Today is that special day of the year, where fiction becomes fact, and the truth becomes questionable. However, the following is a very real story first reported by Ballot Access News:
“the Republican National Committee asked a U.S. District Court to intervene in Libertarian Party of New Hampshire v Gardner, 1:14-cv-322. The issue in the lawsuit is the 2013 change to the New Hampshire election law that it made it illegal for a newly-qualifying party to circulate a party petition during an odd year.
The Republican National Committee’s motion says, “This lawsuit challenges a recent New Hampshire amendment to its election laws regarding ballot access by political organizations. The RNC proposes to intervene for the purpose of defending constitutionality of that amendment (sic)…The Republican Party has qualified for access to the New Hampshire general election ballot in 2016. Accordingly, it has a vital interest in New Hampshire’s election regulation in general and, specifically, the requirements for ballot access…the defendant (the Secretary of State) cannot adequately represent the RNC’s interests in this litigation.”
As far as is known, this is the first time any major party national committee has intervened in a constitutional ballot access lawsuit at a time remote from a presidential general election. The Democratic National Committee intervened in some lawsuits involving independent presidential candidate Eugene McCarthy in 1976, John B. Anderson in 1980, and Ralph Nader in 2004. But those interventions were on how certain ballot access laws should be interpreted, not over their constitutionality.”
In the RNC’s “answer” to the LP’s complaint, is laughable. Almost everything is “The allegations in paragraph [x] consist of legal arguments to which no response is required. To the extent that paragraph [x] contains factual allegations, they are denied.” or “The RNC lacks knowledge or information sufficient to form a response to the allegations in [y].” In other words, the Republican Party is seeking to intervene in a ballot access law case, and they don’t know enough about the law or the fact to form opinions; or they simply claim every fact provided is false, without explanation!
Who says court has to be boring? In Keene, 5 activists turned out to support me for a simple parking ticket arraignment. We laughed and joked as one wore a winter hat despite the court rules of decorum prohibiting headwear. We watched as the obedient slaves took their whippings and pled guilty to a bunch of vicimless crimes. Then it was my turn.
I decided ahead of time that I was going to try an experiment: I would remain silent. Would the judge get mad? Would he compel me to speak by threatening arrest? It turns out, he ended up acting as my defense attorney! Watch this 2-minute clip:
If you find Derrick J’s content valuable, please send your bitcoin donations to:
My little sisters are in 7th grade. They’re good students. They work hard, they lead group projects, and they spend hours each night on homework. Tonight, I sent them an email encouraging to drop out. (more…)
There’s a hate group in Keene trashing the FSP because they don’t like Free Keene (or Robin Hooding, or something like that).
My status update included more, but the part above about the group called Stop Free Keene (SFK) got considerable attention. Some SFK members were openly hateful towards Free State Project (FSP) participants on the basis of group affiliation. Some were even promoting violence. My message and some of the comment thread was copied into the Stop Free Keene group and generally met with negative responses from SFK members.
In the comment thread on my status message, I noted,
Of course, I’m concerned someone’s going to get hurt… (more…)
This column by state representative Mark Warden appears in the Union Leader, where he expresses frustration with the new gas tax and dumb GPS rules:
This year’s New Hampshire Legislature has launched an attack on anyone who drives an automobile. The Democrat-led House passed two major pieces of legislation that will adversely affect commuters as well as tourists visiting the Granite State.
The first is a four-cent (23 percent) increase in the gasoline tax. Driving to work, taking the kids to school and going on a weekend trip will all be more expensive. Then there is the impact it will have on groceries and other products because of the increased cost of transporting goods to market. Trucking and other transportation businesses will pass along higher expenses to consumers.
This gas tax increase will have negative effects on an already sluggish economy. While many agree that the condition of many roads is lacking, it’s not for lack of funding. The problem with this new legislation is that the money is diverted to other uses that benefit drivers in other parts of the state (such as the I-93 widening project). Only 12 percent of the new revenue is earmarked for grants to municipalities.