(1) if the Court denies a new election, the House still can require one, and
(2) the House can refuse to seat the Repug candidate, and
(3) the House can even declare the Dem candidate the winner, regardless.

Now that the Dems have controls of state houses and governerships, and both houses of congress, they should make voting their number one priority since it is the basis of a democracy. This will have a far greater impact and make a grander statement than listening to another Democrat whine about election irregularities.

Link

Let's be clear: At every step of the process, the Democrats followed the letter of Washington law. The state's election statutes are very clear that there are three potential counts of the vote: If, after the general-election tally, a race remains within 1 percent of the total vote, a machine recount occurs automatically. If, after that count, one of the candidates requests it, a manual recount of all ballots occurs. The candidate, however, has to put up a deposit for the costs of the recount, which is reimbursed if the challenge is successful.

Those are the rules. And the most important one is this: Whoever comes out ahead in the final, manual tally is the winner. Period.

And, indeed, Gregoire promised to accept the outcome of the manual recount, even if Rossi won by only a single vote. Rossi, however, refused to match her pledge. That, of course, was the giveaway to what followed.

This is what a blogger from that area had to say about your absurd insinuations:

Right-leaning conspiracy types -- you know, the ones who think FEMA is going to land black helicopters in their Idaho ranch, confiscate their property, and turn it over to the UN -- channeled their rage at the appearance of botched ballot handling in King County and made endless unfounded allegations of fraud in county, complete with the state Republican Party chair waving McCarthy-esque lists of felon voters, dead voters, and people who voted twice, all of which turned out to be a lot of hot air.

Link

Oh, and in answer to your question, I have a electronic BS detector that tells me when I'm needed somewhere, and it last went off a week ago.

First, PPJ, I'd like to say I'm glad that unlike the rest of us, you have a lot of question marks to use and you're not afraid to deploy them when necessary.

Secondly, your question doesn't make any sort of sense, because your logical conclusion is that if someone didn't intervene in Case A, they cannot intervene or comment on any case in the same area in the future.

Who cares what the Repub did

They wanted a new election. They had their day in court.

It is a simple case of right and wrong

And it got through the courts and a Republican Sec of State allowed it to happen.

I forgot, Republicans in your world never act with partisan motives, only Democrats.

Dean didn't step up to the bar, so we know that he is. ready for this boys and girls? A partisan Demo, just as .......gasp...... Dark Avenger is

But if the tables were turned, a partisan Repub wouldn't be there, as they don't exist, just as you are a social liberal, refusing to accept reality as they used to say about them back in the '60s.

And "family greeting?" You know, families haven't come up while you were "in."

Hey, I could see saying that to someone who's on leave or left the service, so I must attribute it to the bad influences you've been subjected to since leaving that paradise on earth known as the American South.

Besides, don't think a lack of comments means that I'm 'out'.

Again, welcome back DA, no matter where you were.
The discourse was getting too refined.

Yes, you did stop being snarky for a while, but as I feared, the change was all too brief.

Of course the incoming majority dems can sit anyone they choose, it's the law, but they prefer to have an actual vote... you know, where all the ballots are counted?

No, you write stupidities to assert this obvious fact, and you've probably got your old jock strap on the wrong end to be so blind, I dunnot.

All the effort you've put into your little screeds here that have no comments about the Florida race is very troll-like.  

Why do you think you've gotten the ratings you have so far?

Nothing has changed.

You've been off-topic for more than three posts, so you're outta the game, whether you know it or not.

Your bringing up the Washington election only shows that you wanted something to b** and moan about, because you had nothing to say about the Florida case.

Now you bring up the NH jamming affair, which you should know had convictions and settlements invovled because the perps were caught. As someone who claims to know something about communication technology, you'd have realized that the case was easier to solve than tha tire-slashing case, which nobody here to my knowledge has said shouldn't be pursued and/or the perps caught and convicted in a fair trial.

But again, you prove that you had nothing but snark to bring to this topic, along with ignorance of the facts behind the Washington state election(why else would you drop it and bring up still another case?).

Of course, telling voters that a vote for a Democrat isn't a vote for fighting the terrorists aren't putting their party ahead of the interests of the country, no sireebob!

I think the word is "hypocritical."

Hypocritical

That's what you are

Hypocritical

Though near and far

Like a Repub stink that clings to me

How the thought of you does things to me

Never before has someone been more

Hypocritical in every way

And forever more, thats how youll stay

Thats why, PPJ, its' incredible

That someone so hypocritical

Thinks that I am hypocritical too

Is that your final answer?

I merely noted the NH thing, didn't make any judgement

Been plenty of tears shead

Looks like a judgement, albeit one that shows the misspelling which you start doing when you get angry and irritable.