MEMBER'S HOME

DTT HOME

How to Use the Members Only Section

DTT Analyses

Prophecy Lessons

Jiang-Yeltsin Joint Statement 

Jiang-Putin Beijing Declaration

DTT INFORMATION

Discerning the Times  

 

6 Heather Road

Bangor, ME 04401

 

Phone

(207) 945-9878

email

DTT@discerningtoday.org

After recounting some ballots as many as five times, Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris declared for the second time George Bush the winner of the presidential election in the state of Florida by 563 votes on Sunday, November 25. But this did not settle one of the most rancorous crises in American history. The battle continues both in the Florida vote and the U.S. Supreme Court. The Republicans claim that we must obey the rule of law. At the same time we have heard from the Democrats that to be "fair" we must have a full and "honest" recount of every vote.

Confused? You ought to be. What we in the United States are witnessing is nothing less than an all-out assault to destroy the rule of law in America using smooth talk and emotions in an attempt to steal the office of president. It could very well determine whether global governance is instituted immediately or some time in the future.

The stealing of America is based in incredible corruption and deception that has nothing to do with fairness.

It was immediately obvious that the Democrats planned to steal the election even before the polls closed. They had hired a consulting firm to call Democratic voters to suggest to them that they may have voted for the wrong person and to register a complaint with the election board. The effort had to have been planned weeks, if not months in advance, even though the Democrats had designed and approved the ballot many months ahead of the voting.

With completely innocent faces, tears welling in their eyes, these Democrat voters yelled foul, immediately garnering the sense of "fairness" of the American people. Democrats have used the "fairness" technique so many times before that it has now become an art-form. According to WorldNetDaily on November 13, "What's happening in Florida is exactly the game plan laid out to me by an attorney who represented the Democrats in a recount in California where they stole a seat from us," former California Assemblyman Pat Nolan told WorldNetDaily. Nolan said the Democrats stole a seat in California the same way that is now happening in Palm Beach. 

Just like in Florida, said Nolan, Democrats "brought in their junkyard dog lawyers from around the country, and basically harassed the local registrar -- got in their faces and demanded to handle ballots" -- which were of the same type now in dispute in Palm Beach. When Bob Haueter, chief of staff to the California Assembly Republican Caucus, and an expert on manual recounts, was told by Tim Downs, the Democrat attorney that "I've taken several seats from you across the United States." Downs also told Haueter, "You get me within 100 votes and I can steal any election,'" according to WorldNetDaily.

Nolan and Haueter aren't the only ones criticizing the Democrats' demand for a recount. Minnesota Socialist Roleigh Martin warns that the skewing of the results by selectively picking counties that favor Gore for hand recount is far more important than any human error in the machine recount. If a recount was done in Republican dominated counties, Bush would be favored. Bush cannot do this, however, since the democrats were careful not to announce their intentions until just before the 72 hour limitation for calling for a hand recount had expired. It was too late for the Republicans to balance the bias inherent in the Democratically dominated counties that are to be recounted.

Trashing the rule of law

The same Democrats who applied state law in denying the military a right to vote appealed the legal certification of Florida's Secretary of State, Katherine Harris on November 14. While the lower courts upheld her decision, the leftist Florida Supreme Court put a stay on the decision, and allowed the hand count to continue to 5:00pm November 26. The state supreme court justified its action by saying the law requiring Harris to certify the vote on November 14 was superceded by another law saying that the voters had a right to a hand recount. In doing so the court said, "The right of the people to cast their vote is the paramount concern overriding all others."

That may make a good motto, but it ignores the fact that the people had already cast their votes in the most equitable manner possible. While the state law probably did not allow time for a hand recount, the Democrats knew the state law before the elections and chose not to challenge it. By setting a new date and time for certification, the state supreme court created a new law, politicizing the law by unconstitutionally usurping the state legislature's authority to create law. In doing so, the rule of law has become arbitrary and capricious, favoring those who are in power or good standing. 

In short, while the law may be a bad law, only the state legislature, not the Florida Supreme Court is allowed to correct it. By making law, the Florida Court opened the door to fraud by allowing dimpled or pregnant (dented) chads to be counted. Ironically, the court cited a 1990 Illinois case in justifying its Florida decision to allow a hand recount that included dented chads. The decision was blasted by the Chicago Tribune on November 26 when it reported that "the Illinois court actually affirmed a trial judge’s order to exclude dented ballots, since he had decided he could not reasonably determine the voters’ will by examining the ballots." (Italics added for emphasis) The door to fraud was wide open.

A plethora of accusations of fraud have been leveled by Republican observers. A November 20 report by NewsMax lists 15 charges of fraud; from using tape to cover chad holes for Governor Bush thereby denying the count for Bush, to apparently confirmed charges that ballots had been sabotaged in a number of ways.

On top of all this confusion, there are the constantly changing rules, from not counting "hanging" and "pregnant" chads to counting them in a desperate effort to get more votes for Gore. Or, counting them in some counties and not in others. These counters have no way of determining if the voter really wanted to vote for that person, or did not cleanly punch the chad because they suddenly realized they were punching the wrong hole. By counting hanging or pregnant chads the chance that a vote is miscounted and applied to the wrong candidate increases dramatically.

True to form, the democrat dominated county canvassing boards had no trouble seeing highly questionable or dimpled chads. In one example that was repeated thousands of times, transcripts of Broward County Board decisions found hundreds of very questionable votes for Gore:

Judge Rosenberg was the only Republican on the Board. He repeated the phrase "Cannot be ascertained with reasonable certainty," hundreds of times, only to be ignored.

Counting computer cards is a mind-numbing experience. In another case an overtired Democrat counter reported to her Democrat supervisor that she had placed Bush ballots in the Gore stack of ballots. This honest mistake was turned into fraud when the supervisor refused to do anything about it. It wasn't until a Republican observer challenged the decision that the Gore pile was recounted to find that nearly twenty-five percent of the ballots in the Gore stack were actually for Bush. 

It could be argued that the Republicans are just as guilty of corruption as the Democrats. Republican Pat Nolan (above), in fact, spent time in prison for corruption charges. However, it is striking that while the Democrats were fully prepared in advance to corrupt this election, the Republicans were totally unprepared for several days.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruling

The U.S. Supreme Court heard the case December 1, and had not render a decision at the time Discerning the Times had to go to press. The Court will focus almost entirely on a federal law—apparently never used in the 113 years it has been on the books—that forbids states to decide presidential elections based on rules adopted after the voting.

That law requires that "any controversy or contest" concerning the naming of members of the electoral college must be decided based on "laws enacted prior to the day fixed for the appointment of the electors." In their appeals, Bush’s lawyers said the Florida Supreme Court on Tuesday violated that statute because it "retroactively changed the law in Florida," which authorized Katherine Harris, Florida’s secretary of state, to certify the winner of the presidential race on Nov. 14.