"Bill Daley, Un-Patriot
Put the people first."
From the National Review 11/10/2000
By Mark R. Levin, former chief of staff to attorney general Edwin Meese
nationalreview.com
<<"This is a nation that respects the rule of law, which means we don't need lectures by any of the late Richard J. Daley's children about "the will of the people." After all, it was the Daley machine in Chicago that arguably helped steal the 1960 presidential election from Richard Nixon.
Nonetheless, yesterday, Bill Daley, Al Gore's campaign chairman, made one of the most unpatriotic and undemocratic statements in American political history. He said, "If the will of the people is to prevail, Al Gore should be awarded a victory in Florida and be our next president." In other words, if George Bush wins the electoral vote in Florida, the presidential election was stolen from Gore. He made this comment because he knows that when the final votes are tallied, Gore will lose Florida and, therefore, the presidency. Clearly Daley isn't speaking on his own. He's speaking for Gore.
In the past few days, the phrase "voting irregularities" has become the clarion call of the Gore operatives. It's an intentionally ambiguous phrase of no legal relevance. But its purpose is to create the impression of widespread, systematic voter fraud throughout the state of Florida, where none exists. So far, all the Gore team has offered as evidence of their claims are examples of voters spoiling their own ballots. That doesn't cut it, and it won't with any court.
There are numerous states where the margin of victory was extremely narrow for both candidates, but especially for Gore. Are we now to go into those states and attempt to reverse those results with lawsuits and demands for recounts and new voting? Should we check the historically unreliable ballot boxes in Daley's hometown of Chicago? Is the will of the people any less important there than in Florida?
It's not lost on some of us that many of the same people who trampled on the Constitution for Bill Clinton during impeachment are now willing to do the same for Al Gore in this election. After the recount is finished, and the absentee ballots are tallied, the loser should concede. Obviously, Gore anticipates that he will be the loser, otherwise all of these outrageous devices and demagogic rhetoric would be unnecessary. But Gore will not go quietly. Therefore, it will be up to leaders in his party to urge him to put the country and the Constitution above his personal ambition and step off the stage.">>>
_________________
"Al Gore has no case"
nationalreview.com
"In an election where nothing is clear, the outcome in this lawsuit is: Neither the voters nor Gore have a case, so long as the judge follows previous Florida case law. In 1974, the Florida Court of Appeals heard Nelson v. Robinson, a case remarkably similar to this one. In Nelson, voters and losing candidates challenged an election in which names of candidates were placed on the ballot in a confusing way."
The court found that some voters were indeed confused by the ballots, which listed the names both horizontally and vertically, but that "mere confusion does not amount to an impediment to the voters' free choice if reasonable time and study will sort it out." The court made clear that the Constitution assumes the voters' "intelligence to indicate his choice with a degree of care commensurate with the solemnity of the occasion." Applying this standard to the ballots in Palm, it is somewhat difficult to fathom that residents of Florida who commonly juggle 10 bingo cards without missing a beat could not follow the large bold arrows on the Palm ballots, which were published before the election."
"The Nelson court then turned to the candidate, and declared that he does not have a right to a "particular spot on the ballot which might make the voters' choice easier. His constitutional rights in the matter end when his name is place on the ballot." More telling, however, is that it is well-settled that a candidate may not object to a ballot irregularity after an election if he has the opportunity to object beforehand. Indeed, some courts have held that a candidate is barred from bringing such a claim at all. The reason for this rule is clear: Before the election, the risk of candidate self-dealing is lower (since he is uncertain of the results), and the cost for remedying the situation is not as high. After the fact, a candidate is likely seeking his own political advantage based on the particular results; and the costs of the fix — a new election or otherwise altering the tally — are very high. Because these concerns certainly exist in Palm, and because Gore election officials not only saw the ballot beforehand, but signed off on it, they should be precluded from challenging it now.
Despite the ease with which this question is resolved, other legal questions are certain to follow. Reports say that Gore has sent more than 70 lawyers to Florida, including Greg Craig who, after defending Elián González's father, is about as popular in Florida as Nader at a Gore rally. Give this many lawyers enough time and it is inevitable that they will create the appearance of more irregularity in Florida polls than you can find in Florida nursing homes. But this is no way to resolve an election. The courts have historically been very cautious about weighing in on political matters, and they will doubtlessly show the same caution here. It is highly unlikely that a court will take any step that will reverse the outcome of the popular vote as it is calculated in the recount — and that is a fair prediction whether the judge is a Republican or Democrat. The only things accomplished by these endless legal challenges are prolonging the inevitable, eroding public confidence in the democratic (and, perhaps Democratic) process, and the further displacement of the rule of law by the rule of lawyers.
____________________
David Krathen, attorney from Fort Lauderdale who filed suit on behalf of one of these confused Florida voters; is a personal injury lawyer; hardly an expert in election law, it looks like he tried to get in on the fenfen lawsuit: cci.membrane.com
Gore and Daley hiding behind lawyers; lawyers and lawfirms were the biggest overall contributors to either party; with 67% of almost $74 million going to the Democrats.
Will lawyers let almost $50 million of contributions go to waste? opensecrets.org
People don't realize the new wave of class action lawsuits like the $250 billion settlement between tobacco companies, private trial lawyers from the ATLA and the States Attorney Generals were the result of Clinton's maneuvering behind the scenes. This class action lawsuit in Florida, if allowed to proceed; will be a taste of what the Democrat's reign will be like; confrontational with regulation through litigation. Apparently the Gore team knows there is no legal basis to file suit but by doing so, they hope to discredit and disparage Bush enough so that some in the Electoral College will switch their votes to Gore. There are states that allow this. |
