So to recap: 1. Dems seek to extend RNC consent decree against voter intimidation in part because of Trump actions http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88127
-
2. Tonight court ordered RNC to report on all Trump, RNC, and state "ballot security" stuff that could violate order http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88394
3. And now Dems have some proof RNC lied saying it is not doing poll watching, with evidence of worker in NV http://electionlawblog.org/?p=88403
-
-
4. And if court believes Rs lied, then judge likely to not be kind to RNC as this case heads to Friday hearing. <end>
-
5. This is a big deal because Ds will get heads up on RNC election day plans and because they might uncover violations of order <really end>
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Where&when was the RNC claim that they did not do poll watching in NV? I can’t seem to find it…
-
OK having slogged thru 351pgs, I find 3 examples where the RNC *almost* says it doesn’t do poll-watching; all carefully worded:pic.twitter.com/yMKvVxpCon
-
You really read "does not participate in poll watching" as "almost does not..."? Lawyer here; I don't read it so
@johnhawkinson@rickhasen -
You’re missing a … in your direct quote? But if you mean The Bottom Line page, that’s not an affidavit, it’s just a presentation?
-
Affidavit says will not partake, presentation says does not participate. Either way, I don't see the "almost"
@johnhawkinson -
Where? Affidavit ¶19 says memorandum says. That’d be hearsay, not sworn statement Memo p.268 speaks to Election Day ≠ EarlyVoting
-
1/ Not exactly. he is describing contents of their training/guidance memo, which he attaches for the court to read. He also
@johnhawkinson -
2/ says no recruiting of volunteers to poll watch and describes and attaches a presentation saying not poll watching.
@johnhawkinson - 5 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Great Work! Please keep up the tremendous reporting!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Two workers in Nevada, no?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@JoeMyGod A must read. -
4 and 5 especially
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@Taniel poll watching isn't the problem. I did it in 2004 for Dems. Voter intimidation and electioneering are the issues in play.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
As a democratic poll watcher since 2001 I've seen GOP poll-watching lawyers but didn't know there was a court order against them.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Some proof". It's interesting, but it's hearsay, isn't it? A statement by 1 guy about what another person said about defendant.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
But they're trying to suppress votes in the name of FREEDOM!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.