Brannon Wants Election Thrown Out

25 comments on this post so far. Add yours!

• 

  Lynne on December 01 at 8:32 a.m.

  He needs to put on his big boy panties and get over it already!

• 

  nic on December 01 at 8:44 a.m.

  From OpenCDA “Brannon concluded by saying he hopes that the outcome of his challenge is that all of the voters will know that each of their votes were counted and are important in the election process.”

  But, if Brannon succeeds by getting the election overturned, then none of the votes count. So, therefore, all of the voters will know that their votes didn’t count. I smell self serving hypocrisy.

• 

  ShoshoneConservative on December 01 at 8:55 a.m.

  5 votes is close. However, he should have had the recount done, THEN made a challenge if he thought he had grounds to do so. “Passing on his opportunity to have the Idaho Attorney General’s office conduct a recount,” but filing a lawsuit to try and void the election, seems counter-productive to me.

• 

  Phaedrus on December 01 at 8:57 a.m.

  Yeah, right. Just like Jim Brannon didn’t want to see any harm come to H4H, but he let his supporters make false accusations of against that organization, without ever asking them to stop, or coming and and clearly stating the truth as to why he was let go. Now, he claims that this isn’t an indictment of DOTC or Deedie Beard? Look what his followers are saying:

  “In summary the election appears to be sloppy at best, maybe jury rigged at worst.”—Niles

  That’s not an indictment?

  What I have discovered during the past few months is that Jim Brannon is either unwilling, or unable to provide any sort of leadership to those who support him, always claiming to be powerless to stop what they are saying or doing; is that the type of person that should be in a leadership position in out city? Or anywhere for that matter.

• 

  nic on December 01 at 9:01 a.m.

  @ ShosCon… he probably went the lawsuit route because he realized that a recount would not end in his favor.

• 

  OrangeTV on December 01 at 9:39 a.m.

  I’m wondering…if Brannon ends up successful (whatever that may entail) in this lawsuit and the election is overturned, do we have another election? And if so, does he not realize that this lawsuit and the events leading up to it have likely turned quite a few people who may have been sitting on the fence against him mainly due to his air of desperation and willingness to drag some our most beloved elected officials and the fine people of this city into this huge mess. If there is a do-over, he’ll lose by even more votes than he did the first time. No one likes a sore loser.

  And if he were to actually make it into office somehow, he will always be tainted by this mess and won’t command hardly any respect from his peers on the council and the majority of the people he is supposed to represent. This could backfire on him in many different ways. Then again, I doubt the whole thing was his idea - he really doesn’t seem that clever. He’s likely being puppeted by the usual irksome you-know-whos that will do anything to cause as many headaches as they can for the city solely for the sake of pettiness and revenge. What a bloody nightmare!

• 

  hmoffsuite on December 01 at 9:44 a.m.

  Otv. Well said, imo.

• 

  Sisyphus on December 01 at 10:12 a.m.

  Brannon’s kidding himself if he thinks this isn’t an indictment on city and county election officials. If its not, then why did he sue them? His legal action reads just like the conspiracy theories his cohorts are famous for. .

• 

  Joker on December 01 at 10:16 a.m.

  What a difficult legal complaint to read! Can Jim Brannon’s attorney get any more convoluted with the reasons for challenging the election. It should take one page and it should be clear as day.

  If this 36 page document of gobblygook is any relfection of Starr Kelso’s ability as attorney, Jim Brannon is doomed.

• 

  Lizard_People on December 01 at 11:12 a.m.

  If this lawsuit uncovers the improprieties that it says it will, will the lawsuit have been worth pursuing?

  Is that a reasonable question?

• 

  Joker on December 01 at 11:27 a.m.

  @Lizard, sure it’s a reasonable question. Sure, it will be worth it if he can get a new election or enough ballots disqualified for him to win.

  The key for Brannon is proving those alleged improprieties. I think that’s easy said than done. Just look at the track record of Larry Spencer and Bill McCory: they’re wrong 98 percent of the time.

  Brannon is risking a lot. If a judge tosses the complaint or finds the election to be valid, he could be painted forever as a sore loser

  Brannon continues to show he’s not ready for prime time. The smart move would have been to ask a judge to order a hand recount the day after the election. Why they didn’t go for a hand recount request is beyond me.

  You can always file the voter fraud suit as a last resort.

• 

  Cabbage Boy on December 01 at 11:41 a.m.

  Joker,
  my understanding is that the state law sez that municipal recounts are to be done via the same method. Meaning no hand recount. Perhaps a judge could rule differently, but would that resolve in time to file a suit?

  Dunno.

• 

  Lizard_People on December 01 at 12:02 p.m.

  I guess this is one of those cases where the ends justify the means. If impropriety is found, then I’ll be glad he filed this suit. If not, then I’ll think of him as a chicken little.

  That requires faith in the judicial system, however. In the 2000 POTUS election, many people feel that was stolen by the judges. I suppose whatever side loses will imagine it was the impropriety on the part of the judge.

  Another thing. The huffed up indignant protestations about “indictments” (as in ‘how DARE my honesty be questioned! I say! Monstrous slur!’) makes me laugh and at the same time makes me wonder what it is that is so terrible about scrutinizing the election process. Why the fear?

  I wish John Does A-Z would just take a deep breath and say, okay, sure, we’ll cooperate!

• 

  spokelooneh on December 01 at 2:36 p.m.

  Negating or vacating the election would be the most extreme form of relief and is unlikely.

  If elections procedural violations are in fact proved, then the appropriate relief will be to cure those violations as much as possible, and see if that affects the election results.

  As with most lawsuits, a whole bunch of issues are alleged to have occurred, and a judge will have to decide on the merits and as to relevancy.

• 

  Cis on December 01 at 2:52 p.m.

  It seem ironic to me… that the very group who yells the loudest about city and county spending money foolishly… is going to cost the city/county a great deal of money to go thru this process.
  I could understand a recount because 5 votes is very close…but the rest? Sorry, this looks like a big loser… who is going to look foolish, if he loses this battle.
  And remember group, the person who made up this 36 page deal… is a lawyer who is paid not only by the word by by the page. And this lawyer gets paid whether Brannon wins or loses.
  I think it is sad that the votes are being held up by this lawsuit.

• 

  Sisyphus on December 01 at 3:20 p.m.

  LP, this lawsuit alleges that Dan et al did not acquit their jobs properly under the law. Yes, the process should be scrutinized and, apparently, it has been, hence the lawsuit. But I do believe that if a mistake was made in the process, Dan would be the first one to acknowledge and correct it if he could. But the burden is on the Plaintiff to prove wrongdoing.

  Dave, or anyone, is the complaint available on line? I don’t think a new election is an available remedy, is it? This is about challenging ballots. And how they tie a specific ballot to a soldier in Iraq or a person living in Canada is beyond me given the sanctity of the secret ballot. I might have some time to kill to find relevant statutes.

  Cis I was hoping someone would tumble to that. Not to diminish what attorneys do for their pay, (we haven’t charged by the word in a century or so) but there are two things apparent from this process. 1) The only sure winner will be Starr. 2) A legal victory doesn’t necessarily translate into a political one? For example, if Brannon wins the lawsuit, many people won’t likely overlook his hypocrisy for failing to try the much less expensive option of a recount first.

  The bond, attorney and potential costs are all very expensive. I’m still really wondering about the financial backing for this baby.

• 

  Sisyphus on December 01 at 3:36 p.m.

  Oops my bad. I found it. Brannon wants to toss the entire election, doesn’t wanna bond it, and oddly requests no attorney fees even under the private attorney general doctrine. This is all very odd.

• 

  spokelooneh on December 01 at 3:54 p.m.

  It’s probably 99% certain that a recount would yield the exact same results.

  That’s why I said long ago is only chance is for a hand recount, that may disqualify some ballots or add in some ballots that the machines counted as undervotes, perhaps enough to change the outcome. If that process eliminates 2 (net) votes for Kennedy, and adds 3 (net) votes to Brannon, the results change.

  There are no issues here that I can see of preserving the sanctity of the secret ballot. There is no way to identify anyone from their ballot or how they voted. Unless some numbskull put their name on their ballot, which would normally void it.

• 

  Sisyphus on December 01 at 4:46 p.m.

  “It’s probably 99% certain that a recount would yield the exact same results.”—you and I know this, but at least five voters won’t and will hold it against Brannon for obligating this expense without at least testing that theory which has no cost.

  Also this contest is in the nature of an administrative appeal. That means the plaintiff has the burden of proving that the city and the county failed to follow the law. The standard of review gives deference that election officials conducted the elections properly. Even then, they fail to allege anywhere that the ballots they challenge couldn’t have all been votes for Brannon. Instead they allege the irregularities affected more than five votes. But even still I don’t see anywhere that they get the remedy they requested, tossing the entire election instead of declaring Brannon the winner. That only happens when they challenge Kennedy’s qualifications, IC section 34-2024, which they don’t. I’m not sure this complaint will survive a motion to dismiss.

  Moreover, I’m suspecting that the argument that they are not subject to a bonding requirement will kill this action should the judge disagree. “The contestant must also file a bond, with security to be approved by the clerk of the court or district judge, as the case may be, conditioned to pay all costs in case the election be confirmed, the complaint dismissed, or the prosecution fail.” I.C. section 34-2008 Somehow, Starr is going to argue that Brannon is not subject to this requirement. Which is odd cause he follows other sections of this title of the code when putting this complaint together, like the verification.

• 

  Phaedrus on December 01 at 6:31 p.m.

  If elections procedural violations are in fact proved, then the appropriate relief will be to cure those violations as much as possible, and see if that affects the election results.

  Since they are focusing on the absentee ballots then the judge might throw out those ? Then Kennedy’s victory total increases by 133 votes. ;-)

• 

  nic on December 01 at 7:03 p.m.

  Did Brannon forget that he was winning after the absentee votes were counted? To challenge the absentee votes seems foolish as that would (as Phaed mentions) increase the amount of Brannon’s loss. While MMQC is often contrary, contradictory, collusional, coniving, conning, and conspiratorial, she’s at least logical in this approach - she’s attacking the individual precincts.

• 

  spokelooneh on December 01 at 11:06 p.m.

  I don’t see where anyone is challenging ALL of the absentee ballots, and an awfully strong case likely involving actual voter fraud would have to be proved to disenfranchise all those voters.

  There does appear to be a discrepancy in the number of voided absentee ballots. The reason for the voids needs to be examined.

  The precinct voter books need to be cross checked against the absentee voter book to make sure no one voted twice.

  Sis, to what court is an appeal of a district court filed? Because I expect this will occur.

  And if you know of any legal bloggers who are commenting about this case, I’d love to read what they have to say.

• 

  Sisyphus on December 02 at 7:17 a.m.

  I don’t know too many ‘legal’ bloggers in the state save Mamajd scootermom and myself. The appeal from district court is to the Supreme Court. I strongly doubt its going there, unless Brannon wins a result from Judge Mitchell, because it seems obvious to me that cost is a major factor judging from what I’ve seen. Moreover, the standards of review are even more deferential on such an appeal. I suspect the bond decision will be outcome determinative.

• 

  Phaedrus on December 02 at 8:13 a.m.

  Sisyphus, you forget that LarrySpencerMistatestheFacts” is involved in this, I see this going to the Supremes. Maybe Mary Wilson will rule on the merits of the case.

• 

  spokelooneh on December 02 at 12:20 p.m.

  Thanks for that, Sis. I think the cabal behind Brannon has access to and is willing to expend significant funds in pushing this case “forward”.

« Back to Huckleberries Online

• ›Scanner traffic