🚀 go-pugleaf

"Baxter" <lbax01.spamguard@baxcode.com> wrote in message
news:100ro39n2orgd8e@corp.supernews.com...
> --
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Free software  - Baxter Codeworks  www.baxcode.com
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> "Mark Cook" <mcook@prodigy.net> wrote in message
> news:FBhPb.26888$bZ.20304@newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...
> > "Baxter" <lbax01.spamguard@baxcode.com> wrote in message
> > news:100r4ce5p9cv023@corp.supernews.com...
> > > --
> > >
> > > >As I said, the Democrat were illegally throwing out legal overseas
> > ballots.
> > >
> > > Lie.  None of the ballots were thrown out.
> >
> > Why would a judge order the inclusion of ballots that had NOT been
thrown
> > out???
>
> Democrats, huh?  Your source impeaches this claim - it says nothing about
> the Democratic Party.

Who wrote the 5 page memo telling Democrats how to challenge ballots?
Did the Democrats use the memo to challenge ballots?
Wasn't the Democrat controlled Hillsborough Canvassing Board the defendant
in the suit that ordered ballots reinstated?

> Further:
> ----------
> While the Bush campaign loudly criticized a Gore supporter's memo that
laid
> out a strategy to challenge overseas ballots, the Bush team had its own
such
> strategy, the Times reported.

You mean the memo that DEMOCRATS used to have ballots thrown out? I thought
you said this didn't happen?

> A Bush campaign memo laid out a two-pronged strategy - telling Bush
lawyers
> how to challenge "illegal" civilian votes that they assumed would be for
> Gore and also how to defend equally defective military ballots, the Times
> said.
>
> Ginsberg acknowledged that they had fought for military ballots while
> opposing ballots from civilians. Others involved in the campaign denied
it.
>
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/july01/2001-07-14-flawed-ballots.htm

I have already shown this article to be incorrect. The author based his
findings on supersede Florida Code.

> > It is further ORDERED that all federal write-in ballots rejected for the
> > above stated reasons are declared valid."
> >
> > http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/election/hills.pdf
> >
> > I guess the Judge was bored so he made up this case.
>
> You've got a few counties that rejected some ballots based on Florida law.

I thought that you said this was a lie? Now you are admitting it? Further,
the Florida law had been supersede for 16 years. It would seem to me that
the Mark Herron should have shepherdise the law before wrote the 5 page
memo.

> The judge ruled that Federal Law superceded state law - "Collectively,
> Defendants rejected ballots that arrived without a postmark, with an
> illegible postmark, or with a postmark dated after election day if there
was
> no handwritten date on the envelope to suggest that the vote was cast
before
> November 7, 2003. See FLA. ADMIN. CODE 1S-2.013"  Some ballots had
> signatures that did not match the signatures on file with the board.  Do
> actually read the ruling.
>
> What you've really got is a case of a Federal court making State Law.

Sorry that is incorrect. The Florida Code was superseded in 1984, not year
2000.

Are you saying that the Fla Admin Code should been thrown out because it
came about because of Federal Law?

> You've also got the case of Bush targeting only those counties where he
> thought the absentee ballots would favor him.
> ----------------------
> Republican attorney Fred H. Bartlit Jr. said the lawsuit targeted only 13
> counties because the GOP "wanted to move fast" and wanted to limit the
> complaint to the degree possible to those counties that have the greatest
> number of military ballots.
> http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2000/11/22/170150.shtml
>
> You've also got the problem that while Bush fought to ensure that the
> Military votes were accepted no matter how questionable, he also fought to
> disenfranchise regular voters.

He never fought to disenfranchise regular voters, that was Al Gore.

> The Repugs also stood ready to have the Repuglican-controled Florida State
> Legislature to appoint electors regardless of the count.
>
> ------------
> bottom line is you've got a few legal challenges, and not the wholesale
> disenfranchisement that you've been trying to claim.

Democrats all across the state used the 5 page memo to challenge overseas
ballots.

> ---------
> Q: What's the status of Florida's overseas military ballots? Were they
> included in the certified tally?
> A:Upon learning that some overseas ballots were excluded (because of late
> postmarks, no postmarks or no witness signature) the Bush legal team filed
a
> suit in Leon County court (where Tallahassee is located) asking that those
> ballots be reintroduced into the hand count. Several days later, the suit
> was withdrawn, after Bush lawyers were satisfied that most counties had
> included many of the overseas ballots. The GOP legal team maintained,
> however, that it was prepared to refile a suit if they learn there are
> counties which decide definitively not to reexamine their overseas
ballots -
> and Friday, December 1, they did just that, bringing suit against seven
> counties and charging that all overseas absentee ballots, regardless of
> postmark, should be counted. On December 11 a federal appeals court upheld
> that lawsuit.
> http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,88674,00.html

You just pointed out that a court ordered ballots to be reinstated. IF the
Democrats did not have ballots thrown out, why did the court order them to
be reinstated?