Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Kari Lake Election Challenge

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    From what I've gathered, Lake's team proved that multiple election laws were broken, but since they couldn't prove it was done intentionally, or that the errors, if corrected, would result in Lake's victory, the judge ruled against them (given the multiple irregularities, it's actually impossible to tell who really won, so the court simply accepted the certified results). The next obvious step for Lake is to sue the state of Arizona for failing to uphold the law and ensure a fair and legal election. Lake's opponent, in particular, should be held accountable since as secretary of state, that was literally her job.
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
      And who is shocked and stunned?
      Kari Lake.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post
        “The Court cannot accept speculation or conjecture in place of clear and convincing evidence,” Thompson said.
        The court cannot, but of course Kari Lake supporters can.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
          From what I've gathered, Lake's team proved that multiple election laws were broken
          Which laws? What was the evidence that 'proved' it?

          , but since they couldn't prove it was done intentionally, or that the errors, if corrected, would result in Lake's victory, the judge ruled against them (given the multiple irregularities, it's actually impossible to tell who really won, so the court simply accepted the certified results). The next obvious step for Lake is to sue the state of Arizona for failing to uphold the law and ensure a fair and legal election. Lake's opponent, in particular, should be held accountable since as secretary of state, that was literally her job.
          So again, they had nothing other than claims (and to make it even more absurd, claims that the REPUBLICAN RUN COUNTY with it's REPUBLICAN RUN ELECTION somehow magically 'gamed the system so that the REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE didn't win).

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Stoic View Post
            The court cannot, but of course Kari Lake supporters can.
            Indeed
            It appears we have at least one of those morons right here on the forum, too.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
              From what I've gathered, Lake's team proved that multiple election laws were broken, but since they couldn't prove it was done intentionally, or that the errors, if corrected, would result in Lake's victory, the judge ruled against them (given the multiple irregularities, it's actually impossible to tell who really won, so the court simply accepted the certified results).
              That's partly true. The part about "Lake's team proved that multiple election laws were broken" is false, and the reason that the court accepted the certified results is that the plaintiffs did not prove what they needed to prove in order to set aside the election results.

              At best you can say that EVEN IF multiple election laws had been broken, that wouldn't be enough reason to set aside the election results.

              Plaintiff needed to prove by clear and convincing evidence, each element to be entitled to relief: 1) That the alleged misconduct – whether the BOD printer irregularities, or the ostensible failure to abide by county election procedures – was an intentional act. See Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269. 2) That the misconduct was an intentional act conducted by a person covered by A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1), that is – an “officer making or participating in a canvass.” 3) That the misconduct was intended to change the result of the November 2022 General Election. See Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269. 4) That the misconduct did, in fact, change the result of that election. See Grounds, 67 Ariz. at 189.


              FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

              Considering all evidence presented, the Court finds as follows:

              As to Count II – Illegal BOD Printer/Tabulator Configurations:
              a. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence of misconduct in violation of A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1).
              b. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was committed by “an officer making or participating in a canvass” under A.R.S. § 16- 672(A)(1).
              c. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was intended to affect the result of the 2022 General Election.
              d. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct did in fact affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

              As to Count IV – Chain of Custody Violations:
              a. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence of misconduct in violation of A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1).

              b. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was committed by “an officer making or participating in a canvass” under A.R.S. § 16- 672(A)(1).
              c. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was intended to affect the result of the 2022 General Election.
              d. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct did in fact affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

              source

              The next obvious step for Lake is to sue the state of Arizona for failing to uphold the law and ensure a fair and legal election. Lake's opponent, in particular, should be held accountable since as secretary of state, that was literally her job.
              Lake's team will be sued for filing this latest frivolous lawsuit, and probably for any future ones.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Stoic View Post
                That's partly true. The part about "Lake's team proved that multiple election laws were broken" is false, and the reason that the court accepted the certified results is that the plaintiffs did not prove what they needed to prove in order to set aside the election results.

                At best you can say that EVEN IF multiple election laws had been broken, that wouldn't be enough reason to set aside the election results.

                Plaintiff needed to prove by clear and convincing evidence, each element to be entitled to relief: 1) That the alleged misconduct – whether the BOD printer irregularities, or the ostensible failure to abide by county election procedures – was an intentional act. See Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269. 2) That the misconduct was an intentional act conducted by a person covered by A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1), that is – an “officer making or participating in a canvass.” 3) That the misconduct was intended to change the result of the November 2022 General Election. See Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269. 4) That the misconduct did, in fact, change the result of that election. See Grounds, 67 Ariz. at 189.


                FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

                Considering all evidence presented, the Court finds as follows:

                As to Count II – Illegal BOD Printer/Tabulator Configurations:
                a. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence of misconduct in violation of A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1).
                b. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was committed by “an officer making or participating in a canvass” under A.R.S. § 16- 672(A)(1).
                c. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was intended to affect the result of the 2022 General Election.
                d. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct did in fact affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

                As to Count IV – Chain of Custody Violations:
                a. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence of misconduct in violation of A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1).
                b. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was committed by “an officer making or participating in a canvass” under A.R.S. § 16- 672(A)(1).
                c. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was intended to affect the result of the 2022 General Election.
                d. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct did in fact affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

                source


                Lake's team will be sued for filing this latest frivolous lawsuit, and probably for any future ones.
                Right, like I said, no charges of misconduct, which is to say no charges that the law had been willfully broken despite proof of multiple "irregularities", such as ballots being improperly formatted causing votes for Lake to be rejected, and election workers violating chain of custody rules. But because it could not be proven that these violations were the result of misconduct, or that they were significant enough to affect the outcome of the election, the judge ruled against Lake.
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                  Right, like I said, no charges of misconduct, which is to say no charges that the law had been willfully broken despite proof of multiple "irregularities", such as ballots being improperly formatted causing votes for Lake to be rejected, and election workers violating chain of custody rules. But because it could not be proven that these violations were the result of misconduct, or that they were significant enough to affect the outcome of the election, the judge ruled against Lake.
                  There was no proof that ballots being improperly formatted caused any votes for Lake to be rejected, and there was no proof that election workers violated chain of custody rules.

                  But as you say, even if those things could be proven, that would not have been, in itself, enough for the judge to rule in favor of Lake.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                    Right, like I said, no charges of misconduct, which is to say no charges that the law had been willfully broken despite proof of multiple "irregularities", such as ballots being improperly formatted causing votes for Lake to be rejected, and election workers violating chain of custody rules. But because it could not be proven that these violations were the result of misconduct, or that they were significant enough to affect the outcome of the election, the judge ruled against Lake.
                    Oh? You have evidence that the ballots that were 'improperly formatted' were for Lake? Let's see it. How did the people formatting the ballots mindread and determine if someone was going to vote for Lake in order to give them that ballot? And how do you address the fact that, as my article notes,
                    Her attorneys pointed to a witness who examined ballots on behalf of her campaign and discovered 14 ballots that had 19-inch (48-centimeter) images of the ballot printed on 20-inch paper, meaning the ballots wouldn’t be read by a tabulator. The witness insisted someone changed those printer configurations, a claim disputed by elections officials.

                    County officials say the ballot images were slightly smaller as a result of a shrink-to-fit feature being selected on a printer by a tech employee who was looking for solutions to Election Day issues. They say about 1,200 ballots were affected by turning on the feature and that those ballots were duplicated so that they could be read by a tabulator. Ultimately, these ballots were counted, officials said.
                    ? How does that line up with (even if we assume they magically gave those 1200 ballots ONLY to Lake voters (because they're magical psychics) your claim that the votes were 'rejected', when in fact all of them were counted?


                    I'll wait.

                    We already know the judge determined there was no convincing evidence for the 'chain of custody' stuff.

                    So it sounds like - just like Lake - you're making things up.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      The court ruling is linked below. Sanctions against Lake’s lawyers are being considered.

                      https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.go...74764564181393

                      I read that Lake tweeted that she wants to appeal - if she can find a lawyer stupid enough to try.
                      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                      “not all there” - you know who you are

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Gondwanaland View Post

                        Oh? You have evidence that the ballots that were 'improperly formatted' were for Lake? Let's see it. How did the people formatting the ballots mindread and determine if someone was going to vote for Lake in order to give them that ballot? And how do you address the fact that, as my article notes,

                        ? How does that line up with (even if we assume they magically gave those 1200 ballots ONLY to Lake voters (because they're magical psychics) your claim that the votes were 'rejected', when in fact all of them were counted?


                        I'll wait.

                        We already know the judge determined there was no convincing evidence for the 'chain of custody' stuff.

                        So it sounds like - just like Lake - you're making things up.
                        As your source says, ballots were improperly printed which caused them to be rejected. Whether or not they were "corrected" later, they still caused confusion and unnecessary delays on election day, and we can only speculate how many people were disenfranchised because of it. As for the violation of chain of custody, it was proven in court with expert testimony that there were no chain of custody receipts from election night:

                        https://twitter.com/KariLake/status/1605680367679045633

                        But, again, like with the improperly printed ballots, there was no proof that this violation of the law was deliberate (the Hillary Rule, I guess); therefore, the judge ruled against Lake.

                        I guess next time I get busted for a traffic violation, I can just say, "I didn't do it on purpose," and the judge will rule in my favor, right?
                        Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                        But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                        Than a fool in the eyes of God


                        From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by dirtfloor View Post
                          The court ruling is linked below. Sanctions against Lake’s lawyers are being considered.

                          https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.go...74764564181393

                          I read that Lake tweeted that she wants to appeal - if she can find a lawyer stupid enough to try.
                          The precedent is being set by the Democrats: they can openly commit fraud and then punish anybody who tries to hold them accountable.

                          As the saying goes, you can vote your way into tyranny, but you have to fight your way out.
                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                            As your source says, ballots were improperly printed which caused them to be rejected. Whether or not they were "corrected" later, they still caused confusion and unnecessary delays on election day, and we can only speculate how many people were disenfranchised because of it. As for the violation of chain of custody, it was proven in court with expert testimony that there were no chain of custody receipts from election night:

                            https://twitter.com/KariLake/status/1605680367679045633

                            But, again, like with the improperly printed ballots, there was no proof that this violation of the law was deliberate (the Hillary Rule, I guess); therefore, the judge ruled against Lake.

                            I guess next time I get busted for a traffic violation, I can just say, "I didn't do it on purpose," and the judge will rule in my favor, right?
                            Ans tour evidence that they were all given to people who voted for Lake is..........

                            Comment

                            Related Threads

                            Collapse

                            Topics Statistics Last Post
                            Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                            7 responses
                            65 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Sparko
                            by Sparko
                             
                            Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                            42 responses
                            249 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post whag
                            by whag
                             
                            Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                            25 responses
                            108 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post rogue06
                            by rogue06
                             
                            Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                            33 responses
                            194 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Roy
                            by Roy
                             
                            Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                            73 responses
                            338 views
                            0 likes
                            Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                            Working...
                            X