Just kidding. best photo I could find.
Eat this, lefties!
Posted on 05/07/2022 6:30:48 AM PDT by Kaslin
The final phase of the Marjorie Taylor Greene inquisition came to an end this week. After Georgia Democrats spent weeks arguing that Greene needed to be removed from the primary ballot for “taking part in an insurrection,” Judge Charles Beaudrot announced that Greene remains eligible to appear on the ballot. That sent the decision to the Georgia Secretary of State. (Associated Press)
A judge in Georgia on Friday found that U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene can run for reelection, rejecting arguments from a group of voters who had challenged her eligibility over allegations that she engaged in insurrection. But the decision will ultimately be up to Republican Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger.State Administrative Law Judge Charles Beaudrot announced his decision after a daylong hearing in April that included arguments from lawyers for the voters and for Greene, as well as extensive questioning of Greene herself.
State law says Beaudrot must submit his findings to Raffensperger, who has to decide whether Greene should be removed from the ballot.
Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, who is also a Republican, accepted the judge’s findings later the same day. In announcing his decision, he declared Greene’s qualifications to represent her district as a question “for the voters of Georgia’s 14th Congressional District.”
Georgia’s top election official said Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene will remain on the GOP primary ballot following a judge’s ruling earlier Friday that rejected a bid to remove her over actions tied to the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.“In this case, Challengers assert that Representative Greene’s political statements and actions disqualify her from office. That is rightfully a question for the voters of Georgia’s 14th Congressional District,” Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger said in a decision upholding an administrative law judge’s ruling.
That’s how this case seemed destined to end from the beginning, largely because the underlying premise was so ridiculous. Rather than finding a way to beat her at the ballot box, Democrats were essentially trying to “cancel” Greene by taking her name off the ballot. The basis for the challenge was an accusation of an extremely serious crime. (Insurrection against the nation.)
But that’s a crime that Greene was never even charged with, to say nothing of being convicted. Even if you believe that the January 6th rioters were attempting an insurrection, keeping in mind that none of them have been charged with that either, it’s patently ridiculous to believe that someone who was legally on the premises and cowering in fear in the corridors as the rioters approached was guilty.
This case has helped to highlight a peculiarity of Georgia’s election laws that may cause even more problems in the future. An obscure facet of those laws states that any voter who is eligible to vote for a candidate can challenge that candidate’s qualifications by filing a written complaint, leading to a hearing before an administrative law judge. The challenge to Greene’s qualifications, as seen during the hearing before the administrative court, was based entirely on things she said or posted on social media. In other words, they were trying to remove her from the ballot based on political speech.
How many more people are going to get this idea and try it in the future? Based on virtually nothing at all, any voter from the opposing party can kick off a circus like this. Even if they have no chance of prevailing they will still be able to force the candidate to waste time and money defending themself and generate negative headlines to impede their chances. The bar for bringing such an action needs to be considerably higher and Georgia’s legislators should take a long, hard look at either rewriting that law or just scrapping that provision entirely.
Without a judge ordering her off the ballot then I didn’t expect Raffenburger to do it on his own. It was a stupid lawsuit to begin with.
I don’t even understand the legal process here because this is being prosecuted as an issue of administrative law. Insurrection against the federal government is a federal crime and should be tried in a federal court with criminal jurisdiction.
Please let Ratboy be crushed in his primary, dear Lord...
I suspect we have not seen the last of this tactic.
This reminds me a little of the fake trials that I read about in “The Gulag Archipelago”.
The trial was harassment.
Just kidding. best photo I could find.
Eat this, lefties!
can she counter sue?
Dirty Deeds Democrats bite the dust again.
“Even though there is no evidence, the seriousness of the charge is what matters.”
—Tom Foley, House Speaker (D)
This is a very old strategy.
You mean Nazi Pelosi cannot choose the Repub candidates?
We need to challenge each and every democrat with this process.
I agree, but where to start. They have us surrounded and are attacking us on 100 different fronts.
I guess the place to start would be to get the voting system locked down. Then rebuild from there. If there’s even time for that. I kind of think we’re real short on time.
They stand up minitruth. It is roundly attacked, criticized, laughed at. Yet... it remains. Then they stand up miniclimatejustice. It is roundly attacked, criticized, laughed at. Yet... it remains.
Our adversaries are moving fast.
They never stop and go for small wins to build larger ones. We keep swinging for the fences.
Dems do know how to fight dirty…including “the death of a thousand cuts”.
Trump gave them just a taste of their own medicine and half of the Repubs joined in with the ‘Rats to criticize him for it.
These Primaries are where we “man up”, I hope.
What would happen if Republicans started to question the qualifications of Dems on the ballot under GA law?
This was a perfect example of Bill of attainder and corruption of blood. This was one of the very reasons our forefathers fought the British and it became constitutionally outlawed in our own country. Whoever brought the charges should be the one going to prison. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_attainder
This needs to be litigated at the Supreme Court, because the correct answer MUST REQUIRE 1) The existence of an insurrection and 2) The conviction in a court of law of the person to be disqualified on a charge of insurrection. The only exception would be officers commissioned in the Armies or the Navy of the Confederate States of America who may not have been included in Congress's general amnesty of the 1870s - and none of them will be running in 2022.
No way can this be a matter of administrative law.
Right.
That has to be taken off the table ASAP. It's like leaving a loaded gun around. If an ALJ or SoS can DQ a candidate using a XIV Amendment "insurrection" charge, then no Republican or further right wing candidate is safe in any blue state.
This process was completely unacceptable.
No, we need a USSC ruling that disqualification for insurrection requires the existence of an insurrection under the Insurrection or the Calling Forth Acts, followed by a trial and conviction of the person at issue in an Article III court.
It would be insane to cooperate with this process in the way you suggest.
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.