Despite all the frantic fake news by the fringe Right-wing election deniers..it's clear that Lake had no case to begin with and is headed for the inevitable defeat all sane people knew was coming:
www.newsweek.com
Kari Lake, former candidate for Arizona governor, closed her two-day election trial on Thursday in what is anticipated to be a disappointing ruling for the Republican.
Lake, who was among the most prominent voices promoting former President Donald Trump's election fraud claims, spent two days making the case that she was the rightful winner of November's election. She lost to Democrat Katie Hobbs by more than 17,000 votes but asked a Maricopa County Superior Court judge to declare her Arizona's next governor or order a revote in the state's most populous county.
Judge Peter Thompson dismissed eight of her claims and narrowed the two he allowed to go forward. Lake's legal team can't just prove that there was fraud in the election, they must establish that someone intentionally interfered and that the result changed because of it.
Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek that Lake's lawsuit is so "frivolous on its face," he's surprised Thompson didn't dismiss it entirely.
On one claim, Lake had to prove that a Maricopa County election official purposely caused ballot printers to malfunction to sway the election. In the other, she had to prove that an employee contracted by the elections department intentionally added completed ballots without following the proper procedures.
The county has disputed the second allegation, contending that while there were printer issues as raised in the first claim, they did not prevent voters from casting their ballots.
David Schultz, election law expert and professor at Hamline University, told Newsweek that for Lake to win, she needs to show that the fraud in question was at "such a level that the results of the election could not be trusted."
"I do not believe she has shown that," he said. "Her legal team has failed to show any intentionality and they have failed to show that any mistakes made were so serious that they cost her the election."
Although Lake promised to unveil bombshell revelations that proved she won the election, evidence presented in the two-day trial was lackluster and didn't appear to meet the standards set by Thompson.
Rahmani said aside from the fact that Lake didn't present any evidence proving intentional printer interference or evidence that ballot chain of custody was violated, "Mere conclusionary allegations aren't enough."
"The law requires actual evidence of intentional wrongdoing," Rahmani explained. "At worst, election officials made a mistake in printing the ballots, but those mistaken ballots were still counted. That type of harmless error is not enough to meet the high bar necessary to overturn an election."
Norm Eisen, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, agreed that the testimony from the trial "made clear" that Lake's claims were "hypothetical & speculative."
Eisen pointed out while Lake's witnesses made the argument that larger ballots caused tabulator issues, it wasn't enough to stand as "evidence of actual, intentional or uncounted votes."
"Today's hearing didn't go well AT ALL for Kari Lake but if you just read her Tweets, you'd think she's on the verge of winning!" he tweeted after the first day of trial on Wednesday. "In reality, even her own expert conceded that the ballots got counted."
Kari Lake wraps up trial with no clear evidence to overturn election
Lake's team needed to meet the high bar set by a Maricopa County judge, suggesting Arizona is likely to certify the election results soon.
www.newsweek.com
Kari Lake, former candidate for Arizona governor, closed her two-day election trial on Thursday in what is anticipated to be a disappointing ruling for the Republican.
Lake, who was among the most prominent voices promoting former President Donald Trump's election fraud claims, spent two days making the case that she was the rightful winner of November's election. She lost to Democrat Katie Hobbs by more than 17,000 votes but asked a Maricopa County Superior Court judge to declare her Arizona's next governor or order a revote in the state's most populous county.
Judge Peter Thompson dismissed eight of her claims and narrowed the two he allowed to go forward. Lake's legal team can't just prove that there was fraud in the election, they must establish that someone intentionally interfered and that the result changed because of it.
Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani told Newsweek that Lake's lawsuit is so "frivolous on its face," he's surprised Thompson didn't dismiss it entirely.
On one claim, Lake had to prove that a Maricopa County election official purposely caused ballot printers to malfunction to sway the election. In the other, she had to prove that an employee contracted by the elections department intentionally added completed ballots without following the proper procedures.
The county has disputed the second allegation, contending that while there were printer issues as raised in the first claim, they did not prevent voters from casting their ballots.
David Schultz, election law expert and professor at Hamline University, told Newsweek that for Lake to win, she needs to show that the fraud in question was at "such a level that the results of the election could not be trusted."
"I do not believe she has shown that," he said. "Her legal team has failed to show any intentionality and they have failed to show that any mistakes made were so serious that they cost her the election."
Although Lake promised to unveil bombshell revelations that proved she won the election, evidence presented in the two-day trial was lackluster and didn't appear to meet the standards set by Thompson.
Rahmani said aside from the fact that Lake didn't present any evidence proving intentional printer interference or evidence that ballot chain of custody was violated, "Mere conclusionary allegations aren't enough."
"The law requires actual evidence of intentional wrongdoing," Rahmani explained. "At worst, election officials made a mistake in printing the ballots, but those mistaken ballots were still counted. That type of harmless error is not enough to meet the high bar necessary to overturn an election."
Norm Eisen, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, agreed that the testimony from the trial "made clear" that Lake's claims were "hypothetical & speculative."
Eisen pointed out while Lake's witnesses made the argument that larger ballots caused tabulator issues, it wasn't enough to stand as "evidence of actual, intentional or uncounted votes."
"Today's hearing didn't go well AT ALL for Kari Lake but if you just read her Tweets, you'd think she's on the verge of winning!" he tweeted after the first day of trial on Wednesday. "In reality, even her own expert conceded that the ballots got counted."
