[Michael.SF.]

Re: Lake loss in Court.:

the Judge ruled that Lake’s legal team did not prove intent. Why was that important in a civil matter? I could see intent being applicable in a criminal matter, but if they proved there were serious issues regarding the election, then that should have been sufficient to rule in her favor. Once again it appears we have a judge who chose not to rule in favor of justice.

[Dan in Wichita]

Yep. Lake proved there were many thousands of tainted ballots that should not have been counted and large numbers of disenfranchised voters, but that wasn't good enough for this judge. He made her prove it was all done intentionally, knowing before the trial even started that he would rule in Hobbs' favor.

Imagine if this exact same scenario had played out in a Dem heavy district where their candidate lost a statewide race by 0.6%. There would be hell to pay.

[napscoordinator]

In her lawsuit she explicitly stated she’d find intent to cheat. Oops.