Wednesday, 03 December 2008

HOW TEN TERRORISTS "ACCOMPLISHED" SO MUCH

Ken Berwitz

Doesn't it strike you as incredible that a total of 10 terrorists, operating in pairs, could inflict this amount of death, destruction, suffering and general terror in a major city?

How could they do it?  How could so few could inflict that much on that many?

Here is some insight, from The Times of London.  Please pay special attention to the parts I've put in bold print:

December 3, 2008

Outgunned Mumbai police hampered by First World War weapons

Indian police who bore the brunt of last weeks attacks on Mumbai had defective bulletproof vests, First World War-era firearms and insufficient weapons training, police sources have told The Times.

Many wore plastic helmets and body protectors designed for sticks and stones, rather than bullets, as they fought highly trained militants armed with AK47 rifles, pistols, grenades and explosives.

The contrast between them was vividly illustrated yesterday by CCTV footage of two militants attacking Chhatrapati Shivaji terminus, Mumbais main railway station, last Wednesday.

It shows the gunmen spraying automatic fire while two constables cower behind pillars, one armed with a .303 rifle similar to the Lee-Enfield weapons used by British troops in the First World War.

Thats 16 too many, Maxwell Pereira, a former joint commissioner of Delhi police, said. These casualties could have been prevented if theyd been properly equipped. The abysmal state of police equipment helps to explain how ten gunmen managed to paralyse a metropolis of 18 million people for more than 60 hours.

It also illustrates how ill-prepared Indias 2.2 million-strong police force is to tackle another such attack.

Wed react exactly the same way tomorrow, Ajay Sahni, of the Institute for Conflict Management, said.

He described India as one of the least policed places in the world, with 126 officers per 100,000 people, compared with 225-550 per 100,000 in most Western countries.

Maharashtra state, of which Mumbai is the capital, has one of Indias better police forces, but even it is woefully ill-equipped because of a centralised and highly corrupt procurement system.

Y. P. Singh, who retired after 20 years in the Maharashtra police in 2005, said that he knew of two batches of body armour that had failed tests in 2001 and 2004. They couldnt take rounds from AK47 or AK56, he said. The bullets pierced the jackets.

He now believes that the Maharashtra police purchased the defective vests and issued them to officers last week.

On Wednesday, television stations showed Hemant Karkare, the head of the AntiTerrorist Squad, donning a bulletproof vest and a battered tin helmet as he arrived at the scene in Mumbai.

He was shot in the chest three times soon afterwards and died.

Two other senior officers who were travelling in the same car as Mr Karkare and were also wearing body armour were shot dead at the same time.

If theyd been properly equipped they might have only been injured, Mr Singh said. Their vital organs would have been protected. Other officers were only issued 5mm-thick plastic body protectors designed for riot control.

That is because India has only 100,000 bulletproof vests for police and paramilitary forces, according to Anurag Gupta, the managing director of MKU, which supplies the vests to the Government.

The helmets used last week were World War Two-era, not designed for combat, he said.

Most of the police involved were carrying .303s or self-loading rifles like those adopted by the British Army in the 1950s.

Some officers said that they were not given enough weapons training because of a shortage of ammunition and shooting ranges. In theory, all officers shoot 50 rounds a year in training. In practice, senior officers get their full quota with small arms.

The rest is all bunkum, Mr Pereira said. Its target practice with a .303 rifle. I wouldnt call it suitable knowledge of weapons and their uses in urban policing.

All those interviewed said that the issue was not money: the Government allocated 154 million for modernising the police in 2007-08 alone. The problem, they said, lay with the Home Ministrys procurement system, which is dominated by corrupt bureaucrats and politicians rather than technical experts.

Its a cartel, Mr Singh said. The Government is spending millions, but the police isnt getting the equipment it needs.

Now you know how they did it.  They had accomplices. 

Their accomplices were everyone in every part of government who allowed the police to degenerate into what you just read about. 

Woefully outdated weapons, woefully defective protection, woefully inept training.

And everyone seems to know why, don't they?  How easy it is to pass the blame "to corrupt bureaucrats and politicians". 

While I have no doubt both are in plentiful supply - as they are everywhere, not just Mumbai - this does NOT explain the condition of the police force.  Government's first responsibility is the safety and well-being of the people.  Mumbai's police, therefore its citizens and visitors, were left wholly unprotected.  

Little wonder that Mumbai was picked for this attack, and little wonder so much was "accomplished" by just ten terrorists.

There is a lesson here for every city in every country that might be targeted. 

India learned the hard way last week.  Which one(s) will be next? 

And, most importantly, what are they going to do about it BEFORE the next attack takes place?  Drone out some more clichs at the UN?  Barf out some more of the requisite criticisms of the USA and Israel?  Or act decisively against the groups that are out to destroy them? 

The first two are easy and useless.  The third is hard, and will only take place if governments finally get serious about fighting international terrorism -- as the USA has done, thanklessly, for years.

We'll see if Mumbai changes anything.  Frankly, I'm pessimistic.


ERIC HOLDER

Ken Berwitz

As you probably know, Barack Obama has proposed that Eric Holder become our next Attorney General.  Given that Democrats will have a huge majority in the senate, his confirmation is a virtual lock.

I have written about Mr. Holder in the past, particularly about his involvement in Bill Clinton's pardons of marc rich and 16 FALN terrorists.  But John Perazzo of www.frontpagemag.com has put together a far more detailed account of how deep Mr. Holder's involvement was in these awful pardons. 

This is a story everyone should see so they know what we're getting as our chief law enforcement officer.  Here it is:

Pardoning Terror  
By John Perazzo
FrontPageMagazine.com | Wednesday, December 03, 2008

During Barack Obamas presidential run, Eric Holder, Bill Clintons Deputy Attorney General from 1997 to 2001, campaigned heavily for the then-Illinois senator. This past summer, Obama tapped Holder to serve on the vice presidential selection team that ultimately chose Joe Biden to be Obamas running mate. Now Holder may receive his own position in the Obama administration, for which he has been nominated to serve as Attorney General.

Holder brings a resume rich with titles to the job. He also brings a history of aiding terrorists, foreign and domestic.

The Columbia law school graduate has been Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia; United States Attorney; and Judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, among other professional distinctions. But it is a personal attribute, not a professional title, which will determine the quality of his performance as Americas chief law-enforcement officer: his judgment. And there is ample reason to be apprehensive about Eric Holders judgment.

For instance, he has condemned the Guantanamo Bay detention center as an international embarrassment, even though detainees are treated more humanely than even the Geneva Conventions require. Despite evidence to the contrary, he has accused the U.S. government of having authorized torture and let fear take precedence over the rule of law. Holder has also demanded an immediate end to warrantless eavesdropping by intelligence and counterterrorism officials.

But Holders biggest lapses in judgment date back to the final days of the Clinton administration. He was among those entrusted with the task of vetting the Clinton administrations 176 last-minute pardonswhose beneficiaries included such luminaries as billionaire financier Marc Rich (who had fled the country rather than face federal tax evasion charges) and former Weather Underground members Susan Rosenberg and Linda Evans. Holders judgment is called into question most dramatically by his intimate involvement in President Clintons August 11, 1999, pardon of 16 members of the Armed Forces of National Liberation (FALN), an FBI-designated terrorist organization that was active in the U.S. from the mid-1970s through the early 1980s. Before exploring the very significant role Holder played in securing clemency for the aforementioned 16, some background is in order.

The FALN was a Marxist-Leninist group whose mission was to secure Puerto Ricos political independence from the United States. Toward that end, between 1974 and 1983 the group detonated nearly 130 bombs in such strategically selected places as military and government buildings, financial institutions, and corporate headquarters located mainly in Chicago, New York, and Washington DC. These bombings were intended as acts of protest against Americas political, military, financial, and corporate presence in Puerto Rico. In total, FALN bombs killed six people
including the Chilean ambassador to the United Statesand wounded at least 80 others.

On April 4, 1980, eleven FALN members were arrested in Evanston, Illinois. More of their comrades would also be apprehended in Chicago in the early 1980s. All were charged with seditious conspiracy, but they
refused to participate in their own trial proceedingsclaiming defiantly that the U.S. government was an illegitimate entity and thus had no moral authority to judge them. All the defendants were found guilty and were sentenced to federal prison terms ranging from 35 to 105 years.

On November 9, 1993, a self-identified human rights organization named Ofensiva 92
filed a petition for executive clemency on behalf of 18 members of the FALN and Los Macheteros (The Machete-Wielders), another violent organization seeking Puerto Rican independence. According to a December 12, 1999 report issued by the House Committee on Government Reform, the prisoners themselves refused to take part in any process that would legitimize the governments actions against them, therefore they refused to file their own petitions.

This presented a problem. The Department of Justice (DOJ) traditionally
stipulates that clemency will be considered only if a prisoner first files a petition on his or her own behalf, an act which the Department views as a sign of contrition. However, DOJ made an exception in this case and accepted Ofensiva 92s petition. This document cast the FALN prisoners as blameless freedom fighters analogous to those Americans who had fought in the Revolutionary War against Britain.

The campaign to free the FALN terrorists found prominent supporters. Among the notables who joined Ofensiva 92s clemency crusade
were Cardinal John O'Connor, Coretta Scott King, Jimmy Carter, and the National Lawyers Guild. Perhaps the most passionate support came from Democrat Representatives Luis Gutierrez (IL), Jose Serrano (NY), and Nydia Velazquez (NY), each of whom echoed Ofensiva 92s claim that the FALN members were political prisoners who deserved to be released.

The attorneys and advocates who were fighting for the freedom of the FALN prisoners
first met with the Justice Departments Pardon Attorney on July 19, 1994. In October 1996, they met with Jack Quinn, Counsel to the President. They were unsuccessful, however, in their efforts to convey the legitimacy of their cause to the Office of the Pardon Attorney (OPA), which in 1996 contacted the Justice Department and recommended against clemency. That recommendation, in turn, was forwarded to the White House. But the matter was not over. OPA continued to meet with groups and individuals lobbying for clemency on behalf of the FALN terrorists.

Enter Eric Holder. In 1997, Holder became President Clintons Deputy Attorney General in the Justice Department headed by Janet Reno. In this role, Holder was responsible for overseeing clemency investigations and determining which of those requests were ultimately worthy of President Clintons attention. As evidenced by a September 1997 memorandum from the Pardon Attorney, the Justice Department was, at this point, receiving numerous inquiries about the FALN and Macheterosfrom the White House and from supporters of the prisoners. The aforementioned House Committee on Government Reform report stated: Throughout the closing months of 1997 it appears that Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder was active in the issue. The privilege log reflects at least two notes regarding his questions on the clemency or his thoughts on the matter.

On November 5, 1997, Holder met with Representatives Gutierrez, Serrano, and Velazquez to discuss the clemency issue. He
advised the legislators that they might greatly increase the likelihood of a presidential pardon if they could convince the prisoners to write letters testifying as to the personal remorse they felt for their past actions. But no such letters would be produced for five months, during which time the clemency issue remained on hold. Meanwhile, in a January 6, 1998 letter, a senior Justice Department official expressly referred to the FALN members as terrorists.

Then on
April 8, 1998, Holder again met with FALN supporters. This time, they finally delivered statements from the prisoners as Holder had advised in November. Once again, however, there was a problem: all their statements were identical, indicating that not one of the prisoners had made the effort to craft his own personal expression of repentance. Undeterred, Holder asked whether the prisoners might at least agree to renounce future violence in exchange for clemency. One of the prisoners backers, Reverend Paul Sherry, made it clear that they surely would not change their beliefspresumably about the issue of Puerto Rican independencebut was vague as to whether they would eschew violence altogether.

Over the next few weeks, Holder and the Justice Department continued to meet with clemency advocates. Holder was the point man for these negotiations. As Brian Blomquist
wrote in the New York Post, A list of FALN documents withheld from Congress shows that many memos on the FALN clemency decision went directly to Holder, while Renos role was minimal. Similarly, New York Daily News reporter Edward Lewine wrote that Holder was the Justice Department official most involved with this issue.

It should be noted that throughout the clemency review process, neither Holder nor anyone else in the Justice Department contacted the FALNs victims or their families. As a result, most were never aware that clemency for the terrorists was even being contemplated. Those few who were aware of the possibility
were rebuffed in their efforts to participate in the review process.

On May 19, 1998, DOJs pardon attorney sent Eric Holder a
48-page draft memorandum concerning clemency for Puerto Rican Nationalist prisoners. Seven weeks later, on July 8, Holder sent President Clinton a memorandum regarding clemency matter. Behind the scenes, indeed, the Deputy Attorney General was methodically spearheading the march toward clemencydespite the fact that the sentencing judges, the U.S. Attorneys, the Federal Bureau of Prisons, the Fraternal Order of Police, and the FBI were unanimous in their opposition to pardoning the FALN.

In late July 1999 an attorney from Holders office spoke to White House Counsel Charles Ruff regarding the clemency. On August 9, 1999, Holders office and OPA held one final meeting to hammer out the details, and two days later the President made his announcement: clemency had been granted to the 16 terrorists, most of whom had served only a fraction of their prison terms. Of the sixteen, twelve accepted the offer and were freed; two refused it; and two others, already out of prison, never responded.

Clinton, who previously had complied with just 3 of 3,229 requests for clemency, justified his decision by explaining that the prisoners already had served sufficient prison time for their crimes. He further cited executive privilege for his refusal to give Congress a number of documents related to his verdict. Congress, for its part, was not pleasedcondemning the clemencies by votes of 95-2 in the Senate and 311-41 in the House.

In the aftermath of August 11, 1999, a report by the very same Justice Department that employed Eric Holder
stated that the FALN posed an ongoing threat to national security. And in late October 1999 the Senate Judiciary Committee released a report from Attorney General Janet Reno stating that the FALN members impending release from prison would increase the present threat of terrorism. Dangerous terrorists had been set free, and Eric Holder had made it happen.

Holders response to the threat reports was unconvincing at best. In an October 20 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, and again with reporters the following day, Eric Holder
denied that Reno was referring to the same FALN terrorists whose pardons he had worked so long and hard to secure. Yet, when Holder was asked to identify whom Reno was in fact talking about, his response amounted to little more than a pathetic stammer:

I dont know, no, I dont know that. We might be able to get you some more information on that, but, I mean, you know, there were certain people who are due to be released, or who were at least eligible for parole, had a release date in the next, as I said, three, four years. I dont know exactly who they were. Maybewe might be able to get you that information.

They never did. Neither Holder nor the Justice Department ever provided the names of any of these mystery men.

In the final analysis, Eric Holder was the individual most central to the Clinton White Houses dogged quest to pardon the FALN terrorists. His efforts toward that end can more accurately be characterized as partisan advocacy than as dispassionate dispensation of justice. As the December 1999 House Committee on Government Reform
report put it:

The 16 terrorists appear to be most unlikely candidates. They did not personally request clemency. They did not admit to wrongdoing and they had not renounced violence before such a renunciation had been made a quid pro quo for their release. They expressed no contrition for their crimes, and were at times openly belligerent about their actions. Notwithstanding the fact that the 16 did not express enough personal interest in the clemency process to file their own applications, the White House appeared eager to assist throughout the process. Meetings were held with supporters, and some senior staff [i.e., Holder] even suggested ways to improve the likelihood of the President granting the clemency. Overall, the White House appears to have exercised more initiative than the terrorists themselves.

Nearly ten years after the FALN pardons, Holder is once again set to enter the Attorney Generals office this time as its head. But before assuming that important post, he owes the American people and the victims of FALN terror the explanation he failed to provide when the terrorists were set free.

When George Bush appointed Alberto Gonzalez as Attorney General, we got a basically decent sycophant who was in way over his head.  Not good.

If Barack Obama is able to appoint Eric Holder, we will get a far more competent sycophant who sees our country as torture-loving war criminals, wants to cut back on our ability to surveil domestic terrorist suspects, and who had no problem in recommending pardons for the worst scum imaginable.

  That's a lot worse.


BEN STEIN EVALUATES HENRY PAULSON

Ken Berwitz

Ben Stein is a really smart man who has cultivated a very nerdy personna and parlayed it into something of an entertainment career, including a nice run on a cable comedy/game show called "Win Ben Stein's Money".

But when he is not selling nerdiness, he is a highly educated, highly intelligent economist.  Just like his father Herb was.

Here, excerpted from his latest column at American Spectator, is an excerpt in which Mr. Stein rates our Secretary of the Treasury, Henry Paulson.

Government can do a lot about the current financial crisis. ...government started this crisis...by mandating home loans to people without credit worthiness, then made it worse by not regulating or banning credit default swaps arranged by people without any insurable interest in the bonds they "insured." Now, government can cure the crisis by guaranteeing solvency of inter-bank loans and by sharply curtailing liability under credit-default swaps. They are also going to need a real stimulus package of major size.

Of course, instead, under that imbecile, Henry M. Paulson, we get state socialism of banks and investment banks. The bailout has morphed from being a help to borrowers in Muncie to being an immense life raft for Paulson's buddies on Wall Street. This is a last, desperate act of rapine against the American people by Mr. Paulson and I do not like it at all. Yes, give them loans they have to repay. Yes, underwrite their loans. But don't buy them and continue to let their executives loot the system. Why on earth should a farmer in eastern Washington state have to prop up Goldman Sachs with his hard-earned money?

I really do not understand why there is no revolution. The bailout was sold as a way to stabilize the mortgage situation, i.e., money for banks to allow them to keep lending to homeowners. Now it's a rescue package for billionaires in Greenwich. How come no one is even saying, "boo!" about this?

Hint to social secretaries:  If these two are invited to a wedding reception, try not to seat them at the same table.

Ok, we now know that Ben Stein thinks Paulson is an imbecile who is seizing public assets and handing them to his rich buddies.  Is Stein right?

Sadly, to this untrained eye, he certainly seems to be.

What do you think?


DO THEY GET KING KONG TOO?

Ken Berwitz

There is never any shortage of stories about government inefficiency and incompetence.  But some really stand out -- or, in this case, up.

Here is how the New York Daily News "bought" the Empire State Building last week:

It took 90 minutes for Daily News to 'steal' the Empire State Building

Tuesday, December 2nd 2008, 10:46 PM

And it wasn't that hard.

The News swiped the 102-story Art Deco skyscraper by drawing up a batch of bogus documents, making a fake notary stamp and filing paperwork with the city to transfer the deed to the property.

Some of the information was laughable: Original "King Kong" star Fay Wray is listed as a witness and the notary shared a name with bank robber Willie Sutton.

The massive ripoff illustrates a gaping loophole in the city's system for recording deeds, mortgages and other transactions.

The loophole: The system - run by the office of the city register - doesn't require clerks to verify the information.

Less than 90 minutes after the bogus documents were submitted on Monday, the agency rubber-stamped the transfer from Empire State Land Associates to Nelots Properties LLC. Nelots is "stolen" spelled backward. (The News returned the property Tuesday.)

"Crooks go where the money is. That's why Willie Sutton robbed banks, and this is the new bank robbery," said Brooklyn Assistant District Attorney Richard Farrell, who is prosecuting several deed fraud cases.

Of course, stealing the Empire State Building wouldn't go unnoticed for long, but it shows how easy it is for con artists to swipe more modest buildings right out from under their owners. Armed with a fraudulent deed, they can take out big mortgages and disappear, leaving a mess for property owners, banks and bureaucrats.

"Once you have the deed, it's easy to obtain a mortgage," Farrell said.

Many crooks have done just that:

- Asia Smith stole her 88-year-old grandmother's house in Springfield Gardens, Queens, pocketing $445,000 in mortgages she took out.

"Her grandmother raised her," said Queens Assistant District Attorney Kristen Kane. Smith, 22, was arrested last December and is serving a one-year jail term for fraud.

- A man posing as someone who had been dead for 19 years deeded the dead man's property to himself. He then sold it to the scheme's mastermind, who took out a $533,000 mortgage and vanished with the cash.

- Toma Dushevic managed to steal seven dilapidated city-owned buildings in Brooklyn 10 years ago.

He got renovation permits, fixed up one of the buildings, and rented out apartments. He sold another building for $250,000 and ran his scam for nearly two years until he was caught. Dushevic returned the buildings and did 18 months behind bars.

The FBI says financial institutions filed 31% more Suspicious Activity Reports involving mortgage fraud last year than in 2006. Nationwide, lenders' losses totaled $813 million, and New York was one of the top 10 mortgage fraud states

There isn't much to add here, other than maybe a big Christmas tip for the window washers -- which, if I were the rightful owner of the Empire State Building, I would expect the Daily News to pay 1/365th of. 

That, and maybe a very large bunch of bananas...just in case.


THE STEALING OF NORM COLEMAN'S SENATE SEAT (cont.)

Ken Berwitz

Well, well, well.  Another 171 ballots have miraculously been found.  Only one month after the election. 

And what do you know?  They favor Al Franken.  Chalk another 37 votes up for the Democrat.

Here are the sorry details, from the Associated Press:

Franken gets bump from 171 found ballots

Associated Press - December 3, 2008 11:23 AM ET

ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) - A newly discovered group of ballots is giving a slight boost to Democrat Al Franken's chances in the disputed Minnesota Senate race, but it still isn't enough to undo the incumbent's persistent lead.

Ramsey County officials found the 171 ballots yesterday, just as they were wrapping up their recount. After the votes were tallied, Franken gained 37 votes on incumbent Sen. Norm Coleman's lead.

Through yesterday, Coleman's margin was 303 votes. However, the numbers can still shift as the last counties wrap up their work this week.

The lead has bounced up and down since the recount began. The exact margin is difficult to know because both sides have put thousands of ballots in limbo through challenges.

Those disputed ballots won't be sorted out until a canvassing board meeting that begins Dec. 16.

Don't you get the feeling that they're going to keep "finding" ballots that improve Franken's position until he is ahead, and then shut it down?

That's what they did for Christine Gregoire in the 2004 Washington state governor's race, and this looks like "deja vu all over again".

By the way, I love the AP's line that "The lead has bounced up and down since the recount began".  What a fraudulent piece of disinformation! 

Coleman started with a lead of over 700 votes. It immediately started dropping.  There has never been any time when that lead was higher.  The only "bounces" have been at levels lower than where Coleman started. 

Then they wonder why people call them biased.


THE DEIFICATION OF OBAMA (OK, SPELLED A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY)

Ken Berwitz

It's amazing how word meanings can differ by changing just a few letters......

Here, from Reuters via www.sweetness-light.com, is one of the more bizarre stories you will read about the deification of Barack Obama:

An Obama Defecating Xmas Ornament?

December 3rd, 2008

From Reuters:

Ceramic figurines called 'caganers' of US Presiden...
LLUIS GENE / AFP/Getty Images

Figurines known as caganer of U.S. President-elect Barack Obama are sold at the Santa Llucia Christmas market in central Barcelona December 1, 2008. Catalans hide caganers, or defecators, in Christmas Nativity scenes then invite friends to hunt for them during Christmas celebrations. The caganers, which symbolise defecating and fertilizing the earth, are believed to bring prosperity and luck for the coming year.

The perfect gift for your true-believing friends.

The caganers, which symbolise defecating and fertilizing the earth, are believed to bring prosperity and luck for the coming year.

Or as we call it here in our country, hope and change.

Yes we can!

Now there's something you probably don't want plopped down your Chimney on Christmas eve.  On the other hand, it is supposed to bring prosperity and good luck.  Honest.

I feel that it is important for us to do the right thing and acknowledge this ornament in the proper way.  I therefore propose that we revise a verse of Clement Clark Moore's great poem, "Twas The Night Before Christmas"** to read:

"Now Dasher! now, Dancer! now, Prancer and Vixen!
On, Comet! On, Cupid! on, on Donner and Blitzen!
To the top of the porch! Where Obama is sitzen!
But try not to look, 'cause I think that he's shitzen"

-------------------------------------------------------

** If you want to read the full version of this wonderful poem - without anyone shitzen -- along with a very interesting little explanation of how it came to be and how it changed our perception of St. Nicholas, just click here.

 


THE STEALING OF NORM COLEMAN'S SENATE SEAT - FINAL STAGES

Ken Berwitz

From The Hill (www.thehill.com) just a short time ago:

Franken claims he is in the lead
Posted: 12/03/08 01:44 PM [ET]

Minnesota Democratic Senate candidate Al Frankens campaign said Wednesday that the comedian has taken the lead in his race against Sen. Norm Coleman (R)

Frankens lawyer, Marc Elias, has been pressing for the media to focus on the campaigns internal vote totals of the recount, which as of Wednesday showed Franken opening a lead of 22 votes.

To drive home its point, the campaign will withdraw hundreds of challenges that it determines have no merit in the states ongoing recount.

We will be sending a letter to the Secretary of State today withdrawing 633 challenges that we believe have no chance of being upheld before the state Canvassing Board, Elias said.

The media have reported that Franken trails in the recount by around 300 votes, but that includes challenged ballots. Colemans campaign has challenged several hundred more ballots than Frankens, but the vast majority of challenges are generally rejected.

Elias argues that, since most challenges will be invalidated, a more accurate count would not include those challenged ballots.

He said that, by withdrawing challenges that are unwarranted, the medias reported margin will grow by hundreds of votes for Coleman but suggested that this will prove his point about the inaccuracy of the reported 300-vote margin.

The current media method of updating vote totals has incentivized the Coleman campaign to over-challenge and not withdraw, Elias said.

About 94 percent of the states votes have been recounted a process that is supposed to end this week.

These numbers are not credible, and we expect the media to demand the full and complete explanation, said Coleman campaign spokesman Mark Drake with regard to the Franken campaign's count.

Gee, a 22 vote lead.   And Franken just got 37 votes from the pile they miraculously "found" a month after the election.  What a coincidence that is.

This election is being stolen right in front of your eyes.  Right on the 50 yard line.  Are you enjoying the show?


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!