Interesting comparison....
Posted on 12/09/2004 5:30:03 PM PST by JosefK
Gregoire ‘Jumps the Shark’ *
Now claims she has nothing to do with lawsuit
Bellevue, WA – Christine Gregoire had nothing to do with an Attorney General opinion opposing the inclusion of previously rejected ballots into a hand recount. Nor does she have anything to do with a lawsuit filed by the Democratic Party regarding the hand recount in the governor’s race.
At least, that’s what Christine Gregoire says.
This week Gregoire, who has been Attorney General for 12 years, claimed she had no knowledge of long-standing Attorney General advice that in a manual recount, rejected ballots cannot be introduced and only previously counted ballots can be re-counted. Despite a November 1996 memo from the Secretary of State which included the AG’s opinion, and despite the fact that Gregoire at that time had been AG for four years and presumably would have corrected the opinion if she hadn’t agreed with it, Gregoire now says she’s not responsible for it.
In today’s Seattle Times (“Gregoire: I had no role in lawsuit”), Gregoire makes the remarkable claim that she has absolutely nothing to do with the state Democratic Party’s lawsuit in the state Supreme Court to change the rules of the recount.
The Times reports that “Gregoire…said she didn't see the suit before it was filed and wasn't consulted.” Three-term Attorney General Gregoire tells the Times, “I'm not the lawyer here. I'm not the client. I am an extremely interested third party.”
Mary Lane, spokeswoman for Dino Rossi, said Gregoire’s claims are reminiscent of Bart Simpson’s famous line: ‘I didn’t do it, no one saw me do it, you can’t prove anything!’
“Does anyone really believe that Christine Gregoire, the state’s top lawyer and one of the candidates in this race, is not involved in her own party’s lawsuit?,” said Lane.
“It’s getting to the point where she’s insulting the intelligence of the people of Washington. First she says didn’t know anything about long-standing advice from the AG’s office about not allowing previously rejected ballots into a hand recount, and now she says doesn’t know anything about a major lawsuit her own party filed over her election. These claims just don’t pass the straight-face test.”
Lane noted that as recently as last week, Gregoire was feverishly raising money for the recount and related legal costs.
###
*If you’re not familiar with the term “Jump the Shark,” visit this web site: www.jumptheshark.com
----------------- (Cross-posted at http://josef-a-k.blogspot.com)
There's also another interesting article at http://www.columbian.com/12092004/clark_co/220540.html regarding the callous fight for Gregoire votes...
I saw her on TV last night and she is claiming that no such AGO was written during her 12 years. Is it possible that the Sec of State memo was written in 1996 and cited an AGO from pre-1992?
The Democrats need to learn how to lose.
Doah!
So does this mean that the suit will be thrown out because the plaintiffs lack standing without the candidate on board? Somehow I think if that motion were maid we'd discover that, all of a sudden, Gregoire does support the suit after all.
So this is the Geraldine Ferraro "I'm not guilty--I'm merely incompetent!" reasoning as to why people should want her in office?
She said she had no role. She doesn't say she doesn't support it.
No.
How insulting that she thinks we're going to believe this. She becomes more pathetic every day.
Besides jumping the shark, she does a mean Sgt. Shultz impersination: "I know NOTHING! I saw NOTHING!!"
She's a doozie, old baggie eyes!
"The Democrats need to learn how to lose."
You'd think they'd have by now.. Sure have a lot of practice.
I used to call it "SID"...when I was wondering what the least offensive assumption was for some people when they said things...were they:
*Stupid (couldn't see why their statement was wrong)
*Ignorant (didn't know enough information to see why)
*Dishonest (knew it was wrong, but said it anyway)
I later added one more, to make it "SIDE" (which is easier to remember, anyway)... the last one was "Evil"
I think you might be on to something for Gregoire.
In an interview yesterday morning, SecState Sam Reed stated that the SecState in 1996 probably had the opinion laying around from a previous AG, but the standard practice is to take that old opinion, run it by the AG's office to see if it is still valid (i.e. the laws havn't changed etc...) then release the opinion if there are no changes, or release the new opinion...
So the bottom line is that the opinion DID get reviewed by the AG's office in 1996 - whether Gregoire saw it personally is irrelevant. She was the AG at the time and is responsible for her office and underlings. Of course, she's been ducking responsiblity in her office for years, so...
Hmmm....
Questions? Comments? Anything I can help with? :)
Interesting comparison....
You betcha:
Where did the interview take place?
Speaking of SecState Reed, he is on TVW today at 11 AM and 3 PM on "Inside Olympia" - and TVW will rerun that some more. Go to www.tvw.org for more...
I really think it's not right to be bashing Senator Hillary Clinton left, right and center. NOW I know why I despise your party - you attack outspoken women with a viciousness that is second to none.
Senator Clinton deserves no comparision to Gregoire - she's a patriot who'd NEVER steal an election, bless her heart.
Hasn't the poor Senator been through enough?
(For the record: Because of reactions like yours, I would prefer that she not run for Prez in 2008. And Virginia Gov'r Mark Warner is more harmonous with my positions and priorities...)
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.