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.


    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.


    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


    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.


    Petrushka | December 28, 2017 at 10:52 am

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

    Imagine that.

      n.n in reply to Petrushka. | December 28, 2017 at 12:44 pm

      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.

      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???

    inspectorudy | December 28, 2017 at 12:50 pm

    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.

    tarheelkate | December 28, 2017 at 1:04 pm

    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.

      SDN in reply to tarheelkate. | December 28, 2017 at 1:06 pm

      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.

        Mac45 in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2017 at 1:36 pm

        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.

      Mac45 in reply to tarheelkate. | December 28, 2017 at 1:32 pm

      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.

    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Send this to a friend