Skip to comments.Kari Lake scores win as Arizona Supreme Court sends part of her lawsuit back to trial court
Posted on 03/22/2023 8:41:31 PM PDT by CFW
click here to read article
This bolsters my contention that in election lawsuits by Republicans the courts are simply refusing to look at any and all evidence.
The Dems KNOW if they steal it there is not a court ANYWHERE that will touch it, SO why not steal it NO CONSEQUENCES!!!
Agreed. When the left screams that the Courts ruled that no evidence of fraud was found, they leave out the part where the Courts all dismissed claims on technical reasons without allowing or viewing any evidence of said fraud.
I watched the trial. She should have won on all her points. They just wanted to give the trial judge some cover and didn’t have the guts to say the trial was completely unfair to Kari and the election was stolen.
Maricopa County is a criminal enterprise. PERIOD. Once the Arizona Dung Beetle Party and the “loved ones” of the criminals in Arizona’s prisons got rid of Arpaio, the county went to sh*t.
1. Did the panel err in deciding that a century of precedent applies the clear-and- convincing standard to all aspects of election contests, contrary to Parker v. City of Tucson, 233 Ariz. 422, 436 n.14 (App. 2013), in which Division Two recognized that the evidentiary standard remains an open question in cases— like this— where there is neither express statutory standard nor an allegation of fraud?
2. Given the EPM’s requirement that “the number of ballots inside the container shall be counted and noted on the retrieval form” “[w]hen the secure ballot container is opened,” EPM, Chapter 2, §I.7.h.1, did the panel err in holding that the EPM does not “impos[e] any express time requirement” for “when” to count ballots and that “an initial estimate” of ballots is all that the law requires?
3. Did the panel err when it ignored the undisputed fact that 35,563 unaccounted for ballots were added to the total number of ballots at a third party processing facility—an amount far exceeding the vote margin between Hobbs and Lake—holding that fact was insufficient to show the election’s outcome was at least “uncertain” under Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269?
4. Did the panel err when it ignored the fact that Maricopa did not perform L&A testing as required by EPM and A.R.S. §16-449?
5. Did the panel err when it ignored the evidence that Maricopa’s failure to perform L&A testing caused massive disruptions to voting on Election Day disenfranchising thousands of Republican voters, and rejecting evidence that the chaos made the election outcome at least “uncertain” under Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269?
7. Did the panel err in dismissing the Equal Protection and Due Process claims on the pleadings as “duplicative” of Count II, without considering the additional issues that equal-protection and due-process review add to Maricopa’s misconduct, such as the targeting of Republican voters and the “patent and fundamental unfairness” of targeted election disruptions?
With the current election process in place it is ALWAYS plausible the outcome could have been different had the election been fair.
If there is a hole big enough to drive a truck through then a truck might have driven through it. We should not be required to prove that there was a truck, the election should already be run in a way to assure us there could not be one.
So did I.
After all the theatrics from the shrill, deranged Bolshevik B***h attorney in the trial it seemed to me that Kari had won.
When the Elmer Fudd Judge put out his opinion so soon it was obvious the opinion was already written before the trial and he was taking dictation from Marc Elias.
Now he’s on the hook to pay attention and actually pretend to be impartial.
Big Whoop, it's a very small part of her lawsuit.
The paper shredders have already handled this problem BANK ON IT!!!
Dare the bastards to steal it again in broad daylight.
Thanks to Kari, we found out about the printer settings being changed on the morning of the elections, and that the same thing happened in 2020 with Trump's election.
99% of republicans would have folded like a cheap tent and "moved on."
Keep fighting, Kari!
That's not my take. They endorsed every bad ruling the trial court made and sent it back, telling the trial judge to invent another bad ruling on the signature matching, rather than refusing to rule on it, for them to endorse. Honest judges would have ruled for Lake on all 7 instead of denying her on 6. Now we have to trust the judges who previously ignored a huge amount of truth 6 times to rule against Lake, to rule for her? IIRC one of the 6, probably the final one, could potentially be appealed to SCOTUS but otherwise the theft is done. Still waiting for a ruling from the lower judge Hamaden's call for either a new election or to let the rest of his votes be counted in the AG race. But so far it looks like the constitutional judicial system in AZ is completely gone. About the only hope I see remaining is if SCOTUS rules this term in favor of pure legislative oversight over elections, in which case the AZ legislature might be able to take some action in spite of "Gov. Hobbs."
Corrupt 3rd-World Arizona - bump for later....
The courts have taken the paradoxical position that if the fact that elections are routinely stolen becomes known it would harm peoples faith in democracy. Therefore to save democracy they must protect stolen elections.
What’s the wait time for a Hobbs recall? 150 days?
I recall reading somewhere that if a recall election happened, it would take place in July.
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.