Thread on A Tale of Two Cases…
You don’t change the rules after the game has started. As we’re seeing, changing the rules after kickoff is one problem with @NCSBE’s secret adventure last week—I’m going to tell you about another. (1/9) #ncpol
At the same closed session where the @NCSBE bent over backwards to “settle” with Democratic super-lawyer Marc Elias, the same @NCSBE decided they had “no interest in compromis[ing]” to help a group of blind voters. (2/9) #ncpol
Both the @NCSBE lawyers and the @JoshStein_ lawyers admitted that the blind voters were right, but claimed it was “too late” to doing anything about it. They even told a judge the blind voters were right on the law. (3/9) #ncpol
So the @NCSBE agreed to “settle” with Democratic super-lawyer Marc Elias to toss out bipartisan anti-ballot fraud measures, but wouldn’t lift a finger to help blind voters because it was “too late.” Apparently, it wasn’t “too late” for Marc Elias. (4/9) #ncpol
None of us would have known about it except last week a federal trial judge in Elizabeth City saw and cut through the bureaucratic morass. (5/9) #ncpol
Now we know that on 9/8, the @NSBE told the judge in writing, “because the absentee voting period began on 9/4, these changes would need to be made while voting is actually happening which presents particular risk that could jeopardize the ongoing election process.” (6/9) #ncpol
At the 11th hour, the Cooper-controlled @NCSBE agreed to tailor the law for @NC_Governor’s former lawyer Marc Elias, but told the admittedly-correct blind voters “better luck next year.” (7/9)
And they told a federal judge a week earlier that “it's simply too late to implement a new process.” Why the different standards? Remember: the #ncleg created anti-fraud laws twice in public with input from all sides. @NC_Governor’s @NCSBE met in secret and changed the laws.(8/9)
Even still, if @NCSBE thought the election laws were lacking, and both Mr. Elias and the blind plaintiffs wanted changes, why the two orders?
Why the different standards? (9/9)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
What do we do when confronted with a doctrine that “questions the very foundations of the liberal order”? That’s how leading legal scholars Richard Delgado and Jean Stefancic describe critical race theory, the school of thought they helped found. #ncpol
They seek to replace the existing order with a new order, one that preaches “the only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination,” and that everything we see and do boils down to race and a racial hierarchy — the intersection of race and power. #ncpol
This doctrine is ascendant in American culture and in parts of North Carolina.
I oppose it, and I will combat it with everything that I have, because it undoes the framework that produced the most successful ongoing experiment in self-government in the history of mankind. #ncpol
The Board of Elections, which is controlled by Gov. Cooper and acting through its lawyer, Democratic AG Josh Stein, went around the legislature and agreed with Democratic plaintiffs… #ncpol (2/4)
...to undo basic election laws passed to prevent a repeat of actual absentee ballot fraud. If approved, this action shatters confidence in the Board of Elections’ intent to fairly conduct this election. #ncpol (3/4)
1/4: In Roy Cooper’s North Carolina, the Governor can walk with a group of protesters with no mask on, but you can’t take your son or daughter to a playground. #ncpol
2/4: Rioters can break windows and set fires with impunity, but you can’t exercise on an elliptical machine. #ncpol
3/4: We’re assured that masses of mask-less people gathered together in the streets caused no rise in cases, yet we’re now all required to wear masks because the danger is too great. #ncpol
Governor, you didn’t respond to me last week on this subject. As I said to you in my message, I was hoping we could talk free from the media/Twitter spectacle. But if the only way you’ll communicate with me is via Twitter, then that’s your decision.
Here’s my message from last week: "Hi Governor, I understand that your office has told the press that you do not have any ultimatums regarding the budget. That is a welcome development. Can you please confirm, free from the Twitter/media fights between our spokespeople...
"...that you would in fact sign a compromise budget into law even if Medicaid expansion is not also enacted? I think we can make real progress here. I’m still committed to the special session on health care access. – Phil"
We got some honesty today on how Democrats view your money. After a vote on tax cuts a Democrat said the state “loses $4 billion annually to Republican tax cuts.”
First of all, that figure is inaccurate. But more importantly, his statement makes it clear that Democrats consider your money to be the state’s money – that it’s somehow a bad thing when people who work give less of their earnings to government.
You see, Republicans don’t believe that your money is the state’s money. You work for it, you earn it, and you should keep as much of it as possible.