Sharron Angle Builds Lead on Harry Reid & Fake Tea Party Candidate Ashjian May Have Broken Law

Conservative Sharron Angle has built a lead on far left statist Harry Reid in the Nevada Senate race.
FOX News reported:

Republican Sharron Angle seems to be solidifying her support in her bid to unseat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in Nevada.

In the latest Fox News battleground state poll of likely voters, Angle drew 49 percent to Reid’s 46 percent. As voters make up their mind with four weeks to go until Election Day, Angle seems to have the edge.

In the first Fox battleground poll in the Silver State four weeks ago, 10 percent of respondents were either unsure, in favor of a minor party candidate or, as state law allows in Nevada, planning to vote for “none of these candidates.”

In this week’s poll, those three categories add up to 5 percent. Over the same period, Angle’s overall vote percentage went from 45 percent to 49 percent.

And yesterday, the campaign manager for the fake tea party candidate Scott Ashjian dropped out and endorsed Sharron Angle.
Big Journalism reported:

There was no “Tea Party of Nevada” until Ashjian created it and the media relished the novelty.

He has never been to a Tea Party event and has not been endorsed by any Tea Party out there so the left loves that he could help give Reid six more years in the U.S. Senate by people mistakenly voting for the “Tea Party” candidate. Speculation has it that Reid is behind Ashjian’s candidacy, but that has not been proven. All Ashjian can do in this race is save Harry Reid. Certainly nobody with any real Tea Party affiliation would ever want that to happen.

Now there are the audio tapes.

The Chairman of the “Tea Party of Nevada,” Syd James (it is basically a party of two), arranged a meeting with the Angle camp under the premise that Ashjian would drop out and endorse Angle (Ashjian’s name would still be on the ballot). Ashjian has claimed that it was Angle who arranged the meeting, but James assures me that it he arranged it and he’s sorry he did.

Ashjian wore a wire into the meeting and covertly taped the conversation with Angle. James said he had no idea that the meeting was taped and would’ve never done it had he known Ashjian was going to tape it. If you listen to the tapes, understand their surreptitious nature and understand the context was that Angle thought Ashjian had come bearing gifts of an endorsement. If Angle made a mistake it was trusting Ashjian, but since James arranged the meeting, the Angle camp was trusting James, who is a highly respected doctor in Las Vegas.

As a result, James feels used by Ashjian and has told me he will resign from his position with the “Tea Party of Nevada” and endorse Angle.

There are still questions on whether Reid-supporter Ashjian broke the law when he recorded Angle in their private meeting.
Ramus sent this in:

Forgive me if I missed this or if I am stating the obvious, but why has no one brought up the possibility that Scott Ashjian may have committed a felony under Nevada law? Many states prohibit the secret recording of a private conversation by telephone.

Nevada is no different, except that the statutory language is not limited to telephone conversations. Also the Nevada statute makes it a felony whereas in other states it is a serious misdemeanor. Granted, some statutes are more clearly written than the Nevada statute I quote below, but doesn’t the language of Nevada Revise Statute Section 200.650 (please see below) suggest that Ashjian, by secretly recording a private conversation with Angle, may be guilty of a felony?
Here is the statute I am referring to —

“NRS 200.650 Unauthorized, surreptitious intrusion of privacy by listening device prohibited. Except as otherwise provided in NRS 179.410 to 179.515, inclusive, and 704.195, a person shall not intrude upon the privacy of other persons by surreptitiously listening to, monitoring or recording, or attempting to listen to, monitor or record, by means of any mechanical, electronic or other listening device, any private conversation engaged in by the other persons, or disclose the existence, content, substance, purport, effect or meaning of any conversation so listened to, monitored or recorded, unless authorized to do so by one of the persons engaging in the
conversation.

(Added to NRS by 1957, 335; A 1973, 1749; 1989, 660)”

The penalty section follows Section 200.650 —

“NRS 200.690 Penalties.
1. A person who willfully and knowingly violates NRS 200.620 to 200.650, inclusive:
(a) Shall be punished for a category D felony as provided in NRS 193.130.
(b) Is liable to a person whose wire or oral communication is intercepted without his or her consent for:
(1) Actual damages or liquidated damages of $100 per day of violation but not less than $1,000, whichever is greater;
(2) Punitive damages; and
(3) His or her costs reasonably incurred in the action, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, Ê all of which may be recovered by civil action.
2. A good faith reliance by a public utility on a written request for interception by one party to a conversation is a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought against the public utility on account of the interception.
(Added to NRS by 1957, 336; A 1967, 474; 1973, 1749; 1995, 1195)”

A link to the statute section 200.650 is here
The link takes you to the statute itself, which in turn has other links to the referenced sections 179.410 et seq. Those sections define the terms “person,” etc. The penalty section immediately follows the substantive law in 200.650 so I won’t re-link.

Ashjian may have violated the first part of this law by secretly recording what was, in essence, a private conversation. He may have also violated the second part of that law by then disclosing the recording.

Can anyone add anything to this? Can we confirm that it was a crime from the above text?
It sure looks like he broke the law.

Comments

As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to edit or remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. The same applies to trolling, the use of multiple aliases, or just generally being a jerk. Enforcement of this policy is at the sole discretion of the site administrators and repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without warning