This time instead of the OWH publisher writing an Op-Ed, or a reporter expressing their opinion, they actually got one of their columnists to write an anti-Recall piece.
So Robert Nelson summarized some undercover videos that the Anti-Recallers showed him of the Recallers collecting signatures.
(And hey Forward Omahaers. How about posting those on YouTube for the rest of us to analyze? This is all supposed to be public right? What gives?)
Here are a few points Nelson makes (you have to buy the actual paper in order to read the whole thing):
The collectors said:
- The Mayor put a 15% tax on restaurants.
- The estimates about the cost of the elections are wrong.
- Federal money would pay for the election.
- Something something about how we may get paid.
And that’s it?
Here’s the deal: If you went to sign a petition, some dude holding a piece of paper ain’t the person with all the facts. Would you expect someone going door to door for a candidate to have all the facts on that candidate? How about someone waving a sign outside the polls? Hey, how about the candidate saying something that was untrue in their own ad? If they were wrong or even lied, would that make the election illegitimate?
Of course not. (But is there a method in the books on how to throw that person out? Hmm.)
That’s why they have the statements from both sides there to read. (And the “it must be read” is an idiotic law, but we’ll let the Judge deal with that.)
And then the “breaking the law” part that Nelson alleges (oooh! here’s the state statute!), is anecdotal at best. “We’ve got to get, like, 10 signatures an hour.” OK, was that a goal? A requirement? A cutoff?
Judge Bataillon can get to the bottom of that super-interesting question. But if that’s the best the Anti’s have on that issue? Next.
So you really want the money quote from all of this?
See Election Commissioner Dave Phipps:
As we suspected, this issue isn't yet ripe.
Judge Pete Bataillon told them to keep counting and, if the Election Commish says they have enough signatures, then he will decide if the Anti's argument has merit.
So he essentially gave the Anti's an additional two weeks -- December 20th -- to gather their arguments.
One thing that we will wait to see: If they say they have the sigs on Friday, will the Pro and Anti forces begin their campaign for a potential January 25th election? Otherwise it is an even shorter window.
We have a feeling it will be all systems go (if'n they get the sigs) after Friday.
Well Joe Jordan swung that controversial video from the Forward Omaha folks, and oh my!
Let's just say that in comparison, the Zapruder film practically showed the mugshots and drivers licenses of the guys on the Grassy Knoll.
Take a look, for all of the twenty-six seconds of undercover camera glory:
My garsh, how could Judge Bataillon NOT throw out the Recall with that stellar piece of evidence.
And here is the rest of the Anti's "case".
Note that "case" is in quotes. If you were describing it to someone you would put your fingers up and use little "air quotes" to symbolize how ridiculous their "case" is.
Might there not be enough signatures? Maybe. (Mightly?)
But this recall ain't going to get thrown out based on those four videos.
We're convinced this was always a stall tactic to get additional time to knock out signatures, and nothing more.
Forward Omaha should have to pay the court costs for this heap.