Kari Lake Accused of Breaking Law by Proving Democrats Broke Law, and Having Gall to Legally Show Fraud Ballots with Bad Signature Matches

[Blaster]

Never did. I consider myself unaffiliated with views that do not fit within any box.

You seem to change with everything you post. You need to be more consistent in your views.

 

[Faun]

"results"

The difference is I am honest, and you are not.

Quote a lie I told...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

You seem to change with everything you post. You need to be more consistent in your views.

Tell me one issue I have changed on.

Just one

 

[Faun]

Because the election systems were changed via COVID panic to make sure it would be as difficult as possible to prove anything.

"You found no evidence because we flushed it down the toilet"

You're an idiot, Nancy. Here's a prime example of just one of the cases tossed due to lack of merit.

Nevada Supreme Court unanimously dismisses Trump lawsuit to overturn Nevada election result

Documents filed Monday ask the high court to reverse Judge James Todd Russell's finding on Friday that the legal team for six Republican electors failed to prove the Nov. 3 election was swayed by fraudulent or illegal votes.

www.rgj.com

They filed a case claiming dead people voted, others voted in Nevada and another state, and many weren't registered to vote.

The judge threw it out because they had no evidence to demonstrate any of that upon the first motion to dismiss by the defendant...

"Contestants' claims fail on the merits ... or under any other standard," the judge said in his 35-page ruling.​

... so then the plaintiff filed an appeal... ALL 6 Justices ruled unanimously against them and upheld the lower court's ruling.

“To prevail on this appeal, appellants must demonstrate error of law, findings of fact not supported by substantial evidence or an abuse of discretion in the admission or rejection of evidence by the district court,” the six justices said. “We are not convinced they have done so.”​

That's 7 judges in 2 courts ALL reaching the same conclusion... the plaintiff's evidence failed to demonstrate fraud.

 

[Marener]

So is the Maricopa Board of Directors and they certified a joke of an election. Why do you think the MSM will not cover the story?

Kari Lake's likely illegal posting of signatures has been covered by the mainstream media. They also covered why her allegations are misleading.

Kari Lake's lawsuit against Maricopa County was garbage. Almost all of it was thrown out for legitimate reasons. The narrow allegations that went to trial were likewise dismissed because they didn't have proof of their claims.

 

[martybegan]

They're not excuses, they're accurate descriptions of the lawsuits. Accepting these lawsuits as legitimate would have severe consequences for the legal system. These rules are in a place for a reason. To protect people from abusing a very powerful system.

They are excuses, because if even one of them had even a slice of their merit admitted to the whole system would be called into question.

 

[martybegan]

Quote a lie I told...

The IQ test results.

I don't believe, I will never believe you.

 

[Lastamender]

You're an idiot, Nancy. Here's a prime example of just one of the cases tossed due to lack of merit.

Nevada Supreme Court unanimously dismisses Trump lawsuit to overturn Nevada election result

Documents filed Monday ask the high court to reverse Judge James Todd Russell's finding on Friday that the legal team for six Republican electors failed to prove the Nov. 3 election was swayed by fraudulent or illegal votes.

www.rgj.com

They filed a case claiming dead people voted, others voted in Nevada and another state, and many weren't registered to vote.

The judge threw it out because they had no evidence to demonstrate any of that upon the first motion to dismiss by the defendant...

"Contestants' claims fail on the merits ... or under any other standard," the judge said in his 35-page ruling.​

... so then the plaintiff filed an appeal... ALL 6 Justices ruled unanimously against them and upheld the lower court's ruling.

“To prevail on this appeal, appellants must demonstrate error of law, findings of fact not supported by substantial evidence or an abuse of discretion in the admission or rejection of evidence by the district court,” the six justices said. “We are not convinced they have done so.”​

That's 7 judges in 2 courts ALL reaching the same conclusion... the plaintiff's evidence failed to demonstrate fraud.

Had any of the evidence been released by election officials? Did they have the chance to examine ballots? The answer is no. The court should have demanded transparency. Corruption and intimidation work wonders.

 

[martybegan]

You're an idiot, Nancy. Here's a prime example of just one of the cases tossed due to lack of merit.

Nevada Supreme Court unanimously dismisses Trump lawsuit to overturn Nevada election result

Documents filed Monday ask the high court to reverse Judge James Todd Russell's finding on Friday that the legal team for six Republican electors failed to prove the Nov. 3 election was swayed by fraudulent or illegal votes.

www.rgj.com

They filed a case claiming dead people voted, others voted in Nevada and another state, and many weren't registered to vote.

The judge threw it out because they had no evidence to demonstrate any of that upon the first motion to dismiss by the defendant...

"Contestants' claims fail on the merits ... or under any other standard," the judge said in his 35-page ruling.​

... so then the plaintiff filed an appeal... ALL 6 Justices ruled unanimously against them and upheld the lower court's ruling.

“To prevail on this appeal, appellants must demonstrate error of law, findings of fact not supported by substantial evidence or an abuse of discretion in the admission or rejection of evidence by the district court,” the six justices said. “We are not convinced they have done so.”​

That's 7 judges in 2 courts ALL reaching the same conclusion... the plaintiff's evidence failed to demonstrate fraud.

[/QUOTE]

The issue is the bar is set so high to "prove" voter fraud in this standard that no one will meet the merit standard.

Mighty convenient for the status quo.

 

[Lastamender]

Kari Lake's likely illegal posting of signatures has been covered by the mainstream media. They also covered why her allegations are misleading.

Kari Lake's lawsuit against Maricopa County was garbage. Almost all of it was thrown out for legitimate reasons. The narrow allegations that went to trial were likewise dismissed because they didn't have proof of their claims.

I see the MSM let the country know over 60% of machines failed in Republican districts and wrong size ballots were printed. Did they also let people know about no chain of custody and the SOS Hobbs threatening county officials with jail if they did not certify?

Of course they did not because there would be an uproar and they know it. They omit and outright lie. They do not want Americans to hear the facts.

 

[Marener]

They are excuses, because if even one of them had even a slice of their merit admitted to the whole system would be called into question.

Nonsense. Failure to correct actual deficiencies would call the whole system into question.

But you can't let bullshit lawsuits go through, or else the system falls apart.

For example, Kari Lake complains that the Arizona methods for signature verification is not in compliance with the law. Kari Lake has all the information in her claim in April 2020. Instead of filing a lawsuit then, what does she do? She waits until after the election and uses the information to ask the court to declare her the winner.

That's not okay. You can't wait until after people vote to see if you win or not and then file a lawsuit. It would be depriving everyone in Arizona their vote to let the courts decide elections. These things matter. You can't let people abuse the system this way.

 

[Faun]

The IQ test results.

I don't believe, I will never believe you.

LOL

Yet you did. You even kvetched over the results like my grandmother.

Regardless, whether or not you believe me is not evidence I lied. It's just you having to live with the sour grapes that your IQ is in the shadow of mine.

 

[Faun]

Had any of the evidence been released by election officials? Did they have the chance to examine ballots? The answer is no. The court should have demanded transparency. Corruption and intimidation work wonders.

They didn't need election officials to release anything. They brought their own evidence to court. Sadly for them, the evidence they brought didn't show evidence of election fraud. All it showed was how stupid the plaintiff's were.

 

[martybegan]

Nonsense. Failure to correct actual deficiencies would call the whole system into question.

But you can't let bullshit lawsuits go through, or else the system falls apart.

For example, Kari Lake complains that the Arizona methods for signature verification is not in compliance with the law. Kari Lake has all the information in her claim in April 2020. Instead of filing a lawsuit then, what does she do? She waits until after the election and uses the information to ask the court to declare her the winner.

That's not okay. You can't wait until after people vote to see if you win or not and then file a lawsuit. It would be depriving everyone in Arizona their vote to let the courts decide elections. These things matter. You can't let people abuse the system this way.

Why not?

Also, she would have been denied on Standing UNLESS she lost as she has to show some damage, as another poster showed.


'

 

[martybegan]

LOL

Yet you did. You even kvetched over the results like my grandmother.

Regardless, whether or not you believe me is not evidence I lied. It's just you having to live with the sour grapes that your IQ is in the shadow of mine.

Shadow?

Wasn't it like 5 points or something?

Even if I believed you, which I don't.

 

[Marener]

I see the MSM let the country know over 60% of machines failed in Republican districts and wrong size ballots were printed. Did they also let people know about no chain of custody and the SOS Hobbs threatening county officials with jail if they did not certify?

Of course they did not because there would be an uproar and they know it. They omit and outright lie. They do not want Americans to hear the facts.

The failure of the machines was remedied and the people's votes were counted. The allegations of not having chain of custody were unsupported by evidence and Lake's witness had to admit that the forms to exist and she had no information that they were deficient. As for the officials, they have a duty to follow the law of the land. They don't get to do whatever they want. They have duties and obligations.

 

[Marener]

Why not?

Also, she would have been denied on Standing UNLESS she lost as she has to show some damage, as another poster showed.

Elections are decided by voters, not courts. You don't get to destroy our votes when you had a chance to have your complaint heard before the election.

Your belief she would be denied standing is an excuse and untrue.

 

[Lastamender]

They didn't need election officials to release anything. They brought their own evidence to court. Sadly for them, the evidence they brought didn't show evidence of election fraud. All it showed was how stupid the plaintiff's were.

They need to release anything pertaining to a challenged election. Stalling and lying only results in injustice and well deserved doubt. The judges were biased.

Still waiting on that quote lazy one.

 

[martybegan]

Elections are decided by voters, not courts. You don't get to destroy our votes when you had a chance to have your complaint heard before the election.

Your belief she would be denied standing is an excuse and untrue.

Right now elections may be decided by whoever can cheat the best.

That removes the voters, and the courts don't want to touch the issue with a 10 foot pole.

 

[Marener]

Right now elections may be decided by whoever can cheat the best.

That removes the voters, and the courts don't want to touch the issue with a 10 foot pole.

If Lake didn't want people to cheat, why didn't she bring the lawsuit before the election? That way the procedures could have been fixed (if they truly were deficient as she said) and it could have been decided by the voters instead of a court after the fact.