So the next phase of the Alvin Greene saga continues ...
As you recall Alvin Greene won the democratic primary in SC, he came out of no where without spending a dime that they can find for campaigning - he won on name recognition alone.
Here's the latest:
Now they want a 'Do Over" .... the Cry-Babies have pushed for an "Emergency Public Hearing" on Thursday to ask that the results of the primary be nullified and a special election held. Amazingly they are hunting for a place big enough to hold it because they figure there will be a massive media circus -- no shit.
I think they saw all the media coverage that MN got during their recount and now they want some attention too.
Naw, not really -- I think they just want to fix it so their candidate wins ... but here are the 'tells' to me:
Greene is suddenly facing Felony ChaHrges
Citizens for Responsibily and Ethics, in Washington, is asking SC's attorney general to investigate if Alvin Greene was 'induced" to run which would violate the law there .... well, what is 'induced' mean? Does that mean a group of his friends got together and said 'hey man, you've got some great ideas, run' or 'what are you gonna do, run?' when he complained about something? or was it 'look man, you've always talked of running - go for it'. because to tell the truth, I can't see some republican big-wig finding this guy and saying 'hey man, you run and we will guarenttee you'll win'
Wahl (the man they thought would win) has filed a formal protest - yeah right, this is even worse than Greene winning, but I'm jumping ahead of myself here -- he is claiming 'faulty voting machines' (sound familiar, Florida?) ...
"We are protesting the election based on what we consider to be software problems with the voting machines. Systemic issues involving the software of the voting machine."The claim is that people push his name on the machine but it showed a vote for Greene instead ... but the best - or worst -- part is he doesn't have to prove a damn thing to get the results changed, he just has to argue the point convincingly!!!
So Greene can be kicked out because Rawl just has to our argue Greene. What a crock! He doesn't even have to prove voter fraud -- all he has to do is put in front of the courts the way the dems have won so many elections .... sorry ... he just has to give the courts a theory as to how it "may" have happened.
Here's the best:
" ... He was someone's plant - I do believe that very sincerely. Why he was planted, whether just to manipulate the outcome or just to carry out some mischief, I don't know but laws were broken, and an investigation needs to be, needs to take place"but it sounds like they have no REAL proof, just a bunch of theories .... OMGs ... its like high school elections all over again!
The possible results?
Voting machines, impounded and inspected
ExComm of the NCDP (North Carolina Democratic Party) holds hearings and overturns the results
Ordering of new primary, paid for by the tax payers (all of them, not just the dem side)
they could just appoint Rawl the winner out of hand, no new vote (talk about a stolen election!)
" ... For better or worse, this protest process is the only platform currently available for that investigation. And let me be very clear, regardless of the outcome of this protest, a full and unblinking investigation of this election and the overall integrity of South Carolina's election system must go forward." Vic Rawl, Charleston City Council, primary loser
I give him credit though - he said it all with a very straight face, and those behind him kept their faces straight as well.
The one thing that I do believe - is that Greene claimed impoversment to get a court appointed atty for his pornography charges ... apparently he hid this $10,000 from the courts. That was wrong, he should now be sent the bill for his atty fees -- BUT -- that still should not void his win. If they did that for everytime a candidate lied before an election - there wouldn't be anyone at all in Washington.
But really this is what the fuss is all about:
South Carolina Senate Race
58% Sen. Jim Demint (R)
21% Alvin Greene (D)
June 10; 500 likely SC voters; MOE +/-4.5%
The State Election Committee has come out today to say that there is not a hint or any indication of fraud in the election - that there is just a lot of unfounded speculation.
It is also being pointed out that Rawl himself only spent $250,000 campaigning ... that' really isn't that much. And Rawl himself is vurtiously unknown outside the Charleston area.
Hugh Hewitt, Political Sci Professor, feels this is just the Dems trying to stir up their base and to get air-time. He says it is a race of two unknowns, one with high powered friends. But that the whole process will make Greene have to prove a negative (he has to prove he didn't do it, instead of Rawls having to prove that he actually did something).
That the Dems have stopped listening to the people and only listen to their friends/funders.