Vermont's Independent Voice
Browse News
Browse Arts + Culture
Browse Food + Drink
Browse Cannabis
Browse Music
Browse On Screen
Browse Events
Browse Classifieds
Browse Personals
Mary Richter
Member since Aug 7, 2016
Recent Comments
Re: “Vermont GOP Asks Lisman to Prove or Withdraw Accusations Against Scott”
Part 1The Vermont Republican Party's press release slamming Bruce Lisman for protesting the deceitful phone calls defaming him and steering his supporters to vote on the wrong day is every bit the equivalent of the election rigging that the Democratic National Committee did in order to pull the rug out from under Bernie Sanders.
Have they asked Phil Scott about it? I am one of the voters that received that phone call. I offered the Scott campaign a way to find out the phone number that made that call to my house for the price of the subpoena that it would take to get it. They declined.
You see, I called my land line provider to ask if they retain a list of the phone numbers that call my phone number and explained why it is of great interest. The representative that I spoke to did not know for sure but she did know that it would take a subpoena and must be done in my name. I told her that if the interested parties wanted to pay for the subpoena I would cooperate with them to get the phone numbers. She said to call back if I wanted to go ahead and she would put me in touch with their legal department so that I can find out in advance of obtaining the subpoena if that information is stored.
Posted by
Mary Richter
on 08/07/2016 at 2:40 AM
Re: “Seven Reasons Why Vermont's Next Governor Matters”
Part 3 The Vermont Republican Party encourages everyone including elected officials, members of the administration, candidates and voters to demand proof for any such claim, and then goes on to strongly condemn the Lisman campaign for making accusations of voter suppression with no basis in evidence before being publicly made. I could not believe what I was reading. Hello??? What am I if not a witness? And I am not alone.
Another point that I think they hope you will miss is that the beauty, if you will allow the term, of an 11th hour dirty trick is that there may not be time to determine exactly who did what before election day. Maybe all Bruce Lisman can do at this late date is howl in protest. Maybe that was the whole idea behind the timing of these calls. Surely the Vermont Republican Party knows that but the way their email reads it looks like they hope that it will not occur to you.
I find it very troubling that instead of initiating one holy war of an investigation to nail down who is responsible, the Vermont Republican Party calls on the Lisman campaign to retract their accusations. With less evidence than Lisman has, since Lisman does have witnesses, the Vermont Republican Party's rush to judgement is that someone from within the Lisman campaign organization is responsible for making unsubstantiated claims. That's outrageous. If that is not election rigging then I don't know what is which raises concern that the Vermont Republican Party might be behind the whole thing since they are clearly in the tank for Phil Scott.
The Vermont Republican Party has a pet rock and it's name is Phil Scott. Bruce Lisman is right. It's time for a change.
Posted by
Mary Richter
on 08/07/2016 at 2:31 AM
Re: “Seven Reasons Why Vermont's Next Governor Matters”
Part 2 You can read the conversation that I had with "Phil Scott for Vermont" on my facebook page. In a nutshell, when presented with a way to shine the bright light of day on this matter "Phil Scott for Vermont" declined. No light wanted apparently. Then they accused me of some linkage to the Lisman campaign, and threatened me with state and federal law enforcement authorities. Nor did they respond to my questions "Why would Lisman sponsor defamatory calls about Lisman?" and "Why would Lisman sponsor calls that end by steering Lisman supporters to vote on the wrong day?" Here's a better question. How dumb does Phil Scott think Vermonters are?
The "Phil Scott for Vermont" campaign response to me does not pass the stink test. But I am equally concerned about the behavior of the Vermont Republican Party. In their press release they encourage a complete investigation into the source of the calls but they didn't walk that walk. Despite the fact that my name has been out there for days as one of the people that received the problem call I have not heard from them or anyone representing them to clarify any point about a bogus 11th hour phone call defaming one of the two Republican candidates for Governor and attempting to create confusion about what day is election day. If they had I would have asked them to foot the bill for the subpoena.
Posted by
Mary Richter
on 08/07/2016 at 2:31 AM
Re: “Seven Reasons Why Vermont's Next Governor Matters”
Part 1 The Vermont Republican Party's press release slamming Bruce Lisman for protesting the deceitful phone calls defaming him and steering his supporters to vote on the wrong day is every bit the equivalent of the election rigging that the Democratic National Committee did in order to pull the rug out from under Bernie Sanders.
Have they asked Phil Scott about it? I am one of the voters that received that phone call. I offered the Scott campaign a way to find out the phone number that made that call to my house for the price of the subpoena that it would take to get it. They declined.
You see, I called my land line provider to ask if they retain a list of the phone numbers that call my phone number and explained why it is of great interest. The representative that I spoke to did not know for sure but she did know that it would take a subpoena and must be done in my name. I told her that if the interested parties wanted to pay for the subpoena I would cooperate with them to get the phone numbers. She said to call back if I wanted to go ahead and she would put me in touch with their legal department so that I can find out in advance of obtaining the subpoena if that information is stored.
Posted by
Mary Richter
on 08/07/2016 at 2:30 AM
Re: “Old Dog, New Trick: Vermont Wields Enhanced Animal Cruelty Law”
The only innocent victim here was the dog whose owners ignore the leash law assuming their dog miraculously knows where their property line is and whose neighbor took a shot at it rather than communicate. This case just illustrates why it can be a tough world to be a dog.
As an old 4-H'er, I was taught to respect the law, and to keep my animals on my own property. Of course it goes to keeping the animal safe from harm and being a good neighbor, but it can go well beyond that too. If your loose animal causes an accident you are liable for damages a driver's responsibility is always to human life first.
Case in point. One person was killed and another injured when their vehicle struck and killed a bull on Route 4 in Killington, VT at approximately 35 to 40 MPH after which the vehicle veered into a tree. The owner of the bull was charged with involuntary manslaughter and could face 15 years in prison because he failed to rectify inadequate fencing even though his bull was a frequent escapee. It was that failure to address an ongoing hazard to the public that elevated the bull owner's liability beyond financial damages to serious criminal negligence as far as the prosecutor was concerned.
Although the owner wasn't arrested they now have a record of bad judgement and ignoring the law. If they ever have another dust up over failing to take proper care of their animal the authorities have every right to consider their history.