Judge dismisses Kari Lake’s final claim in election loss for Arizona governor

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: EternalShadow
a reply to: yuppa

Not China, Russia, the middle east, or the EU could bring down America, but the cartels did it in less than a decade.

Wowzers.😳

They've made some progress... too much progress... but all's not lost.

Yesterday, the AZ Senate exercised their Constitutional powers and authority over elections to issue an order to all counties in the state prohibiting the use of any electronic machines that are not manufactured in the USA with USA parts (which currently ALL electronic election machines are foreign manufactured), and as well the source code must be open and available to the public, with all counts and digital ballot images online for public accessibility by the next day.

Katie Hobbs vetoed similar legislation passed last week. She (and perhaps others) will no doubt sue, so this ain't over yet. But it's a good start to taking back the power and cutting off the avenues to corruption.

what does it say about the Democrats that they don't want US-made equipment and public-access numbers?

dems so corrupt.

a reply to: ElGoobero

what does it say about the Democrats that they don't want US-made equipment and public-access numbers? dems so corrupt.

Nothing good!!!

Even more disappointing is that this is simply bringing our election laws into conformance with DoD requirements... which the Feds are not even enforcing. Reminds me of when Obama sued Arizona for passing and enforcing the Feds own laws and regulations for illegal immigrants.

But I have to add, to be fair, the Dem SoS was at least in favor of releasing ballot images the day after the election, so there's that... for what it's worth.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Boadicea

Speculation is that she'll be announcing her bid for Sinema's seat.

That's definitely one rumor. Another is that she will be announced as Trump's running mate in 2024. Normally running mates aren't announced until the party convention, but I think because of the animosity by some Pubs ("Never Trumpers") it's thought Trump may throw out the SOPs and announce up front. That could be interesting.

We'll know in a few hours...

a reply to: Boadicea

Trump enjoys the courting process too much. Plus, he's not going to let someone else make theannouncement. As far as I'm aware, Trump is not scheduled to fly to Arizona today.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Boadicea

Trump enjoys the courting process too much. Plus, he's not going to let someone else make theannouncement. As far as I'm aware, Trump is not scheduled to fly to Arizona today.

My thoughts exactly. No way would Trump allow Kari to make such an announcement without him, and as far as I'm aware he's no where near AZ now. Plus, Trump likes to drag things like this out for maximum attention and anticipation. It keeps people interested in him and in the news. But it is a rumor.

I personally don't see Kari winning Krysten's seat though in a relatively safe Dem area, so I'm not inclined to think she's going to run for Senate. I'd be more inclined to see her run for Secretary of State (ETA for clarity: or Governor again in 2026). Or perhaps a Maricopa County position -- County Recorder or Board of Supervisors, maybe even AG.

Although AG is a long shot, it is apparently a possibility. I cannot speak authoritatively, but as I understand it, the law, as written requires that the AG be a practicing attorney before the Supreme Court for the previous five years... but that requirement was struck down when a non-practicing attorney was elected back in '77. So, technically, there is no legal requirement for the AG to be an attorney -- practicing or otherwise! It would be interesting to see Kari try though...

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Mahogany

what is your deal? you make threads and then don't come back to them. Why make the thread at all?
You should decide if you want to talk TO us or AT us. Currently, it seems it's just AT us.

I have a very simple solution for you.

If you don't like my threads, or the way I write, or the time I have to dedicate to this forum -- simply walk away and don't engage in my threads or my posts.

Thanks for reading.

a reply to: Boadicea

Sinema running as an independent means she doesn't get any funding from the DNC. It also means that if the Dems run a candidate they're likely to split the vote.

This is probably Lake's best chance at winning a national election. At this point, I don't see her settling for anything less than something on the national stage.

a reply to: Boadicea

I could be mistaken here because I did not read the document handed back down to the lower court.

The judges direct instructions was for Lake to prove that NO signature verification occurred, at all. Leaving the defense to prove that SOME verification happened at the very least.

I don't think that was what the decision handed back was to entail.

Is my summary correct?

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Boadicea

Speculation is that she'll be announcing her bid for Sinema's seat.

That's definitely one rumor. Another is that she will be announced as Trump's running mate in 2024.

That would be a dream come true for the democrats. Absolutely, unequivocally.

Lake is coming out of losing a state election, Trump out of a losing national election. They lost some 100 election lawsuits, combined, in the last couple of years. Trump would be coming in for his 4th candidacy (2000, 2016, 2020, 2024) having only won one out of three so far, and having lost the most recent one.

Just based on their losing record, not even taking into account all the current scandals, lawsuits and indictments -- this would be the easiest ticket for the democrats to beat.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Boadicea

Sinema running as an independent means she doesn't get any funding from the DNC. It also means that if the Dems run a candidate they're likely to split the vote.

I understand your logic, but given the current conditions in AZ, I'm not so sure about that. No one wins here without the Independents' vote. We outnumber BOTH Dems and Pubs, and Pubs outnumber Dems. There are plenty of Dems who are not happy with Hobbs (the "Veto Queen" who has vetoed several bills with Dem and/or bipartisan support) and the Dem party in general. Independents will vote for Sinema if she's running, and plenty of Dems will as well. Pubs won't,

This is probably Lake's best chance at winning a national election. At this point, I don't see her settling for anything less than something on the national stage.

You underestimate the AZ voter. Those who support Kari want her here, fighting for AZ. The job isn't done yet. I expect she'll lose at least half of her support if she runs for national office. She will definitely lose the portion of Independents that support her. Never say never, but I think Kari knows she will throw away much of her base if she bails on AZ for a national office. I think the same if she accepts a VP offer from Trump.

But, actually, I have a feeling Kari would rather be president than vice president anyway!

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Boadicea

I could be mistaken here because I did not read the document handed back down to the lower court.

The judges direct instructions was for Lake to prove that NO signature verification occurred, at all. Leaving the defense to prove that SOME verification happened at the very least.

I'm not sure. I've a read a couple things just recently that makes me wonder. I have not yet read the order to check. My understanding was that Kari needed to prove that election procedures as established under Arizona statutes (I don't remember the specific statute right now) were not properly followed, including the failure to properly verify signatures. "Proper" being the operative word. I recall nothing saying that Kari had to prove that NO signature verification at all was performed -- but that is what I've read the last few days.

And that seems to be exactly what the judge ruled... that because some signature verification took place Kari loses.

I expect that the original order is ambiguous, and this was the workaround.

a reply to: Boadicea

While I was waiting for your slow response.........

I found an article with the sources and inept logic applied:

Thompson stated in his ruling that the legal standard was whether Lake had shown there was misconduct by election boards participating in a canvass, citing A.R.S. 16-672(A)(1). However, the Arizona Supreme Court did not specifically refer to that part of the statute in its remand opinion. Thompson then tied the misconduct to the standard the Arizona Supreme Court did use, which was to show that “votes [were] affected ‘in sufficient numbers to alter the outcome of the election’ based on a ‘competent mathematical basis to conclude that the outcome would plausibly have been different, not simply an untethered assertion of uncertainty.’”

The Arizona Supreme Court tied that standard to all of A.R.S. 16-672, not just its misconduct clause. That statute lays out the grounds for an election contest, which includes “On account of illegal votes” and “by reason of erroneous count of votes.”

Link

ETA:

The goalposts were moved repeatedly to this point:

He then said that the statute merely requires the county recorder to be satisfied with the signature review. Since Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, an election fraud denier who started a PAC for other GOP election fraud deniers, was fine with the signature review process, Thompson said that was all that mattered.

a reply to: JinMI

Ahhhh... thank you!

Rightly or wrongly, I feel like judges keep moving the goalposts so to speak, and using legalese to make it all sound lawful and legitimate.

Regardless, it's impossible to look at the proof/evidence provided in court, and not know that there were serious issues conducting the 2022 election, which almost certainly affected the outcome. To what extent is more difficult to determine, but to a significant extent no doubt.

ETA: Just saw your edit. I commented before I saw your comment about "goalposts." Glad I'm not the only one seeing this!!!

Not especially comforting to know that one of the defendants is also the ultimate authority on what is acceptable or not...

originally posted by: Mahogany
That was the last of the chances she had to prove that something was wrong with the election and that she was wronged.

Oh, she proved that already... in spades.

Anyone who cannot see that is ... wrong.

As with the all the other lawsuits she filed, she was unable to provide evidence to back up any of the claims.

Ah, so you are incapable of rational, independent thought... got it...

a reply to: Boadicea

The ETA paragraph above reads to me like, "we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong, carry on."


Nevermind that initially the judge would not allow any process testimony but allowed for the defenses witness to talk all about their "secure process."

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Boadicea

The ETA paragraph above reads to me like, "we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong, carry on."

Exactly!

Nevermind that initially the judge would not allow any process testimony but allowed for the defenses witness to talk all about their "secure process."

Same with forensic document analysis and statistical analysis.

ETA: I've managed to watch most of what I missed Friday.

15 minutes until Kari's announcement...

kari is going to take this issue all the way to the supreme court if needed, she say so.

Also what in the hell is dominion voting machines doing with China shipments of parts, they have an agreement, soo it seems our elections are in the US but with China manufactured machine? is that True.

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: Mahogany

what is your deal? you make threads and then don't come back to them. Why make the thread at all?
You should decide if you want to talk TO us or AT us. Currently, it seems it's just AT us.

I have a very simple solution for you.

If you don't like my threads, or the way I write, or the time I have to dedicate to this forum -- simply walk away and don't engage in my threads or my posts.

Thanks for reading.

I suppose since you aren't able to man up and own your words, I'll just ignore you from this point forward. And it's a shame, just when you almost showed a shred of integrity. But your choice, TTFN

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Boadicea

The ETA paragraph above reads to me like, "we investigated ourselves and found nothing wrong, carry on."

That's always a problem when the system is run by corrupted bastards.

originally posted by: Mahogany

originally posted by: Boadicea

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: Boadicea

Speculation is that she'll be announcing her bid for Sinema's seat.

That's definitely one rumor. Another is that she will be announced as Trump's running mate in 2024.

That would be a dream come true for the democrats. Absolutely, unequivocally.

Lake is coming out of losing a state election, Trump out of a losing national election. They lost some 100 election lawsuits, combined, in the last couple of years. Trump would be coming in for his 4th candidacy (2000, 2016, 2020, 2024) having only won one out of three so far, and having lost the most recent one.

Just based on their losing record, not even taking into account all the current scandals, lawsuits and indictments -- this would be the easiest ticket for the democrats to beat.

As long as you have mail-in ballots Democrats can do whatever they want.