I previously blogged about the ACLU-NH’s lawsuit against Secretary of State Gardner here, here and here. A hearing had been scheduled for this past Monday (August 7th), but at the last minute was canceled because:
This is the third in a series of posts about a lawsuit the ACLU-NH has brought against Secretary of State Bill Gardner that is intended to prevent New Hampshire from participating in President Trump’s Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. Continue reading →
The phrase “matador defense” refers to basketball players who do not put much effort into playing defense. Defense is played with your feet in basketball. Matador defense occurs when the defensive player makes a great show of waving his arms, but doesn’t move his feet and the offensive player dribbles right past.
These tweets have me concerned that Governor Sununu and his Attorney General are planning on putting on only a “matador defense” against the ACLU-NH’s lawsuit against Bill Gardner, which as I discussed in detail here is intended to prevent New Hampshire from participating in President Trump’s Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity: So apparently, without even seeing the decision, Sununu has already ruled out an appeal. This is significant because the odds highly favor the case being heard by a Democrat-appointed judge who will not rule based on the law -which as I discussed here requires that the lawsuit be dismissed because the plaintiffs lack standing– but based on his or her political inclinations -that is, in favor of the ACLU-NH. Continue reading →
The New Hampshire Democrat Party has brought a lawsuit against New Hampshire’s Secretary of State, Bill Gardner, which effectively would prevent New Hampshire from participating in President Trump’s Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity. (Yes it was nominally brought by the New Hampshire chapter of the ACLU, but the ACLU-NH is as a practical matter a surrogate for the Democrats.)
As I will discuss in more detail below, the law in New Hampshire is that in order to bring a lawsuit the persons or entities brining it (the plaintiffs or petitioners) must have “standing.” That is, they must be able to show that they will suffer a definite, personal injury from the unlawful conduct alleged in the lawsuit as opposed to suffering in some indefinite way in common with people generally.
The petitioners in this lawsuit are State Senator Bette Lasky, State Representative Neal Kurk and the ACLU-NH. None of them have standing. Indeed, none of them even allege they have standing. The lawsuit, therefore, is total bullcrap and should be dismissed. Continue reading →
The problem with Senate Bill 3 is that it doesn’t go far enough, as explained below. That said, it is a baby-step in the right direction that can be easily improved upon, and it probably is the best that can be expected under the current RINO (Republican-in-Name-Only) legislature.
If Senate Bill 3 is defeated, which would take GOP votes, it would mean the GOP chose to make no improvements to New Hampshire’s porous voting laws, give the Democrats -who have been flat out lying about Senate Bill 3- an undeserved victory, and embolden the Democrats to escalate their voter-fraud schemes in 2018. Continue reading →
I previously posted about SB 3 here. In a nutshell, while the Democrats and their allies, such as the ACLU (which is essentially a Super-PAC for the Democrats) charge SB 3 is “voter suppression,” it is actually a fairly toothless tiger.
SB 3 will allow the practice of drive-by voting to continue. In 2016, there were over 7,300 instances of potential drive-by voting. More particularly, on election day 1,423 persons were allowed to vote with no photo ID at all while 5,903 were allowed to vote using out-of-State licenses. Continue reading →
In February, the mainstream media (both nationally and in New Hampshire), the Democrat Party and the New Hampshire establishment-GOP (not that there is much difference substantively between them and the Democrats) all lost their minds when President Trump allegedly stated, during a meeting where no press was present, that he and former United States Senator Kelly Ayotte lost the 2016 election in New Hampshire because thousands of Democrat voters had been bused into New Hampshire from Massachusetts.
Trump was assailed for having “no evidence” that thousands of Democrat voters had been bused into New Hampshire from Massachusetts, although these same taking-heads and politicians were at the very same time demanding an investigation of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia despite the lack of any evidence of collusion. “Fact-checkers” proclaimed Trump’s claim “false”.
This is the brilliance of Trump. While it is not literally true that thousands of Democrat voters were bused into New Hampshire from Massachusetts, it is true that both the Presidential race and the United States Senate race were decided by out-of-State or drive-by voters and Trump’s tweet is finally drawing national attention to that fact. Continue reading →
Voter fraud occurs when someone who shouldn’t legitimately vote in New Hampshire votes in New Hampshire. Only permanent residents of New Hampshire should be considered legitimate voters. If a person is residing here only for a temporary purpose, he or she shouldn’t be allowed to vote here.
For example, someone who moved to New Hampshire just to work on a political campaign shouldn’t be allowed to vote in the corresponding election. As, for example, Joe Biden’s niece did in 2012: Continue reading →