Virginia GOP sues to have Terry McAuliffe removed from ballot

HotAir.com ^ | August 26, 2021 | John Sexton

[FryingPan101]

The Republican Party of Virginia on Thursday asked a court to remove Democrat Terry McAuliffe from the November ballot, arguing that his elections paperwork did not meet the state’s guidelines because it was a missing a signature.

The lawsuit, filed in Richmond Circuit Court, argues that McAuliffe never signed his declaration of candidacy form, a step in the process to qualify for the primary and general election ballot. It also claims that two McAuliffe staffers who signed on as having witnessed McAuliffe signing the document did so falsely.

[FryingPan101]

There are no consequences for doing or failing to do anything in the Democrat Party. This is funny.

Forgive me if someone already posted this.

[Reno89519]

Paperwork errors, if inadvertent are often are to enforce. That the “witnesses” signed is a nice complication. What did they witness?

[Reno89519]

Does anyone think a Virginia court will remove him from ballot, will any prosecutor take up the perjury of the witnesses?

[HandBasketHell]

Silly Wepublicans!
Wules are for everyone EXCEPT Democwats!

[Starboard]

This has no chance of succeeding. Zero.

Rules are only for Republicans.

[shanover]

The worthless GOP needs to give it up. The next governor is the old governor.

[AppyPappy]

Ironically, McAwful used the same tactics on Ralph Nader.

[LizzieD]

It’s true that - besides the missing signature - the entire document is fraudulent, because the “witnesses” falsely attested to witnessing him sign. Hard for the powers that be to “overlook”.

[BiglyCommentary]

So karma reaching out.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

Omigosh. The GOPee is actually putting up a fight in Virginia!

I shall mark this moment down for when the Virginia GOPee returns to its usual Assistant Democrat position.

[FoxInSocks]

So the DMV will issue me a driver’s license if I don’t bother signing the paperwork?

No way they pull him from the race.

[pepsi_junkie]

Call me jaded but these sorts of suits only work against republicans. Obama built his entire career on stuff like this. But I remember when US Senator Bob Torricelli (D) in NJ was caught red handed taking bribes (and the FBI deemed him resigning from the Senate as punishment enough for his many crimes and not charging him) right before an election.

The law was crystal clear, they were too close to substitute another name. There was a deadline in black and white in the law and it had past. Torricelli could stay on it if he wanted (he did not, presumably he'd have been prosecuted like a regular person if he tried to stay a Senator) but nobody else. Yet everyone knew Torricelli could not win and the republican would be elected. So the courts in NJ stepped in and said that NJ voters deserved to have a democrat nominee who would win and they set aside that law so demential addled former Senator Frank Lautenberg could be put on at the last second. And yeah, he won.

I expect every time a dem faces a question like this that the courts will preserve him regardless of what the law says. It just is one of those immutable facts of life now.

[Tennessee Nana]

I wish someone would post the dates...

What was the last date he could apply to run...

What was the date the GOP discovered he had not signed thus completed the paperwork...

[zeugma]

## It’s true that - besides the missing signature - the entire document is fraudulent, because the “witnesses” falsely attested to witnessing him sign. Hard for the powers that be to “overlook”.

You would think so. Kinda goes to the entire heart of the very concept of a Notary doesn’t it?

[Pilgrim's Progress]

Silly rabbit, tricks are for commies!

[Political Junkie Too]

It's kind of like Newsom in California forgetting to list his party affiliation.

The California courts ruled that he cannot add his party to the ballot listing.

-PJ

[FryingPan101]

Great blast from the past story. I bet we could come up with 1000’s of stories where a wrong ended up being a windfall for Democrats.

[Bulwinkle]

The two who signed as witnesses perpetrated a fraud on the Commonwealth of Virginia

[T Ruth]

I looked at the form and the box for “Democrat primary” is checked, not the box for “General.” I suppose the argument must be that if he was not a lawful candidate in the primary then he couldn’t win the primary?

Does that mean the second place finisher in the Dem primary would become the candidate in the general election?

Or can the Dems declare McAuliffe the candidate in the absence of any other candidate?

The Republican lawsuit is unclear to me.

[T Ruth]

I looked at the Complaint. Apparently the argument is that McAuliffe cannot be the Democrat nominee because he was not properly on the ballot in the primary election. One of the requests for relief in the suit is:

(iii) declaring that the Virginia State Board of Elections’ certification and declaration of McAuliffe as the winner of the Democratic primary on June 22, 2021 is contrary to Virginia law, and is therefore invalid;