Reply #126: A small piece of the pie.

[troubleinwinter]

"all he has is innuendos, conjectures and "statistical analyses". If a "personal" recount such as I described found significant discrepancies, this would be hard proof."

Representative John Conyers has much more than "innuendos and conjectures". In his January 28 letter to the Assistant Director of the Criminal Investigation Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, he cites numerous "serious allegations of vote tampering and fraud"... violations of federal and Ohio law, including evidence of ballot tampering.

Investigations and prosecutions generally begin with "allegations". Mr. Conyers is highly experienced in criminal matters, and is the House Minority leader of the Judiciary Committee, and does not operate on innuendo and conjecture, but by credible evidence. He does not take these things lightly, and I do not either.

During the recounts, many BOEs refused to allow access to poll books, to make a proper assessment of the audit, though Ohio law deems them to be public documents upon completion of the official election canvass (and reaffirmed by the letter you cite from Petro to Blackwell).

All of this does not take into account the disenfranchisement of voters.

The fact remains that the election in Ohio was tainted. "Personal recount" might give some information, but it is a small piece of the big picture, as it will not address the criminal fraud against citizens' voting rights. Even with an accurate recount, we have a dirty election, with disenfranchised voters, tampered ballots, rejected provisionals, etc.

Criminal fraud is being pursued, in hopes that an example will be set that such crimes will not be tolerated, and will be prosecuted. I hope you applaud the action.