1. Can't watch it cause I'm at work. How's it going so far?

Posted by: RalphR on February 4, 2005 10:04 AM

2. I can't get the KING-5 live streaming video to work from ANY website link. Anyone else having problems?

Posted by: J Barker on February 4, 2005 10:05 AM

3.

Anyone else having problems?

Yep. Posted by: Boonie on February 4, 2005 10:07 AM

4. It works fine for me... A good camera man would sure be nice though !

Posted by: J Mc on February 4, 2005 10:15 AM

5. I am at work too, got the audio of the court hearing. Mostly yack, yack, yack. Get to the meat man! revote, revote...

Posted by: Son Of Liberty on February 4, 2005 10:20 AM

6. Everyone involved has made their requests re: where this case belongs. The judge has asked for a 15 min. recess to think issue over. more in 15

Posted by: darcy on February 4, 2005 10:25 AM

7. They just went into recess for 15 minutes. Judge will return with decision on venue issues.

Posted by: Joe on February 4, 2005 10:25 AM

8. The court is in recess. Decision to be made in about 12 more minutes after the recess.

Posted by: Jay on February 4, 2005 10:26 AM

9. They left the camera on during the break....do lawyers really use backpacks like that girl on the screen?

Posted by: Karl Dahlquist on February 4, 2005 10:30 AM

10. Karl,
Isn't a backpack more practical than a tote bag?

Posted by: bmvaughn on February 4, 2005 10:33 AM

11. Is this available on tv? I can't get the video from 5 to work either. Any news yet? I want so much to believe in our justice system. It gets harder and harder to trust it. It would be great to see a fair ruling. I hope someone will post when something significant happens. Thanks! YES...REVOTE!!

Posted by: J.C. on February 4, 2005 10:42 AM

12. the judge is jibber jabbering on about jurisdiction...he is going to keep it in the courts...IMHO

Posted by: Karl Dahlquist on February 4, 2005 10:51 AM

13. Relative to the Democratic request to dismiss the case, the judge has denied the request. REVOTE!!!

Posted by: Jay on February 4, 2005 10:52 AM

14. Dems motion to dismiss because of venue has been DISMISSED.

Posted by: Joe on February 4, 2005 10:53 AM

15. Judge dismisses Dem contention court has no jurisdiction.

Posted by: Karl Dahlquist on February 4, 2005 10:53 AM

16. Judge is keeping it in Chelan also

Posted by: Jay on February 4, 2005 10:55 AM

17. Let's be precise:

Dems motion that this has to be handled in the Legislature not the courts - DISMISSED!!

Posted by: Scott in Carnation on February 4, 2005 10:56 AM

18. Dems motion on venue - meaning that it shouldn't be heard in Chelan Count, that it should be heard only in the Supreme Court or another county - DISMISSED!

Posted by: Scott in Carnation on February 4, 2005 10:58 AM

19. this judge is awesome!

Posted by: Karl Dahlquist on February 4, 2005 10:59 AM

20. WOO HOO! The Dems' attempt to bounce the ball back into the legislature (after declaring that it was not their job) has FAILED!

The scumbagos are now trying to dismiss the challenge of the state certification.

Keep praying...

Posted by: ERNurse on February 4, 2005 11:01 AM

21. Who is this guy talking now? Dem lawyer?

Posted by: Mike on February 4, 2005 11:05 AM

22. I think that this judge is sharp enough to realize that the SoS certification of the election was inapropriate and INVALID due to the failure of multiple counties to provide ALL of the required information to the SoS prior to the certification.

And now the Dem counsel is trying to dismiss the case "for the good of the people..."

PUH-LEEEZE.

Posted by: ERNurse on February 4, 2005 11:06 AM

23. This guy is clearly rattled.

The judge will toss this motion too.

Posted by: Karl on February 4, 2005 11:09 AM

24. I missed that - what was so funny?

Posted by: Scott in Carnation on February 4, 2005 11:11 AM

Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?