Folks, I'm going to post my opine in a bit, but I thought you should see this.
Also, if readers have tips on election theft attempts or know of any suspicious activity UNreported by the media to change the result - please call Rossi HQ at 425.646.7202. They REALLY need to know...
1 posted on
12/14/2004 5:38:37 PM PST by
JosefK
To: JosefK; truth49
Consider yourself pinged...
2 posted on
12/14/2004 5:39:59 PM PST by
JosefK
(If you have tips on election theft attempts - please call 425.646.7202 (Rossi HQ))
To: JosefK
Either people voted using the proper tools or they didn't. What's with these "do-over" votes?
4 posted on
12/14/2004 5:46:02 PM PST by
jolie560
To: JosefK
The third paragraph of this editorial is flat-out false. This is not a "recanvassing" of the votes. Furthermore, to apply a different standard in King County alone is a flat-out violation of "equal protection of the laws" as found in
Bush v. Gore by the US Supreme Court in 2000.
The Democrats are trying, as in Florida, New Jersey, Hawaii, and elsewhere, to steal this election by deliberate violation of the laws, state or federal. It's as simple as that.
Congressman Billybob
Click for latest, "Should the Iraqi Election be Delayed?"
6 posted on
12/14/2004 5:51:43 PM PST by
Congressman Billybob
(Felicity Fahrquar will tape on Jeopardy! 12/15, broadcast in six weeks.)
To: JosefK
The ruling did not question, however, county elections boards' option of "recanvassing," or re-examining and counting ballots that may have been erroneously rejected before they could be counted. This was addressed during oral arguments; I was there. The reason the ruling does not address the option of "recanvassing' is because there is no provision in the statutes for recanvassing. The statutes make mention of canvassing and recounting. The purpose for not allowing recanvassing is to prevent vote fraud.
None the less, i will be going to the Rossi HQ on Thursday with some very useful information regarding criminal conduct by Gregoire.
To: All
I would like to know how many people predicted King county would "discover" additional uncounted ballots in the recount? I know I did.
And if I hear the "I'm on your side.. but prove election fraud" troll barking again, I will puke. No conscience or principles makes a good Democrat..
13 posted on
12/14/2004 6:31:32 PM PST by
Splatter
To: All
Is anyone else listening to John Fund on KPAM? The man knows what is going on in King county! Great grasp on the WA election manipulation. Great interview..
15 posted on
12/14/2004 6:48:47 PM PST by
Splatter
To: JosefK
KING COUNTY "FOUND" 22 MORE BALLOTS! They are now padding their scam.
17 posted on
12/14/2004 6:50:21 PM PST by
Splatter
To: JosefK
20 posted on
12/14/2004 6:59:19 PM PST by
MissouriConservative
(A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul)
To: JosefK
It is, of course, impossible to know which gubernatorial candidate would have profited had the court ordered all 39 counties to include in the hand recount ballots that had been previously rejected. Democrats presumably believed the change would have benefited their candidate, Christine Gregoire. Basically, under current rules, Rossi won twice. Therefore, the democrats need to change the rules, any rule, or else they lose again.
29 posted on
12/14/2004 9:08:16 PM PST by
staytrue
To: devolve
34 posted on
12/14/2004 11:27:19 PM PST by
ntnychik
(Proud member of the Bush-wazee)
To: JosefK
A "recount" should only include previously counted votes, not those manufactured in a back room sometime after the fact!
42 posted on
12/24/2004 11:44:03 AM PST by
JimRed
(Investigate, overturn and prosecute vote fraud in the State of Washington !)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson