Reply #94: Yeah, there's a lot to be said for that: misdirection. [View All]

[Peace Patriot]

Here's the quote, from another post at DU (from Olbermann blog):

MissBrooks (379 posts)
Mon Dec-27-04 06:40 PM
Response to Original message

26. From Keith's website...

Mr. Hoffheimer, Kerry's lead attorney on the ground in Ohio:

"I would caution the media not to read more into what the Kerry-Edwards campaign has said," Mr. Hoffheimer advised us by e-mail, "than what you hear in the plain meaning of our comments. There are many conspiracy theorists opining these days. There are many allegations of fraud. But this presidential election is over. The Bush-Cheney ticket has won. The Kerry-Edwards campaign has found no conspiracy and no fraud in Ohio, though there have been many irregularities that cry out to be fixed for future elections. Senator Kerry and we in Ohio intend to fix them. 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. Senator Kerry's fully-informed and extremely careful assessment the day after the election and before he conceded remains accurate today, notwithstanding all the details we have since learned."
____________________

Look at this statement, though:

"Senator Kerry's fully-informed and extremely careful assessment the day after the election and before he conceded remains accurate today, notwithstanding all the details we have since learned."

Sounds to me like this guy is defending a position he argued on Election night. Kerry's "fully-informed and extremely careful assessment" before he conceded?--that's absurd. How could he be "fully-informed" on Election night? "Extremely careful assessment"--this may be the lawyer describing HIS OWN assessment (which he advised Kerry of).

"...notwithstanding all the details we have since learned." ???? "fully-informed" on Election night?

The statement doesn't even make much sense.

I'll also wager the guy doesn't know a whole lot about Windows and C++ (hackability of these computers).

"The Kerry-Edwards campaign has found no conspiracy and no fraud in Ohio..." --How could a lawyer state this publicly PRIOR to depositions and examination of the election evidence (that K/E has asked to be protected)?

It's almost subversion--undermining the efforts of the lawyers who did the filing. And what to make of the phrase "has found" (in "has found no conspiracy")? Lawyers joining a case cannot be said to have "found" anything--especially the K/E lawyers AT THIS POINT in their participation. THIS IS NOT THEIR CASE. They are JOINING the case that others filed.

I think the whole statement is kind of weird. Could be a personal thing (defending his own position). Could be misdirection. Why go to these lengths--making these assertions? (no fraud "found"; "this presidential election is over; "the Bush-Cheney ticket has won."). Lawyers are generally MUCH MORE CIRCUMSPECT in the midst of a case.

__________________

On the other hand:

The BushCons are extremely dangerous people. They would not hesitate to kill to achieve their ends. Destroying peoples' lives and reputations is their morning warmup before breakfast.

So...there would be serious reason to assure judges, other politicians, expert witnesses, ordinary witnesses, party politicos, and any manner of person who is associated with, or might become associated with, challenging this election, that it is not aimed at unseating Bush, even if it is.

Judges are not immune to threats (nor to corruption, of course). This is BushWorld we're living in. Our ideals of justice may be in for a severe beating. Beware! Do not underestimate the sheer evil of what we're dealing with, and what we're trying to overcome.

All of this would make misdirection quite plausible as an explanation for various K/E actions and statements.

Also, this is not exclusively a legal situation. It is a highly political situation as well. This is a matter both for the courts and the Congress--and also for the people, the voters. But Congress holds ultimate power. ( Indeed, I believe the Constitution even gives them the power to throw out the entire election and choose the president themselves, not necessarily from the given candidates. Not that this Congress would do it.)

We, the people, are also in an extremely vulnerable and dangerous situation. This Congress was in fact illegitimately elected. Nothing about this election is on the up and up. Secret source code; paperless voting--the results controlled by rightwing BushCons--it's ridiculous. We didn't HAVE an election. We had an ILLUSION. (The Exit Polls being altered on the TV screens on Election night alone tells us that--and there is so much more.) The election was a fraud going in.

And, quite frankly, I don't know what to think of the Democratic Party leadership's acquiescence in participating in an election that was so rigged, going in, that they had no chance of winning the presidency or the Congress. It may have been a situation that crept up on them--they didn't quite grok it until too late. It may have been a combination of this and porkbarrel (funneling HAVA money to the states), outright corruption (Diebold was sure throwing a lot of 'wining and dining' money around), and a long history of poor leadership.

Really, they should have burned down the Capitol to get this changed. I don't care how obstructive Tom Delay was (on the paperless voting thing, for instance). It was just too bloody obvious that having BushWHackers controlling the vote tabulation CANNOT result in a fair election. The NON-transparency of it is amazing.

At the very least, they should have warned voters and volunteers--made it a campaign issue.

The American people have been poorly served and poorly represented in all of this. And it has never been clearer that behind the scenes money and power are controlling every event, including who we are permitted to have as presidential candidates.

John Kerry is swimming in a very polluted sea, with hurricanes and wild waves all around him (not to mention vicious sharks, the wreckage of many ships, oil slicks, fire and floating corpses). I don't know if he can see it all very well. I don't know to what extent he has contributed to the dire circumstances that he finds himself in, and that our republic finds itself in.

I think he is an intelligent and decent human being--and most certainly is capable of being president, possibly a great president . But I was not happy during the campaign with his inability to articulate the fundamental principles of democracy that the BushCons had so egregiously violated. I gave him a lot of slack--given the evil of his opponents, and the contingencies of campaigning. Still, I didn't hear CLARITY on the main issues: illegal war, illegal torture, war crimes, state support of religion, outing a CIA agent for political revenge, unconstitutional detention, massive financial corruption and conflict of interest, breaking of treaties, contempt for international law, diplomacy and world opinion, secrecy, and egregious lying to Congress and the American people.

This bothered me. I kept giving him more and more slack, and ended up very dissatisfied and uneasy. Like, can't he SEE the principle here, that's been blatantly violated?

I think that this uncertainty about Kerry is widely felt in the progressive community, and it may be why we go all hysterical regarding news, pro or con, that he's willing to fight this election fraud fight. Doesn't he SEE what's happened here? How can he stand for it?

Our ideas that he may be implementing a really smart strategy--laying back, keeping them off guard, protecting evidence, protecting witnesses, using misdirection--have a somewhat desperate tone. Yes, it may well be true. I certainly have felt this about him myself, in the current circumstance. My image for it is The Rattlesnake. Actually, I feel this quite powerfully. BUT, when my intellect looks coldly at this situation, I have to admit the evidence points to a compromiser, an insider, and NOT to a champion of the people.

There may be a middle way that he is pursuing--a long term strategy for undoing Bush Inc.--that bypasses Jan. 6, with only a token effort (he did, after all, float a trip to Iraq in January in the news recently)--a more prosecutorial approach.

But this leaves out we, the people--who have a right to know what happened in the election, and to participate in a solution. It also leaves us at the mercy of Bush Inc.--an entity that is destroying our country.

There is another right that we have--we have a right to revolt and to replace any government that is not representing us and does not have our consent.

That is the bottom line of the American Revolution and the Declaration of Independence, and it is the underlying principle of the Constitution, that government must possess legitimate power by consent of the people.

Consent of the people. Legitimacy. These are things that the BushCons will never have, but they do still need the appearance of them. And so they went ahead and quite literally manufactured "consent" out of the thin electronic air. They even let John Kerry have 48% of the vote. The ILLUSION of consent. The ILLUSION of democracy.

We have more than an oppressive government to overcome. We have an ILLUSION to overcome. Our task is very difficult. And what I fear, and what there is much evidence for, is that the Democrats and John Kerry will settle for that 48% illusion, and have no clarity at all about the right of the people to GIVE our consent, in any real sense, and our right to revolt when the powers running our government mess us over as thoroughly as they are doing now.

Democrats revolt? They couldn't even get a paper trail!

I remain fundamentally optimistic, however. We here at DU, and others in many different forums, are demonstrating that there is still life in the American people and that WE still believe in our democracy--and are, in fact, rediscovering its principles and its strength, even in its darkest hour.

We are asking much of leaders who have not been particularly good at representing us. We should not be surprised if they fail. And we MUST continue this fight until we have restored our right to vote, even if we cannot achieve legitimacy in our government in the near term. There is no other choice.