I am staying away from this story until Wai Young's words are confirmed because right now they are the ONLY source for the allegation.
It's frustrating that the facts are so hard to come by here, and that MSM seems to be ignoring the story (aside from that CP report).
BCL:
By law, Young was entitled to have up to three persons present during the recount. I can't imagine why she'd lie about this--a lie would be too easily refuted, and cost her a great deal of credibility.
That does sound weird. But if you are right and a "sampling" is not allowed, wouldn't some of her people have known that too and complained?
Let's assume that the 'sampling' is within the letter of the law.
And if that is true, then I think the law needs to be revisited, don't you?
I've read that section of the Act numerous times by now, and I can't see that "sampling" is permitted--or, indeed, that it makes any sense, especially when a mere sampling closes Dosanjh's lead by a full 33.3%.
If someone has actually parsed the law to permit "sampling," then I would agree--change the law, and, while you're at it, get rid of the bone-headed new ID requirements that disenfranchised so many people this time around. With me on that?
It's frustrating that the facts are so hard to come by here, and that MSM seems to be ignoring the story (aside from that CP report).
This is gotten so tiresome. Where else do you think the story is going to come from, Joanne? From a bunch of your wingnut buddies gossipping about conspiracies?
Putting aside for the moment the question of legality - which is a very important one, don't mistake me - I don't see the *point* of recounting only a "sampling" of votes. Unless all of the votes are counted in one manner or another, the result can't be conclusive in any way. It's only for this reason that I find it hard to believe the reports that Justice Dohm only recounted a sample of the votes. Who in their right mind would take that approach? If that is indeed what happened, it needs to be reviewed by a higher court.
If only some ballots were recounted, it's a disaster for justice and our democracy. What is this, Florida?
This story's become uninteresting now that the Blogging Tories have jumped in with the rumour-mongering. Joanne's traipsing all over blogdom pasting the same gossip and innuendo.
Ti-guy, it's possible that even a Blogging Tory is right at least once, even if for the wrong reasons.
...even if for the wrong reasons?
Look, you may find this hard to believe, but I would find this outrageous no matter which parties were involved. Of course, I was hoping that Wai Young would win.
But I could have accepted the results a whole lot easier if a full recount had been done.
Well, Joanne, you're in good company. : )
Thanks, Dawg. ; )
Joanne, perhaps you have the right motivation behind your call for justice, but it's safe to say that several BTs are just out to see a Liberal lose/Elections Canada embarrassed/a judge be shown to be wrong, and don't understand the larger reasons for demanding a recount. They'd also be baffled at multiparty support for a recount too.
I think it's only human that the Tories were exercised because their candidate was on the receiving end of what appears to have been an incompetent recount. Frankly, I dislike Dosanjh myself, and I won't rule that out as a factor in my interest in this case.
But that's not all there is to it. I had to cancel a blogpost on this earlier today because I had taken it for granted that the law was being correctly applied. After reading the legislation a number of times, and the EC Handbook on judicial recounts, I was moved to write a new post.
I think this thing has to be appealed, or we're all vulnerable, no matter what party we support. Whatever the BTs' motives, and at this point I don't really care what they are, they've got a point. A good, solid point.
Now, if they would only stop the conspirazoid stuff--how the "MSM," the judiciary and Elections Canada are corrupt and biased--my joy would be complete.
Dr.Dawg, it seems to me that you are right in your take on the situation.
It also seems that the Court Party is at war with Elected Government and the People of Canada.
Visit this thread:
http://www.bloggingtories.ca/
for...8479.html#48479
and scroll to post: The Court Party at War....
We are the grassroot movement defending basic principles of democracy in this country.
How about: “Non-partisan Coalition in Support of Elected Government”
Ti-guy, it's possible that even a Blogging Tory is right at least once, even if for the wrong reasons.
It's not the right or wrong, it's the absence of evidence and the rumour/smear-mongering.
By the way, I read in in that Macleans thread that Joanne has sources to rival Kady O'Malley's.
What a hoot!
Joanne, perhaps you have the right motivation behind your call for justice, but it's safe to say that several BTs are just out to see a Liberal lose/Elections Canada embarrassed/a judge be shown to be wrong, and don't understand the larger reasons for demanding a recount. They'd also be baffled at multiparty support for a recount too.
Saskboy, thanks for clarifying that. I won't pretend that I wouldn't be thrilled to have the CPC pick up another seat, but the issue here is public trust in the system, and right now that trust is a bit rocky.
It would really help if someone in an official position would come out with a statement explaining why there was only a partial recount in this case.
BTW, I found a news source saying that Keith Martin's recount is almost completed.
Ultimate Liberal Fear: China Rising in Toronto
It seems to me that Liberano$ plan of action was to do some horse trading in BC. If they knew that they were going to lose both riding in BC in recounts their strategy to go with the recount in Vancouver South on Friday and Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca on Monday made lot of sense.
If it was not for the blog burst that started on the weekend they could have easily thrown Keith Martin under the bus, and let Conservatives send another lawyer Troy DeSouza to Ottawa and call it fair tonight.
If that was the plan than it would explain MSM’s silence on Vancouver South recount scandal over the weekend after the story broke on Friday.
Just look at political implications of Ujjal Dosanjh’s possible loss in a recount. Two largest China Towns in Canada are in Toronto and Vancouver. Chinese community in Canada is very conservative
If Wai Young were to win recount in Vancouver South riding than her win could spell a doom to Liberal’s grip on their last stronghold “Fortress Toronto”.
Chinese community in Toronto buoyed by this stunning upset and Wai Young’s victory might develop some very peculiar and very dangerous ideas like: have their own Conservative representatives in Ottawa representing true values of their community, worse still they might even try to implement these ideas in next election or even by-election and stage more upsets in downtown Toronto. Such development must be avoided at all costs as it might deal final blow to the "Liberal Dragon".
We will see, but I expect that MSM will pick up on Vancouver South re-count scandal as soon as Troy DeSouza is declared a winner in Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca re-count and they will try very hard to put some positive spin on it.
Plan "B"
If you watched a movie "Wag the Dog" and if we are following the script it might turn out that Liberals will try to create even bigger scandal at Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca re-count than what we have read about Vancouver South just to divert public attention from what is really important here; danger of "China Rising in Toronto".
You're making a lot of Conservative friends here, Dawg.
That must make you feel warm and fuzzy, no doubt.
Well, not really. It's too much like having Liberal friends. But it's good to be able to agree on an obvious point of principle, the ignoring of which could affect all of us.
Well, not really. It's too much like having Liberal friends
Thank God that's not a problem for you.
For me, the very thought of celebrating a (potential) victory for rule of law with these Conservatives debases the whole principle that much more.
We're looking at the big picture here, Ti-Guy. Sorry you can't see that.
It seems that the Court Party is sweating bullets tonight. Troy DeSouza is a lawyer so his entire future professional career is on line in this fiasco. Poor guy had no other choice than validate partial re-count decision of Justice Patrick Dohm from last Friday. The next thing we will hear that Justice Dohm stopped the re-count at Wai Young’s request or that there was some misunderstanding to that effect.
MSM plays the costs angle.
Just read for yourself:
http://www.canada.com/victoriati...db-
c968be5c73e6
===Keith Martin wins election in recount===
68 votes separated Martin from Conservative challenger
Times Colonist
Published: Monday, October 27, 2008
Keith Martin has won re-election as Liberal MP for Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca after a recount was called off this afternoon.
Conservative challenger Troy DeSouza called off the recount after it became apparent that the number of disputed ballots would not bridge the gap between him and Martin.
In the election night count, on Oct. 14, Martin won by a 68-vote margin.
Martin had 20,042 votes to DeSouza’s 19,974.
The margin of votes between DeSouza and Martin widened to 70 ballots in the recount, not counting 67 disputed ballots which were not resolved because DeSouza terminated the recount.
“It worked out in the best spirit of democracy and luckily we came out on the right side,” said Martin.
DeSouza had sought and was granted a judicial recount.
The margin of defeat in the original vote was too wide to trigger an automatic recount.
DeSouza said earlier that he wanted a recount to maintain public confidence in the electoral system, given the likelihood of human error during the long and complicated election-night proceedings.
Martin did not oppose the recount.
DeSouza’s lawyer Bruce Hallsor provided 18 sworn affidavits by Conservative party scrutineers who alleged some ballots were rejected or improperly counted. For example, one scrutineer alleged Elections Canada counted a ballot where the person marked an “X” on the candidate’s name, not in the ballot’s circle.
Numerous affidavits alleged some polling stations recorded more or fewer votes than the actual number of voters.
The cost of the recount is covered by Elections Canada, including the $750-a-day charge for the Empress room.
Both the Liberals and Conservatives are each permitted to bring three lawyers and 25 staff.
Elections Canada provides their own officials and legal staff from Ottawa.
The Times Colonist won a precedent-setting decision to attend and report on the judicial recount. It’s believed to be the first time a media organization has been allowed to witness the Elections Canada proceedings, which have previously been held in secret.
We're looking at the big picture here, Ti-Guy. Sorry you can't see that.
Well, if I did, you'd be gushing all over me and I haven't had my vaccinations updated in years.
Seriously, who do you think you're kidding? I don't remember you being exercised over the veiled voter issue (which I criticised the Liberals for) nor do I believe you think the In-and-Out scam is a real scandal.
...I could be wrong though. I don't read your blog and haven't since you posted (and disappeared) that bit of pseudo-science demonising gays.
Big picture? Don't me laugh. Ephemeral alliances of convenience are the smallest pictures I can think of.
One thing that I still do not get is this:
At the end of the count Martin was leading by 70 votes over DeSouza, there were 67 disputed ballots for judge’s consideration but according to Election Canada there were also 129 rejected ballots.
http://enr.elections.ca/Electora..._e.aspx?
ed=1298
Nobody mentions what happened to them. Were they also examined and counted??
The reason I ask is because ballots are rejected when they are questioned by scrutineers on Election Day in a process that was basically repeated at the court yesterday.
Common sense tells me that all disputed ballots (rejected during election and questioned during re-count) should be examined by the judge. Rejected ballots as far as I know could not be just put back into ballot box for re-count (re-examination) so their number would not decrease at the end of the re-count, so we can be assured that this 67 disputed ballots were in addition to 129 rejected ballots for the total 196 ballots. 196 “undetermined” ballots is much greater number than 70 votes that Martin was leading over DeSouza. It seems that we will never know for sure who actually won in Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca riding in 2008.
One thing that I still do not get about Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca recount last night is this:
At the end of the count Martin was leading by 70 votes over DeSouza, there were 67 disputed ballots for judge’s consideration but according to Election Canada there were also 129 rejected ballots.
http://enr.elections.ca/Electora..._e.aspx?
ed=1298
Nobody mentions what happened to them. Were they also examined and counted??
The reason I ask is because ballots are rejected when they are questioned by scrutineers on Election Day in a process that was basically repeated at the court yesterday.
Common sense tells me that all disputed ballots (rejected during election and questioned during re-count) should be examined by the judge. Rejected ballots as far as I know could not be just put back into ballot box for re-count (re-examination) so their number would not decrease at the end of the re-count, so we can be assured that this 67 disputed ballots were in addition to 129 rejected ballots for the total 196 ballots. 196 “undetermined” ballots is much greater number than 70 votes that Martin was leading over DeSouza. It seems to me that we will never know for sure who actually won in Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca riding in 2008.
YES, I am with you on this;
"get rid of the bone-headed new ID requirements that disenfranchised so many people this time around."
That came in under the radar didn't it. Straight from Rove's handbood me thinks.
I have been trying to find out how many cases of "voter" fraud we have had in Canada. NO ONE has answered me so far.
They have had ONLY 24 cases since 2002 in the US, per Robert Kennedy Jr.
That would be Roves's handbooK : -)
5 Visitors Online
Commenting by HaloScan
