Maricopa 8, Lake 0

I have a significantly more negative take on the Kari Lake vote fraud trial than is being presented at Gateway Pundit. The ruling by judge Thompson mirrors his initial rulings throwing everything substantive out, in favor of the things that are easier for him to shoot down later. The appearance of a trial is apparently more important than an actual trial.

The entire ruling is here:

Kari Lake’s team discovered that the machines tested in an extra-legal (outside of mandatory legal requirements) procedure and and that the failures of the machine tabulators were a known and expected event on election day. The county testified first that they didn’t know about this, then that they did know but it was minor and then again that they knew and were hiding it from the public.

Judge Idiot seems appropriately chastised and now pissed off that the supreme court rejected his earlier fabricated law and required him to reconsider the failure of the county to give one shit about signature verification laws and procedures.

rejected any claim along these new facts using this as an excuse:

This Court will grant a motion to dismiss based on a Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted when, as a matter of law, the Plaintiff is not “entitled to relief under any interpretation of the facts susceptible of proof.”

In determining whether a complaint states a claim, the Court must assume all well- plead allegations are true and “indulge all reasonable inferences from those facts, but mere conclusory statements are insufficient.

I’m quite certain that were judge idiot to read this he would interpret my complaints as sour grapes, however the dismissal of Lake’s new claims without being allowed to present evidence is entirely consistent with this courts attitude about vote fraud from the beginning and the judge has set a new threshold which can NEVER be met by any legally presented claim of vote fraud, by Lake or anyone else in the future.

“Mere conclusory statements” is an insanely inaccurate description of the claims made by Kari Lake’s attorneys. It’s an absolute insult as strongly stated as can be in a legal document. You would think that the “judge”, being presented with “mere conclusory statement”s would be able to end the argument right there, however he required numerous additional paragraphs to rationalize these conclusory statements allowing only a portion of the signature complaint to move forward under the courts newly invented law – a law not addressed by the extreme court and one which tAV took significant exception to. Note the bold at the end of the quote in his ruling below. The signature verification methodology is the sole aspect allowed to proceed to trial. Everything else was eliminated before evidence was allowed.

As was said in this Court’s order of December 19, 2022, whether Maricopa County complied with the EPM and statutes governing elections is a question of fact. Lake has narrowed her claim to that complained of in Reyes , and she must demonstrate at trial pursuant to her concessions that Maricopa County’s higher level signature reviewers conducted no signature verification or curing and in so doing had systematically failed to materially comply with the law. This is, of course, in addition to the requirement that she prove that this alleged complete failure to conduct signature verification resulted in a change in the outcome of the gubernatorial election  proven by “competent mathematical basis.” All of this must be done by clear and convincing evidence.  Lake , 525 P.3d at 668, ¶ 10.

The court additionally pretended that evidence had been presented and adjudicated, this is a false claim by the courts and yet another weapon used by judges to ignore difficult decisions.

The allegation of fraud also leaps over a substantial gap in the evidence presented. The Court notes that counsel’s representation of what the McGregor report would show is 180 degrees from what the report actually says. Rather than demonstrating that Mr. Jarrett lied, it actually supports his contention that the machine error of the tabulators and ballot printers was a mechanical failure not tied to malfeasance or even misfeasance.

So Lake proved that the machines were expected to fail but because the report showed that the failure was mechanical, it was therefore not possible to be intentional.

Basically, you knew the brakes didn’t work and sent your wife to work, the car crashed and you collected insurance money but since the after accident report discovered the failure was mechanical in nature it is not your problem. In this case, the judge isn’t even going to ask you if you knew that the brake lines were filed causing the crash, it’s sufficient for to know that the failure was simply mechanical.

Here is the excuse used by the Judge to justify his ignoring of perjury, malfeasance and fraud:

Mr. Betencourt testified that there were, in fact, multiple technical issues experienced on election day. He testified that these were solved by means such as: 1) taking out toner and/or ink cartridges and shaking them, 2) cleaning the corona wire, 3) letting the printers warm up, 4) cleaning the tabulators, and 5) adjusting settings on the printer. It is of note that, apart from 5), none of these solutions implicates the ballot in a manner suggesting intent. Mr. Betencourt testified that each of these on-site actions were successful to varying degrees, with shaking the toner cartridge being the most effective. It is worth repeating that ballots that could not be read by the tabulator immediately because of printer settings – or anything else – could be deposited in Door 3 of the tabulator and counted later after duplication by a bipartisan adjudication board.

As though shaking the toner cartridge was sufficient to cause a 19 inch ballot to be read on a 20 inch tabulator. It’s intentional obfuscation, nothing more. They know damned well that the lines were so long people left and didn’t vote. They also know fake ballots were inserted into the process. You have to prove all of those things before making a claim in a 30ish day window after a fraudulent election now.

This is a claim which was fully litigated at trial and on appeal over seven months since the  November 8, 2022, election. The evidence presented falls far below what is needed to establish a  basis for fraud.

So all that is being allowed to proceed to trial is the ability to prove that signatures were not verified in sufficient quantities such that the outcome of the election was changed. Lake has thus far not been allowed access to those signatures as they are being held by left-wing Runbeck corporation on the Democrat controlled servers. One wonders just how you are going to prove signature verification was not followed when you cannot even see the signatures. Just witnesses I suppose.

It’s still not all dead but it is clear to me that this judge has made his decisions already. He will not be hearing significant evidence of fraud and no matter what evidence is shown, including direct admission of guilt by the county, he will not be ruling in Lake’s favor. As always, I reserve the right to be wrong.

3 thoughts on “Maricopa 8, Lake 0

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s