« Trent Lott Defines "Extraordinary Circumstances" | Main | Left wing blog praising right wing blog »

May 26, 2005



Excellent recap. Regarding Ms Way's apparent self-contradiction about whether the number of returned absentee ballots was accurate or not, it seems to me that the problem was in her poor choice of words. She is not a lawyer. She is not a politician. In her deposition she had noted that she was "concerned" about the accuracy of that number because she had nothing with which to compare that number. The DIMS software was new and had no known reliability for them. In her testimony yesterday, she stated that she thought that number was accurate until they found out about the 95-96 recently found absentee ballots.

So her pre-trial "concern" about accuracy is seen as an absolute, that she didn't know the number. Which flies in the face of her courtroom statement that she thought it was accurate until she learned of the additional ballots.

The previous day Repubes clearly tried to make Huennekens appear to be inept and not in control of the election situation. His "problem" is an unfortunate geeky or nerdy demeanor and a hesitant, halting way of speaking that makes him seem evasive. His testimony followed a very crisp and riveting testimony of the Chelan Co Auditor, Evelyn Arnold. She answered the questions clearly, with complete control, and claim of a perfect election outcome. Well, now, Ms Arnold has been Auditor for 15 years. That is an elected position. She is used to, and comfortable with, public speaking and explaining the complexity of voting process. She did admit, though, that the bigger the voting base (Chelan Co.'s 29,000 cast ballots vs King Co.'s 900,000) the more problems will arise.

I would not want to be in either Huenneken's or Way's situation, being grilled for six hours (after who knows how many hours of deposition previous to the trial) by hostile attorneys trying to trip you up. I felt so sorry for them, and had much empathy. They are both civil servants trying to do the best they can. Not politicans or attorneys with glib and golden tongues. Or in the case of the Republicans, sinister (to use Dale Foreman's word) and black tongues.

Feh on this Republican sham.


I'm beginning to wonder how the eventual, and I think obvious, outcome to all of this weighs nationally. Perhaops, the best thing Torrid, Goldy, and Carla have done is create a point by point database for talking down the angry mob who will conclude, with limited evidence, that this is an obvious case of a liberal judiciary overthrowing democracy in Washington.

The comments to this entry are closed.

April 2006

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29


Blog powered by Typepad