Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Right Brother

Under Arizona law the proof had to be that there was intentional misconduct to deny her votes.


85 posted on 12/24/2022 1:30:28 PM PST by drjimmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]


To: drjimmy

As long as people hinge their hopes on court cases, it keeps hope going, and it just delays what needs to be done. Stop hoping! Hope is not a strategy!


87 posted on 12/24/2022 1:31:49 PM PST by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

To: drjimmy

“Under Arizona law the proof had to be that there was intentional misconduct to deny her votes.”

Manipulating a printer to reduce or enlarge an image so that it cannot possibly be read by tabulators programmed for a specific size is intentional. If a judge doesn’t understand that, then he’s a stupid person.


88 posted on 12/24/2022 1:33:30 PM PST by MayflowerMadam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

To: drjimmy

That is an odd law. If machines are failing widespread, why would “intent’ factor in? What if the majority of the machines failed statewide and only 30% of the vote came in? I would assume that whoever is leading at that time wins if the law doesn’t allow a revote?


98 posted on 12/24/2022 1:42:45 PM PST by Right Brother
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson