Don't mean to start another flame war....but I have a ques. re Bev and Olb

[Sperk]

This is from Bev's site.....

"Official attitudes on transparency: Florida public officials, attending a meeting on public business, paid for with public funds, which, under Florida law is considered a public meeting, were incensed that Black Box Voting walked into what they considered to be a private meeting, to hand a public records lawsuit to LePore."


This is from Bloggerman....
"My ample gut has lately sent me a different message, and her showdown with Palm Beach County Elections Supervisor Theresa LePore on Monday seemed to buttress my instinct. She burst into LePore’s retirement ceremony, her cameraman rolling tape as she did so, and she raced to the podium to announce to the shocked room full of supervisors that she was “serving” LePore with papers as part of her lawsuits over what she claims are LePore’s evasions in providing records of the 2004 vote."

So which was it....a publicly paid for event or a private retirement ceremony? I think Olbermann gives the distinct impression that Bev charged in an disrupted a private event. No? Just goes to show how two reports on the same event can give two very distinct impressions.

Personally....I think if this is the biggest price LePlore pays....it's not NEARLY enough.

[Paradise]

1. Oh, you are sooo right! n/t

[lonestarnot]

2. I understood

the event to be a private event for public election officials. How sacrosanct is that? Free Massons ring a bell?

[lonestarnot]

3. lahoe is a hoe!

may she rot in hell!

[Lerkfish]

4. depending on florida's sunshine laws...

I know that in some states, if more than 5 members of a govt. board meet to discuss business, it has to be an open to the public meeting, If I'm not mistaken.

[lonestarnot]

6. hmmm interesting

Not familiar with FL law.

[Lerkfish]

9. me neither, but I know in OHIO there is some variation of sunshine law

the details I'm fuzzy on, but there is arequirement to make meetings public if they discuss govt. business and there are a certain minimum number of people there...wait, I'll google it...

ok...just a skim google shows me that I don't know as much as I thought...apparently the pdf explaining the law is 230 pages long!!! no time to read it all. apparently a lot depends on how you define "public" "meeting" and several other words, there are more loopholes than a fishnet, so not sure how to simplify it.

There ARE rules to hold open meetings, but I'm not sure there are rules to allow people to speak, or what constitutes "open"...whether its real time or available transcripts.

Hopefully someone here is a lawyer in florida and can provide a more concise answer.

[tbuddha]

5. That's may be one big reason why she hasn't gone on the show

If he is using that kind of rhetoric already, it may be time to question the reasons for the show. I like Keith, really I do, but NEVER forget that he works for NBC, the most repuke of the 3 networks.

[Sperk]

7. I agree, if someone deserves the benefit of the doubt...I'd go with

Bev over Olberman anytime. If it was technically open to the public...he should have made that clear.

[PATRICK]

8. Meanwhile the Headlines

of many major papers shows thousands of disruptive Ukrainian protesters doing everything they learned from our political ops from street theater to invasion of premises to shutdowns.

We have one woman who crashes one of those multitude of secret GOP gatherings to serve papers.

It IS disturbing all right and a damned shame that the weight of absurdity is totally avoided and people criticize her instead!

What a stupid country where the Democratic opposition has helped others overseas do what it squelches and dampens here. Actions in their behalf trying to reverse their willing slow slide to oblivion while we the people become enslaved to fanatics, scoundrels and eternal war.

No one can ever face the shame and irony that is this murdered America.

BTW she never promised she would reverse an election and thanks to being cold shouldered by dummies from shore to shore the best she can do is get the truth out, which is a damn sight more than anyone else is going to accomplish. The audit crusade is brilliant and should be a cornerstone to election reform from state to state. The emasculated feds are never going to give us reform by taking the "high road". How often exactly must we fall for that scam?

Whatever else the source of the current blindness I still think you have to be a complete blithering computer illiterate not to get the danger we are in or a political naif- or one of the other side who flatter those who go along with the charade.