AP reports what a mess the South Carolina primary has become and predictably the military voters receive the brunt of incompetence and delay due to litigation.

South Carolina’s June 12 primary should be delayed because a state
Supreme Court decision removed nearly 200 candidates from ballots,
according to an attorney behind a federal lawsuit over the issue.

A delay is needed because state election officials
violated federal law when they sent ballots to overseas voters and
military members that only had federal races on them, Todd Kincannon
told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

“The ballots that they mailed out to military voters
are not worth the paper they are printed on,” Kincannon said. “Each and
every one of them is illegal because they are all in violation of the
Voting Rights Act.”

Under the Voting Rights Act, any changes to South
Carolina’s election law must be approved by the U.S. Department of
Justice because of the state’s past failure to protect blacks’ voting
rights. Kincannon said that, to comply with that requirement, the state
Election Commission would have needed the department’s approval before
sending the federal-only ballots.

“These guys have a right to vote in state elections, too,” Kincannon said. “You cannot make it up as you go along.”

AP reports what a mess the South Carolina primary has become and predictably the military voters receive the brunt of incompetence and delay due to litigation.

South Carolina’s June 12 primary should be delayed because a state
Supreme Court decision removed nearly 200 candidates from ballots,
according to an attorney behind a federal lawsuit over the issue.

A delay is needed because state election officials
violated federal law when they sent ballots to overseas voters and
military members that only had federal races on them, Todd Kincannon
told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

“The ballots that they mailed out to military voters
are not worth the paper they are printed on,” Kincannon said. “Each and
every one of them is illegal because they are all in violation of the
Voting Rights Act.”

Under the Voting Rights Act, any changes to South
Carolina’s election law must be approved by the U.S. Department of
Justice because of the state’s past failure to protect blacks’ voting
rights. Kincannon said that, to comply with that requirement, the state
Election Commission would have needed the department’s approval before
sending the federal-only ballots.

“These guys have a right to vote in state elections, too,” Kincannon said. “You cannot make it up as you go along.”

Th demagogue conjures racial threats to the right to vote.  Google Freddies Fashion Mart for earlier examples of his inclination to stoke ignorant racial fury.

Th demagogue conjures racial threats to the right to vote.  Google Freddies Fashion Mart for earlier examples of his inclination to stoke ignorant racial fury.

In a debate over budget appropriations, Representative Schweikert from Arizona spoke on the House of Representatives Floor about the ongoing Arizona and Texas battle with the Justice Department over voter ID laws.  His appropriations amendment would cut off funding to the DOJ and limit their ability to litigate over the voter ID issue.

In a debate over budget appropriations, Representative Schweikert from Arizona spoke on the House of Representatives Floor about the ongoing Arizona and Texas battle with the Justice Department over voter ID laws.  His appropriations amendment would cut off funding to the DOJ and limit their ability to litigate over the voter ID issue.

 Daily Caller:  “The Department of Justice is using official resources to publicly defend a career employee in the Civil Rights Division Voting Section who made inflammatory comments about Mississippi voters.

DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler didn’t answer when The Daily Caller asked her to explain these inconsistencies in DOJ’s public handling of this case. She also declined to confirm or deny whether Gyamfi made that inflammatory Facebook posting on official DOJ time, on official DOJ computers or both.”

 Daily Caller:  “The Department of Justice is using official resources to publicly defend a career employee in the Civil Rights Division Voting Section who made inflammatory comments about Mississippi voters.

DOJ spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler didn’t answer when The Daily Caller asked her to explain these inconsistencies in DOJ’s public handling of this case. She also declined to confirm or deny whether Gyamfi made that inflammatory Facebook posting on official DOJ time, on official DOJ computers or both.”

Amazon has posted the link to the new book by John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky.  The book will pick up where my book Injustice left off, disecting the vote fraud deniers both inside and outside of government.

Shortly, Election Law Center will be posting a regular sales scoreboard showing the sales ranking of Fund and Von Spakovsky’s “Who’s Counting” compared with books by vote fraud denier Tova Wang and also Rick Hasen.  I am anxious to see which book performs better in the marketplace of ideas, especially since Hasen saw fit to single out Fund and Von Spakovsky in his book.  I am anxious to see which argument gets more traction.  Stay tuned.

Amazon has posted the link to the new book by John Fund and Hans von Spakovsky.  The book will pick up where my book Injustice left off, disecting the vote fraud deniers both inside and outside of government.

Shortly, Election Law Center will be posting a regular sales scoreboard showing the sales ranking of Fund and Von Spakovsky’s “Who’s Counting” compared with books by vote fraud denier Tova Wang and also Rick Hasen.  I am anxious to see which book performs better in the marketplace of ideas, especially since Hasen saw fit to single out Fund and Von Spakovsky in his book.  I am anxious to see which argument gets more traction.  Stay tuned.