Come Meet Candidate for Governor Bill Eigel

 

Lawfare in Missouri Politics

 

 By Gretchen Garrity

A detailed document has just been released that exposes three instances of alleged lawfare against Missouri citizens (all women) by the Secretary of State's Office.

Quoting from the document, the three instances include:

"First Scenario: If the Missouri Secretary of State seeks the criminal prosecution of a citizen
activist who previously stated in writing to the SOS that she perceived a letter from them to
her contained a “thinly veiled threat,” and, if the grounds the SOS is using for criminal
charges is based on election complaints from two members of an opposing political party,
and, if the total ‘evidence’ collected by the SOS is deficient and/or false, could this be the
weaponization of the Secretary of State’s office? What if the charges sought against the
citizen activist are the same as a 2022 complaint against a different person,2 and the
Secretary of State determined these similar charges in 2022 were “not an election
offense”?3 (This scenario begins on page 3)

 Second Scenario: If the Missouri Secretary of State coordinated with county officials to file a
lawsuit against citizens who exercised their rights for open records requests, could this be
lawfare by the Secretary of State and other elected officials against citizens? (This scenario
synopsis is on page 16)

 Third Scenario: If a citizen activist has the courage to research and collect proof of election
violations, to carry the burden of taking the fight to the courts, to sacrifice time and treasure
for the sake of securing elections, only to learn that the primary gatekeeper blocking this
case from getting into court is the chief election officer for the state, could this be lawfare by
the Secretary of State? (This scenario synopsis is on page 17)"

The first instance involves Linda Rantz, a Missouri elections activist with Cause of America, who wrote the eManual for Hand Counting. Rantz has been at the forefront of election reform, seeking to share and teach hand counting, and authored the document referenced here: "Lawfare and the Weaponization of the Missouri Secretary of State's Office."  You can access the document HERE. UPDATE: If the link does not work, try this ONE. The links keep breaking for some reason.

In Rantz' case, after she made a complaint regarding improper handling of post-election hand-counted ballots in a local Osage County election, "The County Clerk and the Secretary of State wanted to “prove or disprove the accuracy of the hand count.” For this reason, after the election, hand counted ballots were unsealed by the County Clerk, Nicci Kammerich, and the Front Desk Clerk, Brooke Dudenhoeffer, and run through a Dominion tabulator.6 This was NOT done in the presence of a bipartisan team, as required by law. 

There was also a complete recount of every ballot to ensure that the hand count teams were
“accurate,” as stated by one of the election judges who recounted the ballots.7

According to Dudenhoeffer, everything done post-election was either under the “guidance” or
“instructions” of the “Secretary of State’s Office.”

Soon after her complaint was made, Rantz received a communication from the Secretary of State's Office finding no validity to her complaint, but accusing her of lying. "Likewise, though you swore or affirmed in your complaint that the allegations you alleged were true to the best of your knowledge, a review of your complaint demonstrates they were not. I recommend you be more careful next time you file an election complaint with this office."  

According to Rantz, "Although a more ‘toned-down’ version was subsequently sent to me,12 my 40+ years of experience working for lawyers gives me an understanding of threats written in legalese.
I have many contacts in the legal and law enforcement fields. Those with whom I shared the reply
letter from the Secretary of State agreed that it was an apparent threat." 

There is much more and I recommend readers take the time to read the document. The body of the three instances runs 17 pages, with a total of 67 pages of references, links, documents, etc., to back up the alleged lawfare on the part of the Secretary of State's Office.

The second instance of alleged lawfare is almost unbelievable. Greene County Clerk, Shane Schoeller, who is currently running for Secretary of State, sued a citizen for merely making a Sunshine request for the Cast Vote Records of the 2020 election. According to the document, "Because of Sunshine Law Requests, it was revealed that the Missouri Secretary of State was involved in not only the Greene County lawsuit against a citizen, but Camden County was apparently also planning to sue one of their citizens.

An email47 from the Greene County Attorney, Austin Fax, to the Secretary of State’s attorney, Jesus
Osete, states, “We have discovered that Camden County’s software is potentially different than
Greene County’s software. So, we are going to hold off on including Camden County as a Plaintiff for
now.”

Note: Green County Attorney, Austin Fax, is also the Christian County Attorney.

The third instance of alleged lawfare on the part of the Secretary of State's Office concerns Ali Graef who has worked to expose the lack of certification of voting machines in the state. Referenced in the document is an interview that David Rice conducted with Graef:

J@y Ashcr-ft is using the SOS office to Certify Illegal Elections and Block Legal Actions to Expose Him and Others by David Rice

Missouri's Election Fraud is so deep that almost none of our recent elected officials or laws are legal and need to be thrown out of office or statute.

Read on Substack

 

 The meticulous appendix of information lays out the evidence for the alleged lawfare on the part of the Secretary of State's Office.

 

Secretary of State Jay Ashcroft is running for governor against State Senator Bill Eigel, and Mike Kehoe.

The Irony

 Lesson  #1: Make sure your kids don't go browsing the bookshelves alone while the event is happening.

Serving Up the Public

July 23, 2024 Library Board Meeting

By Gretchen Garrity

As residents continue to pressure the Christian County Library to relocate inappropriate books from the children and teen sections of the library, the staff and some members of the board of trustees continue to resist commonsense solutions.

At the July 23, 2024 board meeting, several things occurred that point to President Allyson Tuckness as a vector for at least part of the resistance. For some months now, the library has hired off-duty police officers to attend the public board meetings and to keep the peace. This has proven wise since there was a physical outburst by a citizen who had to be removed.

In an effort to keep tight control of the public meetings, Tuckness had enforced stringent rules for the public, including limiting speakers to 10, limiting speech time to three minutes, and attempting to limit audience reactions such as clapping or holding of signs. After she was roundly admonished by Rep. Jamie Gragg she has since allowed both clapping and signs, as well as sometimes allowing for more than 10 speakers:

 

Although the Missouri Public Library Trustee Manual (from the Secretary of State) states that board meetings “generally should be completed within two hours,” most Christian County library board meetings are targeted to end within one hour. They usually end on time or nearly so.

After the meeting on the 23rd, at least 12 or more citizens remained talking in the parking lot in small groups. The meeting ended a little later than usual, about 7:08 p.m. Distributed among those groups were current board of trustee members, as well as a citizen who is a constitutional coach with a nationally known organization.

At one point the security officer approached the citizens and requested they disperse. Citizens resisted and were told the library parking lot was private property. After assuring the officer the parking lot was public property the officer stepped away to consult a supervisor, only later to come back and again assert that because it was now a closed business, citizens were being asked to disperse and that it “was a little suspicious.”

“My sergeant said, ‘Yes it is a government building, but it is closed at this time, and that the president requested to disperse,'” the officer stated. So, Library Board President Allyson Tuckness was behind the manipulation of public peace officers to remove citizens from a taxpayer-funded library property.

After no less than three police cars converged in the Nixa library parking lot and conferred with citizens, it was agreed that all were peacefully assembling and had a right to be present in the parking lot, regardless of the time and the wishes of the library board president.

This kind of behavior on the part of the library board president is unacceptable. To get an idea of how she treats the public, watch July’s meeting as Tuckness refuses to allow board member Echo Alexzander to address allowing more than 10 citizens to comment. Her excuse was that the issue was not on the agenda. Later, she interacts with a citizen who had noted that the timekeeper, Tory Pegram, was starting the timer late with certain citizens, allowing them more time to speak. Forward to the public comment section at about 36:00 minutes. Tuckness specifically mentions “no raising of voices.” Watch her raise her voice when a speaker asks to reclaim time on the clock that had apparently been running while the board took pictures of one speaker’s sign. Timestamp: 43:42. 

To a great extent, the friction between the public and the library board and staff is due to an ongoing refusal to address concerns and to disrespect the public by ignoring questions and pleas about child safety within the library. Having made child safety a political issue, the board and staff are now having to deal with a growing number of citizens who insist the library must address relocating inappropriate books to the adult section, where parents may decide for themselves if they want their children exposed to them.

Board President Tuckness is politically motivated enough to sic the police on citizens, including other board members with whom she may disagree. It is to the police officers’ credit that they ultimately refused to go along with her dictate.

NOTE: This article is cross posted at Hick Christian's Substack.

Whaley to Join Alex Bryant tomorrow morning

 

From: Wake up Springfield

 Candidate for representative of the 138th district, Burt Whaley, will be Alex Bryant's guest at 6:45 a.m. on 93.3 FM radio tomorrow morning. Listen live HERE.

They Just Keep Doing It

 At Tuesday night's Christian County Library Board of Trustees meeting, it was revealed that the library continues to promote sexually explicit books to minors. David Rice has a stellar article about it. Read it HERE.

The Library Bill of Rights is for Sexualizing Children by David Rice

Protecting Innocence: How Library Policies and Court Decisions Expose Children to Harmful Content, Undermining Parental Rights

Read on Substack

Meeting tonight in Nixa

 

Burt Whaley: 100% Pro-life

 

The 138th District. From: Ballotpedia

 

By Gretchen Garrity

 “Before I formed you in the womb, I knew you..." Jeremiah 1:5

There is a significant difference between Missouri Representative candidates for the 138th District, Burt Whaley and Tom Franiak. 

Vying for Rep. Brad Hudson's seat, who is running for the state senate, the two candidates have both been endorsed by the Missouri Right to Life, even though Franiak is willing to compromise on the "Morning After Pill" aka the "Plan B" pill.

At a February 13, 2024 meeting of the Christian County Missouri Republican Assembly, Tom Franiak was asked about his pro-life views.

Question: "...but you are pro-life, correct?"

Franiak: "Yes, sir."

Question: "Life begins at conception, correct?"

Franiak: "Yes."

Question: "But you also said you were alright with the abortion pill?"

Franiak: "You know we cannot detect when life begins, right?"

Question/Statement: "Life begins at conception."

Tom Franiak

Franiak: "It begins at conception, yes, for my religion. But there is no way to detect it medically so I will be very transparent here and say if Missouri was to pass a Morning After Pill I don't see it being much different than any other contraceptive, because we cannot detect a heartbeat. We cannot tell whether the cell has been divided, um, I believe that in order to be a great legislator you're going to have compromise. I can plant my feet in the ground and I can say absolutely no compromise, but we'll never win that battle. The liberals will come after you every time. So, in order to be a great legislator in Jeff City you're going to have to be open to some compromise. But one thing I will do is stand up here and tell you exactly where I will compromise and that's one of them. But once we can hear a heartbeat it's off...so if we have to compromise it would be the Morning After Pill, and that's the only place I would compromise."

Months later at a July 16, 2024 meeting/town hall candidate event hosted by the Christian County Republican Central Committee, a question was asked about determining whether or not the Morning After Pill could result in abortion as opposed to preventing a pregnancy since there is a question about when and whether conception has taken place.

Franiak explained that there are two kinds of pills that accomplish the end of a pregnancy, one being an over-the-counter pill that is a high dose of a contraceptive drug, while the other pill is a prescription chemical abortifacient. At one point he called the OTC pill an "extreme" dose of contraception. Franiak went on to say that conception doesn't happen for at least five days and up to two weeks after sexual contact. He argued in favor of the OTC pill because there is no harm to a fetus. 

Burt Whaley

Contrast Franiak's position with that of Burt Whaley, who taught biology during his career as an educator. Whaley answered the question by explaining the issues involved when life begins. "Now let's define conception. In most cases, conception occurs within the first 12 to 24 hours. There are rare situations where it has taken longer. We can detect life in the second--in two-and-a-half weeks. We can actually view a sonogram to determine that there is a...gestational sack...You can determine that within two-and-a-half to three weeks. So for that structure to occur you have to have multi-cellular process occurring early. So you're talking about a zygote starting within the first few days. That zygote then forming and moving down the fallopian tube and starting to form the gestational sack. How can we, how can we create legislation that takes the life of a growing baby? Whose says the baby...when does the baby start? At conception. The starting process of the multicellular division. How can we create any legislation that determines that we're going to destroy that cell, or that multicellular structure--which I call a baby. If we call it a baby--that's what God calls it. He says in Jeremiah 1:5, "Before you were formed in your mother's womb I knew you." How can we make any other legislation that would violate that essential principle? I can't, and I won't."

According to Missouri Right to Life:

"Missouri Right to Life acknowledges the scientific reality that for humans produced by fertilization, the life of a human being begins at conception.¹ Therefore, all drugs or devices that are intended to prevent implantation after conception occurs, or in any other way destroy human life, cause abortions. They are abortifacients. Some drugs, such as the so-called “morning after” pills (“Plan B”) do not act as abortifacients in every instance. Plan B in some instances prevents conception. If conception occurs despite taking Plan B, however, Plan B prevents implantation, and as a result, the new human being cannot obtain nutrition and dies. Because of this feature of Plan B, one never knows when it will act as an abortifacient. Anything that may act as an abortifacient at any time is wrong to use. Just like Russian roulette, it may kill at any time. Therefore, Missouri Right to Life opposes “Plan B” and any other drugs that may act like it."

This is the stated position of Missouri Right to Life. How then, have they endorsed both candidates for state representative in the 138th district? One adheres perfectly to MRL's stated position, the other is willing to compromise.

@right2winozarks #christiancountymo #2024election #prolife4life #prolifetiktok #prolifegeneration #candidate #shockingvideos #election #missouri ♬ original sound - Right2WinOzarks

Candidate for Governor Bill Eigel Meet & Greet in Ozark

 

MO Liberty Radio: First-hour Guest is Burt Whaley

 

Sam Britton's Off the Cuff radio show will be live tonight at 6 p.m. His guest in the first hour is Burt Whaley, state representative candidate for the 138th district. Get to know Burt HERE and HERE.

In Case You Missed It