In the Ukraine, a challenger to election fraud needs a physical constitution able to withstand hours of freezing temperatures at interminable rallies, and capable of surviving the ravages of dioxin poisoning. For John Kerry, Victor Yuschenko's American counterpart, the challenges are more media-related and stylistic, less physical.
Under cover of John Edwards' late night promise to "count every vote," Kerry's lawyers have been adeptly pursuing evidence that could reverse the election outcome, while keeping their candidate so Teflon-coated that he remains untouchable by "sore loser" or "conspiracy theory" jibes.
Indeed, Kerry's slick moves have been so effective that many of his own supporters still half-believe that all this is not about questioning the election result.
In the last few days,
Kerry has launched a further escalation of his legal involvement,
while also leaving casual observers even more convinced that Bush
is safely ensconced in office.
Just before the Christmas holiday, on 23 December, 2004 Kerry lawyer, Daniel Hoffheimer called for a demonstrably legitimate recount in Ohio, explaining that:
"...Only then can the integrity of the entire electoral process and the election of Bush/Cheney warrant the public trust."
The occasion for this first questioning of the legitimacy of the Bush reelection was the news that the Kerry/Edwards campaign has just joined in aspects of an ongoing recount suit by the Green and Libertarian parties targeting Triad Systems, a Republican-linked supplier of voting machines to around half of Ohio counties.
The legal move comes against a backdrop of allegations that Triad GSI orchestrated a system of "cheat sheets" to enable a fraudulent recount in Ohio, and may have tampered with vote tabulation equipment. With Triad equipment in half of Ohio's counties, any systematic fraud could well have scuppered a Kerry win.
A legal assault and a verbal slight -both directed at the Bush "victory."
Two steps forward.
Based on the news, BreakForNews.com ran a Christmas 'eve analysis maintaining that Kerry was effectively laying grounds for unconceding, by now pursuing potential direct evidence of election fraud, while impugning Bush's victory. And we pointed out that legal actions that might end in overturning the Ohio election result were a default way to unconcede without ever saying the "U" word.
Two days later, before
Santa could awaken from a well deserved sleep, election fraud pointman
for the mainstream media, Keith Olbermann
"Thems fightin words, " opined Olbermann.
"Fightin words that came just eight working days before the Electoral College votes are opened before Congress."
But before the day was out, Hoffheimer was already scolding "conspiracy theories" while "clarifying" his comments, and then some.
This was part of Hoffheimers "clarification":
"I would caution the media not to read more into what the Kerry-Edwards campaign has said, than what you hear in the plain meaning of our comments. There are many conspiracy theorists opining these days...
"When all of the problems in Ohio are added together, however bad they are, they do not add up to a victory for Kerry-Edwards."
Later that same Monday, guessing that Kerry was just playing for kudos from the election fraud movement, a befuddled Olbermann reported:
"This evening, after several Web columnists and bloggers joined me in questioning the bluntness of the phrase (one even wildly claiming this was a precursor to a Kerry "un-concession"), Hoffheimer changed his tone."
Well, we didn't join Mr. Olbermann, we preceded him by 60 hours with our analysis on BreakForNews.com.
Olbermann later admits that:
"...it was not some great, conspiracy-based, tin-foil-hat, piece of linguistic gymnastics, to infer..., that the Kerry-Edwards campaign did not believe that "the integrity of the entire electoral process and the election of Bush-Cheney" warranted the public trust."
Of course it wasn't. We knew that. And Olbermann knew because:
"...I can understand the English language."
Hoffheimer had just totally reversed the spin, within days. Think of it as... two small but significant steps for Kerry-kind. One giant leap back for GOP and media befuddlement.
Here we have the Kerry campaign's Ohio lawyer scorning conspiracy theories. Perfect positioning for the Kerry/Edwards camp. It's beautiful!
Somehow, Kerry & Co. are working hand in legal hand with hundreds of thousands who know that the 2004 election was stolen. All the while displaying an adeptly senatorial stance which scoffs at conspiracy theories!
Teflon Kerry's post-election edifice of investigation is like a Mayan pyramid. There isn't a single crack anywhere into which the right-wing media could insert a mere penknife.
That's no accident. It's
If Kerry took the bait, he would be pilloried for undermining the commander-in-chief with the nation at war, by daring to question the election outcome. Not to mention leaving the United States vulnerable to an opportunistic attack by an Al-Queda leadership keen to exploit division in its imperial enemy.
Not taking the bait was a no-brainer. But first, no matter what the cost, Kerry supporters would have to be dissuaded from swallowing bait that the leadership knew bore only the taste of defeat.
And so, John Edwards strolled out to reassure supporters and launch the cover story about counting every vote. But Kerry would have to halt his supporters by quickly killing off the questions about the result -before they could begin. Kerry would choose his own timing. That's why the quick preemptive concession.
At the same time, John Kerry nailed the "sore loser" angle, and nailed it good. He was a paragon of graciousness. It was a faultless, if slightly incredible performance. Something jarred about it. Even grassroots Republicans sensed that, but never pondered the motive.
Before long, with the
Internet in full stolen election mode, Kerry was mending fences with
his activist supporters by means of his calculatedly ambiguous "whatever
the outcome of this election" statement. Less noticed was Edwards
similar gambit. A resounding "This fight's not over... because
I'm not finished with this fight" rallying cry to his home state
In short order, the
election fraud issues were soon under attack from multiple directions.
The Cobb/LaMarche legal team led the charge on the recount front.
Focussed on uncovering malfeasance precinct by precinct, they now
say recount laws were broken in 86 of Ohio's 88 counties.
Cliff Arnebeck with John Bonifaz headed an Ohio Supreme Court challenge directed towards revealing larger scale vote manipulations. Another Arnebeck suit embarrassingly tainted Chief Justice Moyers of the Ohio Supreme Courts bench by charging that the judge's own election was suspect.
By the way, today yet
another Arnebeck suit scored
a victory. Over half the members of the Ohio Supreme Court had
to recuse themselves from his long-running case seeking to reveal
who put up the money for a $4 million advertising campaign which influenced
Supreme Court judicial elections in the state. Chief Justice Thomas
Moyer, Terrence O'Donnell, and Evelyn Lundberg Stratton were all beneficiaries
of the TV adverts. The Ohio Chamber of Commerce now faces potential
fines of $25,000 for each day it refuses to reveal who bankrolled
Meanwhile, Jesse Jackson has been mobilizing disenfranchised minority voters and John Conyers has held two pivotal hearings at which vital evidence came into the public domain.
And, both by Internet, and on the ground in Ohio thousands of activists have launched their own investigations, become their own media and grown into their own movement.
Lest anyone get the idea that all this was coherent rather than haphazard activity, the route has been sprinkled with false cues to distance Kerry from the frenzy of action.
In mid-December, Cliff Arnebeck told the L.A.Times that Kerry did not really want to challenge Bush. Why? It must be some kind of "Skull & Bones thing," said Arnebeck.
Just eleven days ago, David Cobb, said that Kerry was trying to "undermine" Green party efforts to get an effective recount. He called Kerry a member of the "ruling elite."
Within days Kerry had signed on to the G/Lib lawsuit -as just announced by Daniel Hoffheimer with such great gusto. And then as quickly downplayed by him with such great chutzpah.
Confused? Good. It must
|Home Last 5 Days NewsBytes Archive Links|
Original Content Copyright © BreakForNews.com 2004