T. Belman. I saw this coming. The Judge held that Lake “failed to provide evidence of intentional misconduct”. But her expert witness was emphatic in saying it was intentional. Expert evidence is evidence.
TO MY MIND, THE JUDGE JUST DIDN’T WANT TO OVERTURN THE ELECTION.
Kari Lake, a Republican who was defeated by Katie Hobbs in the Arizona governor’s race, had made false election claims the centerpiece of her campaign.”
Alexandra Berzon and
A state judge on Saturday rejected Kari Lake’s last-ditch effort to overturn her defeat in the Arizona governor’s race, dismissing for lack of evidence her last two claims of misconduct by Maricopa County election officials.
The ruling, after a two-day trial in Phoenix that ended Thursday, follows more than six weeks of claims by Ms. Lake, a Republican, that she was robbed of victory last month — assertions that echoed the false contention that was at the heart of her campaign: that an even larger theft had stolen the 2020 presidential election from Donald J. Trump.
Ms. Lake and her supporters conjured up what they called a deliberate effort by election officials in Maricopa County, the state’s largest county, to disenfranchise her voters. But they never provided evidence of such intentional malfeasance, nor even evidence that any voters had been disenfranchised.
In a 10-page ruling, Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson acknowledged “the anger and frustration of voters who were subjected to inconvenience and confusion at voter centers as technical problems arose” in this year’s election.
But he said his duty was “not solely to incline an ear to public outcry,” and noted that, in seeking to overturn Katie Hobbs’s victory by a 17,117-vote margin, Ms. Lake was pursuing a remedy that appeared unprecedented.
“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,” Judge Thompson wrote.
He went on to rule flatly that Ms. Lake and the witnesses she called had failed to provide evidence of intentional misconduct that changed the election’s outcome.
“Plaintiff has no free-standing right to challenge election results based upon what Plaintiff believes — rightly or wrongly — went awry on Election Day,” the judge wrote. “She must, as a matter of law, prove a ground that the legislature has provided as a basis for challenging an election.”
Undaunted, Ms. Lake insisted her case had “provided the world with evidence that proves our elections are run outside of the law,” and said she would appeal “for the sake of restoring faith and honesty in our elections.”
Ms. Lake, a former Phoenix television news anchor, lost to Ms. Hobbs, a Democrat who is the Arizona secretary of state, and who rose to national prominence when she resisted efforts by Trump loyalists to overturn the vote in 2020.
Let’s re-phrase that, shall we: The Judge just didn’t want to see a Democratic governor unseated, particularly because of election fraud.
Patrick Byrne discusses the testimony regarding the machines and the changed testimony on day 2:
Discussion: Kari Lake’s Temporary Setback in Maricopa from Judge Peter Thompson
20 min video
The judge showed his hand when he refused to allow the signature evidence, as it is the most obvious and certifiable evidence of fraud. He further maligned the AZ law and preferred a higher standard. Despite all of this, the burden was clearly met by the witnesses and there was NO CHAIN OF CUSTODY which renders the ballots INVALID!!
This show trial was simply arranged to discredit Kari’s arguments, but for anyone who actually watched the trial, she easily proved her case, despite the prearranged verdict.
The only open question is whether the voters will accept this lame excuse or whether there will be a wave of repulsion followed by activity.
Ted,
Indeed, to your mind and mine as well.