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

Skip to comments.

McDaniel's Lawyer: We Have Enough Evidence To Launch Official Election Challenge
Bretibart ^ | July 16, 2014 | Matthew Boyle

Posted on 07/16/2014 2:33:20 PM PDT by Hostage

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 next last
To: elcid1970

Ditch Mitch!


21 posted on 07/16/2014 3:02:49 PM PDT by tennmountainman (True conservatives don't like being rained on by their own party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
have you noticed how the MSM, when they bother to cover it, try to make it sound like McDaniel is upset that blacks voted?

McDaniel is right to be upset. It is illegal under Mississippi law to vote in a primary unless you intend to vote for the party's nominee in the general. Ask yourself how many of those blacks who voted in the runoff intend to vote for Cochran in November? Whether or not they already voted in the Democrat primary.

It was a key part of the Cochran campaign strategy to encourage violation of the law by enough Democrat blacks to swing the runoff. They were bragging about it!

22 posted on 07/16/2014 3:04:05 PM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Whoa! Didn’t know about Mitch Tyner.

I was referring to Mitch Turtleneck.


23 posted on 07/16/2014 3:04:06 PM PDT by elcid1970 ("In the modern world, Muslims are living fossils.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

You’re spot on about Cochran. He could have retired and enjoyed being a beloved son of Mississippi.

But McConnell-Barbour got him to do this dirty deed and now he’s going to pay for it.


24 posted on 07/16/2014 3:08:30 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Gotta be the folks mentioned on the vote buying video from the preacher. I believe the max cap on cash was $2600 or so and she got reimbursed $40,000 for the ‘street money.’

The really stupid thing was putting the cash into small individual envelopes of $25. That shows knowledge, intent, orchestration, etc.


25 posted on 07/16/2014 3:23:18 PM PDT by TigerClaws
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

nice to see somebody actually willing to fight for a change.


26 posted on 07/16/2014 3:30:21 PM PDT by Bullish (You ever notice that liberalism really just amounts to anti-morality?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cynwoody
McDaniel is right to be upset. It is illegal under Mississippi law to vote in a primary unless you intend to vote for the party's nominee in the general. Ask yourself how many of those blacks who voted in the runoff intend to vote for Cochran in November?

And how many McDaniel voters plan to vote for Cochran in November if he is declared the winner?

27 posted on 07/16/2014 3:31:35 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: leapfrog0202

Up the Tea Party—Up Democracy and Liberty!


28 posted on 07/16/2014 3:35:54 PM PDT by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*onward! Ride to the sound of the guns!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Forward the Light Brigade

Up the Tea Party—Up Democracy and Liberty!


Heck yeah!


29 posted on 07/16/2014 3:37:46 PM PDT by leapfrog0202 ("the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery" Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

You really are a troll aren’t you?

The post you responded to misquoted the law a little but most everyone following this story knows what they meant.


30 posted on 07/16/2014 3:40:08 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Malichi

Sure hope they have their information sealed up tight; in case you know, the law office has a break in and steals their computers.

I can just see something “nasty” happening now that the attorney says they found something....

I do hope they protect themselves and all information...wishing them the best on the outcome.


31 posted on 07/16/2014 3:40:11 PM PDT by Engedi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Bullish

Ditto.


32 posted on 07/16/2014 3:42:15 PM PDT by apocalypto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Hostage; All
Tyner also told the reporters that he’ll be providing a copy of the evidence to federal and state law enforcement officials as well. “We’re not only going to give it to you guys in the media, we’re also going to give a copy of it to the U.S. Attorney, to the Federal Election Commission, and we’re also going to give it to the Attorney General of the State of Mississippi,” Tyner said to cheers from McDaniel supporters at the press conference.

HALLELUJAH!!! Barbour has got to be crapping down both legs. I'm thinking, seriously, they might need to shelter Thad from all of this for awhile. His heart might give out.
33 posted on 07/16/2014 3:53:40 PM PDT by Din Maker (I've always been crazy, but, that's the only thing that has kept me from going insane.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
-- The post you responded to misquoted the law a little but most everyone following this story knows what they meant. --

Actually, there are two related "laws," and the poster was pretty close on quoting the notion that is directly expressed in Mississippi law.

23-15-575. Participation in primary election.

No person shall be eligible to participate in any primary election unless he intends to support the nominations made in the primary in which he participates.

On that law, the voter's stated intentions control; but it is not allowed to "qualify" the voter by asking them, so the law is roughly toothless. That law does work, but only to the extent that the voter volunteers the incriminating information.

The "law" that a person can't split their votes between parties in the primary is based on a ruling by the state AG.

As a practical matter, it is easy to show an invalid "crossover" voter by pointing to the pollbooks, and those votes are invalid without asking the voter what their intentions were. "Crossover" as a narrow meaning in Mississippi election law, that being a person who votes in primaries for both parties. This is done by voting in the primary for one party, and the runoff for the other party.

Mississippi Code 97-13-35 - Voting; by unqualified person, or at more than one place, or for both parties in same primary.

Any person who shall vote at any election, not being legally qualified, or who shall vote in more than one county, or at more than one place in any county or in any city, town, or village entitled to separate representation, or who shall vote out of the district of his legal domicile, or who shall vote or attempt to vote in the primary election of one party when he shall have voted on the same date in the primary election of another party, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be fined not exceeding two hundred dollars, or be imprisoned in the county jail not more than six months, or both.

For the careful parser out there who notices the "same date" qualifier, that's covered too. The runoff is deemed to be part of the original primary, and for legal purposes, the primary and runoff are one election, held on the same day.

MS AG Op., Brown (April 7, 1988) 1988 WL 250048

There is, however, a statutory prohibition to "crossover" voting. Crossover voting may be defined as participation in the first primary of one political party and participation in the runoff primary of another party. Several Attorney General's opinions and case law has defined the first and second primary as one election process. The runoff primary has been described as a continuation of the first primary. Therefore, Miss. Code Ann. AS: 97-13-35 (1972), which prohibits participation in more than one primary on the same day, has been interpreted to prohibit crossover voting.


34 posted on 07/16/2014 4:06:36 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Sybeck1

Amanda Shook is one of them, I’m sure.


35 posted on 07/16/2014 4:14:36 PM PDT by struggle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

“And how many McDaniel voters plan to vote for Cochran in November if he is declared the winner?”

Cochran’s campaign and the gop voided the contract.


36 posted on 07/16/2014 4:23:41 PM PDT by duffee (NO poll tax, NO tax on firearms, ammunition or gun safes. NO gun free zones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel

“I hope the challenge stands. The Republican Establishment should not trifle with the affections of the T.E.A. party and the normally conservative voters, by taking them for granted year after year.”

They haven’t really been taking Conservatives for granted lately, they’ve declared war on us.


37 posted on 07/16/2014 4:27:50 PM PDT by duffee (NO poll tax, NO tax on firearms, ammunition or gun safes. NO gun free zones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
-- And how many McDaniel voters plan to vote for Cochran in November if he is declared the winner? --

That question swings both way, does it not? The net effect is to draw even more "question" into the outcome of the contest.

The MS law appears to have the aim or effect of enforcing party loyalty, and forbidding a condition of one party being home to candidates having irreconcilable differences.

Civil war inside the party is really messy.

38 posted on 07/16/2014 4:29:35 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Actually, there are two related "laws," and the poster was pretty close on quoting the notion that is directly expressed in Mississippi law.

That's right but I will say it was not Lurker that was at all close to the MS law, it was the poster he responded to, which is what I think you meant.

Lurker's question is vacuous. I think it was designed to stir uncertainty in the original poster's assertion. This is why I exhibit a serrated edge with Lurker who professes to be a lawyer, but I think he's more of an imposter.

...so the law is roughly toothless

That's right and plenty of news outlets have drawn attention to that fact that this law is unenforceable. Many leftist rags and squawkers have also tried to insinuate that the McDaniel camp was using this law when in fact they are not.

The McDaniel campaign is using a solid law that is easy to enforce. It is that law stating that a person voting in the primary of one party may not crossover and vote in the other party's primary or the other party's runoff. Violation of this law is easily discovered by examining the poll books of both parties. During a runoff, the poll books are supposed to be 'switched'.

For example, a republican runoff polling station is supposed to have a democrat poll book for that precinct so they can see if a voter is ineligible by noting if they voted in the dem primary. They have the dem poll book in front of them to check.

But what the McDaniel team has uncovered is the dem poll books were not provided to the precincts so there is no way to know if the dem voters were eligible to vote or not UNLESS they can inspect the dem poll books and find out. This should have been done at the time of the vote but now they are having to go back and do it themselves and the Cochran-Barbour gang is blocking them. This is why they are in court.

Thanks for quoting the various legal passages.

39 posted on 07/16/2014 4:44:43 PM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Din Maker

Speaking of Boss Hogg, have not head from Boss Hogg in some
time. Where is that Fat Bstd hiding?


40 posted on 07/16/2014 4:47:51 PM PDT by tennmountainman (True conservatives don't like being rained on by their own party!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-54 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