So, as I showed in my first post about Jan Schmidt blocking me on Facebook, I had sent an email to her:
From: “Skip” <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
To: Jan.Schmidt@leg.state.nh.us
Sent: 6/14/2019 3:29:53 PM
Subject: Facebook blockage
Ms. Schmidt,
Give the precedent set by Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald in ruling that President Trump cannot block Twitter users from his feed given the First Amendment, and that you have blocke me on Facebook, I, too, should no longer be banned from your Facebook feed.
Both Twitter and Facebook are “designated public forums”, both you and President Trump are elected officials. The electorate can interact with their Representatives (even if they never vote for them) but only if they have access to their account actions.
Thus, given this ruling last year that ensures that the entire electorate should and must have access in “public forms” to elected officials, I expect to be returned to your Facebook feed in its entirety.
Kindest regard,
– Skip
GraniteGrok.com
Well, is this part of the Left vs Right divide? Progressive animus towards Conservative / TEA Party types? Or that she hasn’t been thrilled that GraniteGrok has truthfully been reporting on her and a lot of her Progressive BFFs that believe that the Proper Role of Government is to social engineer the rest of us. In any case, we ended up in a bit of a back and forth:
From: “Representative Jan Schmidt” < tesha4@gmail.com>
To: “Skip” < Skip@granitegrok.com>
Sent: 6/14/2019 6:48:01 PM
Subject: Re: Facebook blockage
Dear Sir,
I don’t have you blocked on Twitter, and you are not a constituent, and there are multiple avenues to reach me as this email shows. If you will send me you mailing address I will have my lawyer contact you on this matter.
Regards,
Representative Jan Schmidt
Nashua Delegation Chair
At Home: Tesha4@gmail.com
11 Pope Circle, Nashua NH 03063
Hillsborough District 28, Ward 1 Nashua
In Concord: Jan.Schmidt@leg.state.nh.us
NH House of Representatives
Labor, Industrial, and Rehabilitative Services Committee
Room 307 Legislative Office Building
Well, it seems that she decided to go the Deflection route as it was clear I had said that she had blocked me on Facebook. And frankly, she can just as easily send her lawyer my email address – it’s in this email thread and it is public knowledge on GraniteGrok.
From: “Skip” <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
To: “Representative Jan Schmidt” <tesha4@gmail.com>
Sent: 6/14/2019 7:23:32 PM
Subject: Re[2]: Facebook blockage
Jan,
I didn’t say Twitter – I said Facebook. Given that you are a NH State Rep and I am a NH State resident, you are a member of my NH House of Representatives and I should be able to approach you just as I can another other NH State Rep, Senator, Executive Councilor, or Governor.
Email is not where you are discussing the issues – you are on Facebook but you have blocked me there contra that Federal court decision.
– Skip
GraniteGrok.com
Strictly speaking, I’m not a voter of her’s but her votes in the NH House affect me just like a NH State Senator’s vote from a District other than mine affects my family as well. It seems that she wishes to have the right to not allow anyone that is not from her district to see / read / hear what she is saying politically. After all, isn’t it the Progressive thoughtline of “intersectionality” that holds that everything is connected to another? Thus, what she does, how she legislates, and how she votes is connected to me. So shouldn’t that fact alone allow any NH State voter access to those communications? Does this mean that she is oppressing me from her position of power?
And I alluded to the next thing:
From: “Skip” <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
To: “Representative Jan Schmidt” <tesha4@gmail.com>
Sent: 6/14/2019 7:59:45 PM
Subject: Re[2]: Facebook blockage
Jan,
>> If you will send me you mailing address I will have my lawyer contact you on this matter.
By all means, I think you should be talking to your lawyer.
– Skip
GraniteGrok.com
She really should be but we’ll leave that for later. And she continues to make it clear she is deliberately avoiding the point:
From: “Jan Schmidt” <tesha4@gmail.com>
To: “Skip” <Skip@granitegrok.com>
Sent: 6/15/2019 8:40:58 AM
Subject: Re: Facebook blockage
You have unfettered access to me, directly.Twitter and email – the Supreme Court rulling has nothting to do with this.
My constituents are the people of Ward 1 Nashua.
Jan Schmidt
tesha4@gmail.com
So, I have unfettered access? Let’s see how far that extends:
From: “Skip” <Skip@GraniteGrok.com>
To: “Jan Schmidt” <tesha4@gmail.com>
Sent: 6/15/2019 10:05:42 AM
Subject: Re[2]: Facebook blockage
I have said nothing about Twitter (which I don’t use) other than the Federal Court ruled that as an elected official, President Trump could not block people from seeing his feed(s).
If you are willing to email me EVERYTHING that you are putting into the Nashua Politics Facebook group, then fine. Otherwise, under the Federal Court precedent on elected officials blocking people in public forums, please remove your block from me.
As an elected NH State Representative, you represent not only those that voted for you but all NH State Citizens. Of which I am one, because the decisions you make in the NH House of Representatives affects me and my family.
Have you lawyered up yet (my second post concerning your other action)? Or does someone have to go to GraniteGrok and read it to you? If so, I would be most accommodating to do so over the phone.
– Skip
GraniteGrok.com
To that “someone have to go to GraniteGrok and read it to you?” bit – I have been told that she won’t go to GraniteGrok and that someone else has to relay what is going on. So, being the gentle soul that I am, I simply made the offer to cut out the middleman and do it directly.
Yeah, no answer back on that as of yet. But I do have another question for Jan:
If I am not a constituent because I can’t vote for her in her town, then why is it that her vote in the NH State House applies to my town?
By her reasoning, should it not? Again, her words, not mine. Her discussions allow everyone Statewide to understand her core principles and her core reasonings that lead to her votes that affect us all. It would be one thing if she didn’t participate but she does. To keep some in the light and others in the dark is discrimination, straight up. Is that how the rest of us should view her? Is that how she wishes to be perceived? Someone that discriminates? I thought the Left had plenty of words that describe that state of mind and soul – none of them very complementary. But here we are.
SI have heard from various Reps that they do give a higher priority to those emails they receive in-District over those out-of-District. But here, this isn’t about sheer number of unsolicited emails (and I know from “volume” of email!) – this is about access to elected officials that have a material effect on all of us based on their actions and votes. She puts herself out there in the Nashua Politics group (I can tell as people are still responding to her comments although I cannot see them) and elsewhere voluntarily – so it is clear she wants those views out there.
Who else has had her political thoughts shut off?
