TRUTHOUT BLOG: Wm. Rivers Pitt at the Conyers Hearings --
truthout.org
t r u t h o u t | Conyers Hearings on Ohio Vote Fraud Coverage
By William Rivers Pitt
Wednesday 08 December 2004
3:55PM
Michigan Congressman John Conyers, the leading Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, conducted a hearing into voting irregularities in Ohio. The house GOP leadership refused to sanction or recognize the hearing.
(Photo: House.gov)
Interview at the Conyers hearing with Cliff Arnebeck, Chair of Common Cause Ohio and attorney with The Alliance for Democracy.
WP: What did you think of the hearing today?
CA: The best part about it was that it happened. If you look at who was here, you had leaders from the generally white political reform movement, and leaders from the black civil rights movement. This is a powerful coalition. Normally, what has happened it the blacks have fought their civil rights struggle, with their numbers being the predominant part of it. Whites have been fighting for political reform, and talk about it as affecting everyone, but don't have the black roots participating. What Reverend Jackson has done, has said, is, you know, you look foolish talking about your civil rights being abused. We are going to be there with you.
We have formed a coalition, and are building the infrastructure, not just to address this election, but to continue to address the legislation and litigation issues that arise. We have joined together, and this is a new and powerful coalition. We are not talking about one group having dominance over the other, but a real partnership of the traditional political reform community with the traditional civil rights community, and Reverend Jackson is the one that proposed it, has initiated the organization of it.
Bill Moss, who was here and testified, has been designated to be the leader of this new coalition for Ohio. He had leading black ministers from all over the state in the room, and was in the office of Common Cause Ohio when this happened. Bill Moss will be the lead plaintiff or contester on the complaint that is going to be filed tomorrow. We are working together, and it's a powerful coalition that will make things happen.
WP: You are working with Jon Bonifaz on the lawsuit.
CA: I am working with Mr. Bonifaz in the capacity of a client. I am chair of the legal committee for Common Cause Ohio, and in that capacity I authorized Jon Bonifaz to represent our group. With national approval, he's representing Common Cause in aspects of the recount litigation. Jon Bonifaz is also a professional friend and colleague of mine for many, many years in the political reform movement, so I would have been seeking his counsel and advice, and working with him, even if we didn't have that connection. He is a superb lawyer.
I have tremendous respect for Jon. As you probably know, Jon is the lawyer that stepped out of the National Voting Rights Institute to file litigation on behalf of Dennis Kucinich and others challenging the constitutionality of the Iraq War Resolution. That was a tremendous job, and I told him that my children and my grandchildren will thank him for having done that.
WP: What specific information will you be bringing to the lawsuit? You mentioned earlier some data that suggested that the so-called margin of victory for Bush stands to be erased by the information being presented in this suit. Can you elaborate?
CA: First of all, from a jurisdictional standpoint, an election contest is not simply a proceeding where you say, "Hey, there were these problems. The long lines resulted in at least 15,000 people not voting."
WP: You're talking about specificity?
CA: Let's assume you could prove it statistically. You say 15,000 did not vote and the likelihood of their voting would have been 75% for Kerry. That's not enough to contest an election. Unless you have enough in the way of votes so that it actually goes to the question of what was the true outcome, the true result, who was the winner, you can be thrown out for not having proper evidence for an election contest.
We believe, based upon these multiple levels of statistical analysis, the statistical anomalies, that in that area alone there is a basis to say the result of the election was statistically opposite of what has been reported. That's without even going into the horrendous civil rights violations and saying, "Here's the evidence to show that these people, had they been able to vote, would have voted the other way."
In the challenge, we will also be...People for the American Way has a separate suit in the court of appeals in Cuyahuga County in Ohio which is designed to readdress this question of the provisional ballots, that they should be counted if they were cast in the right county. We want to raise that, we want to have that counted as part of the proper count.
WP: When will your suit be filed?
CA: What I said originally was, "As soon as possible." We were even going to file it before certification. We are certainly hoping, and feeling very pressed, to file it tomorrow, because the meeting of the Electoral College is supposed to occur on the 13th, and we want to be filed and discussing that issue in court sufficiently in advance to affect that situation.
WP: What can people do to help?
CA: Get involved. It is really important that the public be aware of this. make it clear to anyone exercising authority in this matter that we are aware of this, so that when the Supreme Court is thinking about it, or Congress is thinking about it, or Bush is thinking about it, or Kerry is thinking about it, they know the public is aroused, the public values its right to vote, the public insists upon honesty in our elections and the rule of law, and we will not tolerate fraud in this important matter.
Jesse Jackson, as you could see today, is giving tremendous moral leadership to this. He has tremendous credibility. This is a man who walked with Dr. Martin Luther King in the long civil rights struggle that we honor so much in our history now. This is the man who was holding Dr. King when he died.
WP: Jackson summoned the memory of Selma today while describing this issue.
CA: I was sitting right next to him when he talked about the fact that there aren't members of Congress with children dying in Iraq, and tears were in his eyes. This is a man who feels this stuff deeply, and when he talks about what is at stake, he means it in the deepest part of his being. It shows, and people respect that, and I feel privileged to be associated with him in this struggle. It is a struggle for democracy, and we can't let anyone get away with treating our elections as though it is too late to change things, as though they got away with it and there is nothing to be done about it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
t r u t h o u t | Conyers Hearings on Ohio Vote Fraud Coverage
By William Rivers Pitt
Wednesday 08 December 2004
3:05PM
Interview at the Conyers hearing with Jon Bonifaz, general Counsel of the National Voting Institute, who is bringing a lawsuit against Ohio Secretary of State Kenneth Blackwell to see that there be a full recount of the Ohio vote from the November 2004 election.
WP: Tell me what you thought was the most productive aspect of this hearing.
JB: I think this moves the ball forward with respect to demonstrating that people in this country, throughout this nation, demand a full accounting of what happened on election day, and demand that all votes be properly counted. Until we get to that point of all votes being properly counted, we cannot declare this to be a legitimate election.
WP: Tell me about the lawsuit you are pursuing.
JB: The main focus is that we want a full recount of all votes cast in Ohio for President in the 2004 election. While that recount will continue past the time of the Electoral College meeting on December 13th, we will insist that it be completed in a timely manner, and by January 6th, when that recount is completed, there may in fact be a different set of Electors. I can't say for sure whether that will happen, but a recount is important to ensure the proper counting of every vote.
WP: What did you think about Rep. Conyers saying he might object to the seating of the Ohio Electors?
JB: I think if the recount is proceeding beyond January 6th, that it is the duty of any member of Congress, any member of the U.S. Senate, under their sword duty to the constitution, to prevent a President from being sworn in until it has been determined who won the Presidency. You cannot have an election that is called free and fair, and have people sworn into office, while the votes are still being counted.
WP: What, if anything, can people do to help you?
JB: They can go to DefendTheRecount.org to sign up for legal updates, and they can join the legal defense fund, and they can demand of their members of Congress and U.S. Senate that there be a full accounting of what happened on election day and a proper counting of all the votes prior to the declaration of the next President of the United States.
<Continues at Website........> |
