Alabama Liberals are trying hard to pull off a last-minute smear campaign, designed to overshadow the outcome of today’s special election with manufactured controversy.
Republican Roy Moore, known as the “Ten Commandments Judge” from his previous public service, faces Democrat Doug Jones in one of the hottest and most controversial races in modern history. At the last minute, today’s race for the Senate seat vacated by Jeff Sessions grew even more controversial and confusing.
Yesterday afternoon, liberals pulled a sneaky preemptive move to discredit the election process itself. Attorney Chris Sautter, normally based in Washington, D.C., filed what seems, on the surface, to be a reasonable request. In the interest of full election transparency, saving the “digital ballot images” certainly sounds like a good thing. No reasonable person would want to see such images destroyed unless they had something to hide, right?
Sautter’s arguments were good enough to convince Judge Roman Ashley Shaul of the Montgomery County Circuit court to issue an “injunction” Monday afternoon, proclaiming that “all counties employing digital ballot scanners in the Dec. 12, 2017, election are hereby ordered to set their voting machines to save all processed images in order to preserve all digital ballot images.”
Even though that sounds like a good idea, there are several valid reasons why the order came too late. State officials quickly dashed for the courthouse themselves, filing, this time, with the State Supreme Court. The state’s highest authority agrees that the earlier order would do nothing but disrupt the process at the last minute and canceled the lower court ruling, by issuing what is called a “stay.”
Even if every election official in the state rushed to comply, it simply wouldn’t be possible to put the Circuit court’s order into effect. Not only that, Sautter named the wrong people as responsible. “The only Defendants to this case,” Secretary of State John Merrill and a member of his staff, “do not have authority to make changes to voting machines or to require local officials to do so,” the state’s attorney argued in his brief. The earlier ruling, he says, “purports to order Counties, which are not parties, to take action that the Secretary believes is impossible to complete before the election and which will disrupt the election. The order will cause confusion among local election officials who are not a party to this suit and who will be unsure of their obligations.”
The first clue that Sautter’s lawsuit is more smoke than fire comes from the simple fact that “the paper ballots will be preserved, even though they are not what’s used to tabulate the statewide vote total, and would have to be rerun through scanners if there was a recount.” So nothing will be lost, it just might need to be rescanned. Under the lower order, the snapshots were to be saved for the same six months as the paper ballots.
The big issue boils down to a single check-box. “Some voting machines take a digital image of voters’ paper ballots.” They only do that when the box is checked, and by default, it is not checked. If there had been more time, the setting could have been changed and it remains an option for the next election.
Secretary’s of State are traditionally in charge of elections so it is understandable why John Merrill was named as a Plaintiff, along with one of his assistants, but nobody else was named. Not even the standard “John and Jane Does 1-x” placeholders that most law offices have pre-filled in their lawsuit forms, to let names be inserted as the proper parties are identified. That becomes a problem here which liberals seize on to make the officials look bad.
“The voting machines are under the authority of the Probate Judges, not the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of State is not a party to the contracts between Probate Judges and ES&S to maintain and program the voting machines,” the state’s brief explains. “To change a machine’s program would require a third-party vendor, ES&S, to go to 2000 machines around the state.”
Partisan mudslinging has been rampant in the Alabama special election since day one. When the Harvey Weinstein scandal started an avalanche of sexual abuse claims, liberals jumped on the bandwagon with similarly salacious claims against Judge Moore, trying to tarnish his image through manufactured allegations.
Just being accused amounts to a conviction in the eyes of many Alabama voters. Rino Republican Jeff Flake went as far as showing his real colors by donating $100 to Moore’s Democrat challenger.
Not everybody has been taken in by the traditional Saul Alinsky tactic. Even President Trump remains standing behind Moore. “The people of Alabama will do the right thing. Doug Jones is Pro-abortion, weak on crime, military, and illegal immigration, bad for gun owners and veterans and against the WALL. Jones is a Pelosi/Schumer Puppet. Roy Moore will always vote with us.” Trump Tweeted.
The end is near and by tomorrow we will see which way the dust settles. Hopefully, election officials in all states will make a check of their equipment ahead of the next election to go ahead and check the box, just to give liberals less ammunition to use against conservatives.