Former Princeton professor Sean Wilentz announced today the conclusion of his 13th investigation of 2004 balloting in Ohio.
"John Kerry won the election, fair and square. It took us a couple tries, but when we compared Kerry's vote totals with those of Cleveland aldermen, a troubling pattern emerged."
President George Allen, reached for comment, said that the Democrats' continuing fascination with the 2004 Ohio election is matched only by their examination of the Wisconsin balloting in 2008 which resulted in his ascent to the Presidency.
Robert F. Kennedy III announced today that his examination of Ohio ballots from the 2004 election had proven that John F. Kerry won.
"John F. Kerry should have been our 44th president, no doubt about it. We discovered 120,000 fraudulent votes for Bush. It took a little work, but there were dimpled chads for Kerry; apparently the poll workers changed incomplete votes for him into votes for Bush."
President Tim Pawlenty declined comment, but a spokesman noted that the Democrats continue to display their sore loser status by questioning the vote counts in Arizona, New Mexico and Iowa during his election in 2016.
Since the election, questions have been raised about how votes were tallied in Ohio, a battleground state that helped deliver the election to President Bush over Senator John Kerry.
The critics, including an independent candidate for governor and a team of statisticians and lawyers, say preliminary results from their ballot inspections show signs of more widespread irregularities than previously known.
Yeah, I'm sure. And get this lie:
The critics say their sole interest in the question is to improve the voting system.
“This is not about Mr. Kerry or Mr. Bush or who should be president,’’ said Bill Goodman, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, a New York group that is part of the lawsuit. “This is about figuring out what is not working in our election system and ensuring that every cast vote counts.
Yes, of course it's a completely non-partisan issue, right, Bill? Except that when you surf over to the Center for Constitutional Rights' website, what do you see at the top left?
Ooooh, Articles of Impeachment against George W. Bush. "See CCR Attorneys in the short documentary, How to Impeach a President."
Here's the video:
It's hilarious. The opening line in the film is "Since 9-11 it has been clear that the principal enemy of democracy has been in the White House."
Yes, you might have been duped into believing since 9-11 the principal enemy of democracy is Islamofascism, the ideology that was behind the attacks of 9-11. But the Center for Constitutional Rights knows better.
My favorite line--the laugh line you might say--is when one of the lawyers for CCR says, "This is a real grassroots campaign."
Yeah, a grassroots campaign led by a bunch of lawyers from a liberal thinktank--correction, it should be called a liberal "feeltank", as pointed out in the comments by XRayNova.