Arizona Judge Rejects Kari Lake’s Effort to Overturn Her Election Loss

[Natural Citizen]

NFT SCHILL Trump is not the subject of this thread.

You don't have any self-awareness whatsoever, do you? Not even just a little bit, huh.

 

[BackAgain]

It wasn't the judge alone. It was Arizona caselaw. The judge merely cited the caselaw.

There is a lot more to the law than merely citing a statute or a precedent. You analysis is shallow.

 

[BackAgain]

At first you were being careful not to lie. Your strategy was to say a bunch of nothing.
Your new strategy to just make things up.
Hillary didn't say she won.
You went from a timid moron to a lying moron.

You are being wholly dishonest. No surprise.

Your “strategy” is controlled by lies.

 

[MagicMike]

An activist judge can always overturn an election. It's how same sex marriage became legal in California.

There is no such thing as "an activist" judge.
They don't last long.

 

[BackAgain]

Because I watched the fucking trial not Gateway MAGA cumbucket.

You watched a “trial” so you “know” that all ballots were counted? Go fuck yourself Zinc. You’re an asshole.

I know this because I’ve watched many a trial.

 

[beautress]

Merry Christmas to both left and right USMB members and guests. May the road rise up to meet every one of you, may the wind be always at your back, and may each day of the new year bring special joy and comfort to you and those you love. The ways of caring for others blesses everyone, and the sincere heart that cares for his fellow man enough to learn the ways of peace, which begins in the human heart, and the determination to stick with it. It's a good day to turn over a new leaf. Hope peace lasts throughout the new year for you and your loved ones. Love, beautress.

 

[Toro]

 

[BackAgain]

The claim is a joke, you sound just like a flat earther.

Your opinion really really matters.

The claim remains.

 

[Ame®icano]

What fraudulent election?

Making assumption after reading only two sentences of the post will get you nowhere, just as your post proves it.

 

[Toro]

 

[Ame®icano]

When did Hillary claim she won the 2016 election?

I'm pretty sure that's made up bullshit.

When she claimed Trump colluded with Russians, and when she called him illegitimate president. What, you don't remember?

 

[Faun]

You watched a “trial” so you “know” that all ballots were counted? Go fuck yourself Zinc. You’re an asshole.

I know this because I’ve watched many a trial.

What a shame Lake couldn't prove not all the ballots were counted.

 

[Faun]

Your opinion really really matters.

The claim remains.

No, your insanity does.

 

[Delldude]

The voters clearly do. As they are demanding far more than you are from their candidates.

And you are comfortable electing the same retreads who keep screwing everything up......cool to be you.

 

[pyetro]

I could. It’s easy. Just use google.

Why do you ask? Are you denying it?

Let’s make it easy for you:

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...

news.yahoo.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html

Need more? Ok. Try this:


— source: Fact-check: Did Democrats suggest 2016 presidential election was stolen?

There’s lots more. You know. Those pesky election deniers. Like the fat blob with the gap teeth out of Ga. ?

Did Strawberry

I could. It’s easy. Just use google.

Why do you ask? Are you denying it?

Let’s make it easy for you:

Hillary Clinton Maintains 2016 Election ‘Was Not On the Level’: ‘We Still Don’t Know What Really Happened’

Hillary Clinton is sticking with her conviction that the 2016 presidential election was not conducted legitimately, saying the details surrounding her loss are still unclear."There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level," Clinton said during an interview...

news.yahoo.com

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html

Need more? Ok. Try this:


— source: Fact-check: Did Democrats suggest 2016 presidential election was stolen?

There’s lots more. You know. Those pesky election deniers. Like the fat blob with the gap teeth out of Ga. ?

You mean the one who lost to Kemp, who doesn't believe in Trump's fraud conspiracy theorists? You shouldn't have

When she claimed Trump colluded with Russians, and when she called him illegitimate president. What, you don't remember?

Hillray wasn't asking judges to nullify the elections.

 

[JimH52]

I'm not quoting me. I'm citing the standards of evidence that Kari had to meet, laid out by the judge when authorized Lake's hearing.

"However, evidence is not before the Court at the motion to dismiss stage—pleadings, made under the auspices of Rule 11 are. Accordingly, Plaintiff must show at trial that the BOD printer malfunctions were intentional, and directed to affect the results of the election, and that such actions did actually affect the outcome."

Right there. Lake had to prove that the malfunctions were intentional, that this was actual sabotage. AND that the sabotage was directed to affect the results of the election. AND that the actions did actually affect the outcome. And she failed utterly.

Worse still, the judge already laid the case law he was required to hold Kari to:

"A court must apply “all reasonable presumptions” in “favor [of] the validity of an election.” Moore v. City of Page, 148 Ariz. 151, 155 (App. 1986). “[H]onest mistakes or mere omissions on the part of election officers, or irregularities in directory matters, even though gross, if not fraudulent, will not void an election, unless they affect the result, or at least render it uncertain.” Findley v. Sorenson, 35 Ariz. 265, 269 (1929).

You know all of this. But pretend you don't.

This is how I knew the outcome. I'd seen the brief that Kari submitted and knew her claims and what she had to support them. I knew the high standard of evidence she would have to face, as the judge laid them out. And I knew her brief didn't meet those standards.

Nothing has changed on appeal. No matter how hard you pretend.

If she appeals, she is just showing how clueless she is. She will lose over and over and over....on the order of trump....the King of Losers.

 

[JimH52]

Isn't that the way our judicial system is set up?

She has the right to embarrass herself again. Go for it and show what a sore loser she is.

 

[JimH52]

Ah, using the power of the State to punish those who express disagreement with your policies.

So perfectly MAGA.

Dogshit candidates are gonna dogshit.

Look how desantis attacked Mickey Mouse. It is the MAGA way.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Your opinion really really matters.

The claim remains.

Yep just like the flat earthers still claim the earth is flat. You all have become the flat earthers of the political world

 

[citygator]

The whole country has less money in its pockets. Shit happens when elected officials decide to destroy the country.

Not here. What have you been doing twitch your time?