Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Talk Station.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Eight oh five on Tuesday. Regular listeners know to be
tuned in at this time. It's appointment listening because we
get the inside scoop. With bright Bart News joining us today,
Capitol Hill reporter Nick Gilbertson returns to talk about what
I've been mentioning all morning, the Pennsylvania vote counting, which
is in violation of the law. There, I just remind
my listeners, as I do with the outset of every
(00:25):
inside Scoop segment, Bright Bart Bookmarket, b R E I
T B A RT dot Com. Great reporting there and
of course, notably by Nick Gilbertson, the Capitol Hill Reporter.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Nick's great to have you on the fifty five Cadsey
Morning Show as always.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Hey, Brian, great to be here, Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
You know, I am a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
I continue I maintain my law license, although I have
not practiced. This is my eighteenth year in radio concluding it,
so I'm no longer an active practitioner of the law.
But I have a profound respect for the law. I
understand it. I understand the constitutional framework, the separation of
powers and the separate but equal branches of government, including
the Supreme court, and that's the federal level, but the
(01:05):
states are all set up the same way. Apparently the
people counting the votes in Pennsylvania, least in a couple
of counties, didn't get the memo. They actively and out
loud intentionally violated the law in trying and continuing to
count votes that did not qualify to be counted under
Pennsylvania law. This was mind blowing the defiance that came
(01:27):
out of one of these officials. It doesn't matter anymore,
this woman said. I think we all know that precedent
by a court doesn't matter in this country, and people
violate laws anytime they want. So for me, if I
violate the law, it's because I want a court to
pay attention to it, So say a commissioner, Elise Marzilla,
a woman named Ellis Margallia. I mean, I couldn't believe
(01:51):
my eyes when I was reading this. Well, what's your
response on all this, Nick, You've been following it?
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Yeah, Brian, I was absolutely shocked when I saw that
board meeting there in Bucks County last week. And yes,
it's mind you. This is the party, by the way,
that screamed about threats of democracy. You know, an election
integrity here for four years after twenty twenty and now
we have this going on. But yeah, this all comes
(02:18):
down to two really a couple types of ballots here
that we're getting talented in Bucks County and other counties
throughout the state in defiance of these Supreme Court rulings
from you know this year and President that was said
that decided, you know, these votes shouldn't count. So the
first type that are in question are these misdated ballots
(02:40):
and you know they're missing signatures, are misdated or undated ballots,
and the court had already ruled, you know that you
can't count these. There's no way to you know, verify
these in the state election law. There's really no wiggle
room right on this stuff. And you know, these people,
they go ahead last Tuesday ls mar there and her
(03:01):
fellow board member Robert Harvey Jr. They vote two to
one to count the votes even though there's an existing
Supreme Court order. Then on Thursday there's again there's two
types of ballots again that are in question. On provisional
ballots and whether you know, if they're they have to
be signed in two places, one on the affidavit and
one on the on the ballot or on the envelope itself.
(03:24):
If they're missing a sat nature in one of those
two places. The court ruled in September, you can't count them.
They cannot be counted. And again, these people knew this
on Thursday, their own legal council, the county solicitors, now,
we are advising you not to counties. And they're basically
making the same argument their Republican council was making. And
(03:46):
they go ahead and count them anyway. And she gives
that really extremely defiant statement that shows a lack of press,
lack of value for precedent and the rule of art
and interpretation of the law. So really interesting. And Bran,
I'm not sure if you saw this, but in the decision,
one of these justices they wrote and a com being
(04:07):
concurring statement to agree with the decision. And he specifically
went after these local elections.
Speaker 1 (04:15):
Yeah, Justice Justice Robson.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Yes, Kevin Brobson. He goes, I want to quote disabuse
local election officials of the notion that they have the
authority to ignore election code provisions that they believe are
un constitutional. It's just one paragraph, but really straight to
the point. Yeah, you guys don't have this power.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Well, The follow up is almost even more comically. Indeed,
this court has held the administrative agencies like county boards
of elections lack the authority to declare unconstitutional the very
statutes from which they derive their existence and which they
are charged to enforce.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
I mean, you know that was a I may be
so bold, be slap.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
I mean they were all over this, and the order
itself even has in capitalizations shall comply shall not be counted.
It's like, how hard over the head can you hit him?
Speaker 3 (05:11):
Yeah? I laughed out loud at that second part there,
the statutes from which they derived their existence. Yeah, no,
really really incredible stuff. And it's good to, you know,
see the Supreme Court coming in here and coming on this,
because of course this all ties into the tight Senate
race there between McCormick and Case. Obviously McCormick is won,
(05:34):
and Democrats are just looking for any way they can't
you know, overcome this, this these eighteen seventeen thousand votes
that McCormick leads by.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Well, it is awfully nice of the Governor of Pennsylvania
to back the Court and their their conclusions that they
had already reached previously in two separate cases. Democrat Governor
Josh Shapiro said, yeah, okay, we need to go ahead
and not count them. Well, thanks, buddy, appreciate you. You
following the law yours. It's it's nice support you've given
your own constitution.
Speaker 3 (06:04):
Yeah, right, comes out of uh yeah, yeah put yeah,
Shapiro joining in it. Of course, it comes after the
court basically ruling right, he couldn't he couldn't Well, things
were kind of hanging limbo there. He couldn't come out
and advocate for their rule of law.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
But yeah, well, if the county's own judicials are owned advocates,
their own lawyers already told them that they could not
count these votes. I would like to think that the
attorney general the state of Pennsylvania would have echoed the
same sentiments.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Yeah, and well that's the most darring thing to me too,
is that that and the fact that these people were
warning her that we're going to get sued, You're going
to bring a lawsuit on the county that's going to
cost the taxpayers dollars, to the fact that their counsel
is literally advising against that, and you know, she's up
there kind of using the sport of elections as you know,
(06:56):
just however she wants to is just really staggering.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
It is. Now someone had asked me this earlier.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
And I don't know Pennsylvania very well or law very
well at all. I mean, only would I come across
in the news that makes these types of profound points
and very important national topics. But do you know by
any chance, Nick, and I don't want to put you
on the spot. If you don't know, just say so.
Can they be charged for violating the law and putting
the putting the taxpayers through this process? Because I pivot
(07:25):
over to Minnesota and there is a guy served as
the head election judge in Minnesota which has been charged
with two felony counts for letting eleven people vote even
though they were not registered to vote. Do you know
if there's a corollary provision that might hold these two
nut jobs accountable in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
So I honestly, I don't know off the top of
my head, Brian, I'm not a lawyer, but I do know.
I mean, I was on a press call yesterday with
the rn T A R and C chairman Michael Michael
Wattley was very oudamant that you know, he said it's
a parrot quote. It is imperative that these officials who
are engaged in such conduct face serious consequences for their
(08:07):
brazen betrayal of the public trust. This is the kind
of conduct that undermines faith and elections. When election officials
pick and choose at the last minute which rules to
follow and which to ignore, it naturally leads voters to
lose trust in the process. End quote. So certainly, you know,
we we have the r n C calling for severe
(08:28):
consequences for the likes of Ellis mar Seglia and and
and and Harvey Junior, and you know, if this was
going on in other counties to these board members there.
But again, that's that's a little out of my.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Night's okay right now, Well, it's out of my league too.
I wasn't going to answer the question either. I hadn't
seen anything written on that. I just knew that there
was another article out there about this guy that has
been charged for these letting unregistered vote people to vote,
obviously in violated and violation of state law there. But
you know, it really boiled and I would argue that
(09:02):
it really just it surprises me that they would be
so bold as to utter statements like that out loud,
even if they held them dear in their heart. You know,
screw the law, it doesn't matter. I'm counting the votes.
You know, this shouldn't come down to a question of
whose ox is being gorg You know, Democrats shouldn't be
cheering that type of statement from a Democrat elected official,
(09:25):
because everyone, as you point out, is going to start
questioning the integrity the election. Well, if they feel that way,
if the Republicans are in charge of all, the Republican's
gonna be doing the same damn thing. Nobody should be
doing it, and everyone should be celebrating the SmackDown that
they got from both sides of the political ledger.
Speaker 3 (09:42):
Yeah, and that's that's the major problem too, is if
there's no uniform if everybody decides, every county board decides
to make up their own rules, not follow Supreme Court
precedents in the state and count ballots however they choose,
you really don't have a uniform st elections statewide, you
know what I mean, We're you're valuing ballots the exact
(10:05):
same way. And yeah, it's good. Good on everybody coming
out now and admonishing this this woman and you know,
the right and Republicans have been really shining a light
on this, and it's a I don't think this this
woman ever thought that that those words when she said them,
would turn into a national news story. But you know,
here here we are, and uh yeah, I think I
(10:28):
think it's a good lesson for you know, not she's
learning it the hard way, but it's a good lesson
for other you know, county county boards and these people
and at pretty much activists in these positions that you
can't get away with this.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
You can't.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
They can't, No one can. Republicans can't cheat, they can't
send in un you know, filled out ballots. They can't
go around and violate Pennsylvania, remember, Nick, And I'm sure
you can because it wasn't that long ago. We were
counting votes in the twenty twenty election during COVID, and
Pennsylvania was the most lawless state and union almost. They
were just shooting from the hip, changing laws that were
(11:04):
on the books already and ignoring them and extending here
and I mean, to me, it was just insanity. They
were creating on the fly new rules for voting while
the process was going on. You need legislative action and
a loss sign in or a bill signed in a
law by a governor to change the election laws. And
yet we all wat to kind of have a pass.
Speaker 3 (11:27):
Yeah. No, yeah, twenty twenty, there's twenty twenty was you know,
it was so crazy with COVID and the mail in
ballot and how we kind of really changed the culture
of our election and moved that way. And yeah, it
was so disorganized that it was hard to make heads
and tails of what was going on in Pennsylvania four
(11:48):
years ago. And it's you know, this time around, I mean,
it's it's good to see how things are working out
in the court and the legal system playing out correctly
to this point anyway. But yeah, it's entirely hypocritical of
Democrats as a party to be engaged in this election denialism,
(12:13):
especially how everything they did after twenty twenty. They brought
two cases against the leading Republican presidential candidate months after
he announced had never been in any criminal trouble before,
and two of those cases were over his election challenges
in twenty twenty. Now, sentence, they're beyond Pennsylvania in Georgia
and other states, of course, but it just goes to
(12:35):
show just the hypocrisy here of Democrats and you know,
Dave mcgri Bob Casey's election denialism here in Pennsylvania's pretty striking.
I mean, I just want to contrast this with Mike Rodgers.
He was a Republican candidate in Michigan and he ran
a really close race with delicious luck and lost by
like nineteen twenty thousand votes. Last night I saw more
(12:57):
than ninety five percent was in. He conceded the moment
with the Associated Press called the race and he was real,
you know, humble and gracious in his defeat. And I
think that just illustrates a little difference here. That's that's
kind of going on here between the two parties that
you can see right now.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
Yeah, I guess she just did.
Speaker 2 (13:16):
These two election officials just didn't get the memo, and
obviously they were hoping. I think the strategy was it
was only four hundred and five votes here would not
have changed the outcome of the election. I think they
were hoping if they gathered enough bits and pieces by
engaging in a violation of law in amongst various counties,
they could close the gap between the two candidates less
(13:38):
than point five percent. That would result in a recount,
during which time they could cheat again and maybe let
the Democrat win.
Speaker 3 (13:46):
That's one seems to be the strategy to me. You know,
it's four hundred and five votes doesn't much if you're
talking one county, you know, but if you're talking all
sixty seven counties in Pennsylvania, a couple hundred votes here,
a couple hundred votes there, you know, get them through
and close the gap, get the recount. You know that
that seems to be certainly be the game plan to me.
And it's not just you know that those four hundred
(14:09):
and five misdated or or ballots missing or missing dates
altogether in Bucks County, and then there were another one
hundred and twenty five that had the signature issues. So
it's not just uh so it's as many ballots. It
looks like they're trying to get across the finish line here,
you know, in every as many counties as possible to
(14:30):
try and close that gap. That's one hundred percent right.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
All right, Well, you know, take multiple bites at the apple,
even if the first bite settled the entire issue. Tell
you what I mean, Nick Gilbertson, it's been a real
pleasure having having back on the fifty five Caresey Morning Show.
He is the Capitol Hill Reporter, Bright Bart Bookmarket, Brightbart
dot Com or line on the information. They provide great
reporting every single day. Keep up the great work, Nick
(14:55):
and the entire crew at Bite Bart. Best of health
to all of you, and I'll look forward to another
inside scoop next Tuesday. The here on the fifty five
Kars Morning Show.
Speaker 3 (15:03):
Hey, thanks for having me, Brian. Great to be here.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Always a pleasure. Nick.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
It's a twenty right now stick around. We're going to
get a Daniel Davis deep dive and it is going
to be a good one because we're talking about Russia,
Ukraine and a little tidbit of information on that. Pewtin
just announced a revised nuclear doctrine just today saying that
any attack on Russian supported by a country with nuclear
power could be grounds for a nuclear response. We being
(15:31):
a nuclear power supporting a country that's not Ukraine, them
shooting into the depths of Russia now justifies in the
hearts and minds of Vladimir Putting and the people there,
a nuclear weapon response. Frightening stuff. Eight twenty one to
fifty five KRC Detalk Station he's coming up next to.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
Stick around fifty five KRC.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, and more personal
info in more places that could expose you more
Talk Station.
Speaker 2 (00:03):
Eight oh five on Tuesday. Regular listeners know to be
tuned in at this time. It's appointment listening because we
get the inside scoop. With bright Bart News joining us today,
Capitol Hill reporter Nick Gilbertson returns to talk about what
I've been mentioning all morning, the Pennsylvania vote counting, which
is in violation of the law. There, I just remind
my listeners, as I do with the outset of every
(00:25):
inside Scoop segment, Bright Bart Bookmarket, b R E I
T B A RT dot Com. Great reporting there and
of course, notably by Nick Gilbertson, the Capitol Hill Reporter.
Speaker 1 (00:35):
Welcome back.
Speaker 2 (00:36):
Nick's great to have you on the fifty five Cadsey
Morning Show as always.
Speaker 3 (00:40):
Hey, Brian, great to be here, Thanks for having me.
Speaker 1 (00:42):
You know, I am a lawyer.
Speaker 2 (00:43):
I continue I maintain my law license, although I have
not practiced. This is my eighteenth year in radio concluding it,
so I'm no longer an active practitioner of the law.
But I have a profound respect for the law. I
understand it. I understand the constitutional framework, the separation of
powers and the separate but equal branches of government, including
the Supreme court, and that's the federal level, but the
(01:05):
states are all set up the same way. Apparently the
people counting the votes in Pennsylvania, least in a couple
of counties, didn't get the memo. They actively and out
loud intentionally violated the law in trying and continuing to
count votes that did not qualify to be counted under
Pennsylvania law. This was mind blowing the defiance that came
(01:27):
out of one of these officials. It doesn't matter anymore,
this woman said. I think we all know that precedent
by a court doesn't matter in this country, and people
violate laws anytime they want. So for me, if I
violate the law, it's because I want a court to
pay attention to it, So say a commissioner, Elise Marzilla,
a woman named Ellis Margallia. I mean, I couldn't believe
(01:51):
my eyes when I was reading this. Well, what's your
response on all this, Nick, You've been following it?
Speaker 3 (01:57):
Yeah, Brian, I was absolutely shocked when I saw that
board meeting there in Bucks County last week. And yes,
it's mind you. This is the party, by the way,
that screamed about threats of democracy. You know, an election
integrity here for four years after twenty twenty and now
we have this going on. But yeah, this all comes
(02:18):
down to two really a couple types of ballots here
that we're getting talented in Bucks County and other counties
throughout the state in defiance of these Supreme Court rulings
from you know this year and President that was said
that decided, you know, these votes shouldn't count. So the
first type that are in question are these misdated ballots
(02:40):
and you know they're missing signatures, are misdated or undated ballots,
and the court had already ruled, you know that you
can't count these. There's no way to you know, verify
these in the state election law. There's really no wiggle
room right on this stuff. And you know, these people,
they go ahead last Tuesday ls mar there and her
(03:01):
fellow board member Robert Harvey Jr. They vote two to
one to count the votes even though there's an existing
Supreme Court order. Then on Thursday there's again there's two
types of ballots again that are in question. On provisional
ballots and whether you know, if they're they have to
be signed in two places, one on the affidavit and
one on the on the ballot or on the envelope itself.
(03:24):
If they're missing a sat nature in one of those
two places. The court ruled in September, you can't count them.
They cannot be counted. And again, these people knew this
on Thursday, their own legal council, the county solicitors, now,
we are advising you not to counties. And they're basically
making the same argument their Republican council was making. And
(03:46):
they go ahead and count them anyway. And she gives
that really extremely defiant statement that shows a lack of press,
lack of value for precedent and the rule of art
and interpretation of the law. So really interesting. And Bran,
I'm not sure if you saw this, but in the decision,
one of these justices they wrote and a com being
(04:07):
concurring statement to agree with the decision. And he specifically
went after these local elections.
Speaker 1 (04:15):
Yeah, Justice Justice Robson.
Speaker 3 (04:19):
Yes, Kevin Brobson. He goes, I want to quote disabuse
local election officials of the notion that they have the
authority to ignore election code provisions that they believe are
un constitutional. It's just one paragraph, but really straight to
the point. Yeah, you guys don't have this power.
Speaker 2 (04:37):
Well, The follow up is almost even more comically. Indeed,
this court has held the administrative agencies like county boards
of elections lack the authority to declare unconstitutional the very
statutes from which they derive their existence and which they
are charged to enforce.
Speaker 1 (04:53):
I mean, you know that was a I may be
so bold, be slap.
Speaker 2 (04:59):
I mean they were all over this, and the order
itself even has in capitalizations shall comply shall not be counted.
It's like, how hard over the head can you hit him?
Speaker 3 (05:11):
Yeah? I laughed out loud at that second part there,
the statutes from which they derived their existence. Yeah, no,
really really incredible stuff. And it's good to, you know,
see the Supreme Court coming in here and coming on this,
because of course this all ties into the tight Senate
race there between McCormick and Case. Obviously McCormick is won,
(05:34):
and Democrats are just looking for any way they can't
you know, overcome this, this these eighteen seventeen thousand votes
that McCormick leads by.
Speaker 2 (05:42):
Well, it is awfully nice of the Governor of Pennsylvania
to back the Court and their their conclusions that they
had already reached previously in two separate cases. Democrat Governor
Josh Shapiro said, yeah, okay, we need to go ahead
and not count them. Well, thanks, buddy, appreciate you. You
following the law yours. It's it's nice support you've given
your own constitution.
Speaker 3 (06:04):
Yeah, right, comes out of uh yeah, yeah put yeah,
Shapiro joining in it. Of course, it comes after the
court basically ruling right, he couldn't he couldn't Well, things
were kind of hanging limbo there. He couldn't come out
and advocate for their rule of law.
Speaker 2 (06:19):
But yeah, well, if the county's own judicials are owned advocates,
their own lawyers already told them that they could not
count these votes. I would like to think that the
attorney general the state of Pennsylvania would have echoed the
same sentiments.
Speaker 3 (06:32):
Yeah, and well that's the most darring thing to me too,
is that that and the fact that these people were
warning her that we're going to get sued, You're going
to bring a lawsuit on the county that's going to
cost the taxpayers dollars, to the fact that their counsel
is literally advising against that, and you know, she's up
there kind of using the sport of elections as you know,
(06:56):
just however she wants to is just really staggering.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
It is. Now someone had asked me this earlier.
Speaker 2 (07:03):
And I don't know Pennsylvania very well or law very
well at all. I mean, only would I come across
in the news that makes these types of profound points
and very important national topics. But do you know by
any chance, Nick, and I don't want to put you
on the spot. If you don't know, just say so.
Can they be charged for violating the law and putting
the putting the taxpayers through this process? Because I pivot
(07:25):
over to Minnesota and there is a guy served as
the head election judge in Minnesota which has been charged
with two felony counts for letting eleven people vote even
though they were not registered to vote. Do you know
if there's a corollary provision that might hold these two
nut jobs accountable in Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (07:44):
So I honestly, I don't know off the top of
my head, Brian, I'm not a lawyer, but I do know.
I mean, I was on a press call yesterday with
the rn T A R and C chairman Michael Michael
Wattley was very oudamant that you know, he said it's
a parrot quote. It is imperative that these officials who
are engaged in such conduct face serious consequences for their
(08:07):
brazen betrayal of the public trust. This is the kind
of conduct that undermines faith and elections. When election officials
pick and choose at the last minute which rules to
follow and which to ignore, it naturally leads voters to
lose trust in the process. End quote. So certainly, you know,
we we have the r n C calling for severe
(08:28):
consequences for the likes of Ellis mar Seglia and and
and and Harvey Junior, and you know, if this was
going on in other counties to these board members there.
But again, that's that's a little out of my.
Speaker 2 (08:42):
Night's okay right now, Well, it's out of my league too.
I wasn't going to answer the question either. I hadn't
seen anything written on that. I just knew that there
was another article out there about this guy that has
been charged for these letting unregistered vote people to vote,
obviously in violated and violation of state law there. But
you know, it really boiled and I would argue that
(09:02):
it really just it surprises me that they would be
so bold as to utter statements like that out loud,
even if they held them dear in their heart. You know,
screw the law, it doesn't matter. I'm counting the votes.
You know, this shouldn't come down to a question of
whose ox is being gorg You know, Democrats shouldn't be
cheering that type of statement from a Democrat elected official,
(09:25):
because everyone, as you point out, is going to start
questioning the integrity the election. Well, if they feel that way,
if the Republicans are in charge of all, the Republican's
gonna be doing the same damn thing. Nobody should be
doing it, and everyone should be celebrating the SmackDown that
they got from both sides of the political ledger.
Speaker 3 (09:42):
Yeah, and that's that's the major problem too, is if
there's no uniform if everybody decides, every county board decides
to make up their own rules, not follow Supreme Court
precedents in the state and count ballots however they choose,
you really don't have a uniform st elections statewide, you
know what I mean, We're you're valuing ballots the exact
(10:05):
same way. And yeah, it's good. Good on everybody coming
out now and admonishing this this woman and you know,
the right and Republicans have been really shining a light
on this, and it's a I don't think this this
woman ever thought that that those words when she said them,
would turn into a national news story. But you know,
here here we are, and uh yeah, I think I
(10:28):
think it's a good lesson for you know, not she's
learning it the hard way, but it's a good lesson
for other you know, county county boards and these people
and at pretty much activists in these positions that you
can't get away with this.
Speaker 1 (10:42):
You can't.
Speaker 2 (10:43):
They can't, No one can. Republicans can't cheat, they can't
send in un you know, filled out ballots. They can't
go around and violate Pennsylvania, remember, Nick, And I'm sure
you can because it wasn't that long ago. We were
counting votes in the twenty twenty election during COVID, and
Pennsylvania was the most lawless state and union almost. They
were just shooting from the hip, changing laws that were
(11:04):
on the books already and ignoring them and extending here
and I mean, to me, it was just insanity. They
were creating on the fly new rules for voting while
the process was going on. You need legislative action and
a loss sign in or a bill signed in a
law by a governor to change the election laws. And
yet we all wat to kind of have a pass.
Speaker 3 (11:27):
Yeah. No, yeah, twenty twenty, there's twenty twenty was you know,
it was so crazy with COVID and the mail in
ballot and how we kind of really changed the culture
of our election and moved that way. And yeah, it
was so disorganized that it was hard to make heads
and tails of what was going on in Pennsylvania four
(11:48):
years ago. And it's you know, this time around, I mean,
it's it's good to see how things are working out
in the court and the legal system playing out correctly
to this point anyway. But yeah, it's entirely hypocritical of
Democrats as a party to be engaged in this election denialism,
(12:13):
especially how everything they did after twenty twenty. They brought
two cases against the leading Republican presidential candidate months after
he announced had never been in any criminal trouble before,
and two of those cases were over his election challenges
in twenty twenty. Now, sentence, they're beyond Pennsylvania in Georgia
and other states, of course, but it just goes to
(12:35):
show just the hypocrisy here of Democrats and you know,
Dave mcgri Bob Casey's election denialism here in Pennsylvania's pretty striking.
I mean, I just want to contrast this with Mike Rodgers.
He was a Republican candidate in Michigan and he ran
a really close race with delicious luck and lost by
like nineteen twenty thousand votes. Last night I saw more
(12:57):
than ninety five percent was in. He conceded the moment
with the Associated Press called the race and he was real,
you know, humble and gracious in his defeat. And I
think that just illustrates a little difference here. That's that's
kind of going on here between the two parties that
you can see right now.
Speaker 1 (13:15):
Yeah, I guess she just did.
Speaker 2 (13:16):
These two election officials just didn't get the memo, and
obviously they were hoping. I think the strategy was it
was only four hundred and five votes here would not
have changed the outcome of the election. I think they
were hoping if they gathered enough bits and pieces by
engaging in a violation of law in amongst various counties,
they could close the gap between the two candidates less
(13:38):
than point five percent. That would result in a recount,
during which time they could cheat again and maybe let
the Democrat win.
Speaker 3 (13:46):
That's one seems to be the strategy to me. You know,
it's four hundred and five votes doesn't much if you're
talking one county, you know, but if you're talking all
sixty seven counties in Pennsylvania, a couple hundred votes here,
a couple hundred votes there, you know, get them through
and close the gap, get the recount. You know that
that seems to be certainly be the game plan to me.
And it's not just you know that those four hundred
(14:09):
and five misdated or or ballots missing or missing dates
altogether in Bucks County, and then there were another one
hundred and twenty five that had the signature issues. So
it's not just uh so it's as many ballots. It
looks like they're trying to get across the finish line here,
you know, in every as many counties as possible to
(14:30):
try and close that gap. That's one hundred percent right.
Speaker 2 (14:33):
All right, Well, you know, take multiple bites at the apple,
even if the first bite settled the entire issue. Tell
you what I mean, Nick Gilbertson, it's been a real
pleasure having having back on the fifty five Caresey Morning Show.
He is the Capitol Hill Reporter, Bright Bart Bookmarket, Brightbart
dot Com or line on the information. They provide great
reporting every single day. Keep up the great work, Nick
(14:55):
and the entire crew at Bite Bart. Best of health
to all of you, and I'll look forward to another
inside scoop next Tuesday. The here on the fifty five
Kars Morning Show.
Speaker 3 (15:03):
Hey, thanks for having me, Brian. Great to be here.
Speaker 1 (15:05):
Always a pleasure. Nick.
Speaker 2 (15:06):
It's a twenty right now stick around. We're going to
get a Daniel Davis deep dive and it is going
to be a good one because we're talking about Russia,
Ukraine and a little tidbit of information on that. Pewtin
just announced a revised nuclear doctrine just today saying that
any attack on Russian supported by a country with nuclear
power could be grounds for a nuclear response. We being
(15:31):
a nuclear power supporting a country that's not Ukraine, them
shooting into the depths of Russia now justifies in the
hearts and minds of Vladimir Putting and the people there,
a nuclear weapon response. Frightening stuff. Eight twenty one to
fifty five KRC Detalk Station he's coming up next to.
Speaker 1 (15:49):
Stick around fifty five KRC.
Speaker 2 (15:52):
The holidays mean more travel, more shopping, and more personal
info in more places that could expose you more
Brian Thomas News
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.