I’m not trying to doom, but we should all temper expectations on what happens next. What is incorrectly being reported is that Lake will get to argue the signature verification issue. But that is skipping over what would have to happen in the meantime to get her there.
If you read the order of the AZ SC, they remand it back to the trial court saying this:
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED remanding to the trial court to determine whether the claim that Maricopa County failed to comply with A.R.S. § 16-550(A) fails to state a claim pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for reasons other than laches, or, whether Petitioner can prove her claim as alleged pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-672 and establish that “votes [were] affected ‘in sufficient numbers to alter the outcome of the election’” based on a “competent mathematical basis to conclude that the outcome would plausibly have been different, not simply an untethered assertion of uncertainty.” (Opinion ¶ 11.) “
So for those wondering what the italics portion means, the trial court has a chance to find another way to dismiss this without hearing it. There are a number of specious grounds the judge could boot it.
I’ll revisit the statutes on this issue after I get some rest. But I have a suspicion that this will boil down to the witnesses. What do the whistleblowers say and what does the county say. And that is easy for a judge to simply write that he thought the county was more credible. That cannot be appealed.
It is more than just "reported," Are you saying that Lindell and Lake's claims to the contrary are incorrect in their assertion that signature verification will need to be done on > 100000 cast votesin question?
The problem is that the election contest statute provides for inspection of ballots. It says nothing about signatures. I don’t remember if it was in this specific case or in Hamadeh’s case, but the judge wouldn’t allow a look at ballot envelopes because the envelope is not a ballot and the ballot was what was in the statute.
The AZ legislature did not ever contemplate this level of egregious bullshit happening in elections. Otherwise they would have revised the contest statute to make it actually possible to successfully challenge an election. As it sits now, the process for contesting rigged elections is itself rigged.
I do not know how they are going to actually look at and compare the signatures. One has to remember that the elections contest statute is a special proceeding. It is not like other civil causes of action. It is far more limited in scope, and accelerated in time. There is little to no discovery, no depositions of witnesses, and generally rigged in favor of the election board.
Obviously this is highly problematic. These cases are radioactive for the judiciary. They don’t want them on the docket. You’re not going to find a judge who is going to defy a statute in this circumstance only to inevitably get reversed by a higher court. That’s sticking your neck out for no gain.
From the understanding that this is on an accelerated timeline as a contest, how much time would it take to do this analysis? Didn’t Dr. Shiva’s signature protocol still take a few months? I don’t see the judge allowing 30-60 days or more to accomplish this. I’d also bet that Marc Elias files for an injunction in federal court for “disenfranchising” people. Given how this case has played out so far, it wouldn’t surprise me that the petition for injunctive relief lands with the same cucked judge that sanctioned Lake for her pre-election case.
Again, I don’t want to doom. But reality is reality. This is what we are up against. I’ve yet to find a way for this to occur.
The AZ court system is not the last redress available, and elctions in AZ at the governor's level have been challenged and overturned in the past. The path is difficult but not unassailable or impossible.
The 2020-2022 time frame was a learning process for us and folks like Shiva laid down a pathway for verification that does not have to be re-invented. In 2020 we did not have the tech at our fingertips like we do now. The reason 100000 sigs are in question is becuase they have already been vetted and found wanting.
If you think Lake and Lindell are spreading falsehood by emphasizing the importance of this ruling paticualrly where signature verification is involved, I challenge you here and now to say so bluntly.
Since they are the one's who have invested the millions in prosecuting this case and they contiue to be hopeful about the ultimate outcome, I choose to believe that they have more insight than either of us, and have sound reason to believe as they do. They have visibility to information that neither you nor I have, and I choose to share their optimism rather than your doom.
The AZ court system is not the last redress available, and elctions in AZ at the governor's level have been challenged and overturned in the past. The path is difficult but not unassailable or impossible.
I never commented on what the last redress available is. I never said they’ve not overturned an election before
The reason 100000 sigs are in question is becuase they have already been vetted and found wanting.
Not true. Anything she posted was from 2020. Take that to the bank. That was all from a hearing in the legislature about 2020. Only the cucked county has possession of the 2022 sigs and they will not turn them over. Nobody but the county has seen these since the election.
If you think Lake and Lindell are spreading falsehood by emphasizing the importance of this ruling paticualrly where signature verification is involved, I challenge you here and now to say so bluntly.
If you didn’t have the reading comprehension of a goldfish, you’d see where I pointed out that they don’t just get to jump in and do this. The AZ Supreme Court order remanded it back to the district court to either find another reason to kick this case besides laches (of which there are many specious grounds) or to hear the case about the signatures. Who do you believe on this - the AZ Supreme Court who wrote and signed the order? Or Mike Lindell and Kari Lake? You think a district court judge who booted it the first time and invented his own evidentiary standard for the rest of the case and imposed an absent from the statute mens rea for their actions is going to be like “oh gee, guess I should get on with the signatures…” instead of booting it??
Since they are the one's who have invested the millions in prosecuting this case and they contiue to be hopeful about the ultimate outcome, I choose to believe that they have more insight than either of us, and have sound reason to believe as they do. They have visibility to information that neither you nor I have, and I choose to share their optimism rather than your doom.
Like on election night when Kari Lake wasn’t worried and she had the votes? And how she wasn’t worried in the 400 days afterwards that they counted Hobbs into victory? When hasn’t she been optimistic? When has Lindell not been optimistic? And what has Lindell won besides being a staunch supporter?
List of major hurdles:
not getting kicked again for failing to state a claim on other specious grounds
election contest rules do not provide for examining ballot envelopes - the judge cannot simply decide it does; that would immediately get thrown out on appeal.
without envelopes there can be no “conclusive and mathematically sound” basis to call the outcome into question, as required by the AZ Supreme Court’s order. It is pure speculation.
reviewing the actual signatures would take substantially more time than permitted in an election contest
You can completely ignore everything I said and I don’t care. If you want to live in magic world of cope, rainbows and unicorns, have at it; I hear there is a pot of gold if you can get to the end of the rainbow. However, I choose to live in reality. If you want to have a real debate about what I said, calling me a doomer and saying that you believe Lake and Lindell over me is about the most lacking in substance “debate” I have had on this board. Neither of those 2 have addressed what I have said, and I stand by it.
I’m not trying to doom, but we should all temper expectations on what happens next. What is incorrectly being reported is that Lake will get to argue the signature verification issue. But that is skipping over what would have to happen in the meantime to get her there.
If you read the order of the AZ SC, they remand it back to the trial court saying this:
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED remanding to the trial court to determine whether the claim that Maricopa County failed to comply with A.R.S. § 16-550(A) fails to state a claim pursuant to Ariz. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) for reasons other than laches, or, whether Petitioner can prove her claim as alleged pursuant to A.R.S. § 16-672 and establish that “votes [were] affected ‘in sufficient numbers to alter the outcome of the election’” based on a “competent mathematical basis to conclude that the outcome would plausibly have been different, not simply an untethered assertion of uncertainty.” (Opinion ¶ 11.) “
So for those wondering what the italics portion means, the trial court has a chance to find another way to dismiss this without hearing it. There are a number of specious grounds the judge could boot it.
I’ll revisit the statutes on this issue after I get some rest. But I have a suspicion that this will boil down to the witnesses. What do the whistleblowers say and what does the county say. And that is easy for a judge to simply write that he thought the county was more credible. That cannot be appealed.
It is more than just "reported," Are you saying that Lindell and Lake's claims to the contrary are incorrect in their assertion that signature verification will need to be done on > 100000 cast votesin question?
The problem is that the election contest statute provides for inspection of ballots. It says nothing about signatures. I don’t remember if it was in this specific case or in Hamadeh’s case, but the judge wouldn’t allow a look at ballot envelopes because the envelope is not a ballot and the ballot was what was in the statute.
The AZ legislature did not ever contemplate this level of egregious bullshit happening in elections. Otherwise they would have revised the contest statute to make it actually possible to successfully challenge an election. As it sits now, the process for contesting rigged elections is itself rigged.
I do not know how they are going to actually look at and compare the signatures. One has to remember that the elections contest statute is a special proceeding. It is not like other civil causes of action. It is far more limited in scope, and accelerated in time. There is little to no discovery, no depositions of witnesses, and generally rigged in favor of the election board.
Obviously this is highly problematic. These cases are radioactive for the judiciary. They don’t want them on the docket. You’re not going to find a judge who is going to defy a statute in this circumstance only to inevitably get reversed by a higher court. That’s sticking your neck out for no gain.
From the understanding that this is on an accelerated timeline as a contest, how much time would it take to do this analysis? Didn’t Dr. Shiva’s signature protocol still take a few months? I don’t see the judge allowing 30-60 days or more to accomplish this. I’d also bet that Marc Elias files for an injunction in federal court for “disenfranchising” people. Given how this case has played out so far, it wouldn’t surprise me that the petition for injunctive relief lands with the same cucked judge that sanctioned Lake for her pre-election case.
Again, I don’t want to doom. But reality is reality. This is what we are up against. I’ve yet to find a way for this to occur.
The AZ court system is not the last redress available, and elctions in AZ at the governor's level have been challenged and overturned in the past. The path is difficult but not unassailable or impossible.
The 2020-2022 time frame was a learning process for us and folks like Shiva laid down a pathway for verification that does not have to be re-invented. In 2020 we did not have the tech at our fingertips like we do now. The reason 100000 sigs are in question is becuase they have already been vetted and found wanting.
If you think Lake and Lindell are spreading falsehood by emphasizing the importance of this ruling paticualrly where signature verification is involved, I challenge you here and now to say so bluntly.
Since they are the one's who have invested the millions in prosecuting this case and they contiue to be hopeful about the ultimate outcome, I choose to believe that they have more insight than either of us, and have sound reason to believe as they do. They have visibility to information that neither you nor I have, and I choose to share their optimism rather than your doom.
You chose not to listen to anything I said.
I never commented on what the last redress available is. I never said they’ve not overturned an election before
Not true. Anything she posted was from 2020. Take that to the bank. That was all from a hearing in the legislature about 2020. Only the cucked county has possession of the 2022 sigs and they will not turn them over. Nobody but the county has seen these since the election.
If you didn’t have the reading comprehension of a goldfish, you’d see where I pointed out that they don’t just get to jump in and do this. The AZ Supreme Court order remanded it back to the district court to either find another reason to kick this case besides laches (of which there are many specious grounds) or to hear the case about the signatures. Who do you believe on this - the AZ Supreme Court who wrote and signed the order? Or Mike Lindell and Kari Lake? You think a district court judge who booted it the first time and invented his own evidentiary standard for the rest of the case and imposed an absent from the statute mens rea for their actions is going to be like “oh gee, guess I should get on with the signatures…” instead of booting it??
Like on election night when Kari Lake wasn’t worried and she had the votes? And how she wasn’t worried in the 400 days afterwards that they counted Hobbs into victory? When hasn’t she been optimistic? When has Lindell not been optimistic? And what has Lindell won besides being a staunch supporter?
List of major hurdles:
You can completely ignore everything I said and I don’t care. If you want to live in magic world of cope, rainbows and unicorns, have at it; I hear there is a pot of gold if you can get to the end of the rainbow. However, I choose to live in reality. If you want to have a real debate about what I said, calling me a doomer and saying that you believe Lake and Lindell over me is about the most lacking in substance “debate” I have had on this board. Neither of those 2 have addressed what I have said, and I stand by it.