[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by John41

Not their first brush with the law. Some years ago they were fined for shooting endangered animals. Should have gone to jail.
This is a serious charge, election fraud, which it was. Time to get their comeuppance and show they are not above the law.

That is not what happened. They were NOT fined for shooting endangered animals. They felled an animal on their land in the Western state they use for hunting and did not use it for food or dispose of it. Someone reported it.

Nothing came of it.

[graciegirl]

Originally Posted by Advogado

As a result of the use of "fake" candidates to disenfranchise voters in last August's Republican primary, the Developer (along with the "fake" candidates and the incumbents whom the "fake" candidates were helping) are under criminal investigation by the FDLE for possible elections fraud. Not a word about it in the Daily Sun. For details, see today's on-line newspaper.

Advogado. Are you involved with running the POA?

[Advogado]

Originally Posted by graciegirl

Advogado. Are you involved with running the POA?

No.

Originally Posted by graciegirl

That is not what happened. They were NOT fined for shooting endangered animals. They felled an animal on their land in the Western state they use for hunting and did not use it for food or dispose of it. Someone reported it.

Nothing came of it.

ACTUAL FELONIES CHARGED
Morse and his wife, their daughter and five others are accused of 18 wildlife violations during hunting excursions during the past four years on Morse property in Montana. The charges include the illegal killing or possession of elk, deer and other wildlife.
One ranch manager told investigators he was revolted by Rainey's refusal to track what was clearly a mortally wounded elk and kill it so the animal would not suffer. The manager, Toby Griffith, also got into a "tense and heated" dispute with Rainey, part owner of the Wolf Mountain Ranch with Morse, over Rainey shooting several elk in one day.

[JoMar]

I suspect that some will take their hatred of the Morse Family to their grave.

[Mrprez]

Originally Posted by JoMar

I suspect that some will take their hatred of the Morse Family to their grave.

I’m going to setup and monetize ihatethemorses.com

Originally Posted by JoMar

I suspect that some will take their hatred of the Morse Family to their grave.

Yes I hate cruelty to animals.

remembering the outpouring of Villagers who defeated the puppet commissioners I think you are in the small minority that believes the rich don’t follow the rules of the little people

so sad some lack empathy

Originally Posted by Mrprez

I’m going to setup and monetize ihatethemorses.com

better ikissuptothemorses.com

the term is syncophant

[Topspinmo]

Originally Posted by John41

Yes I hate cruelty to animals.

remembering the outpouring of Villagers who defeated the puppet commissioners I think you are in the small minority that believes the rich don’t follow the rules of the little people

so sad some lack empathy

I agree, no reason to kill animals for sport especially if you’re not starving or have no choice. I would have to be starving before I would shoot deer 🦌.

[tophcfa]

They got connections and friends in very high places, the investigation will result in nothing. More importantly, perhaps this will be a wake up call that once you start prioritizing maximizing profits over your clients best interests, the clients will start to demand reasonable checks and balances over ultimate control of things. Time will tell? Stay tuned!

[jblum315]

I believe they were fined for not having proper licenses, and also for shooting anikmals and leaving their corpses to rot

[MandoMan]

Originally Posted by eyc234

Read the article and reread but could not find where it said, "the Developer", was part of the investigation. Where in the article does it specifically state "the Developer" is part of the investigation. Just looking for truth and facts.

I don’t remember it saying “The Developer,” either. My understanding is that the alleged purpose was not to disenfranchise voters but to make it so only Republicans could vote in a Republican primary for those specific offices, instead of letting Democrats and Independents also vote for them IN THE PRIMARY because the incumbents were running unopposed. I don’t think the men in question actually changed parties. I may be confused, but wasn’t one of them the President of the Republican Club at the time? I think there had to be Republican opposition in the primary in order to say that it was actually a Republican primary, and so closed to those not registered as Republicans. All registered voters of every party got to vote in the general election.

[Mrprez]

Originally Posted by John41

better ikissuptothemorses.com

the term is syncophant

I have no feelings one way or the other about the Morses. I like what they have created and therefore chose to live here. If I got to the point where I disliked them for whatever reason, I would leave. Why don’t you do the same?

[txfan]

Originally Posted by JoMar

I suspect that some will take their hatred of the Morse Family to their grave.

Same with the lovers, also, it would seem!

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Choro&Swing

I don’t remember it saying “The Developer,” either. My understanding is that the alleged purpose was not to disenfranchise voters but to make it so only Republicans could vote in a Republican primary for those specific offices, instead of letting Democrats and Independents also vote for them IN THE PRIMARY because the incumbents were running unopposed. I don’t think the men in question actually changed parties. I may be confused, but wasn’t one of them the President of the Republican Club at the time? I think there had to be Republican opposition in the primary in order to say that it was actually a Republican primary, and so closed to those not registered as Republicans. All registered voters of every party got to vote in the general election.

The primary was always the Republican primary. The incumbents were not running unopposed, there were Republicans running against them in the Republican primary.

When there were no other parties running in the general election (no Democrats and no Independents) then the Republican primary would ultimately be choosing the winner and so all voters could vote in that primary.

For another candidate to run in the general election they had to register as something other than Republican. All Republican candidates would have been part of the Republican primary. I believe the two candidates in question registered as Independent in order to get into the general election.

Once there were other candidates for the general election the Republican primary would not be ultimately choosing the winner. There would be at least two candidates on the general election, on Republican and one Independent, so voters would have a choice. Since there would be a choice on the general election, the Republican primary was then open to only Republican voters and not all voters.

Adding the Independent candidate on the general election closed to Republican primary to anyone not a Republican. That is when people began changing their affiliation to Republican in order to be able to vote.

It wasn't clear to me from the article who is being investigated. Is it the two candidates who changed affiliation to register for the general election, block the non-Republicans from voting in the primary, then withdrew as soon as the primary was over? Is it some group that encouraged or funded the two candidates to make this move? Could it possibly be some of the voters who changed affiliation only to be able to vote in a primary and then maybe changed back as soon as the primary was over? It will be interesting to see how all this works out.