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