Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Rules on Kari Lake Being Able to Review 2022 Ballot Envelope Signatures
The Western Journal ^ | Nov 30, 2023 | Randy DeSoto

Posted on 11/30/2023 7:23:58 PM PST by where's_the_Outrage?

An Arizona judge on Wednesday denied 2022 Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake's request to review ballot envelope signatures, concluding it "would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process."

In September, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah presided over a two-day trial to decide whether Lake's legal team could have access to review the ballot envelope signatures for the 2022 general election in the county.

Lake lost the race to Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs by less than 1 percent of the vote.

Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer denied the GOP candidate's request in April, prompting her to go to court.

In a post on the X social media platform in September, Richer said he was defending voter privacy and election security by not releasing the ballot envelopes for Lake to review. “I believe these envelopes are not public record according to state statute. And I believe that making them public would have a chilling effect on voting, would weaken the security controls on early voting, and would open the door to voter harassment,” he wrote.

Lake responded at the time, “Professional Victim @stephen_richer is lying again. We’re not asking these signatures to be made public. We are asking to review them to assess whether they are legitimate or not. We have a STRONG reason to believe they’re not. Clearly, so does Stephen.”

(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Arizona
KEYWORDS: arizona; ballotreview; electionfraud; electionfraud2022; electionresults; fraud; johnhannah; karilake; katiehobbs; maricopa; maricopacounty; maricoping; stephenricher
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
To: where's_the_Outrage?

Nothing corrodes public confidence quite like an obvious cover-up.


21 posted on 11/30/2023 7:43:43 PM PST by NorthMountain (... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil
would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process.


22 posted on 11/30/2023 7:46:20 PM PST by tomkat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: noiseman
Permitting prospective car buyers to test drive cars would have a corrosive effect on sales of certain models of cars.

Having just bought a used car, I can tell you from first hand experience ... test driving them certainly had a corrosive effect on "consumer confidence" in several of them ... and a positive effect on "consumer confidence" in the car I eventually bought.

And that's exactly the effect this corrupt judge corruptly wishes to prevent ...

23 posted on 11/30/2023 7:46:58 PM PST by NorthMountain (... the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

That is Really Super Dumb.
Kinda like there has been no court finding of 2020 election fraud since there has been no case allowed.

-fJRoberts-


24 posted on 11/30/2023 7:47:14 PM PST by A strike (Words can have gender, humans cannot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

Do not worry “your honor”, this election has had a MAJOR CORROSIVE EFFECT on the process.

Jackass


25 posted on 11/30/2023 7:47:23 PM PST by eyedigress (Trump is my President!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?
An Arizona judge on Wednesday denied 2022 Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake's request to review ballot envelope signatures, concluding it "would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process."

Seems the judge is admitting that there's trouble with the signatures ?
Judge must be Lace-curtain Irish. It's about how it looks rather than what is legal, lawful and correct.
26 posted on 11/30/2023 7:51:28 PM PST by stylin19a (Back when men cursed & beat the ground with sticks, it was named witchcraft. Today it's named golf.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau
I saw the process and how they reviewed them and how ballots were resolved. IMHO....Kari should be concentrating on her run...I think Sinema is going to clobber her. Kari’s experience...”0”.

Any system that permits the vendors of the computers used to administer the “election” to keep secret ANY portion of the machines’ internal workings under the guise of “proprietary information” is a system that cannot and must not be trusted. The very notion is absurd. After 2020, it was clear from the testimony of many election officials that even they had no idea what was actually going on inside the “black box”, and they were in fact prohibited from even asking by the terms of the software license agreements attached to them. That is an absolute outrage. If computers are to be used at all in administering elections, and especially in counting votes, then there can be NO agreements to protect proprietary information. Any such system must be 100% transparent as to its operation.

Implementing a secure and accurate election system is not difficult. The more unnecessarily complex and obscure the governing officials make the system, the more you can be sure that they are doing so to hide fraud.

27 posted on 11/30/2023 7:54:20 PM PST by noiseman (The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

He’s saying that preserving the ILLUSION of election integrity is more important.

Hannah is a weirdo from LA who couldn’t get into a California law school so he got into the U of A law school instead and unfortunately stuck around Arizona, where he comes up with decisions like this using inverted logic, which is normal for the weird, weird world of the LA basin.


28 posted on 11/30/2023 7:54:51 PM PST by Regulator (It's fraud, Jim)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil
"would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process."

Yeah, exposing invalid/ missing signatures could do that.

29 posted on 11/30/2023 7:57:22 PM PST by MileHi ((Liberalism is an ideology of parasites, hypocrites, grievance mongers, victims, and control freaks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?
..."would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process."

Translated:

Transparency is what we let you see, and election integrity is what we tell you.

Draw your own conclusions.

30 posted on 11/30/2023 7:57:35 PM PST by logi_cal869 (-cynicus the "concern troll" a/o 10/03/2018 /!i!! &@$%&*(@ -)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

If a random sample of ballots was reviewed and found to be proper, THAT would increase confidence in elections.

This is obviously an admission a thorough review would undermine confidence in the election process.

We have to keep the ugly truth buried so people will remain fooled the winners of the election were correctly elected.


31 posted on 11/30/2023 7:58:34 PM PST by Gnome1949
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?
Kari Lake's request to review ballot envelope signatures, concluding it "would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process."

This is wild. Ballot envelope signatures are not private. Only the ballot inside is private. The signature is a public proof of your identity--it's meant to be examined and verified. That's what the signatures are for.

Translating briefly, the judge (who needs a jail sentence) is saying that determining the integrity of the electoral process in Arizona would be bad for the reputation of Arizona elections because it would tend to show that the process is fraudulent.

32 posted on 11/30/2023 7:59:44 PM PST by SamuraiScot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

I read the headline, and knew that the answer would be no. Sure enough, the first paragraph proved my suspicions true.

Too many Republicans just lie down and let these Dems walk all over us. People like Kari Lake have courage, but she can’t do this by herself.


33 posted on 11/30/2023 8:02:47 PM PST by Joann37
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: econjack

And also erodes public confidence in the judiciary...


34 posted on 11/30/2023 8:04:33 PM PST by piytar (Do NOT forget Ashli Babbit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?
Also,

"would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process."

What public confidence in the electoral process?!

35 posted on 11/30/2023 8:06:24 PM PST by piytar (Do NOT forget Ashli Babbit!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jz638
letting the loser of an election check to see the names of people who voted for the winner amounts to a means to collect the names of voters, which allows the losing candidate to harass those voters.

Actually, the vote itself is inside, and doesn't need to be visible to the auditor. Whether the signature actually belongs to a registered voter by that name is what's being tested--and that's visible on the outside. If that's wrong, the vote is just thrown out and its vote subtracted.

But there's no violation of a voter's privacy involved. If the signature is bad, it didn't belong to a real voter. A real, registered voter's vote is not being revealed, and there's no one to harass.

36 posted on 11/30/2023 8:11:02 PM PST by SamuraiScot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

Maricopa County Superior Court Judge John Hannah choses to give aid and comfort to the domestic and foreign enemies of the United States rather that to adhere to his oath of office.


37 posted on 11/30/2023 8:13:25 PM PST by Carl Vehse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

How about a “corrosive effect” on people who are the true winners of elections being able to be sworn into the position? This “judge” sounds like a typical dimmocrap ‘tard.


38 posted on 11/30/2023 8:13:55 PM PST by EinNYC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: where's_the_Outrage?

“would have a corrosive effect on public confidence in the electoral process.”

I believe the judge is saying the fraud cannot be examined since to do so will reveal the true scope of election corruption.


39 posted on 11/30/2023 8:15:26 PM PST by Rlsau1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nateman

Correct, now it’s like a secret society.


40 posted on 11/30/2023 8:16:16 PM PST by Blue Highway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson