appellees' argument."

The Appellees in this case was Katherine Harris. Her argument to the court
was that if you are going to order a recount, it should be of the entire
state. But of course that is not what Gore wanted.

Link to Gore vs. Harris http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/election/OP-SC00-2431.pdf

> Secondly, during the protest phase you are not obligated to request
> state-wide recounts. You can pick and choose which counties you
> want recounted. Guess what? Bush did the same thing. He picked
> 4 counties and those 4  counties conducted recounts. So what do we
> conclude about your level of  intelligence and awareness?

Which counties were they?


>
> --
> "Anybody who wants to harm American troops will be found and brought to
> justice. There are some that feel like if they attack us that we may
> decide to leave prematurely. They don't understand what they are talking
> about if that is the case. Let me finish. There are some who feel like
> the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is,
> bring 'em on."
>
>    - George WMD Bush, July 2, 2003
>
> And they did. Impeach Bush NOW!!! Before more young kids die.