Today’s Facebook bulletins from McDaniel suggest that he’s not aware it’s over

He posted this on Facebook today:

“Rise up, warriors, take your stand at one another’s sides, our feet set wide and rooted like oaks in the ground.”

— Tyrtaeus of Sparta

More about Tryrtaeus here.  He did not present ideals that involved knowing when to fold ’em.  One of his (well, his if he was a real person) big themes also seems a little off here:  Support of the state (Spartan) authorities in their struggles.

This, also posted on Facebook, also suggests the fight, such as it is, will go on:

“This is the lesson: never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never—in nothing, great or small, large or petty—never give in except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy.”

— Winston Churchill

Whoever is doing the Facebook feed also posted this:

“…Let us use this court decision to motivate us, not to sadden us. Today we must begin an important transition, to return our party to its conservative principles. It was the Party of Reagan. It can be again. 

This party belongs to us and it’s time to reclaim it for true conservatives.

Let our battle cry be: WE ARE ALL McDANIEL REPUBLICANS NOW!”

#remembermississippi

I don’t see how he can post this stuff and not appeal.  Other thoughts?

Joyce Freeland’s reaction:  His staff is saying, “Drink the Kool-aid” (well, Flavor-Aid, as the Kool-Aid people would insistently remind you).

Funny. Most of McDaniel real objections were technicalities about absentee votes, but he’s disappointed he lost on a technicality

Alternate title:  Chris McDaniel acknowledges he does not always understand.  I hated picking between these.

Here is the statement from Chris McDaniel about the dismissal of his case, from his Facebook page:

I am very disappointed to hear Judge McGehee granted Senator Cochran’s Motion to Dismiss on a technical filing issue, instead of hearing the case on its merits. 

Nevertheless, I trust that God has a plan. We may not always understand, but all will be revealed in time. Although we do not yet have our justice, my prayer is that God’s will be done. I likewise pray for all involved (including those who wronged us). 

In the coming days, I will keep you informed on our options. 

Standing and fighting for you and our principles has been the honor of my life. I am grateful for your support and proud to call you my friends.

 

A hearing on the Cochran motion to dismiss, and the Cochran reply brief

Following #mssen on Twitter produces a lot of live-tweeting from the hearing on motions in the Senate election contest.  The judge gets the quote of the day; with McDaniel’s lawyer arguing that the secretary of state had opined that there was no deadline for filing a state election contest, the Court asked:

McGehee: point me to that authority that says the court should do what Mr. Hosemann thinks, his opinion

The judge stated that he was going to wait to rule on the subpoenas because it would be unfair to do so without hearing from the circuit clerks (someone on Twitter noted the unaccountable absence of “Circuit Clerks for McDaniel” bumper stickers).  He also said that he will try to get an opinion deciding the motion to dismiss done by tomorrow.

Meanwhile, YallPolitics has the Cochran reply brief on their motion to dismiss.  It basically is designed to lock down the arguments already made, and really doesn’t leave much that McDaniel said unanswered.

McDaniel’s subpoenas as a Potemkin Village: More evidence that the McDaniel Election Challenge is Just Pretend

A Potemkin Village is a pretend peasant village built for the entertainment of royalty.  It is pretty clear to me that McDaniel’s election challenge is about… entertaining isn’t the right word.  Pleasing.  Pleasing his constituancy.  He’s going to say he tried everything and got beat on unfair injustice and technicalities.  Send money and prepare to continue the good fight.

The subpoenas of the circuit clerks are all that and more.

Rule 45 of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure governs supboenas.  In the last day or so, the McDaniel campaign has faxed subpoenas to 46 circuit clerks demanding they bring documents to Jones County on two or three days notice, as described in my prior post.  I’m concluding that the subpoenas were faxed because that’s how the Circuit Clerk of Lafayette County got her subpoena.  Here’s what Rule 45 says about subpoenas:

(b) Place of Examination. A resident of the State of Mississippi may be required to attend a deposition, production or inspection only in the county wherein he resides or is employed or transacts his business in person, or at such other convenient place as is fixed by an order of the court.

Well, I think we can all assume that, for three subpoenas reported on the internet (Hinds, Lafayette, and Oktibeha), the clerk under subpoana does not live in Jones County, where they were required to deliver the documents.  There has been no order reported stating an “other convenient place,” and, frankly, I’d be shocked if the court entered such an order.  Presumably, an effort to obtain such an order would be met by Cochran’s lawyers with arguments noted in my prior post.

(c) (1) A subpoena may be served by a sheriff, or by his deputy, or by any other person who is not a party and is not less than 18 years of age, and his return endorsed thereon shall be prima facie proof of service, or the person served may acknowledge service in writing on the subpoena. Service of the subpoena shall be executed upon the witness personally.

To be blunt, personal service means you hand it to the person.  And someone has to swear that was done.  Sending in a fax:  Not personal service.

 [T]he party causing the subpoena to issue shall tender to a non-party witness at the time of service the fee for one day’s attendance plus mileage allowed by law.

I’m not sure how you fax a check for the witness fee.  I’ve always handed it over with the subpoena (well, had my process server hand it over much of the time, and sometimes handed it myself).  Maybe I’m not creative enough to see other ways of doing it.

By this point, I think it could be clear that someone receiving a document subpoena to go to a county some miles distant, with no personal service and no witness fee, can pretty much say, “Oh, that’s not a subpoena, it’s one of those spam faxes, like the ones offering us a Bahamas cruise on a discount.  We don’t have to do anything about that,” and toss it in the circular file.

(2) Proof of service shall be made by filing with the clerk of the court from which the subpoena was issued a statement, certified by the person who made the service, setting forth the date and manner of service, the county in which it was served, the names of the persons served, and the name, address and telephone number of the person making the service.

Right.

(A) A person commanded to produce and permit inspection and copying of designated books, papers, documents or tangible things, or to permit inspection of premises need not appear in person at the place of production or inspection unless commanded by the subpoena to appear for deposition, hearing or trial. Unless for good cause shown the court shortens the time, a subpoena for production or inspection shall allow not less than ten days for the person upon whom it is served to comply with the subpoena.

I think we would have all heard reports of the throw-down that would have occurred if there was an attempt by McDaniel to shorten the ten day period.  To two days.

(f) Sanctions. On motion of a party or of the person upon whom a subpoena for the production of books, papers, documents, or tangible things is served and upon a showing that the subpoena power is being exercised in bad faith or in such manner as unreasonably to annoy, embarrass, or oppress the party or the person upon whom the subpoena is served, the court in which the action is pending shall order that the subpoena be quashed and may enter such further orders as justice may require to curb abuses of the powers granted under this rule. To this end, the court may impose an appropriate sanction.

I’m thinking sanctions here.