Want another thread about election fraud? They say Kerry's working on it.

[ginnyinWI]

It's a post about a post on Brad Blog. It might be nothing at all, and it might be something. It does seem to fit--JK knowing full well that the election was stolen and working behind the scenes on wrapping up a case to prove it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=360895&mesg_id=360895

[whometense]

1. I saw this and have been thinking about it

all day. Thanks for posting it, Ginny.

For simplicity's sake, here's the comment from Brad Blog
http://www.bradblog.com/archives/00001340.htm#13

COMMENT #13
...jen said on 4/21/2005 @ 3:05pm PT...

Thanks Kira #12.

Anyways, I wanted to share this bit of happy "news" I got this morning! I posted this earlier on my "home" blog and am just copying that post here:

When I got home I got a phone call from someone working for Kerry. They called to thank me for signing the "Kids Come First" Act, and of course for $.

Before he could get to any of that I expressed to him that my #1 concern is with the election system, went over some of the problems from the '04 election, and asked if he knew if Kerry was aware that the election was stolen. He said he is very aware of it and one of the reasons he's not speaking out is because they are still in the process of gathering all the information and proof they can before publicly addressing it.

He said they knew that if they tried to address the stolen election before they had "all their ducks in a row" (my words, not his) they would be labeled conspiracy nuts and ridiculed to the point of people not believing any of what they said. He said as far as the paperless voting machines that it would take longer than if there had been a paper traill, but that it is still traceable. He also said the same thing about the Vote Tabulators - that even if the hacking of the machines was done in a way that couldn't be detected, that they can detect it but it takes longer...

I didn't ask how or any details of what's being done, but I thought it was somewhat encouraging and interesting that Kerry is in fact part of the investigations and discovery process - makes me wonder who else is involved that is just being very quite about it!

[ginnyinWI]

2. thanks

I should have thought of just posting the pertinent comment, rather than a post-of-a-post-of-a-post!

If true, and I am saying "if", then it just confirms what we've been suspecting, that he does know and he is indeed working on it. That, all by itself, is comforting if true. We know it would be just like him to both know and be working on it! :)

That said, who knows if that poster is accurate, or if the caller to the poster was even who he said he was--so many "ifs"! Bottom line: I'll just keep trusting Kerry to be Kerry, and see what happens. I would like to see those lefty freepers take back their harsh judgements--they make me so mad!

[whometense]

3. In a sense, I'm skeptical about the comment.

It seems unlikely that anyone making fundraising phonecalls would be in a position to know what Kerry thinks or doesn't think.

BUT the info in it totally coincides with my private thoughts on the matter. I never thought for an instant he would give up on this. And contrary to what a lot of people thought, it seemed to me that his quick concession meant something 180 degrees different from folding. I always thought it was the appearance of folding he was after.

After reading that other thread I wondered if I should take down the original comment - they were kind of cloak-and-dagger about the whole thing. But anyone doing serious spying could go over there themselves, anyway.

[Pirate Smile]

4. I doubt this is true. I hope Kerry is working on it but whoever the

person talked to on the phone wouldn't know it.

Yesterday, I got my call from Kids Come First to see if I would donate.

I remember the whole hullabaloo about it last week and that they are valid but they are really being done rather poorly.

They did mention that it may be taped for quality control purposes so maybe they are checking to see how the company is performing.

The person wasn't very good at it. He didn't really do anything wrong but he definitely wasn't a Pro. I cut it off pretty quick because I wasn't going to donate, said "thank you" and hung up.

Today, I saw another diary on DailyKos bitching about getting this call, and how after they said they couldn't donate, the caller kept pushing and pushing. I remember quite a few people mentioning this last week during the threads on this topic.

I really hope they hire a new company to do this or start using volunteers. I don't think it is reflecting well on Kerry. It doesn't change my opinion, of course, but other people who aren't quite as committed seem put off.

[whometense]

5. I agree with you on this.

I haven't gotten a call yet, but I have caller ID and don't pick up the phone if it's not someone I know, so I may have been called.

I agree that it reflects - unfairly - poorly on Kerry, and he doesn't need people being put off by fundraising phone calls. I saw that thread on Kos as well, and it was filled with the usual Kos hostility and dismissiveness towards Kerry. I hate being called and asked for money. But of course it won't make an iota of difference in my support for him.

[ginnyinWI]

6. do you think maybe the caller was just saying

whatever it took to get some money donated? Like he had gotten that response before and just decided to say something like that? It is possible. Nothing is certain unless JK gets up and says it himself.
But I'm with you, I hope it's true.

[Pirate Smile]

7. Yes, that is what I thought. Say "yes" if it will get you the donation

because they must be on commission since they are pressuring people so much.

I really don't think the people calling are in a position to know inside information. No way.

I feel bad because I don't like being critical but I really think they should know if the effort is counterproductive.

[whometense]

8. that sounds like a possibility.

I can't imagine the fundraising people know much about Kerry - or election fraud - if they're just hired guns.

I just finished reading the BCCI article referenced in the other thread. :loveya: :loveya:

What can we do to spread it around, I wonder, now that election season is over. It says so much about him as a person that contradicts the bashers:

Second, the BCCI affair showed Kerry to be a politician driven by a sense of mission, rather than expediency--even when it meant ruffling feathers. Perhaps Sen. Hank Brown, the ranking Republican on Kerry's subcommittee, put it best. "John Kerry was willing to spearhead this difficult investigation," Brown said. "Because many important members of his own party were involved in this scandal, it was a distasteful subject for other committee and subcommittee chairmen to investigate. They did not. John Kerry did."

Makes me so proud - and so sad.

[ginnyinWI]

9. he not only has a sense of mission,

he wants to do everything with integrity--to keep telling the truth and treating people fairly. So he's doubly amazing, given the career he's in, where there's corruption all around.

[TayTay]

10. There is some consistency to this

There is every reason for Kerry to drop this as an issue. There is also every reason for him to keep this as an issue. Depends on whose point of view you are looking at.

There are diverse groups in the Democratic Party. The ones who check into DU believe that the election was out and out stolen. (On purpose, with a plan, done by people who were intent on undermining American Democracy and installing a fraudulent regime into the White House. Big damn charges.) The larger Democratic world has 'heard things' and doesn't know what to make of it.

I am intrigued by all this. Larissa on Raw Story reported a while ago that the election was majorly screwed with and that was just in Ohio. That there were overt things done to discourage the Dem vote. That there were covert things done that may have affected the vote. (The closing of that one county when the vote count began because of nonexistent terrorist threat. The strange ballots with the white tape over the Pres vote. The things that don't add up at all.) And the important info that Kerry's own lawyer team on the ground in Ohio was not 'his team' and had been infiltrated and diverted from it's proper function.

I am just a spectator in this. I don't know 90% of the story, I'm sure. But I really think Kerry does. He has been fighting these people since '70. These guys on the * team are the same guys that screwed with him under Nixon's criminal regime. They have refined and perhaps perfected their methods now. I don't think any of this would be news to Kerry. (Not born yesterday, not after the drug-running, Iran-Contra, BCCI, the concerted effort to 'get' Clinton and so forth.) Kerry's daughters have made public hints that something bad and illegal went on. So, I think he knows.

John Kerry is a very careful man. It's in his nature. He is careful in speech and in action. But his language, of late, has been very interesting. He did not drop the election issue. It isn't the only thing he talks about, because that would be perceived as some sort of crazy obsession and as sour grapes. But he keeps bringing it up in public. He brought it up in Boston at the MLK breakfast on Jan 17th (or so) before the Inauguration. He brought it up again in the speech I saw him deliver at Faneuil Hall. It is still there. It is still on his mind. And he is a very careful man, careful in his speech. I think he knows something. (I have always seen him as a very careful guy. The VVAW was the action of a careful guy who was offended to the core by the illegal and foolish actions his government had taken. He took deliberate action and made that movement work as an intelligent and well-organized thing.)

Knowing something and having proof are two separate things. If proof does come out, it has to come out in such a way that it is not about John Kerry. It is about America, our sense of our own Democracy and the desire to make the democratic process strong and fair at home. I also stone-cold believe that if he does know something and it can be proved, then he will do so. I just think he will. It's in his nature.

[rox63]

12. Right on the money, TayTay

As a fellow Masshole and long-time Kerry-voter, I completely agree with TayTay's assessment of Kerry. He is a very careful, thoughtful, determined man. During the 2004 campaign, sometimes found his cautious nature frustrating. I just wanted him to come out openly swinging at *. But that's not who he is, and he has to be true to himself.

If he truly believes the election was stolen, and that our electoral system has been corrupted, will not drop this. Even if it takes years to unravel, he will keep at it until he gets to the bottom of it.

[TayTay]

14. Thanks Rox!

Sometimes my wonky side is useful. I have been paying very close attention to what Sen. Kerry has been saying. He is very deliberate and doesn't say things he doesn't mean. He has referred back to the concession speech he made in Nov as a way of whacking *. (Yeah, really.) He has said, on multiple occasions that he referred in that speech to a need for America to come together and that the country wants us to unite and work things out in a bipartisan way. Kerry was able to suggest that * has been unable to do that, that * has been pulling away to the right and not trying to take the rest of the country with him. The implication is that Kerry is occupying the moral high ground because he conceded in an effort to pull the nation together, while the guy who was inaugurated has not followed that same road. Now that is what I call careful speech. (Think about it. That concession speech was graceful, but now look how carefully was it crafted. Kerry can use it now to prove his point. Again, a deliberate, and thoughtful man.)

Same thing now. Look at the speech on the floor yesterday. That was going after the freeper faction with a damn vengeance. It is also completely in line with his recent speeches. It is just the next step. What else was the 'felt need' speech about if not a set up to say exactly who is obstructing the needs of the American people. The speech yesterday is a way of saying this is who is doing it, this is how it is being done, and I am done playing around with these people. Then he went on to whack them with a vengeance. (That must have been a great speech to deliver,I imagine. Very freeing to say what you actually think.)

If John Kerry is keeping the election fraud theme in his speeches (did he do so in Texas?) and is adding the direct attack on the wingnuts and their horrendous misuse of religion to affect public policy, then I think the speeches are going somewhere. Stay tuned.

[whometense]

13. TayTay, you've outdone yourself!

Great, thoughtful post. And I'm glad you brought up all the Larissa issues - they are all still haunting me as well. As I said above, Kerry is neither a coward as so many at DU and Kos like to think, nor is he in any way naive.

I believe he knows something. But contrary to what was said by the telemarketer, he won't let loose till the ducks are all in a row.

[ginnyinWI]

15. careful, deliberative, analytical

I would expect him to carry out any investigation thoroughly, and leave no doubt as to the results. ;)

I agree, this campaign always was about America, not Kerry himself, and that's how the truth would be presented. It was a huge insult to our electoral process. Sure there always has been a certain amount of fraud in elections, and a certain amount of voter suppression. And a certain amount of campaign smearing! But we have reached new lows in these last two elections, and it is not coincidental that both involved the BFEE! They know no bounds!

In one of the links included in the original post, not the BCCI one but the Iran-Contra one, someone describes JK as having "rebellious idealism". That really fits, doesn't it? He stubbornly keeps fighting for America to be the best it can be.

[Pirate Smile]

18. Now there is a diary on the Recommended Diaries on DailyKos

about these calls.

Here we go again
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/4/23/8297/33923

[whometense]

20. Thanks.

Some nice comments about Kerry there, and an emotion-free discussion of the calls. Very nice.

[LittleClarkie]

11. I thought Brad Blog was kinda anti-Kerry. No?

I'm sure Kerry's doing the best he can. But he's too much the prosecutor to come out half-cocked.

[rockymountaindem]

16. I don't know which I'd rather believe...

that we really won and that it was stolen, or that we really lost.

On the one hand, it would be nice to know we won and throw it all in Bush's face. On the other hand, it would be sad to know that the voting system is indeed broken.

It is this paradox that has kept me from embracing any election theft theories.

[politicasista]

17. I always hope that fraud is proven so people can STFU

But I don't know what to believe either.

[fedupinBushcountry]

19. We Won

If you followed everything and read all the evidence so far, in your heart you would come to the conclusion that we won. In my gut I feel that the truth of this election will come out.

There were so many instances in both red and blue states, that so many people were disenfranchised and were not able to vote. The one's that were hurt the most were the young, minorities and older people. I have 2 kids one is in college in Virginia the other lives in Queens, both of them had problems with registration. In fact with my daughter being away at school, she so much wanted her vote to count, but she was so confused. She was registered here, but did not receive her absentee ballot, so she re-registered in Richmond and ended up voting there, and in fact told the registrar, what she had done. Was it legal I have no idea, her place of residence is here . She told me of many students who were in tears on Nov. 3rd, because they did not know if their vote was counted, now that is sad.

My son in N.Y., registered there and a few weeks before the election, they had an article in the paper that said many who registered were not really registered due to some mistake in the computers. He barely made it in time, but what if he hadn't of read that article.

Here in Virginia we had new places to vote, I worked at ours, but they also opened up another poll at the school right up the street, I had no idea about it, and many were totally upset when they came to the one I was at and had to go down the street and get in line all over again at another place.

That is just a few things I know right here in my state, now add in the press Kerry and comes up Bush, how many people do you think didn't even realize it did it, or being first time voters didn't understand the way the machine worked? The reports in Ohio N.M. and Nevada, just to name a few were red flags big time.

Then we have the polls, the one's that switched at 1:00 a.m. in the morning from a 3% lead for Kerry to a 3% led for Bush, with only I can't remember the exact total of people they added on to that poll, but in the end those few extra added on, it is mathematically impossibility to switch like that.

I too was one of those who screamed NO when Kerry conceded, but I came to understand why he did, he didn't want to cause a big hoopla when there was 3 million extra votes for *, he knew that he had to prove TOTAL fraud in order to stay in it, and if he had stayed he would of looked like a big whiner.

On that day of the concession speech, he said he would make sure every vote counted. He has never stopped looking into this. I was a bit on the inside of the happenings , since I worked on the Kerry blog, and I can tell you this they were getting a lot of info, but not enough to prove the F word. It is hard to do when you can't get into the machines, which by the way the case to get into those machines is still in the court in Ohio, what is up with that, why has it not been brought forth yet, and Kerry and Edwards names are both on that case.

When Kerry said he was up against a bunch of crooks he wasn't joking. If JK has anything to do with this we will all know the TRUTH, it may not come quickly enough for everyone, but as someone else said it took quite a few years for Iran-Contra deal and the BCCI, Kerry never quits until he finds the TRUTH.

Just my 2 cents.

[Firespirit]

22. Thanks for this excellent post

(And thanks TayTay also for your excellent analysis too.)

I must admit that for two or three weeks, I blocked the idea of election fraud having switched anything. (There's a personal reason for this which I'm not getting into right now.) Eventually I had to look at the facts and come to my own conclusion about it, which -- at present -- is that at the very least, the electoral vote was stolen. I'm not sure about the popular vote but acknowledge it as a possibility.

I hope that in addition to proactive work to prevent bad things from happening in 2006 and '08, Kerry IS in fact still looking into 2004. He can take all the time he needs, since there's no real urgency in it anymore. (Yes, I did entertain the idea of things turning around last December, before the "recount" got hijacked.) The most important thing now is to do a thorough job and assemble a case with no holes in it, something that John Kerry is definitely capable of doing and would WANT to do.

[ginnyinWI]

21. I went through that for a while too

I decided I'd rather believe it was stolen than believe the whole country wanted the chimp for another four years. I'd rather believe in governmental corruption than that I was living amongst a population that had all become total idiots.

Then, I was feeling so much like I had to do something about it immediately. It all seemed so wrong! But in the end, there isn't a whole lot that us regular people can do, aside from talking to fellow Dems about it and supporting change. It will be up to the more powerful players to make the greatest efforts. So we watch and wait.

I agree with you--I really want this to all come out someday soon, and embarrass the Republican party big-time. So often, it seems, that the big and powerful are protected from things like this, until they do enough to turn the public against them. Example, Nixon: the Watergate scandal didn't really get going until other things happened, like the oil embargo fiasco in 1973. You'd think enough dirt has already accumulated on this administration, but they are getting so much better at covering it up, and have more friends in high places.