[DB]

"The 3rd District Court of Appeals ruled Thursday McClintock had the right to amend his form, but it did not see evidence the document was turned in on time. Due to a mixup, the court did not receive a faxed copy of McClintock's form, which shows he submitted it to the secretary of state's office before the deadline."

Just from the above the secretary of state's office acted improperly by refusing to accept his ammended form.

The "mixup" is undefined as to who was responsible for it. If it was delivered to the court as requested but the court's staff failed to get it to the judge then how is that McClintock's fault?

[RGSpincich]

If it was delivered to the court as requested but the court's staff failed to get it to the judge then how is that McClintock's fault?

It should have been at court with the attorneys AND submitted with the briefs. It is unimaginable that pertinent information like that would be not be included in the briefs. The court had to request it? That's nuts. That in itself probably convinced the judge that McClintock had made previous fatal errors in the candidate's submission of paperwork.

It is also unimaginable that McClintock did not know the ramifications of not agreeing to adhere to the campaign spending limits. That's what caused the whole problem.

He's not well organized or well versed on campaign law.

[tubebender]

From the article "The 3rd District Court of Appeals ruled Thursday McClintock had the right to amend his form, but it did not see evidence the document was turned in on time. Due to a mixup, the court did not receive a faxed copy of McClintock's form, which shows he submitted it to the secretary of state's office before the deadline."

That sounds like the fax got to the court fax center on time but some 'Dim Hack sat on it.

On the other hand, with 134 profiles on the guide no one is going to read beyond the first 2 or 3...