Judge Dismisses kari kake's Final Claim In Election Loss For Arizona Governor

[Liberal7360]

The final court case is done.

The judge dismissed the case because she had no evidence of her claims. She had no evidence of her claims. Just like trump.

This went on for way too long.

She might run for senator next year, I hope she does. She will have a spectacular loss which will be fun to watch.

It's good to see judges in our courts honestly uphold the law.

Judge dismisses Kari Lake's final claim in election loss for Arizona governor

While most other 2020 election deniers around the country conceded after losing their own races last November, the defeated GOP candidate for Arizona governor did not.

www.aol.com

 

[reflechissez]

Arizona Court REJECTS Kari Lake. Court confirms "the election of Katie Hobbs as Arizona Governor."

So all that's happened is we listened to a grown ass woman cry like a toddler since last November.

debatepolitics.com

 

[Lutherf]

This case hinged on the question of whether the county "verified signatures" or not. Lake's contention was that the verification process was so lax that, effectively, signature verification didn't happen. The judge's ruling appears to be that as long as a process was in place it doesn't matter whether that process was effective or not. It's like if the law says "separate the red balls from the blue balls" and you have a bucket with 1000 assorted balls so you pick 10 red balls, set them aside and leave the rest mixed together. Did you satisfy the instruction or not? This judge says that you satisfied the instruction. Case closed.

 

[Peacenik]

The final court case is done.

The judge dismissed the case because she had no evidence of her claims. She had no evidence of her claims. Just like trump.

This went on for way too long.

She might run for senator next year, I hope she does. She will have a spectacular loss which will be fun to watch.

It's good to see judges in our courts honestly uphold the law.

Judge dismisses Kari Lake's final claim in election loss for Arizona governor

While most other 2020 election deniers around the country conceded after losing their own races last November, the defeated GOP candidate for Arizona governor did not.

www.aol.com

The problem for people telling themselves things they want to believe which are are not true is when the law separates the facts from the BS.

 

[Mr Person]

This case hinged on the question of whether the county "verified signatures" or not. Lake's contention was that the verification process was so lax that, effectively, signature verification didn't happen. The judge's ruling appears to be that as long as a process was in place it doesn't matter whether that process was effective or not. It's like if the law says "separate the red balls from the blue balls" and you have a bucket with 1000 assorted balls so you pick 10 red balls, set them aside and leave the rest mixed together. Did you satisfy the instruction or not? This judge says that you satisfied the instruction. Case closed.

It's a conspiracy to victimize Trumpists and white middle class christian males, who we all know are the greatest victims in the history of victimhood.








Reality

She is a lying piece of shit Trumpist who gambled that she could win by appealing to lying piece of shit election-denying Trumpists, and it failed. Having appealed to swine, she couldn't backtrack. So we got this stupid ongoing court show, which failed like Trump's 60+ lawturds. That's all.

 

[Mycroft]

The final court case is done.

The judge dismissed the case because she had no evidence of her claims. She had no evidence of her claims. Just like trump.

This went on for way too long.

She might run for senator next year, I hope she does. She will have a spectacular loss which will be fun to watch.

It's good to see judges in our courts honestly uphold the law.

Judge dismisses Kari Lake's final claim in election loss for Arizona governor

While most other 2020 election deniers around the country conceded after losing their own races last November, the defeated GOP candidate for Arizona governor did not.

www.aol.com

First of all, this isn't "the final court case". You can be sure that Lake will appeal.

Second, the judge dismissed using tortured logic. Even though there was ample evidence presented by the plaintiff that the verification process was not followed and that hundreds of thousands of ballots were not properly verified, the judge ignored the evidence and said that, since there was testimony that some of the people verified signatures properly, that means that the mail in ballot system is secure. This totally ignores the people who did not verify signatures properly.

“Ms. Onigkeit’s testimony makes abundantly clear that level one and level two signature review did take place in some fashion.”​

LOL!! "in some fashion". Notice the judge didn't say the review took place "according to law".

shrug...

Nothing new here, folks. Corrupt judge = corrupt ruling.

 

[Peacenik]

This case hinged on the question of whether the county "verified signatures" or not. Lake's contention was that the verification process was so lax that, effectively, signature verification didn't happen. The judge's ruling appears to be that as long as a process was in place it doesn't matter whether that process was effective or not. It's like if the law says "separate the red balls from the blue balls" and you have a bucket with 1000 assorted balls so you pick 10 red balls, set them aside and leave the rest mixed together. Did you satisfy the instruction or not? This judge says that you satisfied the instruction. Case closed.

Her case was entirely speculative. Nothing changed in the process of signature verification. Kari Lake or Trump can tell themselves a wrong thing all they like. They can convince as many wanna-believers as they like. That does not change the facts. She had no basis to show that the signatures were not valid. She can BS herself. She can BS other people. She can BS some people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but she cannot BS all the people all the time.

It doesn't matter whether she sincerely believes a wrong thing. That does not make a false thing true. She can convince herself the sky is green if she likes. But the sky will still be blue. And so was the Arizona governor election outcome.

 

[Buckeyes85]

First of all, this isn't "the final court case". You can be sure that Lake will appeal.

Second, the judge dismissed using tortured logic. Even though there was ample evidence presented by the plaintiff that the verification process was not followed and that hundreds of thousands of ballots were not properly verified, the judge ignored the evidence and said that, since there was testimony that some of the people verified signatures properly, that means that the mail in ballot system is secure. This totally ignores the people who did not verify signatures properly.

“Ms. Onigkeit’s testimony makes abundantly clear that level one and level two signature review did take place in some fashion.”​

LOL!! "in some fashion". Notice the judge didn't say the review took place "according to law".

shrug...

Nothing new here, folks. Corrupt judge = corrupt ruling.

Question: when was the last time that a Trumpist lost an election, or a court case that wasn't the result of a rigged system/cheating/biased judge?

Has it ever happened?

 

[Airyaman]

This case hinged on the question of whether the county "verified signatures" or not. Lake's contention was that the verification process was so lax that, effectively, signature verification didn't happen. The judge's ruling appears to be that as long as a process was in place it doesn't matter whether that process was effective or not. It's like if the law says "separate the red balls from the blue balls" and you have a bucket with 1000 assorted balls so you pick 10 red balls, set them aside and leave the rest mixed together. Did you satisfy the instruction or not? This judge says that you satisfied the instruction. Case closed.

 

[mike2810]

Question for those supporting Kari Lake.
What if Kari Lake had won the general election. If the process is so flawed how could Arizona voters know that Lake won?

The judge made the correct ruling. Lake lost.

Interesting the GOP candidates like Lake did not complain when they won or they use the bs of we won despite the corruption.
Still waiting for her to provide the "evidence" of fraud in the GOP Primary. The claim she made before the primary election even started.
As soon as she won, crickets.

ps. GOP wrote the Arizona election laws.

 

[Crakhobarbie]

First of all, this isn't "the final court case". You can be sure that Lake will appeal.

Second, the judge dismissed using tortured logic. Even though there was ample evidence presented by the plaintiff that the verification process was not followed and that hundreds of thousands of ballots were not properly verified, the judge ignored the evidence and said that, since there was testimony that some of the people verified signatures properly, that means that the mail in ballot system is secure. This totally ignores the people who did not verify signatures properly.

“Ms. Onigkeit’s testimony makes abundantly clear that level one and level two signature review did take place in some fashion.”​

LOL!! "in some fashion". Notice the judge didn't say the review took place "according to law".

shrug...

Nothing new here, folks. Corrupt judge = corrupt ruling.

Since your opinion appears to be so set in stone, perhaps you'd care to explain the mechanism involved in this alleged fraud.
For example: ballots are sent to individual voters homes. Exactly how are these mail in ballots stolen by the fraudsters?
Also, hundreds of thousands of mail in ballots not arriving at their individual voters homes would have been noticed. But that didn't happen. So, logically, there's no viable mechanism for doing what has been irrationally claimed was done.

 

[mrjurrs]

The final court case is done.

The judge dismissed the case because she had no evidence of her claims. She had no evidence of her claims. Just like trump.

This went on for way too long.

She might run for senator next year, I hope she does. She will have a spectacular loss which will be fun to watch.

It's good to see judges in our courts honestly uphold the law.

Judge dismisses Kari Lake's final claim in election loss for Arizona governor

While most other 2020 election deniers around the country conceded after losing their own races last November, the defeated GOP candidate for Arizona governor did not.

www.aol.com

0 for 2022

 

[Mycroft]

Question: when was the last time that a Trumpist lost an election, or a court case that wasn't the result of a rigged system/cheating/biased judge?

Has it ever happened?

No.

 

[Mycroft]

Question for those supporting Kari Lake.
What if Kari Lake had won the general election. If the process is so flawed how could Arizona voters know that Lake won?

She didn't contend in her lawsuit that she won. She contended that the election should be vacated...which means the election should be re-held.

The judge made the correct ruling. Lake lost.

The judge did not make the correct ruling and his ruling had nothing to do with deciding whether she won or lost.

Interesting the GOP candidates like Lake did not complain when they won or they use the bs of we won despite the corruption.
Still waiting for her to provide the "evidence" of fraud in the GOP Primary. The claim she made before the primary election even started.
As soon as she won, crickets.

Irrelevant deflection...rejected.

ps. GOP wrote the Arizona election laws.

And corrupt Maricopa County election officials disregarded the law.

 

[element94]

First of all, this isn't "the final court case". You can be sure that Lake will appeal.

Second, the judge dismissed using tortured logic. Even though there was ample evidence presented by the plaintiff that the verification process was not followed and that hundreds of thousands of ballots were not properly verified, the judge ignored the evidence and said that, since there was testimony that some of the people verified signatures properly, that means that the mail in ballot system is secure. This totally ignores the people who did not verify signatures properly.

“Ms. Onigkeit’s testimony makes abundantly clear that level one and level two signature review did take place in some fashion.”​

LOL!! "in some fashion". Notice the judge didn't say the review took place "according to law".

shrug...

Nothing new here, folks. Corrupt judge = corrupt ruling.

Corrupt REPUBLICAN judge? That's right, no matter who you are, or your affiliation, if you go against the big lie, you're corrupt!
There was no compelling evidence of the claim to overturn the results, period. This matters to those of us who are concerned about the law, and the continuing proven lies from the radical right. You're witnessing the system working, which is bad news for pathological lying losers.

 

[Lutherf]

It's a conspiracy to victimize Trumpists and white middle class christian males, who we all know are the greatest victims in the history of victimhood.








Reality

She is a lying piece of shit Trumpist who gambled that she could win by appealing to lying piece of shit election-denying Trumpists, and it failed. Having appealed to swine, she couldn't backtrack. So we got this stupid ongoing court show, which failed like Trump's 60+ lawturds. That's all.

Did I misstate what the arguments and opinion were?

 

[Crakhobarbie]

She didn't contend in her lawsuit that she won. She contended that the election should be vacated...which means the election should be re-held.


The judge did not make the correct ruling and his ruling had nothing to do with deciding whether she won or lost.


Irrelevant deflection...rejected.


And corrupt Maricopa County election officials disregarded the law.

Perhaps you'd care to explain the mechanism involved in this alleged fraud.
For example: ballots are sent to individual voters homes. Exactly how are these mail in ballots stolen by the fraudsters?
Also, hundreds of thousands of mail in ballots not arriving at their individual voters homes would have been noticed. But that didn't happen. So, logically, there's no viable mechanism for doing what has been irrationally claimed was done.

 

[Mycroft]

Corrupt REPUBLICAN judge?

A corrupt judge is a corrupt judge, no matter what their party affiliation.

 

[Buckeyes85]

No.

Ok, a republican has never lost an election fair and square, but you are not a conspiracy theorist?

 

[element94]

A corrupt judge is a corrupt judge, no matter what their party affiliation.

No compelling evidence that would overturn the results was presented. Bit of a problem that.

 

[Lutherf]

Her case was entirely speculative. Nothing changed in the process of signature verification. Kari Lake or Trump can tell themselves a wrong thing all they like. They can convince as many wanna-believers as they like. That does not change the facts. She had no basis to show that the signatures were not valid. She can BS herself. She can BS other people. She can BS some people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but she cannot BS all the people all the time.

It doesn't matter whether she sincerely believes a wrong thing. That does not make a false thing true. She can convince herself the sky is green if she likes. But the sky will still be blue. And so was the Arizona governor election outcome.

Her case was not speculative. It was based on testimonial, video and statistical evidence that the process outlined in law could not have been completed effectively enough to satisfy a strict reading of the statute. If this same level of scrutiny were to be applied to banking, for example, and people were allowed to withdraw funds from bank accounts with only a cursory check of their signature to verify their identity would you consider that "verifying the signature"?

 

[Mycroft]

Ok, a republican has never lost an election fair and square, but you are not a conspiracy theorist?

Not since 2020...not republicans who matter.

And no, I'm not a conspiracy theorist. I am a factual realist.

 

[mike2810]

She didn't contend in her lawsuit that she won. She contended that the election should be vacated...which means the election should be re-held.

Does not address the question I asked:
"What if Kari Lake had won the general election. If the process is so flawed how could Arizona voters know that Lake won?

The judge did not make the correct ruling and his ruling had nothing to do with deciding whether she won or lost.

we will disagree. The judge made the correct ruling based on Arizona election laws.

Irrelevant deflection...rejected.

funny

And corrupt Maricopa County election officials disregarded the law.

Pretty strong statement. Prove that the Maricopa County election officials are corrupt.
if not, it is just your bs.

 

[WorldWatcher]

The judge did not make the correct ruling and his ruling had nothing to do with deciding whether she won or lost.

DocumentCloud

www.documentcloud.org

WW

 

[Crakhobarbie]

I am a factual realist.

No. You are a conspiracy theorist. If you could post evidence of fraud viable enough to be substantiated in a court of law, then you'd be a "factual realist"......