Posted on 12/26/2022 8:07:43 AM PST by Dr. Franklin
This Judge ignored a county official that committed perjury on the stand in his court room and did nothing.
Also, the dismissal of the count concerning signature verification due to the rule of laches was wrong in that the plaintiff did not have standing when the A.G. originally made the problem public but the SOS did have the responsibility to correct the problems with the signature verification software and failed to do her job.
This Judges phone records need to be made public.
The government is Post-American.
If Kari is serious about an appeal, then she needs to hire lawyers who aren’t on Hobb’s payroll.
They were dreadful. Didn’t ask the right questions. Didn’t ask follow-up questions that would have significant impact. They mis-numbered the documents in evidence. The long-haired guy was literally bumbling, and made a point to piss of the judge.
Who would take her case, though? Nobody wants to be a victim of Arkancide.
Alinsky the Alinskyites. Late, but better late than never.
And what’s worse, they are dragging the rest of the world with it. I cannot even go to Poland without hearing about the freaking Kardashians and hearing rap music.
I disagree. I think the lives of any jurist that goes against the steal will be at threat not to mention his or her children and grand children due to the implicit threat from Antifa and the BLM faction.
Nice life you have there judge. Bea shame if something happened to it
The minute Lake said she was going to make a Declaration of Invasion right after taking the oarh was the minute she had to be destroyed. The drug cartels and the Jewish/Lutheran/Catholic fake charities and NGOs need to keep the border open to eliminate Heritage Americans and create their globalist dystopia. It’s not too hard to understand.
And there’s the biggest problem. The burden of proof when bringing a lawsuit as plaintiff is on YOU, the plaintiff, and not on the defense. It’s easy in these types of cases to introduce enough doubt to prevent a win for the plaintiff, especially when the election officials have plenty of time to destroy evidence in the meantime.
In a functioning republic, the burden of proof in election challenges would be on those administering the election, not on the challengers. If we ever hope to have true election integrity, then every election MUST be assumed to be fraudulent until PROVEN fair and the results accurate. There should be automatic forensic audits of EVERY election as a matter of course, and the election methodology should be simple and completely transparent. No “black box” machines and no mail-in ballots.
If election officials have nothing to hide, then they should be all for enhanced election security and transparency. The fact that they fight tooth and nail against these things tells us all we need to know, however.
Does she appeal to the AZ court of appeals or appeal on one man one vote making it a federal issue?
Preponderance.
A growing number of citizens can not accept speculation or conjecture that the elections were legitimate when prima facia evidence and common sense says they were not.
To be legitimate any Democracy MUST of itself conduct elections that people can reasonably have faith in.
The judge is arguably not only obstructing the due process for investigating possible Section 2 violations of the 14th Amendment (14A) by Arizona, that section a penalty for states where ballot box fraud has occurred, but given the catch-all "in any way abridged" wording of Section 2, we're also possibly witnessing a judge helping to violate that section imo!
Excerpted from 14A:
"Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State." [Apportionment of Representatives]
As a side note to this post as it concerns Section 2, please consider the following.
Consider that the post-Civil War congressional Republicans who drafted Section 2 made it to discourage southern Democrats (my word) from rigging the ballot boxes that Democrats are now alleged to have done for 2020, and now 2022 elections!
Apportionment of Representatives
Getting back to Section 2, the feds, including the J6 lawmakers who voted to accept Biden's alleged stolen electoral votes, likewise wrongly ignored possible violations of Section 2 in several states in 2020 imo.
J6 lawmakers also wrongly ignored likely (imo) violations of constitutional procedures for electoral votes, state winner-take-all laws for electoral votes, for example, unconstitutional under 12th Amendment (12A) imo.
More specifically, the states surrendered their power to make so-called electoral vote "winner take all" laws, for example, when they ratified the Constitution, evidenced from 12A.
Excerpted from the 12th Amendment:
"12th Amendment: The Electors shall meet in their respective states, and vote by ballot for President and Vice-President, one of whom, at least, shall not be an inhabitant of the same state with themselves; they shall name in their ballots the person voted for as President, and in distinct ballots the person voted for as Vice-President, and they shall make distinct lists of all persons voted for as President, and of all persons voted for as Vice- President, and of the number of votes for each, which lists they shall sign and certify, and transmit sealed to the seat of the government of the United States, directed to the President of the Senate [emphasis added], ..."
In fact, Justice Joseph Story had emphasized that the overall effect of a state with divided electoral votes is that it reduces number of electoral votes for a single candidate.
"In case of any party divisions in a state, it may neutralize its whole vote, while all the other states give an unbroken electoral vote." —Justice Joseph Story, Article 2, Section 1, Clauses 2 and 3, Commentaries on the Constitution 3, 1833."
Joseph Stolen. Junta Joe.
and distributed to
If there was even a HINT of "tabulation errors" where a republican won over a democrat, you can be damned sure that a re-do would be ordered in the blink of an eye.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.