IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
Posted on 12/31/2011 2:00:50 PM PST by smoothsailing
December 31, 2011
Kevin Liptak
(CNN) - Four candidates left off the Virginia Republican primary ballot joined Rick Perry Saturday in suing the state's board of elections over laws they say are "unconstitutional."
Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum joined the lawsuit, originally filed Tuesday, challenging provisions that determine who can appear on the primary ballot.
All five candidates filing the lawsuit failed to qualify for the ballot.
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
Depending upon where it is filed. I know judges who will have the courthouse opened and have a hearing on Saturday or Sunday or even the middle of the night if necessary.
A few years ago, they called out the South Dakota State Supreme court in the middle of the night, during a blizzard to settle Daschle vs. Thune. It does happen.
LOVE it! Happy New Year Potlatch!
La la la. But that was not what happened here.
You said they COULD NOT. I stated they COULD. It depends on the judge.
Thanks and Happy New Year to you my friend!
I doesn’t say it didn’t happen here either. But I gave up expecting consistency from you a long time ago.
December 31, 2011
VIA EMAIL, TELECOPIER and CERTIFIED MAIL
Charles Judd, Kimberly Bowers, and Don Palmer, Members
Virginia State Board of Elections
1100 Bank Street
Washington Building, First Floor
Richmond, VA 23219
Pat Mullins, Chairman
Republican Party of Virginia
The Richard D. Obenshain Center
115 E. Grace Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Re:
Notice of Pending Motion to Intervene in Rick Perry v. Charles Judd, Kimberly
Bowers, Don Palmer, and Pat Mullins
Dear Members of the Virginia State Board of Elections and Chairman Mullins:
The undersigned are national counsel to The Honorable Michele Bachmann, The Honorable Newt Gingrich, The Honorable Jon Huntsman, Jr.,and The Honorable Rick Santorum, Republican candidates for President of the United States, and their principal presidential campaign committees.
As you are well aware, on December 27, 2011, the Honorable Rick Perry, Governor of Texas and Republican presidential candidate, filed suit against the individual members of the
Virginia State Board of Elections (“the Board”), in their official capacities, and the Chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia (“RPV”), in his official capacity, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. This action seeks a declaratory judgment asserting that certain provisions of Virginia Code section 24.2-545 B are unconstitutional, as well as injunctive relief
enjoining the collective defendants from enforcing the requirement that nomination petition circulators be either eligible or registered voters in the Commonwealth of Virginia and compelling the collective defendants to certify him as a candidate for the Republican Party
presidential primary ballot.
On December 29, 2011, United States District Court Judge John A. Gibney, Jr. held a hearing on Governor Perry’s motion, during which he invited counsel to Governor Perry to
contact additional Republican presidential candidates regarding possible intervention in the suit, and set a hearing date for Friday, January 13, 2012.
Please be advised that the four Republican Candidates for President listed above will be filing a single, joint motion to intervene in the Virginia action.
1
In light of these developments, Congresswoman Bachmann, Speaker Gingrich, Governor Huntsman, and Senator Santorum respectfully request that the Board either take action to add them to the ballot mooting their challenges (and avoiding unnecessary costs and expenses to the state and the parties) or not undertake action until Judge Gibney has had an opportunity to hear from the parties on January 13, 2012.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
J. Christian Adams
ELECTION LAW
CENTER PLLC
Counsel, Michele
Bachmann for
President
Stefan C. Passantino
MCKENNA LONG &
ALDRIDGE LLP
Counsel, Newt 2012
Craig Engle
ARENT FOX LLP
Counsel, Jon
Hunstman for
President
Cleta Mitchell
FOLEY & LARDNER
LLP
Counsel, Rick
Santorum for
President
cc:
Joseph M. Nixon
BEIRNE, MAYNARD & PARSONS
Counsel, Rick Perry for President
DC:50844690.1
2
Really?
And you have a Juris Doctorate from where?
"NOOT?"
Now that's kind of subtle is it not
So why not let us all in on your little secret? Are you a Romney-Bot or a Paul-inista?
READ AND WEEP oh all knowing one:
"Virginia AG Intervenes in GOP Ballot Dispute as Blocked Candidates Join Suit"
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/12/31/virginia-attorney-general-
Look at their accomplishments. Newt allied himself with Ronald Reagan to build the Reagan Coalition, the Religious Right, and the Republican majority (together the Reagan Revolution) which directly led the downfall of the Soviet Union, the Contract with America, government reforms, less government, tax cuts, a balanced budget, and the great, long-standing Reagan economy.
Romney, on the other hand, vehemently denied Ronald Reagan and aligned himself with Ted Kennedy and the left. Romney accomplished installing liberal big government programs, defended and promoted Roe v Wade and legalized abortion as “settled law,” advocated and implemented RomneyCare with its liberty killing government mandates against formerly free citizens and its taxpayer funded or subsidized and mandated abortion procedures. He ran and governed to the left of Ted Kennedy on the “gay agenda” resulting in gay marriage in Massachusetts. He appointed liberal judges and liberal appointees throughout his government. Under his “leadership” conservatism and the Republican party was all but destroyed in Massachusetts.
Romney is one evil liberal progressive. No way in hell will MittBots be allowed to support this abortionist, big government, socialist scumbag on FR!
Guess my message isn’t clear enough. I have to keep repeating it and zotting would be MittBots.
79 posted on Sat Dec 03 2011 19:59:37 GMT-0800 (Pacific Standard Time) by Jim Robinson
hahahahahahahaahahaahahahahahahahaha, and HAHA. sic em’.
Petition signatures with a real signature check ≠ Petition signatures without one.In previous years the same number of signatures were required, but not much checking was done. This year, because of a pending law suit, Virginia's GOP actually validated the signatures submitted to them. In previous years candidates at all levels, including for presidential primaries, had no problem submitting "enough" signatures. This year, even though they were told about the pending validation in November, savvy experienced politicians failed to qualify even when they had the advantages of long time Virginia residence (Gingrich) or a Texas sized pile of cash to spend (Perry.) The proportion of false signatures their operations collected was obviously much greater than they'd expected. Three more failed signature collectors - Santorum, Bachmann, and Huntsman - joined the Virginia AG in trying to modify the result. They hadn't reached 10k signatures so didn't submit any. Whether they couldn't get to 10k by any collection standard and thus were too weak to have passed the old, without signature checking, standard, or whether they'd been more careful in recognition of the new standard and prescreened their own collections isn't currently known.
I'm no lawyer, and certainly not an election law specialist. Whether this change from de facto ignoring the law regarding signature validity previously to now following that law as written constitutes a 'violation' of the law allowing for 'legal' redress requires a level of mental agility I happily lack. But as a matter of common sense, which should also mean as matter of policy this should prove there is a significant difference between the two methods and that different levels of signature collection are appropriate under the two methods. And this proof that signature fraud is both real and common should also invalidate those who claim voter fraud is rare and insignificant. If the level of signature fraud can surprise such elite, experienced politicians as Gingrich and Perry why should be accept the claims of elite experienced politicians like Obama and friends regarding voter fraud?
heck, you can’t even get the name right either, “Orgywhatzit”. ROFL. <P.
I keep thinking it is orawheat.org, or something.
IF you'd rather NOT be pinged FReepmail me.
IF you'd like to be added FReepmail me. Thanks.
*****************************************************************************************************************************************************
LOL! O-rang-a-lang-a-ding-dong.where-i-be-at?
;-)
It’s Carville.
Good find.
I wonder what part of KEN CUCCINELLI IS A THOUSAND TIMES SMARTER THAN whodat.org and knows a thousand times more about this issue as well - does whodat not get?
This action seeks a declaratory judgment asserting that certain provisions of Virginia Code section 24.2-545 B are unconstitutional, as well as injunctive relief enjoining the collective defendants from enforcing the requirement that nomination petition circulators be either eligible or registered voters in the Commonwealth of Virginia and compelling the collective defendants to certify him as a candidate for the Republican Party. presidential primary ballot.
Bump!
And illegal act by the attorney general, something to celebrate, why not do the ground work and get the signatures, they had more than enough time to do it.
GOOD!!! And good on Rick Perry for getting the ball rolling!
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.