Do you really want the possible election fraud in the 9th Congressional District 2018 election investigated by a State Election Board that has had 100% of their results (determinations) overturned in court? Or would it be better to have State/County prosecutors and law enforcement investigate the alleged election fraud in the 9th district?
Why not? I read up on the chair and he seems a good guy with integrity - just because he tweeted against Trump, that's hardly criminal conduct. Fraud is either proved convincingly or it's not, where is the question of bias in this.
Do you actually think that the politically-appointed members of the State Board of Elections have the training, infrastructure, staffing, lack of bias, or basic law enforcement understanding to investigate election fraud? What do you think of the track record of their investigation results -- 100% (yes, a complete 100%) of their biased "investigations" in recent years have been overturned by courts - in some cases forcing changes in outcomes or new elections to be held. Is this the entity that should be driving election fraud investigations?
Again, irrelevant questions, let anybody investigate, let the FBI investigate, who cares. The point is that there was fraud and it should be exposed. This kind of fraud will have hard evidence so it's not like he said-she said.
So basically you want the NC state board of elections to investigate this voter fraud which means no proper investigation will be done or completed. Just so we are very clear.
I don't care, let everyone investigate, there are multiple Russia investigations going on right now, if people are inclined to root out fraud, let all of them investigate.
In related news... "State Republican party officials held a press conference Saturday evening, calling on Cooper to appoint a trustworthy and transparent replacement. They suggested Democrat Burley Mitchell, former chief justice in the state Supreme Court." - https://www.wral.com/state-board-of-elections-chair-resigns/18033698/ Burley Mitchell is an individual well-respected for his integrity on the bench in our state.
Just to follow-up on the latest news from North Carolina about the election board circus and fiasco. A court moved the end date of the current election board which was deemed unconstitutional to Wednesday, December 12th. As noted earlier in this thread the chairman of this board resigned after the governor & legislature demanded his resignation for breaking the law. As of today the Wake County DA has not indicted the former chairman of the state elections board yet. The other significant proposed change today was to move election investigations to the prosecutorial district in which the candidate resides instead of having the Wake County DA directed by the state elections board. This would allow the local prosecutor in the 9th Congressional District to directly investigate the alleged election fraud if the change is approved in the legislature (this individual item appears to have bipartisan support). (Note the above was Edited to add more detail) Lawmakers try once again to restructure the state elections board https://www.wral.com/lawmakers-try-once-again-to-restructure-the-state-elections-board/18038443/ North Carolina lawmakers are trying - once again - to restructure the state elections board. That's after a court order in November threw out their most recent attempt to give themselves appointments on the board, and after North Carolina voters declined to give lawmakers power over the elections board in a constitutional amendment. The court has left the current nine-member board in place until Dec. 12th, 2018, while an election investigation is underway. The initial version of House Bill 1117, filed Monday evening, would once again split the agency under the oversight of two boards. One five-member board, controlled by the governor, would handle only the administration of elections. As has been the practice in the past, the governor would appoint three members of his own party and two members of the other major party from lists of candidates recommended by the respective party leaders. A second, eight-member bipartisan board would handle ethics, campaign finance, and lobbying, with half the board appointed by the governor, and the other half by state lawmakers. At the county level, the four-member bipartisan boards instituted by lawmakers but scuttled by the courts would return to their traditional three-member format, with the state board appointing the members and the governor's party having a 2-1 majority. However, the law would still require the lone Republican on each county board to serve as its chairman in election years. The proposal would also repeal the long-standing law that state political investigations are handled by the Wake County District Attorney's office, moving those investigations instead to the prosecutorial district in which the candidate resides. The proposal would also repeal six boards and commissions whose structures were found unconstitutional in the same ruling: The State Building Commission, the Child Care Commission, the Clean Water Management Trust Fund Board of Trustees, the state Parks and Recreation Authority, the Private Protective Services Board, and the Rural Infrastructure Authority. And in what appears to be a rebuke, the measure would repeal the Constitutional Amendment Publication Commission, the three-member panel charged with writing descriptions of proposed constitutional amendments for voter information materials. The two Democrats on the commission this year, Secretary of State Elaine Marshall and Attorney General Josh Stein, were outspoken on their opinion that state lawmakers wrote deceptive ballot descriptions of the six proposed amendments in the the Nov. 2018 election. Four of the six were approved. House Bill 1117 will likely be heard in House Elections committee Tuesday or Wednesday. However, it's likely to change in its next version.