Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: lawdog who wrote (103240)	12/6/2000 2:12:07 PM
From: Bill	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 769667

sending your operatives to alter absentee ballot applications is a felony LOL! How could it be a felony if no one was tried and convicted? You don't know the law! Hahahaha!!

To: lawdog who wrote (103240)	12/6/2000 2:40:17 PM
From: TradeOfTheDay	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

back to those dog-law books for you.... you obviously haven't a clue

To: lawdog who wrote (103240)	12/6/2000 3:07:18 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769667

You remind me of a religious zealot. "I believe what I believe and facts to the contrary are just tools of Satan!" I doubt that this will have any effect, but read it anyway. This is the relevant part: "Now let's turn to the Seminole County case, which may be the vice president's last hope. In that county, both the Democrats and the Republicans sent out applications for absentee ballots to people likely to be absent. Seminole County, unlike many other Florida counties, requires that those applications include voter ID numbers. In the case of the Republicans (but not the Democrats), that did not occur because of a computer malfunction. These are not ballots; they are applications for ballots. When the applications came in, and the Republicans realized the computer glitch, they asked the canvassing board for permission to insert the ID number on the applications. The board said: 1) you can only do it here, in our office; and 2) you must not use state records to figure out which ones to fill in; you have to use your own records. That's what happened. No one complained until after the election. The claim relies on the applications for the ballots. Basically, the suit argues that it is proper for the Democrats to fill in the voter ID before the applications go out, but improper for the Republicans to fill in the voter ID after the applications are received. The remedy? Plaintiffs want all 15,000 absentee ballots to be tossed out, invalidated, although there was nothing wrong with any of the ballots, which were all properly voted. No court decision in Florida allows all ballots to be disqualified because of an error in the applications for some of them. On the contrary, Florida case law concludes that courts may not use technicalities to prevent the counting of votes. No Florida statute or regulations even suggest the remedy that the Democratic voters want. Remember, there was no problem with the actual ballots themselves. If the court denies that remedy, that should end the matter. If the Florida trial court grants that remedy, then it has changed the "law," because it was not fairly anticipated from the prior case law. And that change violates that federal statute that forbids post-election changes in election law. " Message 14953717