Posted on 12/29/2022 8:47:59 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Republican Kari Lake highlighted a story in a tweet about a recent ruling in Georgia ordering a new election there after a hearing found that state elections officials identified so many “systemic irregularities” that it likely changed the results of the election.
Lake’s recent tweet about the GA election update, was made just days after a judge ruled not to overturn the result of her race in Arizona or hold a new election in Maricopa County, even after hearing testimony that the same set of circumstances occurred in her own Arizona race.
The similarities to her own situation were notable.
In Gerogia, two sitting county commissioners, a candidate for local office, and two residents sued Screven County election officials over the November 8 General Election certification there.
In mid-November, GA Attorneys representing the GA parties being sued over the handling of the results of the election in Screven County, Georgia, filed their first answers to the lawsuit.
“The point of contention is over the county’s decision to certify election results in Screven County in a county commission race with a margin of just seven votes. In that race, the opponents of the certification now say proper ballots with the correct county commission districts were not given to voters who changed districts thanks to the redistricting earlier this year,” local GA news reported.
In District 1, Democrat incumbent Edwin Lovett prevailed over Republican Tyler Thompson by seven votes. 715 Screven County voters cast ballots in that district with Lovett garnering 361 votes (50.49%) and Thompson garnering 354 (49.51%).
GA news reported more details about their election issues:
“Respondent shows that it is the responsibility of the Chief Registrar of Screven County, Georgia to assign individuals upon registration or reassign individuals to voting districts when redistricting occurs. Additionally, it is the responsibility of the Chief Registrar to provide Screven County election officials and the Secretary of State with updated voter registration and district assignment information to ensure that ballots will be provided to voters based on the district in which they reside. All ballots are provided to voters based upon information supplied by the Chief Registrar; information upon which election officials, including Respondent, rely.”
Additionally, the elections workers contended the following in their filing:
Petitioners Allison Willis and Mike Dixon lack standing to contest the election because they are not entitled to vote in the contested election for County Commissioner District
1. Petitioner Michael Lloyd Waters is not currently a resident of District 1 and he did not become a resident of District 1 as a result of redistricting.
Petitioner Vikki Reddick is a resident of District 1 but Brown and Derriso do not know any additional information because that is the responsibility of the Registrar.
Derriso and Brown admit they discovered that the Chief Registrar made an error regarding the issuance of certain ballots for the District 1 election, and admit that Respondent Derriso certified the election on November 15 and 16, 2022 “as required by O.C.G.A. § 21-2-493(i), which provides: “If any error or fraud is discovered, the superintendent shall compute and certify the votes justly, regardless of any fraudulent or erroneous returns presented to him or her, and shall report the facts to the appropriate district attorney for action.”
They contend that Respondents were aware of an error, Georgia law required them to certify the results of the election.
Brown and Derriso ask for the suit to be dismissed because the Petitioners ‘failed to name an indispensable party (the Chief Registrar),’ because Petitioners ‘failed to follow written instructions regarding voting procedures,’ and request that all costs incurred so far be assigned to the plaintiffs.
“The Georgia case involved a rural county commission race in Screven County, where several candidates filed a lawsuit alleging incorrect ballots were issued to at least two dozen voters, potentially altering the outcome of a county commission race decided by just seven votes,” The Georgia Virtue article, posted by Lake reported, adding:
“Several voters, it was later found, had been assigned ballots to districts they did not live in, meaning voters of a certain district were effectively disenfranchised from the vote in their home districts—an argument Lake made after up to 1,000 Arizona voters were provided with incorrect ballots in early voting in the fall.
The judge ultimately ordered a new election in Screven County—something Lake has been pushing for in Arizona after alleging, and failing to prove, instances of rampant fraud and irregularities in her own election.”
“WORTH NOTING,” Lake wrote on Twitter.
“Judge to Order New Election in Screven County, Georgia, After ‘Systemic Irregularities’ Kari Lake (@KariLake) December 28, 2022.
Newsweek reported with more details about the situation:
Screven County has just over 14,000 residents; Arizona has nearly 7.3 million. The ballots in question were just several doors away from the district boundary; Lake’s race was statewide, and had no resemblance to the dynamics seen in a rural county commission race about 2,000 miles away. Screven County was also decided by seven votes; Arizona by more than 17,000.
But the Screven County case also had something Lake’s case did not: evidence that the issues reported there had a tangible impact on the outcome of the election.
While Lake’s attorneys claimed in court that a printer malfunction caused some ballots not to be counted by machine, ballots that were submitted were ultimately counted by hand, and did not have any impact on people’s ability to vote.
The case in Screven County, however, did, and a judge needed only 17 minutes to determine that the apparently accidental distribution of ballots might have caused an incorrect outcome.
According to the law there, a new election is warranted if the number of illegal votes exceeds the margin of the results, or if it is proven there were systemic irregularities in the election process determined to be “sufficiently egregious” to cast doubt on the result.
In this case, plaintiffs challenging the elections process identified more than 20 illegal votes that were cast for the wrong candidate, a margin wide enough to be considered “sufficiently egregious” and cast doubt on the result. Lake’s attorneys failed to prove that a similar situation occurred in Arizona.
They deny that illegal votes were received and deny that legal votes were rejected.
hmmmmm
Bookmark
Precedent, isn’t that what judges like to go to. Like the silly precedent the judge found in Lakes case that’s 100 years old and really doesn’t apply.
When Democrats lose in court, they appeal. They keep appealing all the way to the Supreme Court, more than once if necessary.
will kari be appealing the ruling that she received?
If you’re not her case was as strong and clear cut as this one.
Anyone got a “Cliff Notes” version?
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.