The RNC document look like the documents shown in the http://www.canadafreepress.com/2009/williams091209.htm Article with the constitutional requirements statement included. The RNC lookssimilar except for the date received stamp is different and it has the name of receiver. The State of Texas replaces the State of Tennessee and their are different witnesses which include the Republican Party of Texas.
The DNC document looks like the one shown for DNC in the above Article without the Constitutional statement. Unlike the RNC document it doesn't have a received signature or acknowledgment of the date or time received, and it was missing the Constitutional statement:
I will be checking to find out why the DNC document didn't have receiver signature and date received stamp as did the RNC document.... and I quote;
"- and that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution."
The DNC document is apparently not State specific, while the RNC document identifies each specific state.
For some reason The State chose not to provide the same documents from 2004 as requested. They also did not provide the documents from other parties that filed as was requested.
The DNC in 2008 didn't certify their candidates meet Constitutional requirements to the State of Texas, and apparantly they were aware the Candidates didn't meet the Constitutional Requirement. From the above article, there is an identical document signed, witnessed, and notarized by identical people with the Constitutional Provision included.
If you have additional information please provide.
Update1
No comments:
Post a Comment