Blitzer uses Kerry's Statement to Trash Robert Kennedy's "Rolling Stone"

[KoKo]

Article.

Blitzer used Kerry's statement to verify that the whole argument about "Vote Fraud" is BOGUS.

I read Robert Kennedy's article and he used Kerry as a main quote...but I had "shivers" because Kerry's quote was SO WEAK and wished that Kennedy hadn't included it since CNN's Blitzer and others have used Kerry to REFUTE all investigative material about ELECTION 2004 and make it that if the "evidence was really true and factual" then KERRY would have definitely CONTESTED the 2004 Failed Election.

It reminds me of the "Media Trash of Gore" in 2000 where he was blaimed for not asking for a FULL FLORIDA RECOUNT for ALL COUNTIES..instead of the few counties that he called for that allowed the REPUGS to TRASH AND MANIPULATE HIM!

But...Blitzer used KERRY as an EXAMPLE of why "ELECTION FRAUD IS BOGUS"...because "KERRY DID NOT CONTEST IT!!!"

Come on KERRY...SPEAK UP...ROBERT KENNEDY NEEDS SOME SUPPORT!!! GIVE IT TO HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Stinky The Clown]

1. Carlson the Tucker did the same thing, essentially .......

..... why are no bug name Dems out there calling for investigations.

Clearly this is *the* RW talking point on this one, and your insight is 20/20.

[katty]

2. my guess, Kerry won't throw out a line on this

[Cosmocat]

41. WTF ...

He really can't ... And, this is yet another case of the MSM baiting a democrat as a set up for the right ... Man, IF Kerry were to come out and say it, they would just HAMMER him as a "sore loser" ...

He should not have given in at the time, THAT was were he sold out ... But, once he did, he has no choice but to take the high road until the greater portion of the country comes to grips with it ...

[Demobrat]

3. Well of course.

Of course they are using Kerry's instant capitulation as an argument, they would be fools not to. Especially when they know he won't do anything about it.

[still_one]

4. He will... EVENTUALLY

but this is the greatest flaw of Kerry, and why he had has chance, but we need someone else to represent us in 2008

Anyone we choose in 2008 MUST be able to address attacks OR issues quickly and decisively

Anything less, and we will have problems

[Arugula Latte]

5. I can't understand why he did that after Florida in 2000.

Supposedly the Democrats were fired up to fight for our votes.

Then it was blatantly stolen, and Kerry folded immediately. I don't get it.

[KoKo]

9. I never could understand it either...but many folks say Kerry is a

"Gentleman Senator" and "protocol" has made him much less of the RADICAL he was when he came home from Vietnam.

I don't know...but he should have stood with US in a more "forceful way" I think.

John Conyers and the Black Caucus held hearings in a "basement room" to expose SELECTION 2004. But, Kerry held back...:shrug:

He "held back." Taking the "cautious position." Many here on DU support that stance by our Dems... I just can't. :-(

[blm]

16. Deflect from the REAL PROBLEMS - attack Kerry - after all he became the

nominee in June 2004 and he should have done Terry MacAuliffe's job starting in 2001 and spent four years training all the Dem election board members. Do you realize how absurd your focused, single-minded accusations against Kerry really are?

[blm]

15. After 2000, there was no candidate - only the DNC and Dem party heads

and it was THEIR JOB to work on the voting problems and school the Dem reps on every election board in every state.

They should have started in Jan 2001. Kerry became the nominee in June 2004, and you think it was HIS job to take over the DNC and train the election boards to look out for machine fraud?

Has anyone asked why Al Gore never sought to work with the Dem party for four years in securing all the areas of voting fraud that concerned him since his election?

[still_one]

22. interesting question, but my opinion on Gore is that his advisors

were just as incompentent as Kerrys

In 2000 Gore's attorney's and advisors should have told him to request a recount of the WHOLE state of Florida immediately, which was available through Florida state law, instead they advised him to only select certain areas in Florida

In In 2004 Kerry's advisors assured us they had everything under control, and there would NOT be a repeat of 2000. His advisors screwed up in a major way. In Ohio voting machines were moved out of urban areas which were mostly for Kerry, into repuke areas. In most of the swing states they didn't do their jobs. Kerry was relying on them, and they screwed up in a major way

Even today, the Democratic leaders have done very little to assure that everyones vote is counted

[blm]

27. Kerry's election law team was the same as Gore's - they THOUGHT they

had a handle on fraud, but they were never looking for MACHINE FRAUD as we know it now.

[Toots]

33. Do you know what Florida said about recounts?

Asking for a statewide recount was not available under Florida Law. Only specified areas could be requested. That is one reason the Florida Supreme Court had to rule that the whole state needed recounting. Then it was the US Supreme court that said the Florida Supreme court had overstepped their bounds and that all recounting had to stop.

[still_one]

35. no I didn't know that, in fact I was under the impression it was

just the opposite

[blm]

38. That was media spin to make Gore look bad - he was going by Florida law

and the GOPs knew that it could be spun to make Gore look bad. They own the media - they get away with it.

[MH1]

30. 118,601 vs 537.

Also not "blatantly stolen" - RFK is a bit selective in his use of the research, unfortunately.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/blogs/tokaji/2006/06/back-to-ohio-rolling-stone-piece.html

The guy who wrote this is a law professor who specializes in Election Law. And he's on our side. But, he happens to agree with Kerry that the proof just isn't there, so you probably won't see his very intelligent arguments quoted very often on DU.

Here's how he begins the article at the link:

...Kennedy does a nice job of explaining and cataloguing the numerous problems that did in fact occur in Ohio's 2004 election. For reasons explained below, I don't think he makes a persuasive case that the election was "stolen" (i.e., that Kerry really won). The article is nevertheless useful in exposing how shoddy election administration practices can result in lost votes, and how some recently enacted laws will make things worse rather than better.

As a precinct election inspector myself, here is one of Tokaji's points that resonates most with me, and has been a big source of discomfort for me with the notion that the election was "stolen" by wide-ranging fraud:

The biggest problem with relying on exit polls to "prove" widespread election fraud is that it there's no plausible explanation of how such fraud could actually occur. The discrepancies existed not just in one but in many counties, each of which is administered by its own bipartisan board of elections, as Kennedy notes. These counties used a variety of different types of voting equipment, including punch card, optical scan, and direct record electronic systems manufactured and sold by different vendors. To believe that the exit polls prove election fraud, you have to believe that a group of people somehow managed to orchestrate the manipulation of results in not just one but in many counties, all of which run their own elections. Moreover, because the exit poll discrepancy existed in 30 states, according to Kennedy, you have to believe that there was widespread ballot stuffing and/or ballot snuffing across state lines, in hundreds of counties using various different types of equipment, many of which have chief election officials who are either nonpartisan, bipartisan, or Democrats. No plausible explanation has been offered as to how one could pull off such an extensive conspiracy -- and it is a conspiracy theory -- without detection.

Like I said, I work at a polling place. Most of the rest of the board are republicans. Yet I have a hard time believing that they would knowingly engage in anything remotely resembling "ballot-stuffing" or other fraud. Even if I (a Democrat) were not present, I don't think these people would do that. Maybe in some places, an entire board would be composed of weakly-moraled people who would. But to imagine that this would go on across hundreds of precincts and that people like my coworkers would be complicit - the suspension of disbelief required by that theory is just more than I can do.

Btw that identifies one simple thing we can do to stop one avenue of fraud: Make sure you have at least one Democrat on EVERY election board.

Also, the "voter purge." My state did that just before I started working as an inspector. The rolls at my precinct went from about 1600 to 1200, based on what I've been told. Guess how many people have shown up to vote that weren't on the rolls? Maybe 1. Out of about 400. BECAUSE THE PEOPLE PURGED WERE DEAD OR HAD MOVED. That is what the purpose is of purging the rolls is, and it's a valid reason! So, I would say that RFK's use of a 10% figure is out of line; it assumes the results were skewed by ill intent, rather than proving it. I respect RFK Jr immensely for his environmental work, but I believe he is dead wrong on at least this one point of his analysis.

Given all these weaknesses in the "proof", I don't see how Kerry could do anything but concede. And please note, only one person has ever taken longer to concede than Kerry - Gore. Normally concession comes around midnight of election night. Kerry at least waited until the next morning, until he had a good handle on the numbers and realized that there was no plausible way that the election could be overturned.

[Clarkie1]

21. I agree with your assesment of Kerry that his greatest flaw

is his apparent inability to address issues and attacks quickly and decisively. It's always a balance between acting quickly and decisively, and being deliberative and taking ones time. However, most Americans felt some level of discomfort with Kerry because to be an effective President one cannot act as if they are in the senate...they need to act like a President.

[still_one]

23. I am also outraged at his advisors who ran his campaign so poorly

and were not working as hard as they should have in the swing states to assure the the votes were counted properly, and that no one was getting disenfrancished

Hopefully, we are learning from the past

[blm]

28. Please tell us how anyone ELSE acquired the hard evidence needed to make

the case to continue.

It's fun and games to dissect Kerry, but not ONE OF YOU can state how any other candidate could perform DIFFERENTLY under the exact same circumstances. And NONE have taken on the ISSUE of voting machine fraud still to this day.

So, tell us how presidential someone else would have been then. What decision would that person make with no evidence and a Dem party head who didn't believe in machine fraud?

[kenny blankenship]

6. Most theft goes unreported.

A large fraction of rapes also are never reported.
Doesn't Wolfie know any policemen? They often say their jobs are made more difficult because victims fail to cooperate and give full information or are reluctant to press charges. The victim may fear retaliation or believes the system will never catch and punish the perpetrator--in either case the futility of filing a complaint doesn't mean that no crime has occurred.

But that's America these days isn't it? The violent say to the rest of us: you can't stop me, you haven't stopped me, and that means that I've got a legal right to do what I'm doing, and unless you can stop me, you better not say anything against me either.

[KoKo]

7. Here's what RFK says about Kerry's statements from the article:

Sen. John Kerry -- in a wide-ranging discussion of ROLLING STONE's investigation -- expressed concern about Republican tactics in 2004, but stopped short of saying the election was stolen. ''Can I draw a conclusion that they played tough games and clearly had an intent to reduce the level of our vote? Yes, absolutely. Can I tell you to a certainty that it made the difference in the election? I can't. There's no way for me to do that. If I could have done that, then obviously I would have found some legal recourse.''

Kerry conceded, however, that the widespread irregularities make it impossible to know for certain that the outcome reflected the will of the voters. ''I think there are clearly states where it is questionable whether everybody's vote is being counted, whether everybody is being given the opportunity to register and to vote,'' he said. ''There are clearly barriers in too many places to the ability of people to exercise their full franchise. For that to be happening in the United States of America today is disgraceful.''

Kerry's comments were echoed by Howard Dean, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee. ''I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided,'' Dean says. ''We know that there was substantial voter suppression, and the machines were not reliable. It should not be a surprise that the Republicans are willing to do things that are unethical to manipulate elections. That's what we suspect has happened, and we'd like to safeguard our elections so that democracy can still be counted on to work.''

To help prevent a repeat of 2004, Kerry has co-sponsored a package of election reforms called the Count Every Vote Act. The measure would increase turnout by allowing voters to register at the polls on Election Day, provide provisional ballots to voters who inadvertently show up at the wrong precinct, require electronic voting machines to produce paper receipts verified by voters, and force election officials like Blackwell to step down if they want to join a campaign. (205) But Kerry says his fellow Democrats have been reluctant to push the reforms, fearing that Republicans would use their majority in Congress to create even more obstacles to voting. ''The real reason there is no appetite up here is that people are afraid the Republicans will amend HAVA and shove something far worse down our throats,'' he told me


http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/10432334/was_the_2004_election_stolen/4

[blm]

8. Kerry and Dean aren't getting ANY backup from other Dems on machine fraud

and THEY are the ones we need to go after. This article just may be the turning point on that - so far they have shown nothing but skepticism about machine fraud.

[KoKo]

10. John Conyers and the Progressive Caucus had to hold hearing in

Capitol Basment to get attention to this fraud. Michael Moore's "9/11" showed what happened with "Selection 2000."

What are you saying here? CNN's Blitzer used Kerry's weak statement about Fraud in 2004 against Kerry using his own statement which I posted from the Kennedy article.

I think that Kerry just couldn't deal with accepting that Gore's Presidency was STOLEN and HIS OWN Presidency was STOLEN from under him.

He still believe the system "works" he just thinks like most Dems that it's all the "REPUGS FAULT!"

How could we clue Kerry, Reid/Pelosi and so many of our Dems into the fact that it's THEIR FAULT!!!!!!!!!!! :shrug: THEY didn't get what was going on THROUGHOUT THE 90's with the "HUNTING OF THE PRESIDENT"/ Joe Conason's BOOK! and MANY OTHERS.....

[blm]

11. That's YOUR opinion - I believe it's the fault of the Dem party heads who

did NOTHING to secure the machines for all Democrats. They did nothing to prepare Dems on election boards in every state as they needed to do BEFORE the vote.

They had FOUR YEARS to nail down voting security state by state and they chose, instead, to allow the party infrastructure in crucial states to collapse.

They didn't BELIEVE in machine fraud. That aspect of the campaign was THEIR JOB. Blaming Kerry is just the favorite exercise for the lazy-minded who can't figure out how the party works.

[KoKo]

12. I think that's what I was alluding to. It's ALL OUR DEM LEADERS FAULT!!!

They were "asleep at the wheel" and allowed Clinton to go down and never defend any of their own. The "Modus Operendi" is for Dems to ALWAYS APOLOGIZE as the O'Reilly's and Coulters and Attack Dogs of the Right and a "Sock Puppet" installed "P-Resident" keep up the CHORUS!!!!

That's not Howard Dean's fault...it's all our DEMS FAULTS!!!!

[blm]

14. It was MacAuliffe's fault from 2000 - 2004. It was HIS job just as it was

Kerry's job was to win the debates and keep challenging Bush's policies while crafting and presenting his own plans. Make it all about Kerry and you lose sight of the infrastructure of the party that actually COLLAPSED.

It's like blaming a race car driver when the pit crew he has no choice BUT to use, can't figure out how to change a tire.

[karynnj]

19. Kerry's and Dean's statements are what it should be

It is 100% accurate and every part is provable. Kerry is a US Senator, Dean the head of the DNC. In their positions, they SHOULD NOT go beyond what is provable.

The reason is that there is more than sufficient reason to say that things need to be fixed.

[blm]

37. And at least we KNOW that both Kerry and Dean do know more about election

fraud now than was known in 2004.

I will bet they work to secure the machines BEFORE the vote because they know that after is too late.

[Peace Patriot]

13. I think there's a lot of protection of the corporate electronic voting

industry going on within the Dem Party leadership. Don't know if Kerry's involved, but his adviser on corporate-run, "trade secret" vote tabulation, Bilderberg 'Democrat" Christopher Dodd, certainly is. He's the one who conspired with the two biggest crooks in Congress, Tom Delay and Bob Ney, to pass the infamous "Help America Vote Act" of 2002, which completely destroyed election TRANSPARENCY (the most necessary thing in elections) and corrupted election officials from one end of the country to the other with a $4 billion electronic voting boondoggle.

I've thought from time to time, are the Democrats insane? Now we have two rightwing-connected Bushite corporations--Diebold and ES&S--counting most of the votes in the country under a veil of secrecy. That may be good for Bilderberg 'Democrats' (and their war profiteering DLC brethren and sistren), but what of your rank and file Dem candidate/office holder?

It does seem insane, doesn't it? But I think it's just (!) corruption, and some fear. (It was the Anthrax Congress that passed HAVA).

How come they're not shouting this from the rooftops? The election system itself is NON-TRANSPARENT and FRAUDULENT--and run by Bushite corporations!

Kerry says he "can't know" if the fraud changed the outcome. Why can't he know? BECAUSE THE ELECTION SYSTEM WAS DESIGNED FOR HIM AND US *NOT* TO KNOW!

Christ. Go back to Government 101, John, and learn it all over again. Read about Stalin and non-transparent elections!

Non-transparent elections are not elections. They are tyranny.

[blm]

17. Kerry said electronic voting machines need to be banned state by state

after he saw a preview copy of the RS article. He gets it - Dodd was the DEM PARTY'S pointman on voting issues - you blame Kerry for party choices that he had nothing to do with.

Did Kerry ask others to do his debates for him? Craft his challenges to Bush's policies? Have them write his policy papers? No. And it seems many of you blame him for NOT DOING The jobs designated for others in the Dem party structure.

[still_one]

25. I essentially agree with your assessment

so my question now is, what has been done to assure us that 2006 or 2008 won't disenfranchise our votes?

[blm]

26. I'm thinking we need to hit the lawmakers who DON'T get it yet.

Maybe launch a campaign to Rolling Stone and ask them to send a copy of that issue to EVERY LAWMAKER in DC. I will do that first thing Monday morning myself.

[still_one]

34. I will call and write my Senators and representative on Monday

[otohara]

18. He Was Rude and Dismissive From Get Go

the media swept another stolen election under the rug -

[grasswire]

20. why was Wolf battering RFK and not the Bushie??

Wolf spent his whole time hammering RFKjr and attacking his comments. He tag-teamed with Terry Holt, the Bush campaign spokesperson. Wolf was aggressive to RFK, and almost rude at times, interrupting him despite the fact that RFK has a speech impediment that should elicit courtesy.

If there was ever any proof that CNN was complicit in the theft of an election, Wolf Blitzer provided it tonight. He gets an "F" for his work tonight.

[blm]

29. Wolf proves his complicity with BushInc every day.

I was pretty damn certain since 2000, but 2004 and then the Downing Street Memos cover up nailed that door shut for me.

[mtnsnake]

32. Oh c'mon. He didn't "batter" him. He questioned him about proof

of all the allegations. Let's face it...as great as the Rolling Stone article is, what's it gonna really mean unless someone is found guilty and someone goes to jail.

[LongTomH]

36. Wolfie did batter RFK JR.

.....and he wasn't "almost rude;" he was just plain, outright rude. :grr:

[blm]

39. It's purpose was to alert people that it HAPPENED and now we can work

to make sure to watch out for fraud in the next election.

[wisteria]

24. Kerry's statement was a proper statement for someone placed in there

position he was. While this article is about 2004, it is more than just about Kerry. RFK Jr. is trying to present a case for change and Senator Kerry is trying to help him accomplish that with his statements. People like Wolfie and Tuckerson are trying to dismiss the concerns about fair elections by focusing on Kerry.They don't want fair elections because they know they would be booted out of power and would not be able to control the purse strings any longer.

[MH1]

31. Yeah, isn't it funny how so many of the attacks at DU

are against Democrats who want to fix the system, instead of being against the liars and colluders in the media and the republican party who are trying to stop them from fixing the system?

:eyes:

[TayTay]

40. Kerry did 'contest' it, in as far as he legally could

There is no hard and fast evidence for this that will stand up in a court of law.

I have heard John Kerry talk about the problems with the election system in America. I have heard him talk about how people were disenfranchised and how Ohio officials did things to the letter but not the spirit of the law to make voting difficult for targeted groups. (Legally, btw.)

I know Kerry participated in several lawsuits in Ohio, at least one of which was thrown out of court. It was thrown out of court by the judge. (Do you get that? The judge saw no leal basis for the lawsuit to continue. Period. End of Story. We have to fix this 'on the ground' in Ohio. It was dismissed for lack of evidence or jurisdiction.)

The Republican Party in Ohio, and by many counts in other states, did many underhanded and dirty things to repress the Dem vote. Legally. Do you understand what that means? How do you contest legal fraud. Ahm, by amending the election law. How do you do that when the party in power is benefitting from the fraud?

Jesus, it's not that easy. All these people who just think it's like snapping your fingers are on drugs or living in lalaland.

[Generic Brad]

42. Blitzer is a tool

And not the sharpest one in the shed, at that.

[station agent]

43. Wrapped RFK jr.'s Appearance around some songs for a podcast but...

The strangest thing happened. Whenever Wolf or his Republican gues spoke it's really distorted. Wierd huh?

Check it out here if you like.