Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Alabama Secretary of State Will Certify Doug Jones’s Victory Over Roy Moore

Alabama Secretary of State Will Certify Doug Jones’s Victory Over Roy Moore

Moore has filed a lawsuit to stop the certification.

Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill has announced that he will certify Democrat Doug Jones’s win over Republican Roy Moore for the Alabama Senate seat.

He will do this despite Moore filing a lawsuit to stop the state from certifying the victory.

Lawsuit

From The Associated Press:

The court filing occurred about 14 hours ahead of Thursday’s meeting of a state canvassing board to officially declare Jones the winner of the Dec. 12 special election. Jones defeated Moore by about 20,000 votes.

Moore’s attorney wrote in the complaint filed late Wednesday that he believed there were irregularities during the election and said there should be a fraud investigation and eventually a new election.

“This is not a Republican or Democrat issue as election integrity should matter to everyone,” Moore said in a statement released Wednesday announcing the complaint.

Jones defeated Moore “by slightly less than 21,000 votes, a margin of 1.5 percent.” The lawsuit claims that Moore “will suffer irreparable harm if the election results are certified by Defendant without preserving and investigating all the evidence of potential fraud.”

The lawsuit also claims that the Alabama citizens will suffer this same “irreparable harm if the election results are certified by Defendant” without a proper investigation.

Moore listed polls as a reason to file the lawsuit:

The reported results were contrary to most of the impartial, independent polls conducted prior to the Special Election and in contrast to exit polls.

Uh, okay. As Brian Lyman, a reporter for the Montgomery Advertiser pointed out on Twitter, those “[E]xit polls are a snapshot of the electorate, not a predictor of the result.”

Merrill launched a special election into voter fraud on December 19 after a video of a man appeared of a man saying “we came here all the way from different parts of the country as part of our fellowship, and all of us pitched in to vote and canvas together.”

The investigation ended after two days with Merrill declaring no voter fraud happened. The officials found that the man in the video resides in Alabama and worked in the state for one year and is registered to vote.

I attached the lawsuit at the bottom of the post.

Certification

Merrill said this will not stop him from certifying the win. From KRDO:

“Will this affect anything?” Merrill said on CNN’s “New Day,” referring to Moore’s challenge. “The short answer to that is no.”

Merrill said he would meet Thursday afternoon with Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey and the state Attorney General Steve Marshall to certify Jones’ win, and that Jones would indeed be sworn in when the Senate returns in January.

Merrill also told CNN that the office received 100 complaints of voter fraud and they have “adjudicated more than 60.” One of those complaints came from a “town that doesn’t exist, a report he dubbed a ‘flat-out lie.'”

Roy Moore Complaint by KentFaulk on Scribd

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Glad Moore is fighting. I’ve given him a small contribution to help. The fraud was obvious. Out of staters came in to vote. Dems stole another election.

    YellowSnake in reply to Close The Fed. | December 28, 2017 at 11:02 am

    Circular reasoning. The complaint alleges that districts where Moore received less votes than he expected were, by definition, anomalous and the districts where he did better than expected were, by definition, non-anomalous. So Moore determines fraud by seeing which districts didn’t go for him

    As for whether the fraud was obvious – Didn’t Alabama implement strict voter id laws? Didn’t they inhibit by location, time and date the ability to get legal id? What the hell else do you want? Would a republican win be the only acceptable proof that there wasn’t fraud?

    The truth is that Moore was beaten by a legal, organized ‘get out the vote’ program. Yes, people did come from out of state places to assist voters in getting id’s and getting to the polls. But there is no evidence that those outsiders voted! Hopefully, it is a harbinger of the near future.

    And you know this how? That Dems regularly steal elections is no evidence that they stole this one. So where is your evidence?

      YellowSnake in reply to Milhouse. | December 28, 2017 at 12:09 pm

      Your comment doesn’t address mine. It is also incoherent.

        Ragspierre in reply to YellowSnake. | December 28, 2017 at 12:48 pm

        Your first sentence is true. He wasn’t addressing you.

        You second sentence is false when put in the correct context.

        Learn to read, dude.

          YellowSnake in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 2:34 pm

          Your 1st comment is correct. I did think it was addressed to me and it didn’t make any sense in that context.

          Beyond that, you grow tedious. It was not my reading comprehension that was at fault. I just missed the correct indentation. I am positive that that it is not the 1st time that has happened to someone on this site and I am predisposed to Milhouse not making much sense.

          I continue to await your citation (similarly in context) where I admitted, without sarcasm, to being a troll; as opposed to being contrary.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 3:22 pm

          You should remember it, because I immediately repudiated you and withdrew my support for you as a contrarian here.

          YellowSnake in reply to Ragspierre. | December 29, 2017 at 3:51 pm

          So you can’t produce it. As you say of others who can’t support their claims: you are a liar.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 29, 2017 at 4:39 pm

          Wrong on two counts…

          1. I won’t paw through volumes of posts on your command. I remember the incident very well.

          2. I don’t call people liars unless they lie. An unsupported claim is only that, and that’s often bad enough.

          Oh look –

          Two progs having a fight.
          Both lying.

For Moore’s sake it’s good that graciousness is not a qualification to run for office.

Moore can get his new election 2 years from now when the term for the seat once occupied by Session is up for renewal.

Allegations of fraud were made by Moore. It was his case to prove, and it seems like he didn’t.
I think a much greater force in his loss were the efforts of the GOPe to denounce him. McConnell lost that seat, first by smearing Mo Brooks, then by smearing Roy Moore.

McConnell is perfectly fine with the outcome.

John H. Merrill, the Alabama secretary of state, has dismissed complaints, from Democratic and Republican critics, of election fraud. In an interview on Dec. 15, Mr. Merrill, a Republican who voted for Mr. Moore, flatly declared: “I have not seen any irregularities or any inconsistencies that are outside the norm.”
https://hotair.com/archives/2017/12/28/great-news-luther-strange-might-stick-around-days-longer/

That’s a pretty good analysis of the controversy.

According to what I’ve read, Moore’s pleading refers to three experts, but only cites one. That one is a well-known nutter who puts the chances of a valid election at one in 15 billion. Which is unlikely a typo.

NOT an expert I’d hang my reputation on by sponsoring him before a court.

It’s behavior like this that lost the election for Moore.

    randian in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 11:04 am

    “I have not seen any irregularities or any inconsistencies that are outside the norm”

    So there is an acceptable level of irregularity? Since when?

      Ragspierre in reply to randian. | December 28, 2017 at 11:14 am

      Yes. In any election in any state, there are going to be irregularities. Most are simply errors. When you have millions of people all doing something on one day…something that they don’t do ordinarily, some of them will do it wrong. Sometimes with bad intent.

      Since it gives NeverTrumpers the results they want.

      tom_swift in reply to randian. | December 28, 2017 at 1:11 pm

      So there is an acceptable level of irregularity?

      Yes, that was a classic “weasel” statement, entirely meaningless. Like saying that the catastrophic death toll after the Great Tokyo fire and earthquake of 1923 was not “outside the norm”. If the norm is “horrible disasters”, the statement is true; otherwise, it’s pure smartass-ism.

      When dealing with Democrats I think we have enough historical experience to know perfectly well what the “norm” is when the topic is electoral shenanigans; so this statement is obviously misleading, and undoubtedly intended to be so.

        Ragspierre in reply to tom_swift. | December 28, 2017 at 2:09 pm

        What an astoundingly stupid comparison!!!

        What you pretend is that there are perfect elections where no errors are made and no voters do the wrong thing, either innocently or fraudulently.

        That’s simply not reality. EVERY SecState knows this, and knows that it does not invalidate an election.

Moore didn’t lose to a corrupt election, he lost to a corrupt news media.

    Milwaukee in reply to CrustyB. | December 28, 2017 at 6:47 pm

    Is there any chance, and I’m just spitballing here, any chance at all that Moore was less than the ideal candidate, and that part of the problem is his? Alabama, I understand, tends to be a pro-life state. They now have a very pro-abortion-kill-that-baby Senator. Moore was unable to lay a glove on him, to effectively deal with the allegations and move on the election issues.

      “… any chance at all that Moore was less than the ideal candidate…?”

      Of course. He is not that well liked in Alabama. He would not be the first imperfect candidate running. But that is not why he lost. He lost because the GOPe does not want an independent un-beholding to them, and most importantly, he was accused of sexual misconduct that will never be proven. Very few men will be able to recover from that. Eventually it will wear out, no one will believe it anymore.

      Ragspierre in reply to Milwaukee. | December 28, 2017 at 9:34 pm

      Most people believed the ladies, including the T-rumpBart editor, as he’s admitted.

      Only a few deep nutters called them “paid liars”…without the slightest evidence.

      Note carefully that the threatened law suits by Moore are still completely…invisible.

      They will never be filed, for good and obvious reasons.

        “Most people believed the ladies…”
        Most? Do you mean the majority of voters in Alabama? Or do you have some other data?

        “Only a few deep nutters called them “paid liars”…without the slightest evidence.”
        Of course, the Allreds admit they are always paid. ALWAYS.

        “They will never be filed, for good and obvious reasons.”
        Primary being the election is done and it cannot now or ever be proven. And the women involved have nothing worth suing over.

        The only “obvious” thing is you’re a sucker.

        MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 29, 2017 at 9:23 am

        Actually I disagree with “most people believe”. Gloria is a scam artist and the fact that she does not protect the victims (ie Nassar case) and her record of other cases, she is a train robbing scammer. Add her scamming daughter and the Weinstein and you have one big mess.

        GOPe gave this one to the DNC, Moore’s Christian Conservative views did him in not his so called fake stories of 14 year olds.

          Ragspierre in reply to MarkSmith. | December 29, 2017 at 10:50 am

          You can quibble with the “most” assertion all you want. Facts bear it out.

          Allred represents exactly ONE of the ladies. Her representation does not impugn the lady. Slime merchants notwithstanding.

          Idiots cannot differentiate helping victims who come forward from bribing them for specific testimony. Many of these ladies will need to be protected from the raving, dangerous nutters who are present in our society.

          Moore, OTOH, has openly lied about his involvement. He’s threatened lawsuits which he has not filed and will never file. I seem to recall that Allred and the WaPo have some money. But if Moore was interested in redeeming his reputation, a suit for nominal damages against the ladies would be very much within his means. Some of his more duped followers around the country would fund him, I’m sure.

          “Facts bear it out.”

          Give us the “facts” then instead of your BS.

          “Allred represents exactly ONE of the ladies. Her representation does not impugn the lady. Slime merchants notwithstanding.”

          That would be 1/2 the “ladies” that made claims. Allred’s representation certainly does impugn the lady. She is PAID.
          The only slime merchant here is Allred, and people that believe it in spite of all the exposed lies about the yearbook and the rest of her “story”.

          “Idiots cannot differentiate helping victims who come forward from bribing them for specific testimony. Many of these ladies will need to be protected from the raving, dangerous nutters who are present in our society.”

          Idiots are the ones that will believe a story without any, none, zero, nada evidence. Nothing but smear.

          These women were minors at the time of their alleged assaults. No statute of limitations in Alabama for that. They have not filed charges. There is a reason for that.

          The dangerous nutters are people like you. You are an emotional coward.

The big news in Alabama is that the most restrictive voter ID law in the country did not inhibit minority turnout.

Imagine that.

    With a multi-trillion dollar welfare economy, and excessive immigration “reform”, there really is no excuse for any American to be unidentified.

      YellowSnake in reply to n.n. | December 28, 2017 at 3:23 pm

      But such laws can be used to deny citizens their rights. In counties in the so called ‘black belt’, Alabama cut hours or closed DMV offices and other locations where citizens could register.

      It is a bit comforting that when given some help, the people that this was supposed to stop from voting came out in numbers that Moore found ‘anomalous’.

There is credible evidence that Democrats and Republican establishment colluded with the press to carry out a witch hunt in the so-called “reckoning”, which saw certain Democrat assets aborted, only to be resurrected shortly after they were deemed nonviable. The witch hunt was designed to deny civil rights (e.g. due process) and influence the democratic process.

Moore’s lawsuit presents significant credible evidence, both real and statistical, which suggest that a strong possibility of fraudulent voting occurred during the election. This does no mean that it did occur, only that there is a reasonable to strong possibility that it did. However, there has been no real effort to address these concerns, by the Alabama SecState. Also, it now is reported that the voting machines, used in the election, are incapable of storing the records of votes made on them.

We may never know whether there was sufficient fraud to cost Moore the election. It would be very interesting to see who the 22,000 write-in voters were cast for. It is interesting that this is almost the exact number of votes separating Moore and Jones, in the election. and, it constitutes 1.7% of the total votes which were cast for no listed candidate. There are number of interesting facets to this election which have not been addressed. I do ot see how a temporary injunction requesting a short delay in certifying the results would harm Jones or the State of Alabama. It is intriguing that the Republican SecState is in such a rush to certify these results while reasonable questions still remain concerning the legitimacy of results.

    Sherwood in reply to Mac45. | December 28, 2017 at 1:12 pm

    Amazingly…just enough write-in ( throw away ) votes counted to give Jones the election.

    Ragspierre in reply to Mac45. | December 28, 2017 at 1:18 pm

    “It is intriguing that the Republican SecState is in such a rush to certify these results while reasonable questions still remain concerning the legitimacy of results.”

    The Alabama officials are not in a “rush”. They’re following the law.

    Obviously, they disagree that there is any “reasonable” question.

    Injunctive relief is generally considered “extraordinary relief”, and is intended to preserve the status que pending fully developed litigation of a controversy. It, in most states and federal law, requires that the court granting it finds there is a substantial likelihood that the party seeking it will prevail on the ultimate conclusion.

    Here, Moore is asking for far more than preservation of the status quo. He’s asking the court to broom an entire election and mandate a new one. And he’s doing it on really crappy evidence.

    I predict the court will decline. Rightly.

        Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 2:43 pm

        Well, THAT’S odd.

        If a court lacks jurisdiction, it cannot do anything after that determination. Here the court dismisses with prejudice. Which is adjudicatory, and cannot be made without jurisdiction.

        Maybe some oddity in Alabama law…

          I too noticed that the court both declared that it lacked jurisdiction and also rejected the request WITH PREJUDICE. It is either some oddity in Alabama law, as you say. Or it is our old friend, judicial activism.

          This election just gets better and better.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 3:12 pm

          No. It just gets more over and done.

          What Moore was pleading was FOR judicial activism. Having a court intercede in an election and mandate a do-over. And on crap for evidence.

          Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 5:30 pm

          Beg to differ. If Moore had actual evidence, then it would not be activism for the court to enjoin the declaration of a likely-fraudulent result, nor to overturn such a result if the evidence proved valid. The key here is the lack of evidence, not the proposed remedy.

          Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 5:36 pm

          Though if he went to the wrong court…

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 6:25 pm

          Moore was pleading for a remedy that…BY LAW…no Alabama court could grant. He WAS offering the court a chance to rule in blatant “activism”.

          The whole thing is beeeeeeeeezare.

          Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 9:00 pm

          Then who could grant it. There has to be some court that can enjoin the declaration of a fraudulent result, if there’s sufficient evidence to support such a conclusion.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 9:28 pm

          Apparently, no Alabama court has that authority. See my citation of law below.

          Hence, I believe Judge Moore would have perhaps a resort to the SecState, the Federal District court, or the Federal Election Commission. I admit to this being outside my wheelhouse, however.

          In any event, it appears the matter is moot now.

    murkyv in reply to Mac45. | December 28, 2017 at 2:24 pm

    Looks like votes went to God, Bugs Bunny and Chuck Norris.

    Jesus Christ was in double digits, and the ‘Bama football coach came in 7th with 264 votes.

    Robert E. Lee, the Ghost of Stonewall Jackson and George Wallace also got votes.

    Now, why would someone take the time out of their day to go to the to fill out a ballot that is worthless.

    I can see a few doing this in protest, but 20,000???

      Milhouse in reply to murkyv. | December 28, 2017 at 5:32 pm

      Why do you find it hard to understand a protest vote of less than 2%? It wouldn’t have surprised me if it were higher.

It said that Moore took and passed a lie detector test on Dec 8th. Why did he not make this public and demand that ALL of the accusers do the same? That was the one arrow in his quiver that would have changed many votes. I am puzzled by this and do not understand why this was kept secret. If he has been telling the truth then this is a huge miscarriage of justice and will make this backstabbing, last-minute attack one of the Dem’s permanent weapons in the future. To regain any of his lost reputation he should hound and demand that all of these women take lie detector test or concede that they are liars. Unfortunately, the voter fraud will go nowhere.

    Milhouse in reply to inspectorudy. | December 28, 2017 at 2:04 pm

    Because “lie detector” tests are unreliable.

    Arminius in reply to inspectorudy. | December 28, 2017 at 4:21 pm

    Polygraph tests are notoriously unreliable. Cuban spy Ana Belen Montes beat it at least once during her career, and possibly more. There are techniques that you can teach a person so they can beat them. And you better believe spy agencies teach them. I know there are other cases of spies (or traitors in the case of Americans at FBI/CIA who betrayed their country) who have beaten them consistently for years.

    Polygraphs just give intelligence/counter-intelligence services a false sense of security. So much so that, get this: in order to to determine Montes had fully complied with her plea agreement and had truthfully told the government everything about her espionage activities during her career at DIA, the government planned to polygraph her.

    That’s just incredibly stupid. But that’s just how married these agencies are to the pseudoscience of the polygraph. It’s unbelievable.

    Some people don’t need to be taught how to beat it. They’re just natural liars. On the other hand other people just can’t pass them even when they’re being entirely honest so they yield a lot of false positives.

    All in all if I had to rank my level of trust in the polygraph, I’d place it between the magic 8 ball and a ouija board.

Recount laws usually do not provide for an automatic recount unless the difference is less than 1%, or sometimes 0.5%. In this case, 1.5% of the vote, 22,000, would be one heck of a lot of vote fraud. He lost. Like Hillary, he ought to face that fact.

Very possibly it would have been closer if the write-in campaign had not been active. But what happened, happened.

    AL election law gives any candidate the option to ask for a recount if they pay for it.

      Aarradin in reply to SDN. | December 29, 2017 at 12:10 am

      Recount wouldn’t have helped.

      They don’t check to see if the ballots are being cast by foreign nationals.

      They don’t check to see if the ballots were cast by people that live in other States <— Whom the Democrats were caught actively recruiting to go to Alabama to vote.

      They simply recount the ballots that were cast.

      So, no, a recount would NOT have helped Moore.

      Only a full survey of WHO cast the ballots to determine whether they were eligible to vote in Alabama would have helped.

      It seems, that there is no way to actually do that in this country. Ever.

    tom_swift in reply to tarheelkate. | December 28, 2017 at 1:21 pm

    He lost. Like Hillary, he ought to face that fact.

    You think Hillary has actually accepted her defeat?

    Ragspierre in reply to tarheelkate. | December 28, 2017 at 1:28 pm

    IIRC, Moore has NOT asked, or paid, for a recount.

      Moore can not afford to pay for a recount. The SecState has publicly stated that the state will not pay to conduct a recount, as the margin of victory is higher than the statutory threshold for an automatic recount. And, a recount would only show a numerical discrepancy in the results, it would not address fraudulent irregularities. Also, if the voting machines do not maintain a record of the votes cast, there is really nothing to recount.

    Let us suppose, for a moment, that as a county election worker, or supervisor, you wished to eliminate a vote for one candidate, in a precinct which should heavily favor that candidate. How would you do it? If you change it FOR the other candidate, that would look very suspicious. If you simply deleted the votes, that would produce a discrepancy between the number of votes counted and the record of votes cast in that county. The same is true if you introduced manufactured votes for the other candidate. But, if a certain number of those votes are changed to right-in votes for an anomalous candidate, or candidates, this achieves your goal and balances the books.

    There are a number of ways to game the system, with regard to elections. In critical elections, groups have been known to finance “voters” from other states to establish temporary residency in order to vote in a specific election. Then there are the states which allow same day registration of voters. This doesn’t encourage vote fraud much, does it? Let us not forget the potential for fraudulent mail-in ballots.

    The problem with US elections is that they are very susceptible to fraud. Fraudulent registration, fraudulent vote recording, fraudulent vote counting and fraudulent vote recording have all occurred. But, no one in a position of authority ever wants to admit that vote fraud occurs or address it. Instead, it seems that Democrats do all that they can to encourage it and make it easier and Republicans refuse to admit that it exists.

Even if he was to succeed in overcoming the 20 K voting he really needs to show almost 30 K to support his cause. Voting irregularities are normal.

I am all for him to make an issue of it. As for 2020 elections, I don’t think so. His baggage of handling the accusations and Ten Commandments are juvenile.

I think he has a great case against Gloria. Considering how she arraigned non-disclosure agreement with the victims of USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar. I think we all want to see Gloria get a good lashing.

We would not have been in this mess if the RINO’s had not pushed Strange then attacked Moore. What a waste of power by NeverTrumpers. NeverTrumpers are just Uniparty supporters.

I think it is a third party that is the force to be reckon with in 2018 since the DNC is going to go down in flames in 2018. Think angry Bernie voters.

    Ragspierre in reply to MarkSmith. | December 28, 2017 at 1:56 pm

    Strange was Der Donald’s pick.

    So now I guess T-rump is a RINO.

    Well…

      Petrushka in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 2:56 pm

      Trump has really good sources of information. Moore was obviously the Trumpier candidate, but was not endorsed. There’s a reason for that.

      Trump also discouraged fighting the results.

      Whatever you think of Trump and his policies, he knows when to hold ’em and when to fold ’em.

        Ragspierre in reply to Petrushka. | December 28, 2017 at 3:09 pm

        Strange was a solid vote for McConnell, and McConnell does what T-rump wants. Look at his voting record.

        No more complex or convoluted than that.

        YellowSnake in reply to Petrushka. | December 28, 2017 at 3:33 pm

        Yep, Trump folded his casinos multiple times and he made out like a bandit. The last time he recouped his equity by floating stock. The resulting corporation paid Trump management fees, but never turned a profit.

        In Alabama, it seems more accurate to say that he lost twice. I think in 2018 he is going to lose so much that he will get tired of losing. Of course, he will claim he would have won if ………………

      MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 29, 2017 at 9:39 am

      I really don’t think Strange or Moore were Trump picks. He was playing the game on that one. It is his nature was send trial balloons out to get a read on people and the GOPe was part of the experiment. He supported Moore from Florida. Come on. That is not support.

      Morris are you ready to admit that Trump’s pick for judicially positions have been outstanding? That actually is one of Sessions strong points that I watch over the years. I think he has had a hand in that.

        Ragspierre in reply to MarkSmith. | December 29, 2017 at 10:34 am

        “[Ragspierre], are you ready to admit that Trump’s pick for judicially positions have been outstanding?”

        Alt-right Racist Boi, no, not without reservations. Some have been embarrassing.

        But generally The Federalist Society (I was Treasurer of our chapter when in law school) picks have been very good. I’ve already said this.

        Donald Ducks gets some credit for farming that function out to them, which is likely a Sessions idea.

        This is good, as T-rump and Scalia were never really fans of one and other. T-rump LUUUUUUURVED him some Kelo, for instance.

          “This is good, as T-rump and Scalia were never really fans of one and other.”

          More of your prog BS. Disagreements over one policy or another are not proof of “fandom” in the way you express it.

          But then, slime is your middle name.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 29, 2017 at 5:42 pm

          You know, Butt-hurt Barri, I have the asshole that I was issued at birth.

          I don’t need you following me around, stupidly lying constantly. One asshole is quite sufficient.

          “I have the asshole that I was issued at birth.”

          Big one too. Your heads still up it.

          Any time you put your lies out I’ll be right here to call them out.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 29, 2017 at 8:52 pm

          You really are insane. And foul.

          MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | December 30, 2017 at 2:15 pm

          Morris, I know you can’t help being a Jacobin Trump hater, but you just admitted that Trump has made good judicial choices. Suck it up and face the truth, Trump has not been bad for you.

          As for your “Treasure” job of the Federalist Society club, wow! Knocks my socks off. That is right up there with the Pet Sitting business you run to show off your business stills.

          Even though Moore is a fringe character, you have zero facts on the guy. Zero!… and you have failed to substantiate any accusations.

          Grow-up and have a creditable conservation. Treasure of a five person Federalist club, come on, you are really desperate for attention.

After the Wa state Gov race of 2004, as well as Al grabby hands Franken’s win, it’s pretty clear Dems have a 1-2% level of cheater votes in any election. In Wa, they kept “finding” ballots which were not under lock and key.

The attorney representing Dems in that suit is now mayor of Seattle and will probably eventually be Governor. The elections official “finding” the ballots is a well known crook and married to county court judge (kangaroo family court). We have her on video with some choice words they wish we hadn’t recorded.

    n.n in reply to Andy. | December 28, 2017 at 2:25 pm

    In Wisconsin, they carried out quasi-legal raids targeting Republicans and Occupying both public and private spaces. In, Alabama, they carried out a witch hunt (outside the scientific domain) and lynching (trial by press) of a Republican candidate. In DC, they are still trying to abort the baby… the President, Trump, well after the stork’s delivery date in the fourth trimester. Obama spied (the real Water Gate) on the Republican candidate. Clinton colluded with the DNC, press, and foreign sources, including Kiev, to influence the presidential election. There is precedent and current evidence to question the integrity of the democratic process where Democrats, Pro-Choice Republicans, and the Press are present.

      YellowSnake in reply to n.n. | December 28, 2017 at 3:43 pm

      Wow, you need to write a book that no one will want to read!

      But let’s stick to:

      In, Alabama, they carried out a witch hunt (outside the scientific domain) and lynching (trial by press) of a Republican candidate

      It seems that what you are saying is that no actual voter fraud occurred. So is Moore mad as a hatter in his filing?

      BTW, if lying about a candidate is fraud (and I don’t concede that the things said about Moore were lies), then Trump has committed an unfathomable amount of fraud in his run for president. You make an excellent argument for pro-choice. But we will need to wait a little longer.

There wasn’t fraud, per se. The GOPe’s treachery was out in the open, but wasn’t illegal.

Everyone should remember this case in 2018. Smearing challengers as “crazy” is the go-to tactic of the establishment when they can’t defeat them in the primary.

What I’ve learned from this election is that the GOP establishment has no intention of backing your candidates if they win the primary, so plan accordingly.

No jurisdiction exists in or shall be exercised by any judge or court to entertain any proceeding for ascertaining the legality, conduct, or results of any election, except so far as authority to do so shall be specially and specifically enumerated and set down by statute;  and any injunction, process, or order from any judge or court, whereby the results of any election are sought to be inquired into, questioned, or affected, or whereby any certificate of election is sought to be inquired into or questioned, save as may be specially and specifically enumerated and set down by statute, shall be null and void and shall not be enforced by any officer or obeyed by any person.  If any judge or other officer hereafter undertakes to fine or in any wise deal with any person for disobeying any such prohibited injunction, process, or order, such attempt shall be null and void, and an appeal shall lie forthwith therefrom to the Supreme Court then sitting, or next to sit, without bond, and such proceedings shall be suspended by force of such appeal;  and the notice to be given of such appeal shall be 14 days.

That’s the law the court cited.

How any competent lawyer in Alabama…much less a former member of their Supremes…ignored that is a complete mystery.

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 4:58 pm

    Also, reading a bit into Moore’s pleading, on page 23 and 24, the pleading cites to completely inapposite law. The cited law addresses elections for ALABAMA offices, not Federal ones.

    This is just really sloppy…even frivolous…pleading. IMNHO.

I like that he’s fighting , regardless. This is what the left does EVERY single time! Fight back! This may be the PERFECT pretext for the Feds to get involved with their fraud investigation. Put’s heat on all of the states for 2018.

It may be baseless, but it’s a worthy fight. Moore has been so thoroughly trashed, he has nothing to lose, and in fighting and trying to uncover irregularities, he may just find some. Too many folks want to be the noble knight and lay down. Well, the left and Democrats never do. I say, fight, fight, fight. If it is clear there was no fraud, fine. Then concede. And there is no reason to sling mud… everyone has a right to ask for redress and not have honor brought into it. I have not heard that Moore is claiming Jones campaign cheated.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend