Today's Seattle Times features a lurid article about allegations made against Elections Director candidate Julie Anne Kempf. Lurid until the punchline at the end of the article which explains why Kempf was never charged with anything:
The AG's office decided the allegations couldn't be proved beyond a reasonable doubtOh well. But if the Times chooses to report on a years-old unsuccessful investigation against a long-shot candidate, I humbly suggest they might also probe Sherril Huff's actual performance in office.
Sample questions:
What was Huff doing for Dean Logan in 2005 (other than obstructing public records requests)?
What's the deal with the messed-up recounts of 2006 and 2007 where the actual numbers of physical ballots changed from one count to the next?
How truthful are Huff's claims about "Six Sigma" ballot accounting?
Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at January 25, 2009 03:25 PM | Email ThisInnocent - doubtful
Attention Voters, hire this woman for Elections Director and you will see this behavior again.
Posted by: Jeff H on January 25, 2009 04:42 PM