Ringgold, GA — On Tuesday, primary voters in Catoosa County voted 77% in favor of having the local Republican Party organization protect the Republican Primary ballot from undercover Democrat candidates.
The question read: “Do you believe that anyone, even closet Democrats, should be able to run on the Republican primary ballots?”
76.82% of Republican voters said, “No.”
This comes after the Catoosa GOP attempted to deny specific commission candidates a place on the primary ballot who had a track record of imposing anti-Republican policies.
In case there was any confusion, Catoosa voters made it abundantly clear when a whopping 85%, 87% and 89% answered “yes” to the following:
11. “Do you want the Republican Party to ensure our candidates for office are for gun rights?”
12. “Do you want the Republican Party to ensure our candidates for office are for lower taxes?”
13. “Do you want the Republican Party to ensure our candidates for office are pro-life?”
Ballot questions like these are non-binding surveys but are used by local and state parties to guage what Republican voters (who never attend party meetings or events) actually think about the issues. Ballot questions are valuable because the results help guide the party, and inform Republican politicians what their constituents want and believe.
“I don’t pay too much attention to local politics, unfortunately, and that’s why I really appreciate the local GOP keeping these people accountable and ensuring that only true Republicans are actually on the ballot,” said Joseph Cochran, a GenX Catoosa voter.
While the Establishment and leftist media suggest that Catoosa GOP’s volunteer leadership team is a radical fringe group who are out of touch with everyday Republican voters, and that primary voters want to do their own personal vetting of all candidates’ ideology, this data proves that three out of four Republican voters in Catoosa county actually want the Republican Party to vet candidates before they are allowed on the Republican ballot.
Alex Johnson
“What I noticed from reading the answers to the ballot questions,” said GRA Chairman & attorney Alex Johnson, “is that over 76% of Catoosa County Republican voters don’t want anyone who wants to, to be able to run on the Republican Primary ballot, and over 84% of them want the party to ensure candidates are for lower taxes, gun rights, and Prolife.”
They want someone from the party ensuring a candidate meets a minimum standard. They don’t think their selection in the voting booth on primary Election Day is where the Democrats should get eliminated. They want that to occur earlier. They want to walk into the voting booth on primary Election Day and feel confident that they are choosing between two or more people who hold at least a base-level adherence to core Republican ideology.
You might say, they want the Republican party to pre-qualify the options as being “non-Democrat” before that candidate’s name ever appears on the ballot as an option. Lucky for Catoosa voters, this process already exists and it is called “candidate qualification.” This is the process by which the Republican Party serves Republican voters by eliminating rotten apples before dishing up the options to the voters. They file the paperwork with the county and the names of whichever candidates they “qualified” as Republicans.
But this process has been circumvented by the Catoosa Board of Elections and the question continues to be litigated in court.
Catoosa GOP has received significant criticism of their efforts to block specific county commission candidates from the primary ballot when those candidates had a history of supporting anti-Republican policy. For two years the argument was that any person has a right to run and have their name appear on the Republican primary ballot, no matter what they believe, no matter what kind of public record they have, as long as they pay the qualifying fee, and sign their name on the loyalty oath to the party. But in an appalling act of government coercion this year, the Catoosa Board of Elections didn’t even allow the Catoosa GOP to disqualify someone who failed to sign the loyalty oath!
The bottom line is that tests, interviews, and auditions only frighten away weak performers … or fakes. Real Republicans who believe in limited government, low taxes, family values, the right to bear arms, etc., are not scared to sit down and talk about what they believe and are not daunted by a pass or fail examination of their record on public policy. Differences of opinion and approach to public policy exist within the party, and are not disqualifiers, so long as those differences remain within the parameters of base-level Republicanism.
The political class counts on low turnout. Don’t give them what they want.
Does the Republican Party exist to serve politicians and get them elected? Or does it exist to serve the people?
The Republican Party exists to enact its principled and conservative platform, which serves the people. The paid political industry/Establishment want the party to be weak and to not serve the public. All actions should be taken toward the goal of getting the platform enacted.
The political industry has one favorite voter: the voter who stays home.
They love the exhausted voter. They love the confused voter. They love the voter who says, “I’ll get to it next time.”
Because when regular people stop voting, the paid political industry: consultants, lobbyists, bureaucrats, PACs, and career politicians, they do not stop working or getting paid. They just get a smaller group of people to decide more power for everyone else.
That is why the message is simple:
Go vote. Bring someone with you. Vote like the Democrats and Republican establishment are counting on you to forget.
Georgia’s May 19, 2026 Primary is not a boring election. It includes major statewide races, congressional races, and statewide judicial races.
And yes: please vote in the judicial races.
Normally, I am rightly skeptical of incumbents. Incumbency is the political class’s favorite shield. But the statewide judicial races are different this election cycle. In these races, the statewide judicial incumbents have done the far better job and need to be supported.
As an attorney, I can attest that bad appellate judges can cause a lot of harm.
The statewide judicial seats up this cycle include Georgia Supreme Court seats held by Sarah Hawkins Warren and Charlie Bethel, along with Court of Appeals seats held by Trenton Brown and Elizabeth Gobeil.
Do not skip those races. Do not leave them blank. The election for them is happening now and ends on Tuesday. Judicial races matter because courts decide whether written law means what it says, and whether constitutional rights are protected.
Then, for Republicans who want to send a clear message in the partisan races, support the GRA-endorsed candidates. The Georgia Republican Assembly’s 2026 endorsement list includes the following statewide and congressional endorsements and was decided by actual volunteer activists who are more immune to the effects of candidates trying to buy the election with millions of dollars of ads. …
This week the attorney for Harvey Wysong and Brandyn Jamesfiled an appeal to overturn the decision of the Fulton Judge who denied the Writ of Mandamus to block Raffensperger from the Republican Primary ballot.
The appeal was filed immediately after the Fulton Judge Belinda Edwards finally produced a written opinion justifying her decision. The opinion she filed was virtually a cut-and-paste of text submitted by Raffensperger’s lawyers. But it took her over a week to approve it.
The hearing, which was held on Friday, April 24th, was broadcast on a Zoom Call, with many watching, but the Judge forbade anyone from recording the hearing. Garland Favorito with VoterGA said that he was working to acquire a transcript of the hearing. The judge listened to both sides present their arguments at the hearing, but then denied the writ without providing any explanation for her decision. She asked counsel for Harvey and Brandyn why the GA GOP was not a party to the hearing, but at this point the GA GOP does not have the power to remove Raffensperger from the primary ballot, which is the remedy that Harvey and Brandyn are seeking.
“This legal action is about protecting the interests of all Georgia voters,” said attorney Medoff. “When my fellow Georgians and I go to the polls, we deserve to know whether that ‘R’ or ‘D’ next to our chosen candidate’s name means something or not. If Raffensperger is allowed to run as a Republican against the wishes of the majority of the party, the party designation is meaningless.”
In the brief, Medoff addressed the nub of the issue:
“In June of 2025, the Georgia Republican Party (the ‘GRP’) convened to hold the Georgia Republican Party 2025 State Convention. During the convention, the delegates of the GRP voted overwhelmingly in favor of a resolution to deny Brad Raffensperger from qualifying as a candidate in any future Republican primary in the State of Georgia. (Ex. B, p. 12). Under the GRP rules, the resolution was binding. (Ex. B, p. 4).”
Now the controversy will be taken up before the nine-judge panel of the Georgia State Supreme Court. One of the Justices has hinted at his view on the U.S. Constitution’s 1st Amendment “right to freedom of association” and its relationship with Georgia statutory code in a case related to the Catoosa GOP’s effort to block RINO incumbent commissioners from prequalifying, but so far the court as a whole has not weighed in on the merits of the constitutional issue. However, the federal 11th Circuit Court last summer made it unequivocally clear in their decision that the state law cannot “burden” the federally-protected right of “freedom of association” that political parties have as private entities.
Harvey and Brandyn have bravely taken the initiative to try and preserve the integrity of the GOP, but they can’t do it alone. They need the support of their fellow delegates. They need you.
If every delegate who voted to block Brad Raffensperger could pitch in just $10 it would likely cover all of the legal expenses needed. Can you make a small donation today?
This case, even if decided after the primary, could have massive implications for whether or not undercover Democrats will be allowed to deceive voters in the future, and whether the GAGOP will be run with integrity.
You can support Harvey and Brandyn’s efforts to litigate this issue at a GiveSendGO they have setup online at https://www.givesendgo.com/stopRaffy.
Harvey and Brandyn posted: “The Republican Party’s ‘freedom of association’ rights were violated. Our rights were violated. This injustice needs to stop so the Republican Party can be successful. You can participate with us in this fight by making a donation of any amount. Thank you for any support you can provide!”
Atlanta, GA — On Monday, the Superior Court of Fulton County filed notice of a hearing for a challenge to the candidacy of Brad Raffensperger for Governor on the Republican primary ballot, due to the Republican party voting to reject his candidacy last year at the Georgia GOP Convention. If successful, this challenge could disqualify Raffensperger from the Republican primary ballot.
The hearing will take place via Zoom on Friday April 24, 2026 at 1:30pm.
Members of the public are encouraged to observe the hearing via Zoom and show their support for Brandyn James and Harvey Wysong, the Republican Party delegates who filed the challenge.
“This is not a partisan issue; it is an issue of election integrity,” said Jake Medoff, attorney for Wysong and James. “The Georgia Republican Party has the right to decide who will represent it as a candidate, and that process should not be overridden by the whims of party executives.”
The official notice of scheduled hearing for Monday.
“This legal action is about protecting the interests of all Georgia voters. When my fellow Georgians and I go to the polls, we deserve to know whether that ‘R’ or ‘D’ next to our chosen candidate’s name means something or not,” continued Medoff. “If Raffensperger is allowed to run as a Republican against the wishes of the majority of the party, the party designation is meaningless.”
Attorney Jeff Medoff
The scheduling of this hearing is a win for Wysong and James and shows that their claim has legal merit and can’t be lightly dismissed. It also reveals that the court recognizes the urgency of the challenge, with early voting on the horizon.
Brad Raffensperger had a conflict of interest and abused his power as Secretary of State in order to try and quash a challenge to his own qualification, but Honorable Judge Belinda E. Edwards is not allowing him to unilaterally dismiss this challenge as “frivolous.”
“Raffensperger’s Office was obligated to investigate the challenge to his qualifications (O.C.G.A. 21-2-5),” said Medoff. “Instead, they buried it and tried to run out the clock. The Petition for Writ of Mandamus is simply asking the Court to Order Raffensperger to perform duties that he is already legally obligated to perform.”
“Simply put, nothing allows the Secretary to decide that the claim is frivolous. He had a duty to refer the challenge to an administrative law judge for a hearing and he failed to perform it; it’s that simple.”
Harvey Wysong & Brandyn James
Harvey Wysong and Brandyn James originally filed the challenge back on March 20th and asserted that the qualification of Brad Raffensperger as a Republican candidate was illegal. Raffensperger rejected the challenge and now they are seeking relief before early voting begins on April 27th with Raffensperger’s name erroneously listed as a Republican candidate for Governor.
Over the last 5 years, the Republican Party of Georgia passed numerous resolutions, and made numerous public statements affirming their commitment to election integrity and rebuking the Secretary for his actions in opposition to common sense election integrity reforms, and what many believe to be dereliction of duty to ensure free and fair elections. Tensions only escalated between 2020 and 2026. The decision to ban Raffensperger’s candidacy was the final, ultimate solution for the party delegates who had witnessed the Secretary repeatedly dismiss their concerns and ignore the party’s pleas for secure elections.
James and Wysong cite Raffensperger’s decisions to trust leftist non-profits funded by George Soros and Mark Zuckerberg to assist with the administration of Georgia’s elections. They also cite his Amicus brief filed against election integrity advocates who merely wanted to inspect the 2020 Fulton county ballots that appeared to be counterfeit, and which were seized by the FBI in January of this year.
GRA members are eager to see the outcome of this legal battle and are grateful for James and Wysong’s initiative to ensure the integrity of Georgia’s elections process and protect the reputation of the Republican Party.
Brandyn James and Harvey Wysong launched a fundraiser on Give Send Go and have already raised several thousand dollars of the $45,000 they expect they will need. Attorneys, hearings, and court filings are not cheap.
Can you pitch in to help them pay their attorneys and pursue justice and an authentic Republican ballot for Georgians?
Last week the Georgia State Elections Board met in a packed-out Dawsonville court house to address several issues and complaints regarding the elections systems. One of the subjects they took up was S.B. 189, the legislation passed by the Georgia legislature back in 2024 that said, among other things, that the QR codes on the ballots would have to be discontinued by this year on July 1st.
Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger is claiming the statute was an “unfunded mandate,” impossible for his office to implement across the state without more funding that would necessitate a special legislative session. A representative for his office was schedule to testify before the state Board of Elections, but bowed out the night before.
Board members such as Dr. Jan Johnston and Salleigh Grubbs, on the other hand, both agreed that the law should be implemented by the deadline, but Salleigh insisted that they need not call a special session because a lot of the legislators are out currently campaigning for election.
Dr. Johnston said that every county has a ballot-on-demand printer that was provided from Dominion when they setup their machines. Those printers can print provisional and emergency ballots that do not have the QR codes, and they could be used to enable the counties to meet the legal deadline looming. The counties already have 10% of these emergency paper ballots on hand for every election. “We should not stand idle,” said Johnston. She said that if the county election directors have not “already started planning for the use of paper ballots, then they are behind the eight ball!”
Jim Coles is a local county Board of Elections member in Catoosa County. He spoke to the elections officials in his county, and received confirmation that his county was indeed provided with a “back-up” machine, in case the Dominion computer system broke down, to print regular ballots without a QR code for traditional counting. “Every county was issued at least one Dominion ballot-on-demand printer as a back up,” said Jim. That being the case, it would seem then that every county should already have the ability to meet the statutory deadline. They just need to convert Plan B into Plan A.
Ringgold, GA – Today the Catoosa County Board of Elections voted to illegally qualify County Commission RINO incumbent Chuck Harris — in spite of his failure to sign the loyalty oath to the Republican Party. A formal elector challenge was filed by Britt Fant, a Catoosa GOP member.
State law allows political parties to require a loyalty oath from all candidates wishing to qualify with that party, and the Republican Party of Catoosa County requires that oath. In previous Catoosa cases argued in state court regarding blocking candidates from qualifying, judges have repeatedly affirmed that the political parties have the power to condition qualifying upon whether the candidate has signed and submitted the oath. Yet the Catoosa Board of Elections voted 3-2 to allow Chuck Harris to appear on the Republican Primary ballot without signing the oath.
Because Harris did not sign the oath as required by law, the Catoosa GOP did not include him on their certified list of candidates that the Catoosa Board of Elections publicly posted after the qualifying period ended. State law says that no candidate shall be removed or added after qualifying ends. However, somehow mysteriously Chuck Harris’ name appeared on the Georgia Secretary of State’s web site as a candidate that had duly qualified.
Joanna Hildreth, Ruth Fant, Alex Johnson, & Britt Fant at the hearing
“The issue here is – did Chuck Harris do the things under the law and under the party rules which are required? And he didn’t,” said Alex Johnson, attorney for Britt Frant.
(3) when he violated section 17 of the Catoosa County Charter by profiting off the county through the sale of medical supplies to the county which is prohibited for elected officials.
However, today’s legal challenge was not based upon the resolution passed at the Catoosa GOP convention. Rather this challenge was based upon the candidate’s failure to sign the loyalty oath.
The loyalty oath reads: “I do hereby, swear, or affirm my allegiance to the Republican party.”
Chuck Harris and his attorney Tom Weldon both pretended like Catoosa GOP had mistreated him by not informing him about the loyalty oath missing from his paperwork.
But the law doesn’t require the party to hand him any documents. Furthermore, why should the Republican Party encourage a candidate to sign a loyalty oath to the party when they truly believe the candidate would be guilty of false swearing if he did sign it?
Even those who disagree with Catoosa GOP and believe the delegates are mistaken about Harris’s loyalty to the party would likely acknowledge that the Catoosa GOP volunteers sincerely believe Harris is a Democrat in disguise.
During the hearing, Catoosa Board of Elections member Jim Coles asked excellent questions that forced Harris to acknowledge that he had run for office twice before. He was present at the hearings in 2024 where the legal requirements surrounding candidate qualification were discussed at great length, yet he claims that he did not remember signing the loyalty oath to the Republican Party when he previously ran and did not remember that step being one of the requirements for being qualified on the Republican ballot.
Alex Johnson pointed out in his closing statement that candidate Chuck Harris even included a copy of the loyalty oath required by the party rules in a document he filed on Thursday with the local court the week of qualifying!
“Chuck Harris is an elected official who makes laws — who should know the law,” said Johnson. “He had a copy of it. He filed it in court on Thursday [the week of qualifying]. He didn’t sign it. He didn’t submit it, and his attorney was there and should have known it.“
Indeed, Harris’ attorney, Weldon is a former State Representative who would have also had experience signing the loyalty oath each time he had previously run for office. Weldon was present with Harris at the Catoosa Board of Elections office when Harris’ paperwork was transferred from the Catoosa GOP to the Catoosa Board of Elections, and he had the opportunity to help Harris inspect the paperwork and make sure that the loyalty oath was included. But he did not.
Truth is often stranger than fiction, but it appears highly suspicious that both Harris and his attorney would overlook this essential step in qualification given the fact that Harris still has colleagues engaged in ongoing litigation with Catoosa GOP where their fundamental argument is that they, in 2024, met all the legal requirements to qualify as a Republican candidate: they “filed the paperwork, paid the fee, and signed the oath.” Harris has attended many of those hearings and publicly commented on them.
Weldon argued that Harris was not being treated fairly by the Catoosa GOP since they did not remind him to turn in his loyalty oath. Weldon pointed to other candidates that the Catoosa GOP had sent reminders in order to assure they submitted all the required documents in time. But the Catoosa GOP had already communicated publicly that they did not want to qualify Harris and so he had no reasonable expectation that they would go above and beyond to remind him of his obligation to turn in a loyalty oath — particularly since they had already stated that they did not believe any such loyalty oath would be anything other than disingenuous.
“The other side is mocking civil rights law every time they say ‘you need to be treated equally. You can’t have disparate treatment.’ That is talking about race and sex discrimination,” said Alex Johnson. “It’s not talking about political parties. Political parties have a right to associate with people who support their platform. That’s the point of a political party is to get your platform enacted. The Republican Party doesn’t want Chuck Harris because Chuck Harris isn’t supporting the platform! Rightly or wrongly, that is what came out of their convention.”
Alex continued: “I think Republicans and Democrats both agree that we should follow the rule of law. The rule of law is what has been presented today by us. … There is no requirement in the law that the Republican Party provide anything to candidates. That is not in the law.”
“We have to have parties that treat people the same,” said Tom Weldon, attorney for Chuck Harris.
Weldon argued that Catoosa GOP was “an acting governmental agency” while conducting candidate qualifying, because the party receives a portion of the qualification fee paid by the candidates, and therefore did not have a legal right to discriminate. This theory is absurd and not supported by law or precedent. A political party does not temporarily become a governmental agency just because they are allowed by law to conduct candidate qualifying. Legal precedent shows clearly that political parties have the right to not associate with candidates with whom they do not wish to associate. This was affirmed just last year by the 11th Circuit Court ruling which stated: “[A] political party’s right to freedom of association encompasses the right to exclude candidate[s] in the party primary in order to protect itself from those with adverse political principles. (Duke v. Cleland).”
If Weldon’s argument is true, and political parties cannot discriminate in which candidates they qualify, then Socialist Bernie Sanders could run on the Republican primary while spouting socialism. This would mean a Libertarian could also run on the Democrat ballot and undermine their platform and destroy their credibility on issues that are important to Democrat voters. This would result in chaos.
Weldon’s argument displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of political parties. If a party has no ideological boundaries by which they discriminate, they cease to be a political party. If everyone meets the definition of Republican, then the term has no meaning. Your “big tent” ceases to be a tent at all.
“It would be atrocious for the government to say that the Democrat Party has to support Donald Trump. It would be atrocious for the government to say that the Democrat Party has to qualify some Trump supporter to run in this county as a Democrat. That wouldn’t be right. That wouldn’t be fair.”
On the vote as to whether to qualify Chuck Harris as a Republican without requiring him to sign a loyalty oath by the deadline, Jim Coles and Jennifer Motter were the only two members of the Catoosa Board of Elections who voted “no.” Harris was allowed on the primary ballot by a vote of 3 to 2. Coles and Motter are the Republican-appointed members of the county Board of Elections.
It is disappointing that the Board of Elections would dismiss the clear text of the state code and override the will of a majority of about 200 delegates at the Catoosa Convention. They wanted to stop publicly associating with Chuck Harris. Harris indicated he was willing to sign the loyalty oath today, but the Catoosa Elections Board didn’t even make Chuck Harris’ qualification conditional upon his signing the loyalty oath today.
Republicans across America are becoming increasingly concerned about undercover Democrats running under the Republican label. We saw it in Ohio, and North Carolina just recently, where self-identified Democrat progressives attempted to run on the Republican primary. Nevertheless, the Catoosa BOE was willing to force a candidate on the Republican ballot while the party delegates go down kicking and screaming that they don’t trust he is a Republican.
“We are disappointed to see the Board of Elections once again violate our freedom of association rights guaranteed by the First Amendment,” said Joanna Hildreth, the Catoosa GOP Chairwoman. “This is America. Just as the government can’t force a Baptist church to accept a Muslim as a pastor, the government should not force Catoosa GOP to associate with someone who does not share our values and didn’t even sign an oath of allegiance.”
If Chuck Harris is loyal to the Republican Party, why would he ignore the party platform and raise taxes?
If Chuck Harris is loyal to the party, why would he ignore the pleas of party activists to enjoy the basic freedom to keep chickens on their own property?
If Harris is loyal to the Republican party why would he not honor the will of 100+ Catoosa GOP delegates who didn’t want his name on their ballot? Why didn’t he try to please them while he was in office before they felt the need to take such an extreme measure as to demand he “cease and desist” from calling himself a Republican?
It took a lot of nerve for the Catoosa Board of Elections to do this and was a huge insult to the Republican Party of Catoosa County. This sent a message to the party that if the BOE is convinced that someone is a Republican, who cares what the 100+ Catoosa delegates who operate the party think?
But the Catoosa County Republican Party is not discouraged. Britt Fant intends to challenge today’s decision in an appeal to Superior Court.
Click to watch attorney Alex Johnson’s closing arguments at the Catoosa Board of Elections hearing.
Atlanta, GA — On Friday, two Republican Party members, Harvey Wysong from Whitfield County and Brandyn James from Catoosa County filed a legal challenge to the Republican Party’s qualification of current Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s candidacy for Governor. The challenge is based on the motion passed by the Georgia Republican Party state convention last Summer that officially instructed party employees and officers to not allow Brad Raffensperger to qualify for office on the Republican primary ballot. Brandyn James is a 31-year-old African-American and Harvey Wysong is a retired Marine veteran. Both are Republican activists from Northwest Georgia.
The challenge states “The qualification of Brad Raffensperger as a Republican candidate by Georgia Republican Party staff or officers was arbitrary, characterized by an abuse of discretion…”
“The Georgia Republican Party has a constitutional right to associate with whom it wishes, especially who it qualifies to run as a candidate for public office through its party ballot access. As a corollary, the Georgia Republican Party has a constitutional right not to associate with Brad Raffensperger. The actions of the staff or officers of the Georgia Republican Party have violated the Georgia Republican’s Party right of association.“
Brandyn James waves signs outside the Ringgold Courthouse Catoosa GOP.
“I hope that this challenge results in the overturning of Mr. Raffensperger’s qualification,” said Brandyn James.
Some would suggest this effort is futile since Brad Raffensperger is both the candidate in question, and the government official being appealed to for remedy, and he is unlikely to disqualify his own candidacy for Governor. One would hope that an elected official who wants to operate with integrity would recuse himself from deciding a challenge involving his own candidacy (or that of his rival), due to his conflict of interest, and defer the question to another authority.
Wysong and James see this challenge to be the first step in the legal process, and probably want to be able to use this challenge as proof that they pursued all their options in search of a remedy.
“There’s a Latin maxim, ‘Non se jugulabit porcus,’ meaning, a hog won’t butcher itself,” said Wysong. “If that happens, we’ll have to turn elsewhere for relief. We knew that at the outset.”
“It is resolved that the Georgia Republican Party shall not qualify, allow to be qualified, or take any action to allow Brad Raffensperger to qualify as a Republican or run for any elected office unless and until a GAGOP Convention removes this restriction; and,
Contrary to the order of the delegates at the convention, Brad Raffensperger was allowed to qualify as a candidate on the Republican Primary ballot.
“Be it further resolved that the Georgia Republican Party shall fully defend against any future litigation or legal action taken by Brad Raffensperger or others that in any way claims that the Georgia Republican Party is or can be required to allow Brad Raffensperger to run for public office as a Republican.”
James and Wysong argue in their candidate challenge that qualifying Brad Raffensperger with the “Republican” label is “misleading the public.”
Furthermore they write: “If non-republicans use the Georgia Republican Party brand in their quest for political power, and regularly betray the party’s principles and interests, it hurts all Republican candidates.”
The complaint cites both the official Rules of the Georgia Republican Party as well as Roberts Rules of Order. The challenges argued that the staff and/or officers of the GAGOP did not posses the authority to certify Raffensperger and violated the chain of command specified in the Rules of the Georgia Republican Party – Rule 2.1.
Both Wysong and James mention in the complaint that they were among the duly qualified delegates who served in the 2025 Georgia Republican Party State Convention, and voted with the majority to prevent Brad Raffensperger from being allowed to qualify as a Republican in future primaries.
“This fact undergirds my standing to make this legal complaint,” they say.
While some have suggested that resolutions are not binding and are mere toothless “expressions of sentiment”, Roberts Rules of Order says differently. Roberts Rules of Order section 4:4 says clearly that resolutions are motions and binding. “For more important or complex questions, or when greater formality is desired, he presents the motion in the form of a resolution. . .”
The candidate challenge says: “By ignoring these rules of the Georgia Republican Party and working in concert with the state government to qualify Brad Raffensperger, they have done exactly what is forbidden by the Rules of the Georgia Republican Party and the First Amendment – namely, forcing the Georgia Republican Party to associate with a candidate that it did not want and who does not uphold its values.”
Just one week before candidate qualifying, where Brad Raffensperger must appear before the Georgia Republican Party and should legally be denied a place on the Republican primary ballot, due to his unethical, un-Republican record of governance, the Secretary of State, now candidate for Governor, has published false and misleading accusations against the Georgia Republican Assembly (GRA) President Nathaniel Darnell as well as a hefty fine in relation to the sudden collapse of First Liberty Building and Loan.
The order makes no mention of the fact that Nathaniel’s family are victims of the alleged Ponzi scheme awaiting restitution from the appointed Receiver.
Attorney Alex Johnson
“Nathaniel really believed in First Liberty and we all trusted the Frosts,” said PatriciaDarnell, Nathaniel’s Mother. “When we lost our investment, that was Nathaniel’s inheritance. He wouldn’t have intentionally lost his own inheritance if he had known what they were doing.”
“I can’t tell you how it breaks a mothers heart to see her son falsely accused like this.”
Alex Johnson, GRA Chairman says this fact “is conveniently ignored by Raffensperger’s office’s independent and misleading attacks on Mr. Darnell with unproven claims in Raffensperger’s filings/correspondence.”
Nathaniel was unaware that First Liberty was allegedly operating a Ponzi scheme at the time he innocently made referrals to his clients who he in good faith believed could be well served and benefited by their loan agreements. This is why he trusted First Liberty enough to recommend them to his own family members. For years, he saw First Liberty faithfully pay their interest payments on time, just like previous customers had testified to Nathaniel they had for them.
One of the emails ignored in the order
Raffensperger has in his possession numerous emails and texts from First Liberty employees to Nathaniel showing — in writing — that Nathaniel was misled and deceived about their loan agreements, yet Raffensperger chooses to ignore this evidence of Nathaniel’s innocence.
“Since at least 2021, the Georgia Republican Assembly (GRA) has been opposed to Mr. Raffensperger lying to voters by attempting to qualify for elected office as a Republican,” said Johnson. “Last year, GRA members and other good Republicans successfully supported a motion within the GA GOP that prohibits the Republican Party from qualifying him as a Republican.”
Ray Blankenship
“I have massive respect for Nathaniel Darnell,” wrote Ray Blankenship, a Republican volunteer activist in Northwest Georgia. “We all know that Nathaniel had been working for years to bring attention to Raffy’s Democrat tendencies and his Resolution was passed in the STATE CONVENTION to keep Raffy from having our most beloved ‘R’ by his name. I guess when you get a target on your back, you must be over the target yourself. Praying for Nathaniel’s sweet family.”
The GRA has been openly critical of Raffensperger’s record since 2020 and Nathaniel is not only a representative of the organization, but was one of the delegates at the microphone urging the passage of the resolution to ban Raffensperger at the 2025 Georgia GOP Convention. He even made the motion on the floor to adopt the resolution. Secretary Raffensperger has an inherent conflict of interest in his relationship to the GRA President, a conflict that Nathaniel’s attorney Doug Gilfillan formally objected to in December.
“The administration of the law . . . should, like Caesar’s wife, be above suspicion, and should be free from all temptation, bias, or prejudice . . . .” Nichols v. State, 17 Ga. App. 593, 87 S.E. 817, 821 (1916). The involvement in state action by a public official laboring under a personal conflict of interest like Secretary Raffensperger’s conflict here is improper. As a result, Secretary Raffensperger should have recused himself in this matter from any activity, participation, and decisions under O.C.G.A. § 10-5-71, pursuant to which his office is conducting this investigation.
Article I, Section II, Paragraph I of the Georgia Constitution (1983) provides that, “[a]ll government, of right, originates with the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole. Public officers are the trustees and servants of the people and are at all times amenable to them.” See https://sos.ga.gov/sites/default/files/2022-02/state_constitution.pdf. The Supreme Court of Georgia has held that this provision enshrines the principle that “[a]ll public officers, within whatever branch and at whatever level of our government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people, and do accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from the discharge of their trusts.” Crozer v. Reichert, 275 Ga. 118, 121 (2002) (quoting Georgia Dep’t of Hum. Res. v. Sistrunk, 249 Ga. 543, 547 (1982)). Georgia courts have applied this provision to disqualify public officials where a public official is alleged to have even an indirect financial benefit. See Vickers v. Coffee County, 255 Ga. 659 (1986) (commissioners’ selection among alternative tracts of land for sale to county invalidated because selection of a different site might affect adversely value of property owned by voting commissioner); Wyman v. Popham, 252 Ga. 247 (1984) (allegations of indirect financial interest on the part of two commissioners required hearing to determine validity of commissioners’ vote); Olley Valley Ests., Inc. v. Fussell, 232 Ga. 779, 784 (1974) (“The question the superior court must answer is whether, under all the evidence, Commissioner Smith had a direct or indirect financial interest in the outcome of the zoning vote-an interest which was not shared by the public generally, and which was more than remote or speculative.”). There is a financial connection between the Secretary’s political activities, his campaign for Governor as a Republican (both of which clearly implicate his personal financial interests), and the First Liberty matter.
Attorneys are questioning the constitutionality of the Secretary’s order for attempting to impose a significant fine when there has been no jury trial. Brad Raffensperger has acted as both judge and jury in this matter.
False Accusations Against Nathaniel
Raffensperger falsely claims Nathaniel was “preying on investors,” but if someone in good-faith believed First Liberty was a legitimate business, as many people clearly did over the last 30+ years, offering a legitimate loan generating real interest that would benefit the investor, how could that be described as “predatory”?
Former Insurance Commissioner Ralph Hudgens was one of many who recommended First Liberty to Nathaniel.
Nathaniel believed he was acting in the best interests of his clients with the information he had at the time, and there was good faith basis for his beliefs, since First Liberty had been in business for about 30 years, and had been recommended to him by numerous people, including a CPA, businessmen, previous elected officials, ministry and church leaders,and even the past Insurance Commissioner of Georgia Ralph Hudgens. WSB radio host Erick Erickson even publicly advertised for them.
Raffensperger’s order implies that Nathaniel took in excessive pay. However, the rate offered by First Liberty was within the average for the financial services industry: 2 percent or less paid by First Liberty. It didn’t raise eyebrows and would not have incentivized anyone to knowingly participate in a fraudulent scheme. Nathaniel sought to follow his firm’s guidance by disclosing to them that he had started an outside business to raise capital, and to work with other businesses that were raising capital, for a real estate venture. All funds from First Liberty went to that business, which finally raised enough to build their family’s first active rental property.
Archived screenshot from First Liberty’s old web site
Raffensperger reveals his bias and his conflict of interest in this severe order that ignores facts and evidence that prove Nathaniel is one of the many deceived victims of the alleged Ponzi scheme. Furthermore there are numerous people who were more closely involved with First Liberty than Nathaniel, such as employees of the business, who have not yet received any punishment from Raffensperger at all. Brad Raffensperger refuses to accept the possibility that there were any honest or innocent explanations for Nathaniel’s actions.
This situation raises questions, such as:
(1) Since First Liberty advertised broadly on public radio and on their website for years, how did the Secretary of State’s office not discover the problems with First Liberty sooner?
(2) If Raffensperger, the SEC, and the IRS all were clueless about anything being amiss at First Liberty, how do they expect Nathaniel to have known?
These false accusations against the GRA President issued the week before candidate qualifying seem to be a pathetic attempt to help Raffensperger regain the respect of Republican voters who have seen his failures and lack of interest in election integrity.
UPDATE: Now you can help support Nathaniel’s legal defense atGiveSendGo!
Now It’s Raffensperger’s Turn
Now all eyes are watching to see what will happen when Brad Raffensperger shows up to try and qualify to run as a Republican candidate for Governor. The resolution passed at the 2025 convention stated: “the Georgia Republican Party shall not qualify, allow to be qualified, or take any action to allow Brad Raffensperger to qualify as a Republican or run for any elected office unless and until a GAGOP convention removes this restriction…”
Politicians are threatened by parties exercising their freedom of association rights. It is therefore likely that the exorbitant fine and penalties Raffensperger’s office is attempting to impose on Nathaniel was carefully timed to discredit the GRA, and to make GOP volunteers too scared to follow through on the directive of the convention body.
“We hope that all victims of the alleged ponzi scheme receive justice and are fully compensated, while the political industry opportunists like Mr. Raffensperger cease trying to trick voters into thinking they are entitled to Republican votes, support, or ballot access,” said GRA Chairman Alex Johnson.
“Since at least 2021, the Georgia Republican Assembly (GRA) has been opposed to Mr. Raffensperger lying to voters by attempting to qualify for elected office as a Republican. Last year, GRA members and other good Republicans successfully supported a motion within the GAGOP that prohibits the Republican Party from qualifying him as a Republican.
“It is my understanding that Georgia Republican Assembly (GRA) President Nathaniel Darnell’s own family was victimized by the alleged ponzi scheme by First Liberty, which is conveniently ignored by Raffensperger’s office’s independent and misleading attacks on Mr. Darnell with unproven claims in Raffensperger’s filings/correspondence.
“We hope that all victims of the alleged ponzi scheme receive justice and are fully compensated, while the political industry opportunists like Mr. Raffensperger cease trying to trick voters into thinking they are entitled to Republican votes, support, or ballot access.” – Alex Johnson, GRA Chairman
Over the last several weeks people have been amazed by the overwhelming organic groundswell of support behind Colton Moore’s race for Congress in the 14th District. Some are at a loss to explain the army of unpaid volunteers willing to knock thousands of doors across a massive district that ranges from the Tennessee border to the suburbs of Atlanta.
With 15 Republican options, why is there so much overwhelming enthusiasm for Colton Moore?
I believe it is due to his consistent record of moral courage — a rare quality in politics. A brief examination of recent history and his voting record as a State Senator makes this clear.
While serving in the Georgia legislature Colton Moore:
• Sponsored SB 303 to establish election integrity by implementing paper ballots for Georgia elections.
• Was the only Republican Senator to vote “No” to a bill (SB144) giving pesticide makers (like Monsanto) legal immunity if their product harmed consumers.
• Stood up for the lives of babies conceived via IVF, and was the only Republican to vote “No” to the unethical In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) bill that gave IVF companies a “right” to commodify the lives of innocent children without any pro-life ethical boundaries.
• Was the only Republican Senator to vote “No” to HB 268, an outrageous bill that included massive government overreach into the lives of public school students.
• Sponsored a Second Amendment bill, SB 204, this year and was the lead sponsor of the Second Amendment Preservation Act (SB 67 in 2023) and fought hard to protect the rights of gun owners.
When Fani Willis was unjustly persecuting President Trump and the alternate electors, and when most of Georgia’s elected officials remained silent, Colton Moore called for a special session to investigate her and defund her office for its unjust politically motivated law-fare.
Moore’s defense of Trump as a State Senator drew national attention and attracted the praise of the President.
“Highly respected Georgia Senator Colton Moore deserves thanks and congratulations for having the courage and conviction to fight the radical left lunatics,” said Trump.
Moore sponsored legislation called the “Stop Political Persecutions Act” to reform Georgia’s RICO law to make sure it could no longer be abused against one’s political opponents.
Click to listen to State Sen. Colton Moore on the Charlie Kirk Show.
Charlie Kirk, who last year was assassinated for speaking truth on college campuses, said to Colton on his show, “Colton, you have courage, and we appreciate you!”
In 2020, when Northwest Georgia exploded with the second amendment sanctuary movement, where local activists worked with local municipalities to pass resolutions supporting the second amendment and resolving to protect the gun rights of citizens, even if the federal government attempted to strip them away, Colton Moore was right there supporting his constituents. He attended and spoke at the second amendment sanctuary rally in Armuchee in February 2020 as then Representative Moore giving moral support and legitimacy to the activists’ cause.
When Roe v Wade was overturned in 2022, and pro-life advocates in Georgia were clamoring for immediate action to protect innocent pre-born children from abortion, Colton Moore was one of the few legislators that participated in the series of pro-life rallies hosted by the Georgians Ending Abortion coalition. Most legislators avoided the issue and acted like it was business as usual – nothing to see here, despite the corpses of roughly 30,000 dead Georgia babies accumulating each year and the Dobbs decision giving individual states the green light to abolish abortion if they chose. Colton Moore stood out.
When there appeared to be evidence of fraud in the 2020 election, and Georgia officials failed to investigate, certifying the election in spite of valid concerns of fraud, on Dec 4th 2020 Colton Moore called the election “a national embarrassment.”
Like many Republicans, Colton was outraged by the inaction of the Governor and Secretary of State. After 2020 a movement was launched to ditch dominion voting machines and return to paper ballots, hand-counted at the precinct level to deter cheating, and ensure there was a paper trail that could be followed and audited in the event a future election was ever questioned. Sen. Colton Moore was responsive to this grassroots movement, drafting legislation (SB 303) to implement paper ballots. In September 2023 he was one of the very few legislators who participated in an election integrity rally held at Liberty Plaza outside the Capitol, publicly affirming the concerns about fraudulent elections.
In 2024, when 300 or so activists at the 14th Congressional District GOP convention passed a resolution calling for ethical boundaries for In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), Colton Moore listened. The next year a bill came to the State Senate that enshrined a “right to IVF” and Senator Colton Moore was the only Republican in the legislature to vote “no” in accordance with the expressed will of hundreds of his constituents on that issue.
In March 2024 when the Catoosa GOP began exercising their right to freedom of association by denying fake Republican commissioners a place on the “R” primary ballot, resulting in a lawsuit and a fierce onslaught of negative publicity, Colton Moore supported them with statements affirming their legal and constitutional right.
When Americans everywhere were concerned about open borders during the Biden administration and the outrageous numbers of illegal migrants in the U.S., Colton helped to expose the issue at the Atlanta airport, and was a staunch voice calling for a secure border.
While the Washington elite and the “powers that be” in Atlanta often seem out of touch and deaf to the concerns of the grassroots, Colton listens. He cares about the issues that matter to normal Republican families, and champions those issues for them.
In 2025 Colton sponsored the Anti-Corruption Act SB 378 which would end the use of taxpayer dollars to fund lobbying for government agencies, a shocking practice that left many taxpayers stunned that such a thing was ever legal and occurring under our noses.
Moore has served as Vice Chairman of the Georgia Freedom Caucus, the leading voice for sanity and real Republican policies at the Gold Dome.
While individual GRA members may all have a specific pet issue on which Colton Moore earned their trust and respect, the common thread in his record is his ability to say “No” to the lobbyists, and to the RINO Republican caucus, so he can say “Yes” to his political principles and the people he serves.
Many Republicans agree that Congress needs a lot more people with a backbone – more Dave Ramsey and less spending and debt. More loyalty to constituents than lobbyists and foreign interests. More moral courage in the face of pressure and manipulation.
“Few men are willing to brave the disapproval of their fellows, the censure of their colleagues, the wrath of society. Moral courage is a rarer commodity than bravery in battle or great intelligence. Yet it is the one essential, vital quality for those who seek to change a world which yields most painfully to change.”
– Robert Kennedy
If moral courage is the need of the hour, Colton Moore fits the bill, and the enthusiasm of his grassroots supporters for the March 10th special election is not at all surprising.
If you live in Whitfield, Catoosa, Chattooga, Dade, Floyd, Murray, Walker, Paulding, Polk, or the northwest part of Cobb county, consider joining us in supporting Colton Moore in the March 10th Special Election to replace Marjorie Greene. Early voting begins Monday February 16th.
