Kari Lake calls for imprisoning Maricopa County election officials

[Slade3200]

Even if it has all the details, it's after the trial.
The judge is an idiot for not bringing up thousands of boxes of wrong size paper.
For that alone I would declare a new election.

“Even if” so you didn’t even look my link after the whole video debacle and you claiming there’s nothing in print?! Wow

How about this… article from CBS about the paper size and chain of custody claims that they printed before the ruling? This stuff wasn’t hidden.

Still not seeing your case that Lake was targeted and damaged through any illegal means. Judge didn’t see it either. Did you read his ruling? It’s in my last post

Kari Lake to claim in court Arizona governor's race was stolen from her

Lake has claimed for weeks that her loss in the Arizona governor's race was illegitimate. She'll be able to inspect ballots, call witnesses and introduce evidence in the two-day trial.

www.cbsnews.com

 

[my2¢]

Being an analyst goes down the drain when the system fails.

Their backup plan worked. What I question is whether it was wise at affected sites to attempt to fix the printer problem in real time rather than commit 100% to batching the ballots for processing at election headquarters that evening as the plan called for.

 

[Zincwarrior]

Their backup plan worked. What I question is whether it was wise at affected sites to attempt to fix the printer problem in real time rather than commit 100% to batching the ballots for processing at election headquarters that evening as the plan called for.

Evidently they print individual ballots out as voters they can go to any location. In my county we can also. Due to my location I can vote for some things in the county but not city items, so my ballot is different than others.

 

[my2¢]

Evidently they print individual ballots out as voters they can go to any location. In my county we can also. Due to my location I can vote for some things in the county but not city items, so my ballot is different than others.

Yes, here besides the state and county-wide offices there are also items that were dependent on where one resides in the county, such as:

• Justice of the Peace district
• US Congressional district
• State Legislative district
• County Supervisor district
• Elementary School District
• High School District
• City/Town Name (if applicable)

Plus, whether to print ballot in English or Spanish.

With the county having an area larger than many states, election officials claimed that over 12,000 different ballot styles were needed to handle the 2022 election.

 

[Care4all]

Dumbass Nazi.

They were proven in court.

That a judge did what I said he would do from the start and ruled that they didn't alter the election in no way changes the fact that Katie Hobbs tampered with the election by providing the wrong ballots in Republican districts for the purpose of disenfranchising voters.

Geebus!

Katie Hobbs did not provide ballots.

In Maricopa county, ballots are printed individually, one voter at a time, at the voting spot they are at, this allows all voters in Maricopa, the ability to vote in any voting precinct, not just in their own voting precinct. Hobbs didn't print any ballots. Hobbs does not run the election in any county, the election supervisors for each county and each precinct do....

In Maricopa County the election head supervisor, Bill Gates, is a Republican.

 

[Care4all]

Below is the beginning of he Judge Ruling....the judge simply is following Arizona Law, and Kari Lake Lawyers were not.


---------------------------------------------------

Court: Judge does not find clear evidence of misconduct in Kari Lake election case

A Maricopa County judge has ruled against Kari Lake in her election lawsuit, affirming governor-elect Katie Hobbs’ win.

www.azfamily.com

The Court has considered the evidence presented at the Evidentiary Hearing on December 21-22, 2022, including all exhibits admitted as well as the testimony of witnesses. The Court has read and considered all 220 Affidavits attached to the Verified Petition. The Court has also considered the arguments by counsel. The Court accordingly issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: LEGAL STANDARDS AND BURDEN OF PROOF Throughout the history of Arizona, the bar to overturn an election on the grounds of misconduct in this State – or Territory – has always been a high one. See Territory ex rel. Sherman v. Bd. of Supervisors of Mohave Cnty., 2 Ariz. 248, 253 (1887) (“It is the object of elections to ascertain a free expression of the will of the voters, and no mere irregularity can be considered, unless it be shown that the result has been affected by such irregularity.”) (citations omitted).


SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY CV 2022-095403 12/24/2022 Docket Code 926 Form V000A Page 2 Our Territorial Supreme Court agreed in Oakes v. Finlay, 5 Ariz. 390, 398 (1898) that “it is . . . unwise to lay down any rule by which the certainty and accuracy of an election may be jeopardized by the reliance upon any proof affecting such results that is not of the most clear and conclusive character.” (citing Young v. Deming, 33 P. 818, 820 (Utah 1893)) (emphasis added). The official election returns are prima facie evidence of the votes actually cast by the electorate. See Hunt v. Campbell, 19 Ariz. 254, 268 (1917). The burden of proof in an election contest is on the challenger. Findley v. Sorenson, 35 Ariz. 265, 271-72 (1929). “The duty of specifying and pointing out the alleged illegal irregularities and insufficiencies is a task that should be undertaken by litigants and their counsel.” Grounds v. Lawe, 67 Ariz. 176, 189 (1948). As for the actions of elections officials themselves, this Court must presume the good faith of their official conduct as a matter of law. Hunt, 19 Ariz. at 268. “[A]ll reasonable presumptions must favor the validity of an election.” Moore v. City of Page, 148 Ariz. 151, 155 (App. 1986). Election challengers must prove the elements of their claim by clear and convincing evidence. Cf. McClung v. Bennett, 225 Ariz. 154, 156, ¶ 7 (2010). The Order granting in part Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss gave Plaintiff two independent claims for seeking their requested relief under A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1). Plaintiff has only these options because election contests, “are purely statutory and dependent upon statutory provisions for their conduct.” Fish v. Redeker, 2 Ariz.App. 602, 605 (1966). Put another way, Plaintiff has no free-standing right to challenge election results based upon what Plaintiff believes – rightly or wrongly – went awry on Election Day. She must, as a matter of law, prove a ground that the legislature has provided as a basis for challenging an election. See Henderson v. Carter, 34 Ariz. 528, 534-35 (1928) (“[O]ne who would contest an election assumes the burden of showing that his case falls within the terms of the statute providing for election contests. The remedy may not be extended to include cases not within the language or intent of the legislative act.”); see also Donaghey v. Att’y Gen., 120 Ariz. 93, 95 (1978) (“[F]ailure of a contestant to an election to strictly comply with the statutory requirements is fatal to h[er] right to have the election contested.”). Plaintiff’s remaining claims are based on the following statutory ground: “[M]isconduct on the part of election boards or any members thereof in any of the counties of the state, or on the part of any officer making or participating in a canvass for a state election.” A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1). This trial was premised on Plaintiff’s theories arising from the second clause, concerning an officer making or participating in a canvass. The Order permitted two counts to proceed to Trial: 1) the claim that ballot-on-demand (“BOD”) printer malfunctions experienced on Election Day were caused intentionally and that these malfunctions resulted in a changed outcome (Count II); and 2) the claim that Maricopa

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY CV 2022-095403 12/24/2022 Docket Code 926 Form V000A Page 3 County violated its own election procedures manual (“EPM”) as to chain of custody procedures in such a way as to result in a changed election outcome (Count IV). As outlined in the Order partially granting the Motion to Dismiss, there are four elements to each claim. Plaintiff needed to prove by clear and convincing evidence, each element to be entitled to relief: 1) That the alleged misconduct – whether the BOD printer irregularities, or the ostensible failure to abide by county election procedures – was an intentional act. See Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269. 2) That the misconduct was an intentional act conducted by a person covered by A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1), that is – an “officer making or participating in a canvass.” 3) That the misconduct was intended to change the result of the November 2022 General Election. See Findley, 35 Ariz. at 269. 4) That the misconduct did, in fact, change the result of that election. See Grounds, 67 Ariz. at 189. It bears mentioning that because of the requested remedy – setting aside the result of the election – the question that is before the Court is of monumental importance to every voter. The margin of victory as reported by the official canvass is 17,117 votes – beyond the scope of a statutorily required recount. A court setting such a margin aside, as far as the Court is able to determine, has never been done in the history of the United States. This challenge also comes after a hotly contested gubernatorial race and an ongoing tumult over election procedures and legitimacy – a far less uncommon occurrence in this country. See e.g., Hunt, supra. This Court acknowledges the anger and frustration of voters who were subjected to inconvenience and confusion at voter centers as technical problems arose during the 2022 General Election. But this Court’s duty is not solely to incline an ear to public outcry. It is to subject Plaintiff’s claims and Defendants’ actions to the light of the courtroom and scrutiny of the law. See Winsor v. Hunt, 29 Ariz. 504, 512 (1926) (“It is the boast of American democracy that this is a government of laws, and not of men.”) And so, the Court begins with a review of the evidence. DISCUSSION It was Plaintiff’s burden to establish each element by clear and convincing evidence. If Plaintiff herself failed to sustain her burden of proof, the matter is decided. Thus, the Court begins with Plaintiff’s case in chief.


More to come!

 

[Care4all]

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW Considering all evidence presented, the Court finds as follows:
As to Count II – Illegal BOD Printer/Tabulator Configurations:

a. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence of misconduct in violation of A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1).

b. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was committed by “an officer making or participating in a canvass” under A.R.S. § 16- 672(A)(1).

c. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was intended to affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

d. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct did in fact affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

As to Count IV – Chain of Custody Violations:

a. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence of misconduct in violation of A.R.S. § 16-672(A)(1).

b. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was committed by “an officer making or participating in a canvass”

c. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct was intended to affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

d. The Court DOES NOT find clear and convincing evidence that such misconduct did in fact affect the result of the 2022 General Election.

Therefore: IT IS ORDERED: confirming the election of Katie Hobbs as Arizona Governor-Elect pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-676(B).

The Court notes the representations of the County Defendants that a motion for sanctions would be forthcoming and the Court also considers the need of this Court to enter an Order under Rule 54(c), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure so that an appeal on all issues might be taken in a timely fashion.

Therefore: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED: that a statement of costs including compensation of inspectors under A.R.S. § 16-677(C) must be filed by 8:00 a.m. Monday, December 26, 2022. Failure to do so by the deadline will be deemed a waiver of those costs. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED: any motion for sanctions must be filed by 8:00 a.m. Monday, December 26, 2022, and any response by Plaintiff must be filed by 5:00 p.m. Monday, December 26, 2022. The Court will not consider a reply. After consideration of any sanctions motion, or the failure to file such a motion, and the presentation of costs to be assessed, the Court will enter a signed judgment under Rule 54(c). R ETRIEVE D FR O M D E M O C R A C Y D O C KET.

Court: Judge does not find clear evidence of misconduct in Kari Lake election case

A Maricopa County judge has ruled against Kari Lake in her election lawsuit, affirming governor-elect Katie Hobbs’ win.

www.azfamily.com

 

[Indeependent]

LOL

You can't even get that right. The ballots were the right size.

'Read the fine print': Small text size on Maricopa County’s massive ballots worries voter advocates

Voter advocates are warning it will be hard for Maricopa County voters to read and understand their midterm ballots, because the county is using small text sizes to accommodate an extraordinary number of election contests.

www.azmirror.com

No, they were copied from a ballot that was the wrong side and the progarm picked the up and rejected the ballots.

 

[Indeependent]

Si ce the paper was not the wrong size, why should the judge have done that?

O, Faun...so predictable...try reading every article before you put your gigantic ego into a tiny bag.

 

[Indeependent]

“Even if” so you didn’t even look my link after the whole video debacle and you claiming there’s nothing in print?! Wow

How about this… article from CBS about the paper size and chain of custody claims that they printed before the ruling? This stuff wasn’t hidden.

Still not seeing your case that Lake was targeted and damaged through any illegal means. Judge didn’t see it either. Did you read his ruling? It’s in my last post

Kari Lake to claim in court Arizona governor's race was stolen from her

Lake has claimed for weeks that her loss in the Arizona governor's race was illegitimate. She'll be able to inspect ballots, call witnesses and introduce evidence in the two-day trial.

www.cbsnews.com

I'm so glad you looked and found something.
I never said it was hidden.
I wouldn't look at CBS because they're full of shit 99.99999% of the time.

 

[Indeependent]

Their backup plan worked. What I question is whether it was wise at affected sites to attempt to fix the printer problem in real time rather than commit 100% to batching the ballots for processing at election headquarters that evening as the plan called for.

Then the election would take a year.

 

[my2¢]

Then the election would take a year.

Huh? The printer problem caused local tabulators at the voting centers to kick out ballots. The tabulator(s) at the main election headquarters were able to count them. Heard reports of people complaining because they wanted their ballot tabulated right then and there. I sure would hate to be a poll worker dealing with those election deniers that had been convinced the county was pulling the wool over their eyes. You think they held up the line much?

 

[Indeependent]

Huh? The printer problem caused local tabulators at the voting centers to kick out ballots. The tabulator(s) at the main election headquarters were able to count them. Heard reports of people complaining because they wanted their ballot tabulated right then and there. I sure would hate to be a poll worker dealing with those election deniers that had been convinced the county was pulling the wool over their eyes. You think they held up the line much?

To be honest, we have zero idea what happened with those ballots.
I live in NY, a State of 20 million people, that doesn't fuck up ballots.
Making one mistake when you have at least 2 years to prepare says something about the State's incompetence.

 

[Slade3200]

I'm so glad you looked and found something.
I never said it was hidden.
I wouldn't look at CBS because they're full of shit 99.99999% of the time.

do you think the CBS article I posted was full of shit?

 

[Slade3200]

I'm so glad you looked and found something.
I never said it was hidden.

What were you saying wasn’t being reported?

That could be due to the fact that the print and web media was not reporting the details and you're stuck in headline mode.

 

[my2¢]

To be honest, we have zero idea what happened with those ballots.

Even Lake's witness testified the ballots were counted. Uncertainty is why the Oki printers had a problem while the Lexmarks didn't.

 

[Indeependent]

What were you saying wasn’t being reported?

You found the story because I told you what to look for.
One outlet...pathetic.

 

[Indeependent]

Even Lake's witness testified the ballots were counted. Uncertainty is why the Oki printers had a problem while the Lexmarks didn't.

Link to where she says every ballot in every box was counted in front of her or one of her campaign volunteers.
She has interviews on YouTube where she says the ballots were supposedly carried off somewhere to be counted.
Yes, I don't you don't watch interviews on YouTube.

 

[Slade3200]

You found the story because I told you what to look for.
One outlet...pathetic.

I could post many. How many do you want?! I thought an example from MSM CBS that’s 99.999999% fake news would suffice as showing your claim as inaccurate. Do you really need more?

 

[Indeependent]

I'm so glad you looked and found something.
I never said it was hidden.
I wouldn't look at CBS because they're full of shit 99.99999% of the time.

How is looking at 20,000 ballots in 3 days going to prove they went through a ballot counting machine?