San Diego Voters' Lawsuit Changing the Dialog (WDNC Blog)

[GuvWurld]

http://wedonotconsent.blogspot.com/2006/08/san-diego-voters-lawsuit-changing.html

San Diego Voters' Lawsuit Changing the Dialog

Attorney Paul Lehto was in CA Superior Court for San Diego County on Friday. Lehto is representing voters Barbara Gail Jacobson and Lillian Ritt who have asked judge Yuri Hofman either to order a full hand count of the June 6 election in California's 50th Congressional district, or to throw out the election entirely as invalid. Friday's court session was to argue a defense motion asking the court to find itself without jurisdiction over this matter.

There are a lot of scary things wrong with the idea proposed by the defense. The reputed winner of the election, Brian Bilbray, was sworn into office as a Congressmember while votes were supposedly still being counted, and well before the election was certified by San Diego's Registrar Mikel Haas, another defendant in the case. Bilbray's argument is that the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the right to determine eligibility for membership into that body and so this court has no business hearing this case.

Extending the logic of Bilbray's defense motion, as Lehto did before the judge on Friday, one must conclude that the election as a whole, including the act of certifying it after a winner had already been sworn in, is necessarily invalid. Of course we can't yet know how the judge will rule when the matter resumes on Tuesday, but given that the defense is basically arguing that elections are no longer necessary, we have ample basis for confidence in Lehto's response. Most important, though, is how Lehto has changed the dialog.

The plaintiffs have yet to make their case about the conditions under which the election was held. This is where the court will hear about voting machine sleepovers, secret interpreter code, conditional certification and flat-out lawlessness by Secretary of State Bruce McPherson. No matter the defense arguments on these issues, they have already reinforced the plaintiffs' claim of an invalid election.

MORE...

[EFerrari]

1. It's a beautiful thing.

lol

K&R

[GuvWurld]

2. Check out this radio newscast from KGOE

I recently embraced the suggestion to only post part of my blog posts here at DU so people would visit my blog more often to read the rest. In this case DU is deprived of this awesome link to an .mp3 of a Friday radio newscast by Tom Sebourn of KGOE. It's two full minutes on CA-50, including Tom reading Lehto's own words in what sounds like a breathless rant. Priceless!

http://www.guvwurld.org//Voting/KGOE%20News%20-%20CA-50%20Election%20Lawsuit%20in%20San%20Diego%20-%208-25-06.mp3

[MindPilot]

3. So if the election is invalidated, and Bilbray is removed

does that also render moot anything he did while in office? Like that transfer of the Soledad property to the DoD?

[Land Shark]

6. one thing the court can't do is order the house to remove someone

instead, the court finds the facts and the House makes its independent decision on membership. The house pays a political price for ignoring the state court (if it does so), and other courts or tribunals may have jurisdiction (i'm not assessing that question)

[GuvWurld]

7. can you please school us a bit more?

say the judge finds in your favor and orders a full hand count and the result is a clear Busby win...what possible scenarios emerge?

say the judge finds the election invalid for the reasons you argue...what then?

[Me.]

4. K & R

*shadow government*

[bleever]

5. The conversations, they are a-changin'.

K&R.