As most readers of this blog know, I support incumbent Terry Houck in his race against Steve Baratta for Northampton County DA. But I have an obligation as a human being to be fair to Baratta. Although Baratta did file paperwork after the election that certainly suggested he was waging a write-in campaign, I have no evidence from Republicans that he actually attempted to do so. I know party officials opposed them both. I have spoken to several Republican friends who tell me they were approached by no one from Team Baratta when they voted.
Yesterday, at Lamont McClure's State of the County, Steve Baratta confirmed that he made no effort to secure the Republican nod. He insists he sent no people to the polls with instructions on doing a write-in. He did file paperwork after the election, but tells me that's only because he received calls from several people to tell him Republicans were voting for him.
8 comments:
“But I have an obligation as a human being…”
Don’t flatter yourself. :)
Good point.
Be real you are one of the lizard people that they talk about in the deep state!
So, let me get this straight... when Terry sends text messages and mailers out appealing to Republicans to write him in, BEFORE the election, he's playing smart politics...when baratta, AFTER the election, certifies the spelling of his name because he was told some individuals had wrote him, he's "misleading" voters... on another topic Bern, whatever happened to that story you published claiming Baratta's campaign sent out a fraudulent text appealing to Republican voters on behalf of the Houck campaign?? You, without any evidence, days before the election, accused Baratta of sending that message himself, in an apparent play to exploit that text to tarnish Houck's reputation with the Dems. Does your claim still stand that was a dirty trick by Baratta or can you now admit that hit piece, published by you, was actually a tidbit "misleading" itself. And by tidbit, I really mean entirely. It's truly sickening how you have tried unsuccessfully to influence this election to protect an office you know to be floundering in corruption and decay. I thought you used your powers for good? Oh well...
The paperwork filed by Baratta indicated he was running a write-in campaign. The purpose of my post is to note that there is no evidence he actually did that. Houck never hid the fact he was seeking GOP write-ins, which was actually the smart thing to do. The accusation of corruption in the DA's office is nonsense. And for all I know, that text could have been a dirty trick by the Baratta campaign done without the approval of the candidate. I made no accusation. I suggested that, based on the known evidence, it was just as likely that it came from his team as it was that it came from Houck. The fact that you can't let go of this suggests I am correct.
Republican here. I wrote in Barratta because I wanted the show to continue until November.
Damn that Lahoud is one sexy, wealthy, healthy, and wise man!
Barracuda Barrata was first to issue printed and spoken false information about Houck. He newslettered private protected information to the voters for personal gain.He claimed he knew our communities but never visited them until this campaign. He chose to go against the very principles he once took an oath to abide by.
Post a Comment