ala lowenstein who was a prominent liberal democrat, political reformer on the same political side as holtzman, he had run against a congressman named rooney, john rooney. and he lost by 900 votes. in other words, rooney won by 900 votes, holtzman won by 600 votes. rooney rather lowenstein brought a suit to try to upset the rooney victory. so we have here is lowenstein trying to upset a 900-vote victory and seller trying to upset a 600-vote victory. so even though we were on the same side politically, we were on the opposite sides legally. i'm making the claim in the motelman case basically that you can't upset elections unless there's overwhelming proof. you just can't. this is all nonsense about irregularities and things like that, and that was the thrust of my brief in effect and the thrust of my witnesses. i called a statistician from columbia law school to point out that the art to the election would have changed because of certain alleged regularities were greater than all the grains of sand on all the beaches of the earth. i had all sorts of testimony like that. i'm saying you