Loomer Unleashed - November 11, 2018


Lawyer For Democrat Party of Florida "Destroying Ballots Isn't FRAUD-CORRUPTION"


Episode Stats

Length

2 minutes

Words per Minute

188.78049

Word Count

387

Sentence Count

33

Misogynist Sentences

3


Summary

A judge ruled that Brenda Snipes destroyed ballots in the race between W.A. Wasserman Schultz and Tim Canova. Leonard Samuels, a lawyer for the Florida Democratic Party, says there's no evidence of fraud or corruption.


Transcript

00:00:15.000 Might if I ask you a couple of questions?
00:00:16.000 We're on a live stream.
00:00:17.000 There's 2,000 people watching.
00:00:18.000 So you said your name is?
00:00:20.000 Leonard Samuels, counsel for the Florida Democratic Party.
00:00:24.000 So given your own personal opinion, and as a lawyer, of course, do you think that it's appropriate for Brenda Snipes to be overseeing this, given the fact that a judge ruled that she already destroyed ballots in the race between W. Wasserman Schultz and Tim Canova?
00:00:36.000 I mean, doesn't that seem a little unethical for her to be overseeing this?
00:00:39.000 Of course she should oversee it.
00:00:41.000 She was appointed by a Republican governor, Governor Jeb Bush.
00:00:44.000 She's been re-elected several times by the voters of Broward County.
00:00:47.000 He made that having all the information possible on the ballot.
00:00:50.000 There's been not one iota of fraud.
00:00:53.000 There's been not one iota of corruption.
00:00:55.000 There has, though.
00:00:56.000 The judge ruled that she destroyed ballots in the race between W. Wasserman Schultz and Tim Canova.
00:01:01.000 So how can you say that there's not any sharp evidence for corruption when she destroys ballots?
00:01:05.000 I mean, if you are an election supervisor, shouldn't destroying ballots be an automatic disqualification for you to oversee an election?
00:01:11.000 I don't qualify that as fraud or corruption.
00:01:13.000 You don't qualify destroying ballots, legitimate ballots, as fraud or corruption?
00:01:18.000 It was way, way after the election.
00:01:20.000 W. Wasserman Schultz won that election.
00:01:24.000 You're a lawyer for the Democrat Party?
00:01:26.000 I do not believe right now in this process here today there has been any evidence of fraud or corruption.
00:01:32.000 No, but I'm not talking about that.
00:01:33.000 My question was, should she or should she not be overseeing this given her record of corruption and destroying ballots?
00:01:40.000 I don't agree with the premise of the corporate.
00:01:42.000 You're a lawyer.
00:01:43.000 You're saying that there's no corruption or fraud to destroy ballots.
00:01:46.000 That is the definition of corruption and fraud when you're destroying ballots.
00:01:49.000 I don't agree with you.
00:01:50.000 You're saying there's been no evidence of any fraud or corruption.
00:01:53.000 The judge in Florida ruled that she destroyed ballots.
00:01:55.000 Can we do an interview?
00:01:56.000 Thank you.
00:01:57.000 Yeah, I'm doing an interview too.
00:01:58.000 I don't know if you think you're like more important than me or something.
00:02:00.000 He's finished.
00:02:01.000 Thank you.
00:02:01.000 I appreciate it.
00:02:02.000 I'm done, man.