Joe Lieberman calls Florida legislature's decision to convene and nominate electors "partisan politics" . . . but . . .

[XMan]

He also indicated that there is currently no "Constitutional crisis" (The Leeb's words), but there would be as a result of what the legislature intends to do . . .

Article II, Section I, of a document you may have heard of called the US Constitution, states,

<< &quot;Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors... &quot; >>

. Hmm. Kind of sounds like the Legislature is only during their duty under the Constitution.

US Code states . . .

<< Whenever any State has held an election for the purpose of choosing electors, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, the electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such a manner as the legislature of such State may direct.&quot; >>

The day prescribed by law is November 7.

Boy, sure sounds like the legislature is merely following the rules of law and the Constitution. But I guess that means nothing when measured up against the supposed &quot;will of the people&quot;, right?

 

[XMan]

This of course should also mean that the Gore team's legal brief asking the Supreme Court to block the Florida Legislature's appointing of electors should last about as long as a piece of toilet paper in an inferno . . . .

David Boies is also being investigated for allegedly filing a false affidavit in the dimpled chad case before the Florida Supreme Court. The case he cited did not allow the counting of dimpled chad ballots in the manual recount, despite what he claimed in his affidavit.

Starting to look like this will be all over shortly. . .

 

[ride525]

<< David Boies is also being investigated for allegedly filing a false affidavit in the dimpled chad case before the Florida Supreme Court. >>

Oh really, where did you hear this? And EXACTLY what did he file that was so false?

Second, it's interesting to me that the Florida legislature is so ready to try and select electors. Don't they have until Dec 12?
Why not wait until some of this is sorted out?

 

[XMan]

<< And EXACTLY what did he file that was so false? >>



Uh . . . as I said, The case he cited did not allow the counting of dimpled chad ballots in the manual recount, despite what he claimed in his affidavit. Mr. Boies said in his affidavit to the Florida Supreme court that the court in Illinois allowed for ballots with dimpled chads to be counted in the hand recount. This is patently false.

Excuse me, perhaps my language was incorrect. The National Legal and Policy Center, has complained to the Florida bar association regarding Mr. Boies fraud.

Here's a bit of their complaint, which you can read in entirety here.



<< Amid the many legal matters in the State of Florida since November 7, 2000, regarding the 2000 Election, Respondent-Attorney Boies and Respondent-Attorney Berger, representing Vice President Albert A. Gore, reportedly offered an allegedly false affidavit in two separate trials. See Jan Crawford Greenburg &amp; Dan Mihalopoulos, ?Bush Turns Top U.S. Court; Republican Wants Florida?s Manual Recounts Stopped; Illinois Case Offers Shaky Precedent,? Chi. Trib., Nov. 23, 2000, at 1 (Exhibit B) [hereinafter ?Greenberg &amp; Mihalopoulos?]; see also Steve Miller, ?Gore Lawyer?s Ballot Affidavit was False,? Wash. Times, Nov. 25, 2000, at A4 (Exhibit C) [hereinafter ?Miller?]. The following excerpts from a November 23, 2000, Chicago Tribune article set forth the nature and the context of Respondent-Attorney Boies and Respondent-Attorney Berger?s conduct. >>

 

[ElFenix]

for the last 6 years if things have not gone the democrats way they scream the replublicans are &quot;playing partisan politics.&quot; why should it be different now?

 

[4824guy]

If the Republicans call the FL Supreme court judges (which try to interept the laws that are on the books)paritisan, and their ruling against Bush partisan, why can't the Democrates call the FL Legislature, which is controlled by Rep's partisan?

 

[ElFenix]

they can. the democrats just seem to have a longer history of it. notice how anything that breaks the party line is partisanship on the part of the other party?

 

[XMan]

I actually don't totally blame the Florida Supreme Court; they were presented bogus information as to a legal precedent. Had they had the straight story they most likely would have ruled differently.

 

[~zonker~]

Dimpled Chads my ass.... The correct way to vote is to punch out the chad. If a person can't figure that out, they didn't cast a vote. This whole argument is beyond sensible logic. If you observe the rest of the ballot in question, I would imagine that you would find all the other chads punched out in a manner a machine could count them. Let me take an SAT test and just put a small dot in the circle... yeah that sould count.

If a ballot is not cast in a reasonable manner, I would assume they chose to vote for no one for president, which is logical considering the alternatives.....

I agree about the legislature calling a session to select electors. THey have done nothing yet, and what they are working towards is fulfilling their responsibility. I love the new democratic seal.

 

[ride525]

Doesn't this allegedly false information just involve whether the Illinois court said to count dimples or not?

The Florida Supreme Court gave no direct instructions on whether or not to count dimples.

So saying their decision would have been different, is a bit of a stretch. A HUGE stretch....

 

[XMan]

I've heard that there is growing evidence that the dimpled chads may be a result of counting machine malfunction rather than voter error. Brian Williams on CNBC tried to simulate a dimpled chad and was unable to do it; the chads kept popping out. It would seem a lot of undecided voters didn't vote, had their intact chads dimpled, and then reviewed for &quot;intent.&quot;

 

[DefRef]

Another argument by the vote manufacturers is that if a voter voted the bottom of the ticket Democratic, then they OBVIOUSLY intended to vote for Gore. But, if you remember all the attention that the media was shoveling on the &quot;undecided&quot; voter before the election, isn't it possible that some people voted for their local dog catcher and representative, but when it came time to pick a President, they just couldn't stomach the thought of voting for either of these guys and called it a ballot? I'm sure they're watching Gore now and thinking, &quot;Whew. Sure glad I didn't vote for THAT loser.&quot;, totally unaware that if he gets his way, they WILL end up counted for him.

So much for listening to the voice of the people.

(Anyone heard about the ONE MILLION BALLOTS that WON'T be counted in California? It could give Bush the overall popular vote nationally and they're not going to count it. I thought every ballot was a human voice yearning to be heard. Guess Gore was lying about &quot;every vote being counted&quot;...)

 

[cxim]

nice ride.... you have been given links about this lie on several prior occasions...

memory short ? nonexistant ?

Somehow, I think it is neither... You just drink from the democrat trough of deception &amp; dishonesty...

 

[Futuramatic]

Just goes to show just how PARTISAN that court was. They did not even take the time to research the case that the democrats were usign to back their arguement. Why wouldn't they do that you ask? Cause they had already made their mind up. Hmmm....

The FL Legislature is starting this NOW so that they can act if for some reason the crap can't be concluded by Dec 12. As far as I know, Bush has won FL and that states legislature wants to make sure that he gets the electorals he deserves.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

cxim:

Hee hee . . . &quot;Democratic trough of deception and dishonesty,&quot; eh? What beverage is served in that trough? How does it compare to the &quot;Republican trough of partisan puffery and self-righteous pomposity,&quot; from which James Baker seems to drink deeply and often?

Seems like little Georgie &quot;Quayle Jr.&quot; Bush might benefit from a hearty quaff from the latter trough, to help overcome his tendency to hide behind the coattails of Daddy's lackeys when it comes to fighting his battles. You would think he could at least find his own political flacks, and it seems as though Baker et al cannot even be bothered to cut him in on what is going on in his own electoral battle (as witnessed by the fact that he publicly announced that GHWB's crony Cheney had not had a heart attack, after his own campaign was notified that he had). One hopes that at least after he takes office they will inform him via interoffice memos what his positions are on the issues.

 

[cxim]

future... no that was not it....The published case info does not go into detail about the chads... it looked like a good scam on the part of Boies... to get the real info one has to go to a different case, or to one of the attys involved or the trial judge.

There apparently was not a lot written about the technical details.

One also has to remember that Boies was involved in a similar democrat case in Mass a few years ago concerning chads... I think it would be interesting to see if that case was misrepresented in the Mass trial. I have not had any luck in getting details on that.

 

[ride525]

<< nice ride.... you have been given links about this lie on several prior occasions...

memory short ? nonexistant ?

Somehow, I think it is neither... You just drink from the democrat trough of deception &amp; dishonesty... >>



Can't you ever post anything nice......I haven't seen you EVER post anything about EXACTLY what the CITE is.....you've given some rough description....but never said EXACTLY what the GORE lawyers said that was a lie.....I'd like to see a quote from the testimony or transcript.....

If I'd ever seen you post it in the first place, of course I wouldn't have asked again...and again....

Can't you Republicans like you ever post any facts? Or do you just continue at the constant name calling that you never seem to give up on?

 

[cxim]

Tee Edw...
you must know that the crap you spout about The heart attack is just that... It takes 24 hrs to get the isoenzymes back.. often it takes 48 hrs to decide on a small MI. The medical decision about MI vrs non MI took 24 to 36 hrs....

Yes... you do remind me of a a little whanker...You are quite good at slurs of no substance, distortions &amp; partial truths. Which comes as little surprise to me.

Cross a lawyer with a democrat &amp; your face appears...

I call a liar a liar to his face.... straight up..

You don't like it ? quit lying...

Plus ride... I posted links to the Trib article several days ago in several threads as did several other folks...

I'll be nice as pie... quit with the distortions &amp; lies...

 

[XMan]

<< You would think he could at least find his own political flacks >>



Interesting . . . so what you're saying is, you'd rather have a President who staffs his cabinet with buddies of dubious qualification (Janet Reno, William Daley, Donna Shalala, Andrew Cuomo) than one who surrounds himself with qualified and astute personnel (Colin Powell, James Baker, Dick Cheney)?

Kind of a sad reflection on the state of the country, really.

 

[cxim]

ride... here is a repeat Of what I wrote earlier..

>>>Pullen vrs Milligan p 34 of the FL SC decision was represented to the Fl SC as a case supporting dimpled, bulging or pregnant chads in oral arguments by the democrats.

In fact that case did not allow dimples, marks or bulges, only strike thrus. dimpled chads were disallowed by the Illinois trial judge. It was not discussed by &amp; thus affirmed by the Il SC.

While the method of machine ballot marking was not directly addressed in the FlSC ruling, the citing of this case was taken as a go ahead by the Bore camp to push for the approval of dimpled chads in the Fl counties doing recounts.<<<

 

[ride525]

I saw the Trib article....I don't recall any cites about EXACTLY what he did or said that was a lie......I recall something about the Illinois case recommending that dimples not be counted, but the judge still ruling that some discretion be used to try and discern the votes when the machine could not read. But again, no direct CITES about what was ACTUALLY said by Gore's lawyers....j

The Florida Supreme Court NEVER ruled to count dimples, just to try and discern the votes where possible. The Court did NOT give specific rules about it, that's why Broward County and Palm Beach had apparently differing rules about what constituted a vote.

Let me know when I've EVER lied or used distortions......

 

[cxim]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/metro/chicago/ws/item/0,1308,46649-46819-48299,00.html

The link was posted 11/23 &amp; the quoted text 11/23 or 24

 

[XMan]

Linkified in case Ride is cut-and-paste impaired . . .

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

My, you have some temerity challenging my integrity, cxim. I would not have done so to you, and I regard myself as a person of the highest integrity. If you think partisanship is a bar to (or, in your case, a guarantee of) integrity, you have another think coming. Do you really think all Republicans tell the truth, and all Democrats lie? I assure you I do not think the converse, and if anything you seem to have my skills for glib criticism beaten, hands-down.

Cheney's heart attack was confirmed by physicians and reported within 16 hours (see, e.g., this article). I am not a doctor and do not know the state of the intel Bush had at his disposal on any firsthand basis. However, it was extensively noted in editorials (see this one, from the Washington Post) and news articles (e.g., this one, in the Chicago Tribune).

I was not attacking you personally, and I do not appreciate your personal attacks.

Xerox Man:

I am not excited by either of our rather unpalatable choices. Even as a Democrat, I would rather have seen John McCain elected, as I believe he is a person of integrity, whereas Gore and Bush are essentially political functionaries who will honor the polls and little else. But I take issue with the idea that James Baker is a person of character. All I recall of his dubious tenure as Secretary of State was the Iran-Contra affair, which I regard as a serious breach of ethics and the law. I am hoping GW turns out to be a decent president, but I am not encouraged by the fact that he is dusting off dinosaurs like Baker.

And, for another thing (whew!), I do regard Donna Shalala and Janet Reno as persons of great personal integrity and intelligence, regardless of their popularity. So there!

 

[ride525]

<< While the method of machine ballot marking was not directly addressed in the FlSC ruling, the citing of this case was taken as a go ahead by the Bore camp to push for the approval of dimpled chads in the Fl counties doing recounts.<<< >>



I'm not sure I agree yet until I see if Gore's lawyers exactly said that. Again, I'd like a CITE of what Gore's lawyers ACTUALLY said that was a lie. I've looked for it once, I'll look again.....

The Illinois case was cited as an example where a judge said if you have a ballot that the machine can NOT read, but you can see what the voter's intent was, then the vote should be counted. see page 34 here

The Illinois case cite in the decision doesn't mention whether a dimple should be counted or not. Apparently an Illinois judge thought that a dimple wasn't enough to be counted. but again, the CITE in the Illinois decision just says the ballot should be counted, if one can figure out from the punch how the voter voted.

I've looked at the Gore lawyers brief once, I'll look again... Let me know if you see anything about exactly where Gore's lawyers lied.