June 05, 2005
Closer v. Loser

I posted the conclusion of Harry Korrell's closing argument a few entries down. The man's a closer. Compare his 46 min. argument with Jenny Durkan's 1hr20min. oration (Go to TVW Video, fast forward to 5:10:50). Overall, I think she blew it. It was a big mistake for her to speak that long. She sounded like an angry loser and scored more "own goals" than I have time to post here.

It was clear from Judge Bridge's facial expressions and body language that he wasn't buying what she was selling. His mood appeared to fluctuate from indifference to outright annoyance. Much of what she said either (a) advanced a tortured legalistic case that did not comply with the Secretary of State's call for a "workable and rational interpretation" of the contest statute, (b) reminded the judge of the reasons why he's leaning to rule for the Republicans, (c) was politically stupid and would only persuade the electorate of the justice of overturning the election, or (d) several or all of the above.

Here are her concluding remarks, which is one of the best coups the Republicans scored during the entire trial --

[forward to 6:30:23]

This case has had benefits your honor, and I'll be the first to admit it. It's good for the public to see and hold the government accountable. But it's also wreaked damage and havoc on people. It's taken a great toll on many innocent people. It's placed a huge burden on election officials throughout the state and the taxpayers and it will have a longstanding impact on the public trust and confidence in our elections systems unless this court addresses those issues in its decision.

Your honor, there's a saying that any fool can burn down a barn. The end of this case. This case will only help public trust and confidence if the barn is still standing. If the people know it has worth. On a personal note, I had the very good fortune to be raised in a family that believed in public service. Public servants in this state worked very hard on this election. Many made mistakes. Those mistakes should be corrected by this court. They should be taken seriously. But for those who worked hard, their work should not go unnoticed.

Any reasonable person who reviewed the evidence would be appalled by the fundamental disregard for election laws on reconciliation and certification and the covering up of massive discrepancies, especially in King County. No sane person would believe that letting the election stand would do anything correct any mistakes or hold anybody accountable for their misconduct. The only sensible way to restore public trust and confidence in the elections system is to actually hold the election officials accountable, with real consequences for violating the laws. Durkan's conclusion only appealed to the side of Judge Bridges that wants to set this tainted election aside and she handed him a rhetorical framework for explaining such a ruling.

Check back, as I'll be posting a few more of Jenny Durkan's "own goals" later today.

Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at June 05, 2005 12:15 PM | Email This
Comments
1. Stefan,

I caught her closing argument on the John Carlson show. When she began, I was slightly worried. It seemed she was making strong points over and over again.

Fortunately, I listened to Korrell's close online via your posted link. The difference between the two is day and night. Korrell was presenting specific evidence to show that Rossi won (proportional deduction). He had depositions from election workers testifying to misconduct and negligence. Durkan had verbal tears.

Case and point being that she was running on fumes. Emotion doesn't win trials. Probably the most interesting part was Korrell's rebuttal at the end during which he blew the few statistics she tried to use out of the water.

Posted by: Anthony Jones on June 5, 2005 12:26 PM
2. SS,

This is why my hope for the correct verdict has soared today, because the Judge KNOWS if he does not, it is biz as usual in King County, he cannot allow this and he knows it. Dean Logan's indifference on the stand will be the reason, IMHO, but the Judge will not say that of course.


Posted earlier:

The more I think about it, there is NO WAY the judge can let this election stand, and I believe he knows it. If he does not overturn the election, King Cnty will just breathe a sigh of relief and say: "wow, we dodged a bullet, gotta be more careful next time, do a better job of cheating guys".

The judge's dilemma is to craft the judgment such that the supremos cannot overturn his decision. Right now it is 70% chance of overturning the results IMHO. Hope I'm right.

Posted by: sschu on June 5, 2005 12:34 PM
3. I agree that Durkan was foolish in her torture of the Judge during closing arguments!
He saw that she was simply trying to eat up the time needed by the petitioners for rebuttal.

The camera showed Judge Bridges expressions during her long winded and droning blather....I thought he would soon begin banging his head on his desk in pain and fatigue! He only perked up when she lyingly used the words "Finally" and "In conclusion" ! But then he - like us - were even more perturbed when she purposely ignored the meanings of those words and continued droning on and on....

She lost the Judge and any points she was trying to make in her closing argument!

Posted by: Deborah on June 5, 2005 12:34 PM
4. "Your honor, there's a saying that any fool can burn down a barn. The end of this case. This case will only help public trust and confidence if the barn is still standing. If the people know it has worth."

Gotta say I agree with her there -- if she means the "barn" in question is the credibility of our elections. If she means the particular result of this particular election, then let it burn!

"Those mistakes should be corrected by this court."

Those "mistakes" should have been documented and corrected by the people who made them -- as required by law. If they had, the court wouldn't have to do it for them.

I can't see Judge Bridges being moved by this slop.

Posted by: starboardhelm on June 5, 2005 12:42 PM
5. On one hand the election was effectively a dead heat, so the Democrats and MSM are saying it's not worth the trouble of another election, although for the life of me I can't remember them saying that during the recounts when it was Gregoire that was scrounging for ballots.

Since then though the Republicans have done an uncharacteristically good job of showing how important the process is to ensuring that only the legal votes are counted. That process is not there just to ensure that the every last ballot is counted, but it is also to detect fraud when it happens and thus prevent it in the first place. I believe Judge Bridges understands that well and knows that if he lets this election stand it will be open season on ballot stuffing. I'm confident about tomorrow.

To all the people who took the time away from their family to go vote, the Democrats and MSM are saying it's just to much bother for KC to follow the rules. Typical attitude of a monopoly.

Posted by: Jon Cohen on June 5, 2005 12:43 PM
6. Jon Cohen: Too true. "Almost Live" or "Saturday Night Live" had a skit once about an airline with the slogan "We don't care -- we don't have to!" It's a slogan that suits the liberals these days.

If you think liberal bias in the MSM and academia is bad, you should see what we suffer with in our state bureaucracy! (And city -- in Olynpia.)

Posted by: starboardhelm on June 5, 2005 12:55 PM
7. Deborah - "But then he - like us - were even more perturbed when she purposely ignored the meanings of those words and continued droning on and on...."

Oh. So you noticed that, too...

Posted by: Dogbert on June 5, 2005 12:56 PM
8. This is the closing statement of the dems top attorney???! It's crap, much more a harangue than a closing argument. And what's up with the barn metaphors???

Seriously, this is just an awful closing argument. It's no wonder the left relies so much on activist judges making law (and activist vote-counters making ballots!) because they sure aren't winning anyone over on the merits of their case!

Posted by: chuck Miller on June 5, 2005 01:00 PM
9. Apparently Durkin's father passed away during the trial. When I first heard that, I had sympathy for her, but then I wondered, why was she even there for closing arguments? Should I look at that as dedication or should I think her priorities are all messed up? I guess it depends at what point in the trial he passed away and if it were in the first part, there was a respectable amount of time between then and her closing arguments and I suppose that is probably why her closing was so emotional, especially the totally pointless comment at the end about how she was raised.

Democrats love to play the victim card and that was apparent in her remarks about Nicole Way. Those evil Republicans were so mean to her. Afterall she was just trying to do her job and they had the audacity to point out her mistakes and call her on them. Shame Shame Shame. They announced to the world that she is a liar and a cheat. She was publically embarassed and shamed by those evil Republicans, all because she was just doing the best she could. The fact that the best she could was exactly the wrong thing to do is irrelevant in her world I guess.

Posted by: Hanna on June 5, 2005 01:37 PM
10. I do not habitually browse the blog Horsesass.org, but I did look just a while ago. Goldy is yammering on about the Newsweek story. No comments on the local scene. Interesente, n'est pas?

Posted by: maggie on June 5, 2005 01:42 PM
11. Kind of OT but I have to share this. Below is an opinion piece from my local rag, the Columbian. As the only post printed on the subject of our election, I expected something good. It is good but for all the wrong reasons.

Losers prolong divide

If the state election for governor were reversed and a Republican had won instead of a Democrat, none of this would be happening. When did we become a Republican country? When did the Democrats stop fighting for what is rightfully theirs?

How disgusting is all of this?

(I omitted the writer name and city because IMHO, crediting this insanity to a person verges on defamation.

Did the Columbian publish this liberal rant to prove a point? Maybe that ignorance breeds arrogance?)

Posted by: Splatter on June 5, 2005 01:59 PM
12. Deborah, I love your play-by-plays of the trial! They're better than watching it myself.

Posted by: Shannon K on June 5, 2005 02:12 PM
13. Splatter -

I just love the following line:
"When did we become a Republican country? When did the Democrats stop fighting for what is rightfully theirs?"

I would respond that currently the Republicans have majoritys in the US House and Senate. The President is Republican. 28 of the nations Governors are Republican, with 22 being Democrat. My link for where I found the stats on Governors is below. I assume that the other stuff I've listed is self-explanitory...but maybe not to the writher you quoted.

All that said, when does anything "rightfully belong" to any political party?

http://www.nga.org/governors/1,1169,C_TRIVIA%5ED_2163,00.html

Mark

Posted by: Mark D on June 5, 2005 02:13 PM
14. To me the biggest part of Durkan's own goal here is this statement:

"This case has had benefits your honor, and I'll be the first to admit it. It's good for the public to see and hold the government accountable. But it's also wreaked damage and havoc on people. It's taken a great toll on many innocent people. It's placed a huge burden on election officials throughout the state and the taxpayers and it will have a longstanding impact on the public trust and confidence in our elections systems unless this court addresses those issues in its decision."

It is the job of the employees of King County Election to count ballots, reconcile them, and to do so properly. I have no sympathy whatsoever, and I don't think Judge Bridges will either that these "innocent" people have had the burden of their work being inspected. In the private sector, much of our work goes unnoticed, but it always gets inspected. And we are held accountable for our results. This is not considered a burden, this is why we call it "work." I can understand that a Democrat would think it was an extra burden to have their work scrutinized, but this kind of insinuation did not impress Bridges at all.

And, I'm sure the taxpayers of this state are quite fine with the extra time it has taken to make sure we have a fair process for assuring us the correct result in our highest elected office. Polls show that the majority don't trust to the result, and so it a stands to reason they are fine with the lengthy protest process. Again, an arrogant statment on the part of Durkan.

Perhaps the biggest reason for the Judge to be unimpressed by this statement though is that it comes from a lawyer who stands to make more money trying this case, the longer it goes on. It's one thing that the employees of KC Elections were "burdened" by having their work inspected, but it is no burden at all for Durkan to have tried this case, this is what she does to make a living and so it comes across as completely disingenous and arrogant for her to speak on behalf of yet another victim class.

But that's what Democrats do. Glorify perceived victimization for personal and political benefit.

Posted by: Jeff B. on June 5, 2005 02:20 PM
15. Splatter - Also, the R's hold a 21 to 19 lead over the D's in states where one party holds both houses of the Legislative branch. 10 states are split.

http://usconservatives.about.com/library/blstatelegis.htm

Mark

Posted by: Mark D on June 5, 2005 02:26 PM
16. "When did the Democrats stop fighting for what is rightfully theirs?"

When they dedcided that cheating would be more profitable.

Posted by: Dogbert on June 5, 2005 02:40 PM
17. Let's look at Durkan from another angle. I suspect that someone high up in the Dem machine know that they're likely to lose this case if not in court then in the PR war. So they needed a victim to go argue this. I suspect that Durkan knows she's been set up as the fall guy and if she doesn't pull off a miracle then she's toast. That can't be fun.
Want to bet that she ws the most "minority" lawyer that they could get to take the case? Remember image is everything. It would sure look stupid if a male Dem lawyer started crying in court!

Posted by: Victor on June 5, 2005 03:40 PM
18. I want to see that fat, gross, boogar-eating redheaded LEFTIST PINHEAD gal who looks like a dude who was sitting behind Durkan cry. I think that might have been Durkan's "life-partner"!
I hope the camera focuses directly on Durkan's face as the verdict is read and they can frame her face with the red-headed fat gal who looks like a dude. That would be priceless.

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on June 5, 2005 03:54 PM
19. Mr. Cynical,

You should change your name to Mr. Meansprited. That was one of the most rude and uncalled for diatribes I have read in this ordeal.

Posted by: Eyago on June 5, 2005 04:41 PM
20. You guys are all crazy. I haven't been watching the trial, but I just saw a picture of Durkan doing her summing up here, and the redheaded guy sitting behind her is Doug Dobbins, who ran for state Rep in my district this year (and got crushed, ha ha ha). He was also one of the Dems' lead observers in Spokane during the recounts.

Posted by: ScottM on June 5, 2005 05:38 PM
21. Eyago--
Thank you for noticing!!
However, I'm not so sure it was that "mean-spiirited" "rude" or "uncalled for".

Perhaps a wee bit "aggressive"??

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on June 5, 2005 05:39 PM
22. ScottM--
My apologies to Doug Dobbins for confusing him with a Lesbian. However, he is clearly red-headed, fat, disgusting and I'll bet $20 that he ate the boogar!!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on June 5, 2005 05:43 PM
23. I have to say, from my (admittedly limited) encounters with Mr. Dobbins, I must decline to take that bet.

Posted by: ScottM on June 5, 2005 05:45 PM
24. We don't need to destroy Nicole Way. She is a very typical government worker, as a matter of fact she is a typical American worker. She was dealing with a new computer system that she didn't understand and didn't have enough training on. She kept emailing her bosses telling them that there were going to be problems. She kept asking her SUPERVISORS for help and she was ignored. If she was a bad person, she would have lied, instead she told the truth! She stated exactly what she and Garth Fell did and she will be the one fired for it. What happened to Garth Fell? What happened to Huennekens? What happened to Logan?

In reference to Jenny Durkan, a piece in the Olympian today said she was an overachieving child of her fathers for going to court after his death. Her logic that the Judge should rule in the democrats favor because election people work hard is absolutely insane. She is probably just passionate about it, since she is close to Gregoire. Her closing was emotional and based on feelings, heart tuggings and not on laws or problems.

I especially didn't like the argument that the Republicans should have gone into King County and searched for the absentee ballot envelopes of a 1000 felons and the 875 provisional ballot envelopes. She knows that it could NOT have been accomplished, which is exactly why she argued it. Both sides complained about King County not being responsive to discovery requests. It was a strategy designed to stall and obsecure the truth. I personally would like to see someone recount those heavily leaning Gregoire precints and to go through all of those envelopes for double and triple votes, because I believe they are there. King County admitted that their computer kept sending out duplicate ballots, some people even got 4 instead of 1. Although they would only be credited once, if the ballots are put through the accuvote, they would tallied. This election was an absolute disaster in King County because of the incompetent leaders there and nothing but nullification will fix it!

I am hopeful that Judge Bridges will set aside the election, otherwise no election will ever be credible in this state again. The SOS accusations that the Republicans destroyed the people's faith in elections is equally insane. We have lost faith because of the sheer trememdous amount of incompetent and criminal actions of a FEW election workers.

Posted by: sgmmac on June 5, 2005 05:49 PM
25. True story:

During campaign season last year, someone rang my doorbell. I wasn't expecting anyone and wasn't in the mood to deal with a salesman or a pair of Jehovah's Witnesses, so I didn't answer. I heard something being slipped under the handle of the screen door, so after a few minutes, I opned the door and retrieved the item. It was a piece of Doug Dobbins literature. And Doug himself (whom I had seen before at an event) was across the street on someone else's porch. When he heard my door open, he started running across the street toward my house.

The funny part is that my yard was festooned with Republican signs, including one for Dobbins's opponent, John Ahern.

So I pointed meaningfully at the Ahern sign, ostentatiously wadded up the flier and dropped it into the wastebasket next to my door, then shut the door.

After shutting the door, I went into the other room, took my spare Ahern sign and put it in the window.

About three seconds later, the doorbell rang. I didn't answer. At that point, I couldn't think of anything to say to the poor schmuck.

When I met him during the recount, I don't think he recognized me. At least he didn't say anything.

(Incidentally, the only reason he was in the general at all is that no one filed to run against Ahern, so the Dems party-filed him so they'd at least have a name on the ballot.)

Posted by: ScottM on June 5, 2005 06:00 PM
26. Mr Cynical - I saw Caddy Shack...I'm not going to take that bet either.

ScottM - Great story! I have to admire Mr. Dobbins' persistence. Still glad he lost.

Mark

Posted by: Mark D on June 5, 2005 06:25 PM
27. Yep. Demerits for Durkan for going too long!

Posted by: Michele on June 5, 2005 06:57 PM
28. "We don't need to destroy Nicole Way."

No. We don't need to destroy any of these people. That was never our intention.
We did, however, need to expose these people - and in doing so - bring to the forefront - people like Nicole Way and Garth Fell - so *they* (with their admissions) could destroy the machine that has corrupted our election process in King County and the State!

Posted by: Deborah on June 5, 2005 07:22 PM
29. Durkan's taking her cues from the new SAT essay section. According to Dr. Les Perelman, director of undergraduate writing at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the new essay portion rewards LENGTH over clarity and does not take off points for wrong facts!

Doesn't that fit Durkan's closing to a T?

Posted by: Shannon K on June 5, 2005 07:24 PM
30. Deborah--
If any of these people are "destroyed", they have no one to blame but themselves.
For over 6 months they could have stepped forward and told the truth and whole truth about the problems they encountered and the mistakes they made.

It had to be forced out of them.

Don't start goin' soft on us Deborah.
Elections, fairly conducted elections, are the cornerstone to our system. These people are public servants who fell short....
It is not our job to "rehab" them.
Sayonara!!

Posted by: Mr. Cynical on June 5, 2005 07:51 PM
31. Deborah and Mr Cynical:

I don't hold Nicole Way blameless, but she is NOT the one who lied, nor is she the one who covered anything up. She is the one who told the truth, she is the one that the so-called leaders are pinning the blame on, because they are gutless wonders who will let their employees take the fall when they know they are the ones responsible for the mess. She may get fired for sitting on the witness stand and telling the truth! She told those three gutless male wonder supervisors of hers that the computer system wasn't working right in June 2004...... She and three other workers were put on Admin leave and probably won't come back... The real "snakes" are slithering away and avoiding any responsibility.

Leaders and supervisors have a responsibility to their workers to give them resources, expert advice, proper training, and I could go on and on....... Leaders take responsibility for their actions and for the actions of all who work for them. They don't run and hide and they don't make those friday afternoon press releases after the Shark exposes them.

And yes, it is almost criminal that everything had to be dragged out of these so-called leaders..... Unfortunately, it's only getting worse with the All mail voting of Sam Reed's! I pray that Stefan stays on top of not only this election, but those to come also!

Posted by: sgmmac on June 5, 2005 08:53 PM
32. "Don't start goin' soft on us Deborah.",/i>

ACK!
Don't even suggest such a thing!

This heart doesn't bleed for conspirators!
What I'm saying is - If Nicole Way and Garth Fell go down with their ship of lies and corruption - it won't be because of a direct hit from our cannon - it will be from their own rotted hull!

If she is destroyed - it will be because she chose to work with criminals and hide important election data problems.

Posted by: Deborah on June 6, 2005 12:02 AM
33. Pretty interesting that no one was talking about lowering the B&O tax until this Dobbins fella mentioned it, not even the beloved Brad Benson. LOL, the only people over there in the 6th Leg Dist dumber than Ahern are the people that voted for him, I've never encountered anyone who actually admitted doing it. He's smart all right, just like the Mayor of Spokane is straight. Dobbins may not look like much, but he has his wits about him. More dangerous than most local democrats because he's not afraid to take action and doesn't really care who he makes angry in the process. He sure does spend a lot of time talking about McCain for someone who says he's a Dem.

Posted by: SalJaxon on June 11, 2005 01:55 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?