The usual Kevin election post.

[Ion]

...
Just because something seems to be doesn't mean that it is.
...

That's why we need a honest investigation into voting fraud in Ohio.

For me there is fraud.

But that's just me.

For the justice system, we need an honest investigation into voting fraud in Ohio.

Which disproves Central Scrutinizer repeatedly calling in this thread Kevin_Lowe by the insult Kevin_Woo_Lowe and Woo_Lowe.

An honest investigation as advocated by Kevin_Lowe, is needed to clarify whether fraud or no fraud happened.

 

[RandFan]

Correct.

RandFan:

the singular of data is datum.

Data is plural.

...he knows that he commited fraud...

It’s “committed”. Maybe you should use a spell checker before you criticize others. Jerk.

 

[Ion]

It’s “committed”. Maybe you should use a spell checker before you criticize others. Jerk.

I should, but you post too fast.

As for Jerk, well note that English is my third best language, not my best language.

 

[SezMe]

Ion, I have to agree with RandFan here. Taking the 5th is NOT prima facia evidence of guilt. In fact, judges giving jury instructions explicitly say that a defendant not testifying is NOT to be taken as an indication of guilt and if someone takes the 5th, it is NOT to be taken as an indication of guilt or that the person has something to hide. Under USA law, your agrument is invalid.

That said, I have substantial reservations about the conduct of the 2004 USA presidential election. I await the results of further investigations. But until there is solid evidence of problems, one has to, under USA law, assume "innocent until proven guilty" the operative word being "proven." Weasely Ohio election officials, poor election planning, and highly suspicious vote counting procedures give me grief, but do not give me proof.

 

[RandFan]

That's why we need a honest investigation into voting fraud in Ohio.

Not necessarily. Only if investigators think the evidence arises to the occasion.

Just because troopers signed affidavits that Clinton committed crimes did not mean that there should have been an investigation.

For me there is fraud.

And for some Bill Clinton did all of the things the troopers said he did.

But that's just me.

I agree

For the justice system, we need an honest investigation into voting fraud in Ohio.

Perhaps but I don't think so.

Which disproves Central Scrutinizer repeatedly calling in this thread of Kevin_Lowe by the insult Kevin_Woo_Lowe.

An honest investigation as advocated by Kevin_Lowe, is needed to clarify whether fraud or no fraud happened.

The evidence is on the woo-woo side.

I don't have a problem with an investigation but I'm not overwhelmed by the evidence thus far.

By the way it is “a[n] honest investigation”.

 

[RandFan]

Ion

For the record your responses have been better than I remember in the past.

You have not responded with ad hominem or personal attacks and you seem pretty reasonable. I am pleasantly surprised.

Thanks for the replies.

RandFan

 

[Ion]

Ion, I have to agree with RandFan here. Taking the 5th is NOT prima facia evidence of guilt. In fact, judges giving jury instructions explicitly say that a defendant not testifying is NOT to be taken as an indication of guilt and if someone takes the 5th, it is NOT to be taken as an indication of guilt or that the person has something to hide. Under USA law, your agrument is invalid.

That said, I have substantial reservations about the conduct of the 2004 USA presidential election. I await the results of further investigations. But until there is solid evidence of problems, one has to, under USA law, assume "innocent until proven guilty" the operative word being "proven." Weasely Ohio election officials, poor election planning, and highly suspicious vote counting procedures give me grief, but do not give me proof.

I understand the importance of the 5th in the US.

I stress in my posts that taking the 5th is very likely guilt in my personal opinion.

For the justice system, we need an honest investigation.

The claims of Woo in this thread and others, are dishonest.

 

[csense]

Correct.

RandFan:

the singular of data is datum.

Data is plural.

Then why did you just use a singular verb?

Probably for the same reason that Randfan used singular modifiers: because it is being used in the abstract, just like the word information.

 

[Ion]

Then why did you just use a singular verb?

Probably for the same reason that Randfan used singular modifiers: because it is being used in the abstract, just like the word information.

Data is plural means the word data is plural.

Data has little value doesn't mean anything singular about data has little value.

Data is plural, and the plural data have little value.

 

[crimresearch]

I understand the importance of the 5th in the US.

I stress in my posts that taking the 5th is very likely guilt in my personal opinion.

For the justice system, we need an honest investigation.

The claims of Woo in this thread and others, are dishonest.

And how exactly does one, in a non Woo-woo manner, determine the guilt of someone based on their taking the 5th?


BTW :
12/06/04

Ohio starts recounts of votes due to voting infractions favoring Bush, today

And:
12/07/04

documented voting infractions favoring Bush, that's why they started the official recount in Ohio yesterday

What were the results of that recount again?

 

[Ion]

Not necessarily. Only if investigators think the evidence arises to the occasion.
...

I don't know yet what the investigators think about the evidence, but there is a new thread also about Kerry jumping into the fray.

He was reserved.

He is like converted by the evidence for the need for an investigation into infractions in Ohio voting.

 

[csense]

Data is plural means the word data is plural.

Data has little value doesn't mean anything singular about data has little value.

Data is plural, and the plural data have little value.

Randfan's right, your logic is very poor.

 

[Ion]

And how exactly does one, in a non Woo-woo manner, determine the guilt of someone based on their taking the 5th?
...

I don't know.

The US justice protects the accused more than other countries.

In other countries one is still innocent until proven guilty, but has to testify.

...
BTW :
12/06/04


And:
12/07/04


What were the results of that recount again?

Ohio's Secretary of State delayed the recount until a few days ago one day before the electors met, and the recount proceeds now.

 

[Ion]

Randfan's right, your logic is very poor.

Because you say so without argument whatsoever?

No thanks, your logic is very poor.

 

[crimresearch]

Ohio's Secretary of State delayed the recount until a few days ago one day before the electors met, and the recount proceeds now.

Ahh..Thanks, I hadn't seen that news.

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

That's why we need a honest investigation into voting fraud in Ohio.

For me there is fraud.

But that's just me.

For the justice system, we need an honest investigation into voting fraud in Ohio.

Which disproves Central Scrutinizer repeatedly calling in this thread Kevin_Lowe by the insult Kevin_Woo_Lowe and Woo_Lowe.

An honest investigation as advocated by Kevin_Lowe, is needed to clarify whether fraud or no fraud happened.

I say there was fraud in Alaska. Should we have an investigation there too? I think there was also fraud in New York. Should we have an investigation there too? Look! Over there! Fraud! Let's investigate!

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

....well note that English is my third best language, not my best language.

Which is what I have been saying all along. And yet, you kept denying it.

Liar.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Merry Christmas all.

I observe that this thread has become a bit derailed.

Whether or not Triad's owner has donated to Republican campaigns (and if you do a little digging you can even get the exact figures and campaigns relatively easily) is a trivial distraction.

If I had my 'druthers we'd focus on the important point, which is that (barring a false affidavit) illegal tampering with the machinery of the Ohio recount has taken place and that at least one person who works for Triad has conspired to thwart an accurate recount.

That's serious whatever the personal political connections of the guy in charge of Triad. But as I said, you can dig up the facts yourself on that matter in about the same amount of time it would take to make another post picking on Ion.

 

[Kevin_Lowe]

Here's something novel: Democrats obstructing a recount, in New Mexico.

"We are seeking a recount in New Mexico to protect the right to vote and ensure that all votes are counted. We came here expecting cooperation, or at least compliance with the law, from New Mexico's Governor and Secretary of State. However, despite broad support across the political spectrum for an honest audit of New Mexico's voting system, we have been stonewalled and obstructed at every step by the Democratic Party leadership of this state," said Cobb.

http://nov2truth.org/article.php?story=20041223140648485

Now the question is, will the usual trolls opt for consistency and ridicule the idea that there might be any ulterior motive in play? Or will they decide that Democrat party actions that bend the law to impede electoral transparency are bad?

 

[Skeptic]

Now the question is, will the usual trolls opt for consistency and ridicule the idea that there might be any ulterior motive in play?

Thanks for the compliment, but, yes, I WOULD ridicule that idea. No, not the idea that there might be SOME other motive for the (alleged) democratic party's behavior here.

But I WOULD ridicule the idea that this "proves" an all-embracing democratic conspiracy with shady business interests and evil con men to steal the elections from its rightful winner and give it to a selected-not-elected evil tyrant they nominated for president.

I WOULD ridicule even more the idea that such a woo-woo conspiracy theory is "proved", or even to be taken seriously, merely because of "some guy who opposes the recount gave money to the democrats before the election", or "somebody involved with creating the voting machines in that state once said something that can be taken out of context to make people suspicious", sort of "evidence".

P.S.

I am against election transparecy and counting all the votes... when such demands come from politicians or "activists".

Becuase when they do, "we want election transparecy" usually means "investigate until THE TRUTH about how MY SIDE REALLY WON emerges", while "count all the votes" more often than not means "including that of felons, illegal aliens, and idiots who spoiled their ballot--I am SURE to be the REAL WINNER once the criminal/stupid/illegal vote is counted."