Autorank: The Strange Case Of The Psychic Speaker & The Contested Election

[althecat]

From: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0608/S00316.htm

Speaker of the House Nullified
San Diego Congressional Race

By Michael Collins
“Scoop” Independent Media
Washington, DC


It appears the US media overlooked one of the great political stories of the year. In what is becoming something of a pattern, here’s a brief chronology:

On June 6, 2006 Republican Brian Bilbray allegedly slightly outpolled Democrat Francine Busby in the special election for California’s 50th Congressional District, despite Busby’s lead in the polls going into the election. There were immediate cries of foul following the election due to major irregularities, including electronic voting machines sent out to the homes and cars of volunteers for up to 12 days prior to the election, and irregular election results like huge mega-precincts of absentee ballots where turnout was thousands of percent more than registered voters.

On June 13, 2006, Bilbray flew to Washington, DC and was sworn in as a member of the United States House of Representatives by House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

On or about June 30, 2006, 17 days after Bilbray was sworn in as a member of the House, Mikel Haas, Registrar of San Diego County, officially completed the audit of election results required for certification, and officially certified the election of Bilbray over Busby based on 163,931 votes cast, of which 2,053 votes were said to be cast on Diebold TSX touchscreens, and the remainder scanned via Diebold Accuvote OS computers.

On July 31, 2006, the Contestants filed an election contest, seeking a hand recount and to invalidate the election on several grounds, not only including the affirmative evidence of irregular results, but also including the stonewalling of citizen information requests and the pricing of recounts at an estimated $150,000 that made it difficult or impossible for any citizen to tell who won the election.

On August 22, 2006 the defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that the swearing in of Bilbray deprives everyone else of jurisdiction including specifically the San Diego Superior Court because Art. I, sec. 5 of the US Constitution has been held to mean that the House and Senate are the judges of the Qualifications of their Members, one of those qualifications is supposed to be “election.”

There is some thing very wrong with this sequence. Elections are not complete, anywhere, until they are officially certified by local authorities. How can a citizen get sworn in as a member of the House of Representatives before his or her election is certified? Only Speaker Dennis Hastert, his team, and Bilbray have the answer.

In a filling in San Diego Municipal Court yesterday, attorney Paul Lehto outlined the core in stark terms:

Defendants are in effect arguing for the remarkable proposition that unilateral self-serving actions by a majority party in the House of Representatives to shuttle in a member of the same party can be effective, even if those actions do violence to and amount to circumvention of other sections of the US Constitution as well as the California constitution. Document available here.

Lehto is one of the two attorneys representing citizens who are challenging the election. Shortly after the last vote was cast, citizens discovered disturbing facts. Prior to Election Day, several poll workers had taken home voting machines for periods of a day to a week at a time without supervision or even consistent tracking procedures. Other irregularities like vote switching on touch screen machines emerged. Brad Friedman of www.BradBlog.com conducted an extensive investigation that uncovered a series of sloppy procedures by County Registrar Haas.

The election became an immediate cause for citizens, supporters of the losing candidate, and national voting rights activists. The results were also challenged by Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

A suit was filed by two local citizens challenging the election. The initial filing relied on the right of citizens to know that their votes are and counted correctly in order to assure that the candidate designated as the winner is in fact the winner. Part of the suit is a request, denied to date, for a recount of the ballots cast on Election Day.

In response to the suit, the County of San Diego filed a response questioning the authority of the local court to decide the case since (a) membership in the house was the province of the House of Representatives and (b) the speaker had already sworn in Bilbray.

Lehto and Simpkins filed a withering response to this argument. They point out that elections are the province of local and state authorities for all elections including federal contests, unless otherwise specified in the constitution. The following is form the filing yesterday:

Clearly, the swift swearing in did not end the election in the 50th Congressional District, and it did not render everything, including the certification of results weeks later, nugatory and without “jurisdiction.” If this swearing in had this effect, then in the course of dismissing this case the Court would be bound to conclude that the certification of the results after the swearing in of Bilbray was without force and effect, without jurisdiction, and in contravention of principles of federalism, as Defendants argue. That conclusion, however, requires either an absurdity, or the conclusion that our Congressional election was canceled by decision of the Speaker of the House, before all the votes were fully counted, and well before certification. Document available here.

So there you have it. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the United House of Representatives, called “the peoples’ House,” now has the authority to nullify elections simply by swearing in candidates and claiming federal privilege based on one narrow section of the constitution, while completing ignoring the others, including the one stating that members of the House shall be elected every two years “by the People,” and not selected in Washington DC. Once again, the country is faced with a Bush v. Gore style selection manufactured in Washington DC, and if only the people did not know which party benefited and which party was hurt by the selection, the country would be unanimous in denouncing this power grab.

Ongoing support and interference by the House of Representatives or persons associated therewith continues in San Diego. Paul Vinovich, Counsel to the House Administration Committee, Chaired by Bob Ney, R, of Ohio, had a letter delivered to San Diego Superior Court presiding Judge Yuri Hoffman, with a number of arguments in favor of the Judge dismissing the case. This type of communication with members of the judiciary, particularly when another government authority is involved, is covered by strict rules. One such rule is that the ex parte communication be provided simultaneously to counsel for all involved. In his own hand, Vinovich says to plaintiff’s attorney Lehto, “Letter delivered to court last evening.” Lehto received the fax at 8:56 a.m. Thursday morning, many hours after the letter was admittedly provided to the judge by Vinovich.

In the letter, Vinovich admits the time sequence of a July 13 swearing in followed by a July 29th certification of the election and then, through circular reasoning, tries to use the certification as justification for the swearing in ceremony. He fails to note that Speaker Hastert would have needed psychic powers on June 13th to know that the swearing in of Bilbray would be justified by a June 29th certification.

We’re clearly at the point where members of the ruling party are making up rules post hoc to justify whatever actions they wish to take. We are also at a point where there is little if any opposition to this. The House is silent. With the exception of local and national voting rights activists and Chairman Dean, the opposing party is silent. The Defendants literally argue that the Courts are powerless to stop them (without jurisdiction). Friday will reveal whether the courts are powerless to stop this abuse of power and premature termination of elections.

Will Judge Yuri Hoffman carry on the emerging tradition of silence, or will he take us back to the courage and integrity shown by Judge John Sirica, a Republican appointee, who made history by demanding the truth from the Watergate burglars?

*************

Copyright: This article may be used in whole or in part with attribution to the author and a link to “Scoop” Independent Media.

***ENDS***


From: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0608/S00316.htm

[Richard Steele]

1. Who needs elections with banana-republican nonsense like this? Rec'd.

[autorank]

7. Mexico has more safeguards! They had a 9% recount for President...

Of course the electoral institute was crooked as can be and ignored the fact that over 1.3 million ballots were probably stuffed or stolen by PRD's opposition, but at least their structure makes sense. Here we have the Speaker swearing in guy before election results are certified. What a mess.

And then that letter, terrific. Bob Ney strikes again. His good bye gift...

[slackmaster]

74. If Mexico has more safeguards, why can't the control their ballot boxes?

Entire boxes of ballots found in a city dump, boxes with seals broken, boxes with more ballots than registered voters in the precincts?

Yeah, Mexico really has it under control.

:eyes:

[autorank]

87. Oh, I agree, and in print...but structurally, we're worse than the are.

I think that their election stunk and it's a travesty but at least they got a recount which uncovered a lot of muck. Of courss, it wasn't used to open all the ballot boxes so shame on the "independent" electoral institute. We hardly ever get recounts, certainly not in a presidential, 9% of the total, damn...that's alot. And we don't have an electoral commission that's supposed to be independents (there's isn't either, btw). Structurally, Mexico's national elections are superior. As activists, Mexican citizens are superior...three 1.0 million plus demonstrations in three weeks protesting the election...and massive resistance. Yep, that's the deal.

The Mexican People: Heroes of Democracy
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0608/S00269.htm
The “independent” election institute tipped its hand by reporting Calderon the probable winner only to face shame when citizens pointed out there were 2.5 million uncounted ballots. The election institute totaled these and by a remarkable “coincidence,” Calderon’s victory margin remained in tact.

The Los Angeles Times reported that Calderon gained 20% of his victory margin in just one of 300 election Districts:

In Guanajuato's District 13, one of 300 electoral districts across Mexico, Calderón piled up a 44,000 vote margin, equivalent to almost one-fifth of his nationwide edge over López Obrador, candidate of the Democratic Revolution Party, or PRD. Narco News reports that the vote tabulation software for the “independent” election institute was written in part by the brother in law of Calderon, the winner by the current count. Calderon’s brother in law denied this at first but admitted his role when confronted with evidence in the form of contracts.

Opening the seals on ballot boxes was reported frequently on election day, with accusations almost exclusively leveled at PAN activists.

Obrador supporters found ballots discarded, unreported, and uncounted in dumps and other hideaways.

------------------

El instituto “independiente” electoral puso su juego al descubierto al reportar que Calderón era el ganador probable, lo cual sólo les resultó en bochorno cuando los ciudadanos señalaron que había 2.5 millones de votos aún sin contar. El instituto electoral sumó éstos y por una “coincidencia” notable, el margen de la victoria de Calderón siguió intacto.

El Los Angeles Times reportó que Calderón obtuvo 20% de su margen de victoria en sólo uno de 300 Distritos electorales:

En el Distrito 13 de Guanajuato, uno de los 300 distritos electorales de México, Calderón acumuló un margen de votos de 44,000, el equivalente a casi un quinto de su ventaja a nivel nacional sobre López Obrador, el candidato del Partido de la Revolución Democrática, o PRD. Narco News reportó que el software para la tabulación del voto para el instituto electoral “independiente” fue escrito en parte por el cuñado de Calderón, el ganador según el conteo hasta ahora. El cuñado de Calderón lo negó inicialmente pero admitió su participación cuando fue confrontado con evidencia en forma de contratos.

Hubo frecuentes reportajes de la apertura de los sellos de los paquetes electorales durante el día de las elecciones, con acusaciones casi exclusivamente dirigidas en contra de activistas de PAN.

Los simpatizantes de Obrador hallaron papeletas descartadas, sin reportarse y sin contarse, en vertederos y otros escondites.

Snip

En un sentido muy real, Obrador y el PRD están abriendo brechas para agenciar un cambio positivo en el movimiento hacia la libertad y en contra de la tiranía.

Los ciudadanos de EE.UU. le deben mucho al pueblo mexicano. Debemos de responder con actos de compromiso comparables en nuestra propia lucha en pro de la dignidad y libertad de los seres humanos. Si no actuamos, las fuerzas del nihilismo que sirven a las filosofías del mundo en retroceso, corrupto y asesino podrán continuar sin oposición. Estas fuerzas progresan a pesar de todas las indicaciones de que el camino y el proceso nos han puesto en una marcha de catástrofe global innegable y obvia. Hay una alternativa disponible y está cobrando vida en estos instantes en México.

----

In a very real sense, Obrador and the PRD are leading the way to a positive shift in the movement toward freedom and against tyranny.

Citizens of the United States owe the Mexican people a great debt. We must respond with acts of comparable commitment in our own struggle for human dignity and freedom. Failure to act allows the nihilistic forces which serve outmoded, corrupt, and world killing philosophies to continue unopposed. These forces proceed despite all indications that the path and process have set us on a course of undeniable and obvious global catastrophe. There is an alternative available and it is coming to life right now in Mexico.

[tom_paine]

2. This is entirely consistent with the principles of Imperial Amerika

which, unlike Free America (Born 1776-Died 2000, RIP)is a nation run by Imperial Fiat almost totally, if the nonsensical and absurd window dressing of what remains of the democratic institutions of Old America is fully removed (as really it ought to be in the interests of honesty, for it has nothing to do with the new nation forged in the totalitarian fires of late 2000 and aided at every step by Osama Bin Laden).

Under the "constitution" of Imperial Amerika, which is the Imperials get to do what they want and shut the fuck up about it, this is an approriate legal action and Lehto is a traitor bounds, as I am, for Halliburton Homeland Security Concentration Camp.

[nashville_brook]

5. given the *end of democracy,* i wonder

what's next. what are we going to feel next "at street level."

it's a coporatocracy. everything for the corporations all the time. no more bankruptcy protections. few, if any, employment protections. the disappearance of instant money via refinancing. ARMs coming due.

everywhere a corporation touches our lives, is an opportunity for the emerging totalitarianism... is it not?

[autorank]

10. tom_paine, lets slow down there...:) No camps for anybody...'he said

breaking a sweat." My wife would kill me (right after she kicked my you know what;), so that would mean a death sentence for being a budding sentinel of democracy.

Seriously, if they don't like what we say, they can read the Constitution. I live in the Constitution state, the state where the people lived who wrote it, and I'm not letting anyone abridge my rights to tell the truth as I see it. If they don't like it, they can simply not read "Scoop," which I'm sure is not on their preferred list, for any number of reasons. They can also buy a ticket on the first evacuation flight out of here when things fall apart for them, and they eventually do for tyrants.

Keep up the fighting spirit, but shhhh... about the Halliburton places...I'd like to keep the domestic tranquility going as long as I can.

[tom_paine]

71. "I'd like to keep the domestic tranquility going as long as I can."

So would we all, pal.

As to the Constitution, much of it is de facto nonfunctional currently. Would I like to reconnect the burglar alarms before the thieves get away? You betcha.

But I have no illusions about what thieves, ANY thieves, when caught in the act and facing a jail term, would do to someone or someones who tried to reconnect the alarm while they were still in the vault stealing.

[autorank]

86. Agreed...!!!

[chemp]

3. If this crap hadn't been going on for the last six years...

I wouldn't believe it now.
Sheesh!

[autorank]

11. They're so sloppy. This letter is "artless" in the extreme.

After all, it would have made perfect sense for them to file a "friend of the court" brief. Instead, some lawyer who works for Bub Ney, of Ohio fame, writes the Judge a letter and delivers it late to Lehto, pointing that out in his own writing. That is both arrogant and less than intelligent.

Lets see what happens. Win or lose, they had to account for their crap and the Democrats actually supported this, not financially, but with Dean out there complaining about the lousy election. Cheers.

[struggle4progress]

92. What is the House procedure for resolving contested elections ... ?

Article I, section 5 of the Constitution states that each House shall be the judge of its own elections, returns, and Member qualifications. Section 4 further permits Congress to make laws to alter state regulations concerning elections. This means the House or Senate may act as they wish regarding a contested election, even if contrary to a decision of a state legislature or court, or to an agreement reached between the contestants. Court cases, most recently in 1972, have held that House decisions of contested elections, even if perceived as political in nature, cannot be brought to the courts on appeal. The Supreme Court has declined jurisdiction over contested elections. As a result, the House has the final word on seating a Member.

All matters involving contested elections are initially handled by the Committee on House Administration, which is given jurisdiction of such matters by the rules of the House. Its guidance is the Federal Contested Election Act (P.L. 91-138, 83 Stat. 284), enacted in 1969. That law explains the process, starting with the filing of a notice of contest by the loser of the election, the taking of testimony from witnesses, and the holding of hearings on the depositions and papers filed with the Clerk of the House related to the dispute. The statute also places the burden of proof on the challenger to show that sufficient evidence exists to change the outcome of the election results ...

Recounts of vote results in a contested election are undertaken if the election loser can show he/she has exhausted all appeals in the state courts under state law ...

http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly93.asp

[Freddie Stubbs]

4. Which polls showed Busby leading Bilbray prior to the run-off?

:shrug:

[rinsd]

39. One (that I believe) commissioned by Busby did

Had her ahead 7 pts with almost a 5pts MOE.

Survey USA has one a week or so later with Bilbray ahead 2pt, also with almost a 5pt MOE

So the race was most likely a dead heat going in.

[progressoid]

6. "We’re clearly at the point where ..."

"We’re clearly at the point where members of the ruling party are making up rules post hoc"

Not at that point. Hell, they've been doing it for years.

[Me.]

8. K & R

*shadow government*

[zeemike]

9. Well I guess we will just have to "get over it"

I mean it is only the constitution that was violated, not like they committed any crime or something.
So there is no news about this is not surprising. Dennis Hatcher was just doing the business of the Corporate States of America.
K&R

[Blackhatjack]

12. Hate to Say It, But It Will Take A Mexican Style Groundswell Protest....

....which threatens the legitimacy of a government to rule its people, before any of these practices are changed.

We bear some of the responsibility for what is happening because those of us who care to live under a constitution government have been silent, refused to protest the wrongful actions, and certainly have not hit the street like the citizens of Mexico are doing now to protest another stolen election. We cannot continue to allow a minority of corrupt actors to contravene the will of the governed and look the other way hoping things will be better the next time.

It will take millions protesting to fly about the MSM blackout and gain the attention of the "enablers" on Capitol Hill.

[autorank]

67. Mexico - 3 1.0 mil crowds in 15-16 days.. 2000 - 2004 would have been

our time but the difference is that in Mexico the candidate, probable winner, called for and lead the protests with a strong supporting case in the PRD party. We didn't see that here, although I admire Gore greatly for fighting until the end.

The people have to lead the politicians, that's for sure.

WELCOME TO DU!!!

[ChiciB1]

80. Welcome To DU.... I've Been Saying This Very Same Thing

for about a year now! Boston Tea Party, Marching For "We The People", Bulls For The Bill Of Rights.... Oh just something!!

I'm not even in a very good financial position to buy a ticket to go to D.C., but I'll scrape together something if we could get something together BEFORE November! Something big enough to let our supposed leaders in D.C. know that WE MEAN BUSINESS!! We need to know our VOTES will actually be counted. I thought by voting absentee it would be helpful, but several people have told me that we don't even know if those votes were counted. We have a referendum on the ballot in November to require paper ballots, we got the necessary signatures but I don't know if it's going to pass. While I was signing up people, many said it would only cost them more money so why bother. This county is about 37% Repuke, with a lot of Independents who usually vote Repuke. Maybe they'll be mad enough to vote for paper ballots, but I don't know.

And yea, I know.... marches DON'T DO ANYTHING! Or so many of you have told me, but it doesn't just have to be the War alone. Why can't we just do something for FAIR Elections??? I live in FL, which is something I probably say EVERY TIME I post, and that Cruella is my Representative but it's really difficult to get much action going on down in my part of the US! The few Democrats that do come to meetings or those who are willing to work against this corruption seem pretty laid back. I actually think I scare them when I say we need to get much more active. We need to do more than just talk, sign petitions, write letters, email friends, blog or make phone calls.

I've tried to generate action here, but even when others agree, we just don't get much of a turn out. I'm tired of being a loner! I've printed flyers and put them on cars, signs and other places, but I'm tired of doing it by myself!! I did get my daughter to help me a couple of times, but for the most part... it's Me, Myself & I!!

Let's Get United... I'm in for any suggestions... but let's make it something big. And yes, I know many won't be able to afford it, but I'll have a garage sale if I have to for air fare! I'll even take my Morgan Silver dollars and sell them for what I can get, I just think we need to let the Repukes know we MEAN BUSINESS!

Sure, blogging has been helpful and it has changed a little but we need more Ned Lamonts to help us out! I keep getting calls to donate to DCCC, DNC and the state Democratic Party, but I would rather take that money and "make a real statement" in person!

[Subdivisions]

13. It never ceases to amaze me that, first,

things like this are nowhere in the media and second that it doesn't lead to the outrage it so readily deserves.

*Shaking head*

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. Perhaps because the story may not be true

On June 6, 2006 Republican Brian Bilbray allegedly slightly outpolled Democrat Francine Busby in the special election for California’s 50th Congressional District, despite Busby’s lead in the polls going into the election.

Did any polls prior to the run-off have Busby leading? IIRC, they had Bilbray leading.

[Land Shark]

16. Freddie Stubbs, are you saying it's ok to terminate Elections so long as

the pre-election polls (or the ones you know about, anyway) show the favored candidate in the lead??

The pre-election polls are an irrelevant detail to the core of the story.

Here's California's 50th Cong. Dist. listed as one of the most competitive congressional races in the country (as of late July). For example, you can see the 50th in this weblink: <http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/27/170505.php>

To save us from irrelevant distraction though, let's assume for sake of clarity that the race was competitive and close but no poll actually showed Busby ahead. The point still stands: You can not terminate the elections process prematurely be swearing in the favored candidate, prior to certification.

[Peace Patriot]

19. Freddie Stubbs never met a (s)election he didn't like. Just put him on

ignore.

[Kingofalldems]

22. You just hit one out of the park

I thought I was the only one who saw this. Thank you.

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. Hitting it out ot the park would be showing the poll that had Busby ahead

prior to the election. I'm still waiting for that. Can anyone find it?

[Land Shark]

28. It's going, going.... GONE! It's outta heeeerreeeee!!!!!

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1980238&mesg_id=1981488> (poll link at end of this post)

[rinsd]

38. Doh!

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=c4c2efa1-cdaa-461f-8c18-733493cb9e2c

[Land Shark]

59. Neck and neck on that poll, within sampling margin of error n/t

[rinsd]

60. Bingo! Busby was not ahead in the polls.

It was very likely neck and neck and dead heat based on those polls taken close to the election within their margins of error.

[Land Shark]

61. please read the thread, I already linked a poll with Busby +7

plus the poll you cite, within the MOE, is fully consistent with her being ahead at that time, the survey/poll just can't tell because of the MOE

[rinsd]

64. I also did. My first post on this thread had both polls.

Also the poll you reference is an internal one from Lake Research Partners.

http://www.lakesnellperry.com/who/index.htm

On edit: Here's a link to my first post on this thread.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1980238&mesg_id=1981920

[Freddie Stubbs]

51. Most people don't put much stock in polls conducted by campaigns

Apparently neither does Ms. Busby, who is not challenging the results of the election.

[Land Shark]

56. note msg 23, you keep attacking an irrelevant fact as inaccurate

even after you've been proven wrong. That shows a COMMITMENT to proceeding here that leads people to question your motives. If you're just a super-persistent person, you should consider mellowing out this time.

[OzarkDem]

102. We do put stock in legally conducted elections

and taking unsecured voting machines home overnight is illegal. Period.

Rule of law, all that.

If someone can get busted for a blow-job, surely we can hold fair elections to the same standard.

[autorank]

32. Freddie Stubbs ... a truly loyal Democrat who today attacks a Democrat

.;.who is fighting for Democrats who are collectively supported by Democrats...and Freddie, my fine fellow, you do it on the day that the judge is going to announce his decision.

What a great Democrat you are! I'm humbled and in awe.

:patriot:

[Freddie Stubbs]

24. What I really like are facts

It is a shame that some would rather ignore the facts when it is convenient.

[Land Shark]

29. thanks for keepin' the thread kicked, but you got your link now

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1980238&mesg_id=1981488> (see end of this post for edit to link to poll showing 7 point Busby lead prior to election)

Please apologize to OP author and to Michael Collins here for this false charge on your part.

[EFerrari]

31. No, what you really like is innuendo. Facts seem to put you off. n/t

[JimDandy]

72. Hmmm. "Your" facts always seem to hit at democrats. How very

un-DU.

[autorank]

95. You want facts,here they are. Dig in. Offending words to you are gone.

Here are facts and interpretations, you'll be able to distinguish them. You've preocupied yourself with three or four words, find, the author is taking them out for you. Now concentrate on the article and comment on that.

Link: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0608/S00316.htm

Congressional Election Nullified – Nobody Noticed

Speaker of the House Nullified
San Diego Congressional Race

By Michael Collins
“Scoop” Independent Media
Washington, DC

It appears the US media overlooked one of the great political stories of the year. In what is becoming something of a pattern, here’s a brief chronology:

On June 6, 2006 Republican Brian Bilbray allegedly slightly outpolled Democrat Francine Busby in the special election for California’s 50th Congressional District. :)deleted:) There were immediate cries of foul following the election due to major irregularities, including electronic voting machines sent out to the homes and cars of volunteers for up to 12 days prior to the election, and irregular election results like huge mega-precincts of absentee ballots where turnout was thousands of percent more than registered voters.

On June 13, 2006, Bilbray flew to Washington, DC and was sworn in as a member of the United States House of Representatives by House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

On or about June 30, 2006, 17 days after Bilbray was sworn in as a member of the House, Mikel Haas, Registrar of San Diego County, officially completed the audit of election results required for certification, and officially certified the election of Bilbray over Busby based on 163,931 votes cast, of which 2,053 votes were said to be cast on Diebold TSX touchscreens, and the remainder scanned via Diebold Accuvote OS computers.

On July 31, 2006, the Contestants filed an election contest, seeking a hand recount and to invalidate the election on several grounds, not only including the affirmative evidence of irregular results, but also including the stonewalling of citizen information requests and the pricing of recounts at an estimated $150,000 that made it difficult or impossible for any citizen to tell who won the election.

On August 22, 2006 the defendants moved to dismiss, arguing that the swearing in of Bilbray deprives everyone else of jurisdiction including specifically the San Diego Superior Court because Art. I, sec. 5 of the US Constitution has been held to mean that the House and Senate are the judges of the Qualifications of their Members, one of those qualifications is supposed to be “election.”

There is some thing very wrong with this sequence. Elections are not complete, anywhere, until they are officially certified by local authorities. How can a citizen get sworn in as a member of the House of Representatives before his or her election is certified? Only Speaker Dennis Hastert, his team, and Bilbray have the answer.

In a filling in San Diego Municipal Court yesterday, attorney Paul Lehto outlined the core in stark terms:

Defendants are in effect arguing for the remarkable proposition that unilateral self-serving actions by a majority party in the House of Representatives to shuttle in a member of the same party can be effective, even if those actions do violence to and amount to circumvention of other sections of the US Constitution as well as the California constitution.

Document available here.

Lehto is one of the two attorneys representing citizens who are challenging the election. Shortly after the last vote was cast, citizens discovered disturbing facts. Prior to Election Day, several poll workers had taken home voting machines for periods of a day to a week at a time without supervision or even consistent tracking procedures. Other irregularities like vote switching on touch screen machines emerged. Brad Friedman of www.BradBlog.com conducted an extensive investigation that uncovered a series of sloppy procedures by County Registrar Haas.

The election became an immediate cause for citizens, supporters of the losing candidate, and national voting rights activists. The results were also challenged by Howard Dean, Chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

A suit was filed by two local citizens challenging the election. The initial filing relied on the right of citizens to know that their votes are and counted correctly in order to assure that the candidate designated as the winner is in fact the winner. Part of the suit is a request, denied to date, for a recount of the ballots cast on Election Day.

In response to the suit, the County of San Diego filed a response questioning the authority of the local court to decide the case since (a) membership in the house was the province of the House of Representatives and (b) the speaker had already sworn in Bilbray.

Lehto and Simpkins filed a withering response to this argument. They point out that elections are the province of local and state authorities for all elections including federal contests, unless otherwise specified in the constitution. The following is form the filing yesterday:

Clearly, the swift swearing in did not end the election in the 50th Congressional District, and it did not render everything, including the certification of results weeks later, nugatory and without “jurisdiction.” If this swearing in had this effect, then in the course of dismissing this case the Court would be bound to conclude that the certification of the results after the swearing in of Bilbray was without force and effect, without jurisdiction, and in contravention of principles of federalism, as Defendants argue. That conclusion, however, requires either an absurdity, or the conclusion that our Congressional election was canceled by decision of the Speaker of the House, before all the votes were fully counted, and well before certification.

Document available here.

So there you have it. Dennis Hastert, Speaker of the United House of Representatives, called “the peoples’ House,” now has the authority to nullify elections simply by swearing in candidates and claiming federal privilege based on one narrow section of the constitution, while completing ignoring the others, including the one stating that members of the House shall be elected every two years “by the People,” and not selected in Washington DC. Once again, the country is faced with a Bush v. Gore style selection manufactured in Washington DC, and if only the people did not know which party benefited and which party was hurt by the selection, the country would be unanimous in denouncing this power grab.

Ongoing support and interference by the House of Representatives or persons associated therewith continues in San Diego. Paul Vinovich, Counsel to the House Administration Committee, Chaired by Bob Ney, R, of Ohio, had a letter delivered to San Diego Superior Court presiding Judge Yuri Hoffman, with a number of arguments in favor of the Judge dismissing the case. This type of communication with members of the judiciary, particularly when another government authority is involved, is covered by strict rules. One such rule is that the ex parte communication be provided simultaneously to counsel for all involved. In his own hand, Vinovich says to plaintiff’s attorney Lehto, “Letter delivered to court last evening.” Lehto received the fax at 8:56 a.m. Thursday morning, many hours after the letter was admittedly provided to the judge by Vinovich.

In the letter, Vinovich admits the time sequence of a July 13 swearing in followed by a July 29th certification of the election and then, through circular reasoning, tries to use the certification as justification for the swearing in ceremony. He fails to note that Speaker Hastert would have needed psychic powers on June 13th to know that the swearing in of Bilbray would be justified by a June 29th certification.

We’re clearly at the point where members of the ruling party are making up rules post hoc to justify whatever actions they wish to take. We are also at a point where there is little if any opposition to this. The House is silent. With the exception of local and national voting rights activists and Chairman Dean, the opposing party is silent. The Defendants literally argue that the Courts are powerless to stop them (without jurisdiction). Friday will reveal whether the courts are powerless to stop this abuse of power and premature termination of elections.

Will Judge Yuri Hoffman carry on the emerging tradition of silence, or will he take us back to the courage and integrity shown by Judge John Sirica, a Republican appointee, who made history by demanding the truth from the Watergate burglars?

*************

Copyright: This article may be used in whole or in part with attribution to the author and a link to “Scoop” Independent Media.

***END***

[OzarkDem]

103. Fact: the election was conducted illegally

what more do you need?

[Freddie Stubbs]

21. The story lacks credibility if it has a falsehood as its first point

There is of course, a constitutional remedy for a Speaker swearing in a member who was not elected.

Each House shall be the judge of the elections, returns and qualifications of its own members

Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution.

Yet now one member of the House has raised an objection to this swearing in.

[Land Shark]

23. Freddie there are other stories by diff authors not containing this

so your attempt to say "there was no power grab" because an author has a single unnecessary fact that you CLAIM is slightly off because the district is highly competitive but Busby wasn't "in the lead" in any poll is, well..... an overreaction to say the least.

The source documents are linked to, the words of the defendants are the evidence relied upon. the readers are asked to make a single logical inference from the alleged lack of jurisdiction of the court to the lack of jurisdiction for certification.

Under circumstances of the paragraph above, as long as the documents linked to are legitimate and the defendants really are making the constitutional argument (see especially the letter of Vinovich, counsel to the House administration committee) then the rest of the story could be drivel, lies, baloney, or whatever, and the story would still stand. Only, at that point, admittedly people like you, Freddie Stubbs, could more readily MAKE IT APPEAR AS IF the story as a whole weren't true, by seeming to poke a hole in an irrelevant fact. I have the link handy that CA50 is one of the most competitive congressional districts in the country, but polls i've heard about I don't have public weblinks to. But see http://blogcritics.org/archives/2006/07/27/170505.php (competitive race)

If you are really that committed to continuing to question the ENTIRE story based on an irrelevant fact that is not conceded but can't readily be linked to right now, I question why you would do that. Because IN TRUTH, the story would still stand, but IN PUBLIC RELATIONS AND SPIN BATTLES, such an alleged mistake could hurt the story. Just as an aside, we may sometimes judge the "credibility" of a story based on a single known omission, but that is a form of discrimination or prejudgment based on the very inefficient process of evaluating an entire story for ourselves. BUT HERE, the story is so simple, and based so clearly on the undisputed and public record actions of the defendants, that it is readily possible in a very short period of time to verify the critical elements of the story yourself. Please do so.

OK. you probably won't. So here's the link to a poll showing a seven point lead for Busby in May 2006. May I have an apology, please? <http://www.busbyforcongress.com/downloads/pressroom/20060517_pr_seven-point-lead.pdf>

[Name removed]

25. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Land Shark]

27. On edit, I gave you the link to the poll showing the lead, GIVE IT UP,

[Kingofalldems]

57. Some people say we shouldn't investigate or question

Republicans. As a former Watergate junkie, I wouldn't put anything past the GOP.

[EFerrari]

30. Freddie Stubbs: your argument is circular and YOU are the

one arguing a falsehood.

Like the Speaker, you are arguing that the Speaker can swear in the member because HE CAN SWEAR IN THE MEMBER.

What about our ELECTION? Why have ELECTIONS -- or even beauty pageants if our members are PICKED IN WASHINGTON?

You owe the OP an apology.

[rinsd]

36. Ummmm that poll like the others has a huge MOE

And as far as I can tell was commisioned by the Busby campaign.

Another poll taken a week after this with roughly the same margin of error show Bilbray ahead.

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=c4c2efa1-cdaa-461f-8c18-733493cb9e2c

Hence the argument that this was a dead heat going into the election.

Stating that Busby was ahead in polls is not true.

[autorank]

33. Hey Freddie, stop calling me a liar, it's a personal attack.

[rinsd]

37. Fine you were selective in your data to support your statement

While at the same time ignoring data that did not prove your statement.

This in regards to Busby being ahead in the polls.

[autorank]

78. Hmmm...a letter from Ney's aid to the judge zip, 3-4 minor words WWIII

Which is the least important element in the entire article. There were internal polls where she was ahead, the compendium Land Shark linked, and the SurveyUSA poll done there was so goofy you couldn't figure it out (the demographics were were a mess). What really struck me was the fact that Busby, in the "poll of the people" and she lead in that one big with a boat load of republican contenders complaining about each other. Sometimes, some of a candidates supporters will sit out the general, etc.etc. One of the profs at UCSD likened it to the Hackett race in SW Ohio.

When I first saw the comment up thread, I was referred to it by a link during an extremely busy day and thought Land Shark was being attacked on his own thread, hence my comments. The comment about ahead in the polls was based on what's below, the ultimate poll, and the others mentioned.

hat's truly amazing is that this post was generated based on the trial today and the very significant issues involved in (a) swearing in someone who is to be elected by popular vote (meaning certified popular vote) before the vote is certified and (b) the interference of Ney's Committee through the counsels letter to the Judge and late delivery to plaintiffs counsel. That's news.

See both documents here www.electionfraudnews.com (clickon Busby Bilbray link to left)

Did people comment on that. Not much.

Did the sequencing problem get the appropriate reaction , yes in many cases but there are the "contrarians."

I'm amazed that so much time was spent on such a small,irrelevant part of the article.

The real issue is that we've got a CRAMDOWN democracy here and it's done through acts like Hastert's swearing ceremony and *'s signing documents where he tossed the Constitution.

THAT is relevant, current, and the point of the article.

I would have responded earlier had I not been working; although, even in that case, I may have been overcome with incredulity at the micro analysis at the expense of real news, that fits the pattern of right wing disregard for democratic principles and the ruleof the letter referenced and published above.




-------------------------------------------------
US REP. 50TH DIST. April 11th, official results
http://tinyurl.com/jawfv
Total
Number of Precincts 445
Precincts Reporting 445 100.0 %
Total Votes 137353

FRANCINE BUSBY DEM 60010 43.69%
BRIAN P. BILBRAY REP 20952 15.25%
ERIC ROACH REP 19891 14.48%
HOWARD KALOOGIAN REP 10207 7.43%
BILL MORROW REP 7369 5.37%
ALAN UKE REP 5477 3.99%
RICHARD EARNEST
REP 2957 2.15%
BILL HAUF REP 2207 1.61%
SCOTT TURNER REP 2041 1.49%
CHRIS YOUNG DEM 1808 1.32%
WILLIAM GRIFFITH IND 1111 0.81%
etc.

[autorank]

96. Your posts lack credibility, betray a pattern typical of thread hi jacking

Concentrating on one point and pounding it home regardless of what's said, what facts are presented, the posting logic is consistent and relentless. Over and over, distorting the intention of the original post which is

talking about election fraud against Democrats

the posting logic displayed completely ignores this. You have a chance up thread to read the article and actually comment with out the 4-5 offending words. I've done this to see if the logic changes or it's must more of this sam old same old...

[grizmaster]

49. It's irrelevant who led in the polls

The issue is the purposeful subversion of the process which is supposed to ensure that the people choose our representatives, not some cabal using circular arguments to try and keep the courts from making sure the election is legit.


Or are you seriously claiming it's OK for whoever the head of the House is to select and swear in whoever he wants?

[autorank]

81. I think maybe they are ...

I responded in depth to the microanalysis of three largely irrelevant (but justified,in my opinion) words and noted how the arrogance of power is the real issue, from the Registrar who sends machines home for sleep overs, to the Speaker of the House who rushes the the swearing in and then justifies it based on a certification of the election 15 or so days later (talk about post hoc ergo propter hoc, to the oh so helpful letter provided to the Judge. Why couldn't the file a friend of the court brief? much more within bounds.

This is amazing, arrogance and lousy explanatoins...

Thanks for making this point.

[kpete]

15. love that Gore/Feingold

The Media is complicit...

Seriously - with shenanigans like these in California - our votes will never count!!!

[autorank]

88. CCM - Complicit Corporate Media....It's why they're not covering Zogby

To cover a poll on attitudes toward the rights of the people and the risks of elections would mean to cover election issues...they can't even start without going all the way down the path. At least they're consistent. :)

[Peace Patriot]

17. Bloody tyranny--that's what this is! Unfrelling believable!

It has the twisted logic of the "laws" of segregation, and the "laws" that required your race to be identified on your citizen "papers" in Nazi Germany and then further required that you wear yellow armbands if you were Jewish, and then further required that you move to designated ghettos. If you are a good "citizen" and OBEY the "law," you end up with no rights, in the case of segregation, or you end up dead, in the case of Nazi concentration camps.

Fascists lead you down the garden path of twisted logic--to the death of truth, and the end of freedom and democracy--in this case, an election that is "tabulated" by a private Bushite corporation (Diebold--CEO until recently was a Bush-Cheney campaign chair and major fundraiser), using TRADE SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code to "count" all the votes (code so secret that NO ONE outside the corporation is permitted to review it), with virtually no audit/recount controls; Republican election officials, including a Schwarzenegger appointed Diebold shill as Calif Secretary of State, fail to complete the audit required to "certify" this so-called "election"; they blockade a recount with exorbitant costs and stonewalling on information; the Bushite (Bilbray) who was allegedly "elected" to Congress flies to Washington and gets "sworn in" by a Bushite House Speaker two weeks BEFORE his so-called "election" is "certified"; THEN they "certify" it, after the fact; THEN they claim that his ILLEGITIMATE "swearing in" forestalls any challenge to the so-called "certification" of his so-called "election."

The "swiftboating" and removal from office of California's honest and ELECTED Democratic Secretary of State, Kevin Shelley--who had sued Diebold for their lies about the security of their crapass voting machines, and had decertified the worst of those machines prior to the 2004 election, and demanded to see their source code--becomes all the more important in retrospect. Shelley would not have permitted this crap in San Diego. But what does Schwarzenegger appointee Bruce McPherson care? It's his JOB to rig elections! He wasted no time in undoing Shelley's efforts to protect voters from election fraud. He is the one who ILLEGALLY RE-certified the touchscreen voting machines that were introduced into the San Diego Congressional election--the ones that were kept in election workers' HOMES.

Upshot: A Bushite House Speaker chooses our Congressperson. A Bushite Calif Sec of State and local officials try to PREVENT any challenge, and "certify" the questionable election results derived from the TRADE SECRET code of a Bushite corporation (Diebold), AFTER House Speaker Hastert has "sworn in" the illegitimately (s)elected Bushite, Bilbray.

Down the garden path...to total war, total U.S. bankruptcy and the end of American democracy.

----------------------

The same thing happened in 2004: A Bushite Congress, (s)elected by Diebold and its brethren Bushite corporation, ES&S, "certified" Bush's (s)election, and permitted him to be sworn in, despite overwhelming evidence of a fraudulent election in Ohio (run by Bushite officials) and the discovery of election anomalies all over the country, where Diebold and ES&S had gained control of 80% of the vote "tabulation" using TRADE SECRET code.

Down the garden path...to total war, total U.S. bankruptcy and the end of American democracy.

---------------------

Paul Lehto (LandShark), and Michael Collins (Autorank), and all those involved in challenging the CA-50 (s)election, are the heroes of American Revolution II, and will one day be recognized as such by the American majority that has been disempowered and DISENFRANCHISED by the Bush junta and its corporate tools, Diebold and ES&S.

Throw Diebold, ES&S and all election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor' NOW*! --if you want your country back.**

------------------------------------------------------------------------

*(THE ABSENTEE BALLOT VOTING PROTEST: The only way to do this peacefully, in my opinion--and also quickly--is by massive Absentee Ballot voting this November. FLOOD election officials with MOUNTAINS of paper AB votes to deal with, create panic and crisis in the election theft industry, and FORCE reform NOW. AB votes are not "safe" (as the situation in SD makes clear)--and AB voting will NOT give us accurate vote counts this fall--but if enough people vote AB (and many are--it's up to 50% in Los Angeles), it DOES have the potential to force election officials to the table. We MUST get rid of these electronic voting machines. They are the key to it all. They have introduced a culture of secrecy and corruption--affecting both Repub and Dem legislators and election officials--that can only be rooted out by BOYCOTTING the machines. Massive AB voting will amount to a citizen "'Vote of No Confidence" in SECRET voting counting.)

**(56% of the American people opposed the Iraq War way back in Feb. '03, before the invasion. Disapproval of Bush and his war is up to 70% today, with a whopping 84% (in one poll) opposing any U.S. participation in a widened Mideast war! How then do you shove this war down the throats of the American people, against their will? You have to rig the elections. And that's what they've done--by installing NON-TRANSPARENT vote counting systems, controlled by Bushite corporations, throughout the country during the 2002-2004 period. You wonder why the American people are not being heard? THIS is why.)

(Note to Californians: Support DEBRA BOWEN for CA Secretary of State. She is one smart lady, committed to election integrity. I've vetted her past actions as a state senator, and her current policies/platform. She as genuine as it is possible to determine, in this climate of corruption around our election system. She has stood for open government throughout her career, knows her subject (elections/electronic voting) REALLY WELL, and is saying all the right things about how to clean up this (yet another) Bushite disaster of corruption and collusion: secret vote counting.)

[AntiFascist]

69. K&R, especially this response....

I agree, McPherson is bad news for democracy in California.

[midnight]

82. What about race for college applications?

[lonestarnot]

18. Bananas all around!

[lonestarnot]

20. Kick.

[Peace Patriot]

34. K & R! Go, LandShark! Clean up the dreck in this polluted sea!

Rip the throat out of this filthy, lying, deceitful, war profiteering election system! Dismember it! Let the sun shine again in the land of the free and the home of the brave!

[EFerrari]

41. PP, have you blasted the story? I sent to: Pelosi's office

the SFBGuardian, that good pol reporter at the Chron, several radio guys (maybe our best bet!), the GP of San Fran and of Los Angeles. Everyone else with spare outrage or an email list.

[rinsd]

35. Can someone show me a poll where Busby was ahead?

My recollection was a dead heat going into the last week.

These links seem to confirm that (even with huge MOEs)

http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReportEmail.aspx?g=c4c2efa1-cdaa-461f-8c18-733493cb9e2c

http://www.busbyforcongress.com/downloads/pressroom/20060517_pr_seven-point-lead.pdf#search=%22district%2050%20polls%20busby%22

[EFerrari]

40. See post #28. That isn't the larger point for me. I don't vote in CA

so DENNIS HASTERT can decide if my vote counts.

[rinsd]

42. No my argument is about getting it right.

This wasn't Max Cleland up 8pts going in. But the desire to leave a similar impression is there.

This was a dead heat that I think Busby lost because indies didn't show up for the runoff. That is backed by people like Chris Bowers at mydd with post election polling

http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/8/2/1119/55538

I know the Busby campaign talked about Democrats not showing up but they had decent turnout especially considering how heavy a gop district 50 is.

The problem is getting it right. People are arguing they have it right even when they have been proven wrong.

That is aside from matters such as the Speaker, the custody of the machines etc.

A bit nit picky from your perspective, I gather. But I am sick of seeing colored journalism on all sides. I am sick of people saying they are interested in the truth when what they are really interested in is the "truth".

[EFerrari]

44. What we think is immaterial to our right to KNOW those election

results are VALID.


I agree. The problem is getting it right. But, we don't do that by speculating about polls or turnout, imho. We do that by counting votes. And that includes speculation by Busby as far as I'm concerned.

I don't think that's nit picky at all. My horse in this race is the election, not Busby. :)

[rinsd]

46. "our right to KNOW those election results are VALID. "

Agreed.

Don't forget about Busby though. She is taking on Bilbray in a CA-50 rematch in Nov.

http://www.busbyforcongress.com/

[EFerrari]

48. Only if we have real elections!

:)

[autorank]

83. Getting it right is paying attention the main points...

...which you didn't do. The Speaker of the House inducted a new member prior to certification of the "member's" election, period. It's "the peoples' House" because the people elect the members directly and that means certification is part of it. It's that way anywhere in the country. Why miss that point. I responded to you on my rational for the three least important words in the article and I don't really care about wasting more time when you won't even address the issues

--violation of standard procedure
--violation of the Constitution
--violation of state and local election laws
--curious communication to the Judge (documented www.electionfraudnews.com,click on Busby-Bilbray)

If you were really paying attention, you would have noticed that the link was bad in the post, the link to the most important part of the article, the letter from Ney's committee. Nice work.

[JimDandy]

94. Thanks for posting the Vinovich letter!!

http://www.electionfraudnews.com/CA%20Vinovich%20US%20House%20letter.pdf

I'm kind of a stickler for original source documents. Old habit of a long-time researcher.

[robinlynne]

43. That is not the point! the point is the republicans are claiming that

congress has the right to choose who it's members are, independently of elections. That is a dictatorship. The fact that they would have the gall to even bring this up in court is unbelievable! They are saying once we swore him in it didn't matter what the actual vote count was. That is the point.

[rinsd]

45. The why the need to color it?

Why the underlying tone of "it was stolen"? I think Bradblog has been very careful to avoid that. His issue has been custody of the machine and transparency in voting.

"They are saying once we swore him in it didn't matter what the actual vote count was."

They are saying that procedures undertaken post election do not matter (ie: lawsuits) because he is sworn in. It is our side that is taking that argument to a polticial point that you have raised.

"congress has the right to choose who it's members are, independently of elections. That is a dictatorship. "

We could use you on the Cuba threads.

[EFerrari]

47. It's simple. Let me see if I can be more clear.

Dennis Hastert swore in a member that had not been certified by the State of California.

And that certification was already in question from election night on when thousands of voters had "problems" casting their vote. Add to that, the problems that were found later.

If we don't challenge this whole stinkin mess, it is stolen.

[orleans]

54. this as an aside

because i haven't followed this too closely (bad me, i know)

but i'm wondering how he got sworn in. weren't any dems there to say: wait just a freakin minute! does everyone vote him in? how the hell did the hulk get away w/swearing this guy in? i don't get it.

[EFerrari]

66. Maybe it's a calcuation. They only lose this short term. We stand

to have our elections further eroded.

Their long view is their career; ours, the future of our elections. We may sometimes be on the same side but that doesn't mean our goals are exactly the same.

[robinlynne]

89. They simply did it. tv covered it as if it were no big deal. Only around

30% of the votes were counted when he was sworn in. Busby did not say a word.

[JimDandy]

104. Do you recall what source had the

30% figure in it?

[robinlynne]

105. yes. if you look on bradblog., he had a day by day coverage of the vote

count and what was going on. you would have to look back to those dates, and you will see links to the sec of state website and all the vote counts.
bradblog.com
i find it a bit difficult to navigate, but all the info is there.

[JimDandy]

108. Thanks n/t

[rinsd]

50. A reminder about CA-50 and the November election

Don't forget folks that Francine Busby is running against Bilbray this Nov.

Let's make Mr. Bilbray's second stint in Congress a short one.

Her website: http://www.busbyforcongress.com/

Where to donate: http://www.busbyforcongress.com/contribute.php

Where to volunteer:
http://www.busbyforcongress.com/wycd_volunteer_intern.php



I also posted this in the CA forum but wanted to make sure folks here knew as well.

[robinlynne]

52. Bullshit. Francine Busby lost my support. And I worked for her

election. on the phone getting people out to vote, and contributing money to her campaign. The DCCC told her to be quiet about this election fiasco, and she did. She should have stood up and asked for a just vote count, whether or not she won. This is not about who won. This is about whether or not the principles of democracy and one man one vote have any standing here in America. Any candidate who cannot stand up for the principles of democracy deserves whatver they get. let's support candidates who care about p;rotecting elections, and hence democracy.

[rinsd]

53. Fine.

She lost a battle but another one is looming on the horizon.

Thank you for your help on the first two go arounds and I wish you would recosider for this one.

[robinlynne]

90. "the honest candidate's eleciton pledge", which I think she needs to take.

The dem candidate from the 29th district in san diego has already pledged to protect elections, and is working with CA-50, while Busbby is not!

THE HONEST ELECTION CANDIDATE'S PLEDGE

1. I pledge to work hard to make sure that every
citizen who votes for me has her vote counted.

2. I will not concede any contest I am involved in
until I know that every absentee and provisional
ballot has been counted.

3. I shall make sure that non-partisan exit polling
is conducted.

4. If the final results of counted votes is
different from the exit polling by more than the margin of
error, I will demand and force a recount.

5. I shall exhaust every possible legal recourse to
assure that every vote cast for me by a legal
citizen is counted.

6. If asked to "concede" I shall respond: "Only when
every vote cast for me has been counted - to do
anything less would be a violation of the Constitution."

7. If I am called a "sore loser" or a "waster of
taxpayer time" I will reply that: "Democracy is
never a waste of time and wanting to see Democratic
Government working is never a bad cause."

We should withhold our money and volunteer time from
any candidate that refuses to sign this pledge or
who has ever violated any part of it.

[EFerrari]

65. I understand how you feel and you may be right about this

candidate.

And, in a way, it is also up to us to be good teachers to these folks. Let's show them our support when they stand up for our elections, and let's hold them accountable when they don't.

But, let's also expect them to learn from mistakes. That happens over time and generally, after a mistake.

[autorank]

84. Hi robinlynne!!! I have some idea of your frustration...

I had a similar experience, busted my chops to show a clear pattern of problems in an election, really clear, and got blown off by el candidate because of larger political issues. I really couldn't go public either since the candidate wasn't there. Infuriating!!!


I had a quote from Paul Lehto of some time ago where he says that the people are the ultimate custodians of democracy since they and the politicians have entirely different interests at times. Democracy is our prime objective. I don't know anyone on our side or the other at my "street level" who want to steal anything. I do know at least two, and we know more, politicians who would forfeit the fight for fair vote counting for some higher objective, e.g., not being accused of "sour grapes" in their next election. It's amazing isn't it...the system that they use to achieve power is not the ultimate objective. Wonder what it is;)

[Tiggeroshii]

55. Busby never lead in the polls before the election

..or afterwards for that matter. She was always at least 3 points behind Bilbray.

[rinsd]

58. Untrue.

She had at least two polls showing her ahead though they were commissioned by her election.

A poll right after the primary that lead to the runoff showed a dead heat.

And a poll right before the election showed Bilbray with a 2pt lead.

I haven't yet found a poll on that race that doesn't have an MOE 4.5+

This was very likely a dead heat going in. Indies didn't show. Democrats did. Busby lost a close election.

[cascadiance]

97. Actually one of the polls showing her ahead was a Republican one...

It was the Republican conservative opposition to Bilbray lead by Bill Hauf trying to rationalize someone else challenging Bilbray at the time and he had a poll showing her 8 points ahead. Hauf sponsored this poll and when he couldn't talk 2nd place finisher Roach to continue to campaign against Bilbray, he himself stayed in the primary race against Bilbray.

It was one of the first polls that showed Busby ahead after the April "primary" special election.

http://www.calitics.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=458

[grizmaster]

62. Does that make swearing in an unelected person legit?

The repubs (through the Speaker) are bypassing the election process, and judicial review. Until the election is certified there is no elected official. At least that's what my copy of the Constitution seems to strongly imply.

[autorank]

98. It does to them. The harm to DEMOCRATS is IGNORED

Why post at a Democratic site when the only function is to slime the OP with tangential crap. The specific polls, the 30,000 lead in the unitary primary, all the questions are answered...but alas, THE FATE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY PARTY IS IGNORED

Hastert had a swearing in ceremony prior to a certified election. There is nothing in the words or intent of the framers that posited an illigitimate election resulting ina candidate sworn in who is
not certified.

[robinlynne]

106. EXACTLY! thank-you.

[bleever]

63. Can't drive without a seatbelt, but can be elected to Congress without

officially winning the election according the relevant laws regarding certification.

Thank you for this excellent article, autorank, and thank you also, althecat.

:yourock:

[autorank]

76. I've been working all day, andwho do find...it's a three step.

1) Get elected "fair & square"
2) Electoin gets certified.
3) Get swornin.

After all, it's "the people's house" meaning the people elect the members, they are not selected.

Pretty complex isn't it;)

[Kurovski]

68. K&R.(nt)

[autorank]

85. oye como va Kurovski, you Prince of a guy;)

[Kurovski]

91. Always, Sir auto. Always.

:hi:

[lonestarnot]

70. Kick!

[JimDandy]

73. Kick n/t

[autorank]

79. Jim Dandy, a no nonsense election activist!!! Thank you!!!

:hi:

[JimDandy]

93. Anytime, for such a highly ranked guy!

:-)

[katinmn]

75. Distribute this far and wide. Another abomination.

I'm "shocked" for the millionth time that Hastert would stoop so low.

Is this how Democrats are going to bend over when we come to the big event in November?

Thanks Landshark and auto. You're an inspiration.

[autorank]

77. I like that camp.

Thanks for all your efforts. Nothing on CA yet,which is good news, I suspect. Cheers. Mike

[cascadiance]

99. Kick and Recommend #50 for CA50!

[Cookie wookie]

100. From the Vinovich letter:

"State courts do not have jurisdiction to decide an action contesting the election of a member of the United States House of Representatives . . . The House of Representatives determined that Mr. Bilbray is the Representative of the 50th Congressional District...."

The argument he goes on to make is so weak it's shocking. There can be no doubt in anyone's mind, if there was ever any to begin with, that the leadership of the House of Representatives is part of a rogue government, with every intention to deliberately subvert the lawful election process in the US. This letter stands as hard evidence.

How could any court in the country agree with that?

This should be on the front page of the NYT and blasted across the media around the country, that is if we weren't living with a fascist controlled media.

[lonestarnot]

101. Wonder if there will be an uprising come November?

[robinlynne]

107. count me in.