Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge grants Democrats' request to block election results(MO Dems Gear Up For Voter Fraud)
St. Louis Post Dispatch AP ^ | 8/11/04 | Kelly Wiese

Posted on 08/11/2004 3:53:52 PM PDT by Clintons Are White Trash

A federal judge temporarily blocked certification of Missouri's primary election results in federal and statewide races Wednesday and set a hearing for next week on whether to count the ballots of some people who voted at the wrong polling places.

(Excerpt) Read more at stltoday.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Missouri
KEYWORDS: voterfraud
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next last
To: sandyeggo

"Judge Scott Wright issued a temporary restraining order blocking election certification for federal and statewide offices and issues"

That answers it right there. This is about the marriage amendment. The judge just blocked it from taking effect, even though it is far outside the recount range. Another black-robed thug trying to declare the will of the people invalid.


21 posted on 08/11/2004 4:22:28 PM PDT by ex 98C MI Dude (Proud Member of the Reagan Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Clintons Are White Trash

22 posted on 08/11/2004 4:26:17 PM PDT by Petronski (Kerry doesn't have the courage to come forward and tell the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintons Are White Trash

bump


23 posted on 08/11/2004 4:27:32 PM PDT by lowbridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Spok
I really hoped the SCOTUS would have abstained from making any decision at all based on the Separation of Powers, even though I agreed with the outcome.

Are you one of those people who think that they decided the election? They did not, they simply upheld the exisiting voting law in Florida that the RATS were attempting to change at will. The Supreme Court is allowed to rule on existing laws. Well within their jurisdiction.

24 posted on 08/11/2004 4:27:50 PM PDT by w1andsodidwe (Jimmy Carter allowed radical Islam to get a foothold in Iran.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman
"Were any RAT primaries even close or is this just a dress rehersal for the GENERAL ELECTION?"

The last paragraph from the article:

"The lawsuit was filed against Missouri Secretary of State Matt Blunt and others. Blunt is the Republican nominee for governor, facing Democratic State Auditor Claire McCaskill in November."

McCaskill just beat the INCUMBENT democrat governor in Missouri in the primary.

25 posted on 08/11/2004 4:28:24 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter ("It's the Hypocrisy, Stupid,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #26 Removed by Moderator

To: Clintons Are White Trash
Is this another case of the Democrats demanding that the results of election be ignored?

How long are we going to put up with this gang of domestic jihadis?

27 posted on 08/11/2004 4:30:21 PM PDT by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle
No, it's a first volley at Matt Blount, who is going to be going against the Dem candidate for Governor. It's purely political. Claire McCaskill (a Dem) unseated the sitting governor of Missouri (a DEM), first time in state history in a PRIMARY.

The St. Louis voter fraud in 2000 was legion.......... John Ashcroft was robbed of his Senate seat by a DEAD GUY, and it was all due to Gephardt calling for the polls to be held open longer THROUGH A JUDGE. Pure unadulterated VOTER FRAUD, but Ashcroft acquiesced and let the Widder Carnahan be Senator for 2 years, until Jim Talent resoundingly sent her home in 2002.

28 posted on 08/11/2004 4:31:25 PM PDT by JENINMO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

This is a PRIMARY ELECTION. Were any RAT primaries even close or is this just a dress rehersal for the GENERAL ELECTION?

A FLORIDA in the making even before the primary. Missouri is suppose to be an extremely conservative state. This confuses me.


29 posted on 08/11/2004 4:32:32 PM PDT by conshack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Steve_Seattle

My guess is that the number of disputed votes is insignificant, would make no difference in the election, and that this is a harrassment lawsuit intended to create the impression that "Republicans are trying to disenfranchise Black voters."

It seems to me that I recall hearing that a 5% factor of "Non-counted" votes has always been the norm.
How does one even get to vote at the wrong polling station?


30 posted on 08/11/2004 4:34:46 PM PDT by conshack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: w1andsodidwe

"Well within their jurisdiction."

Are you talking about Constitutional jurisdiction or Marbury v. Madison?


31 posted on 08/11/2004 4:35:59 PM PDT by Spok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Recovering_Democrat

"Who says we don't need some turnover on our benches?? I am astounded at the perversion of the people's will by black robed jackasses all over this nation."

No kidding, they are out of control and we better reign them back in.


32 posted on 08/11/2004 4:39:14 PM PDT by Wolfhound777 (It's not our job to forgive them. Only God can do that. Our job is to arrange the meeting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: A Citizen Reporter
McCaskill just beat the INCUMBENT democrat governor in Missouri in the primary.

Huh? The Republicans don't run against the 'Rats in the primary.

33 posted on 08/11/2004 4:39:19 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn't be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Clintons Are White Trash

Let me guess: people who vote at the wrong poll are overwhelmingly likely to vote for Democrats. How'd I do?


34 posted on 08/11/2004 4:39:41 PM PDT by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vigilanteman

They have learned from the Jihadists. It is best to have a trial run just to see how everything goes and if the pet judges will do their bidding.


35 posted on 08/11/2004 4:40:41 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn't be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sandyeggo

The 'Rats are up to it. They will "find" as many votes as necessary. Probably stuffed down Sandy Berger's pants.


36 posted on 08/11/2004 4:42:08 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn't be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Spok

The SCOTUS did not rule on the election. The ruled ont he constitutionality of counting SOME votes while ignoring others on the basis of the 14th Amendment that says that you cannot treat people (or in this case their votes) diffently.


37 posted on 08/11/2004 4:44:59 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn't be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants

McCaskill is a Democrat.


38 posted on 08/11/2004 4:47:02 PM PDT by TheBigB (I'm more frustrated than a legless Ethiopian watching a doughnut roll down a hill.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
No, I'm sorry those were two separate sentences. The article states that the lawsuit is against Matt Blunt.

I was pointing out for observation that the INCUMBENT governor of Missouri has just recently lost his PRIMARY race in Missouri, to McCaskill.

39 posted on 08/11/2004 4:47:19 PM PDT by A Citizen Reporter ("It's the Hypocrisy, Stupid,")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: B Knotts

Maybe. But the big push is to basically elinate the voter registration rolls by allowing "same day registration" with absolutely no proof of citizenship or residency. You can use your real name because there is practically no chance that you will ever be charged with anything.


40 posted on 08/11/2004 4:48:38 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (Even if the government took all your earnings, you wouldn't be, in its eyes, a slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-110 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson