Lake v Hobbs

Just to recap the major evidence for Lake, the county testified that they can’t find where they put the tabulations of the ballots dropped off on voting day. They just got the runaround requesting the documents for evidence and answering machines and people who have access leaving for vacation and unable to provide them.

That means they could have easily counted votes from the rest of the methods and only let in the dropped off ballots that were for Hobbs until she was in the lead and it explains why it would take weeks to count. The county also testified that they witnessed ballots come in which, since Hobbs was in the lead already by counting leftist districts first, were just discarded. It’s sickening and if the judge rules any other way it’s time for a revolution and I hope this sparks it. We can no longer coexist with our government who sets us up, polices our thinking, indoctrinated our kids, fakes democracy, witch hunts, robs us, sends all our money away to politicians friends family and foreign countries which do nothing for us... This is thee most corrupt nation in the west now.

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
Just to recap the major evidence for Lake, the county testified that they can’t find where they put the tabulations of the ballots dropped off on voting day. They just got the runaround requesting the documents for evidence and answering machines and people who have access leaving for vacation and unable to provide them.

That means they could have easily counted votes from the rest of the methods and only let in the dropped off ballots that were for Hobbs until she was in the lead and it explains why it would take weeks to count. The county also testified that they witnessed ballots come in which, since Hobbs was in the lead already by counting leftist districts first, were just discarded. It’s sickening and if the judge rules any other way it’s time for a revolution and I hope this sparks it. We can no longer coexist with our government who sets us up, polices our thinking, indoctrinated our kids, fakes democracy, witch hunts, robs us, sends all our money away to politicians friends family and foreign countries which do nothing for us... This is thee most corrupt nation in the west now.

You have fact links to any of that?

Fact check: Post falsely claims that Maricopa County lost 291,390 Election Day votes

Officials in Maricopa County, Arizona, announced on Nov. 28 that they certified the county's 2022 midterm election results. But some social media users claim there are missing votes in the county.

"IMPOSSIBLE: Maricopa County Lost 291,930 Election Day Votes?" reads a Nov. 28 Facebook post (direct link, archived link).

The claim stems from a Nov. 28 Gateway Pundit article, which misreported voting information provided by Maricopa County.

The article mistakenly compared Election Day in-person votes with total Election Day votes, and it claimed that the difference in the numbers indicated votes were somehow lost. www.usatoday.com...

"" did not find clear and convincing evidence of misconduct ""

Well what's the trial supposed to be for ? ☠️

Lots of court cases go ahead with simple circumstantial evidence !! ☠️

a reply to: Annee

I watched all four parts of testimony on YouTube twice. Part one and two are all that matter though.



For those requesting sources...




55:30 or so on on second video is the gold...actually just watch the whole second video. If you forward through breaks and all it’s not as long as it looks and the whole thing is entertaining if you can get over how angry and disbelieving you feel the entire time she testifies. Just watch it all. part one not as interesting. Part two proves they withheld day of ballots and used them to control the final count and now that the documents showing ballot count on Election Day are missing, every last one. They say they couldn’t find them before trial started and the lady who is in charge of them went on vacation the day after she received the request for them. In your face type cheating.

a reply to: JinMI

And that's another case I was right about and you were wrong about. Next up is the Brunson case which the SCOTUS will announce they have decided not to hear the case on January 9th.

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
a reply to: Annee

I watched all four parts of testimony on YouTube twice. Part one and two are all that matter though.

For those requesting sources...

55:30 or so on on second video is the gold...actually just watch the whole second video. If you forward through breaks and all it’s not as long as it looks and the whole thing is entertaining if you can get over how angry and disbelieving you feel the entire time she testifies. Just watch it all. part one not as interesting. Part two proves they withheld day of ballots and used them to control the final count and now that the documents showing ballot count on Election Day are missing, every last one. They say they couldn’t find them before trial started and the lady who is in charge of them went on vacation the day after she received the request for them. In your face type cheating.

One either has to be completely stupid, or just ok with cheating to overlook this kind of stuff. We are beyond the "oops I made a mistake" kind of bs now

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
a reply to: Annee

I watched all four parts of testimony on YouTube twice. Part one and two are all that matter though.

Do you have legal expertise?

posted by Annee on Dec, 24 2022 @ 01:57 PM:

"You have fact links to any of that?"

posted by AlexandrosTheGreat on Dec, 24 2022 @ 04:34 PM:

"For those requesting sources..."

posted by Annee on Dec, 24 2022 @ 05:50 PM

"Do you have legal expertise?"
.
.
.
.
.
Just ignore her. She's old and senile and can never remember what she said or questions she's asked. When she asks for links, people provide them and then she simply deflects with another nonsensical reply. I worry about her mental health, she seems to get all worked up when posting here. It would probably be better if nobody excites her, it might be bad for her heart. So, just ignore her, for her own benefit.

As to what you posted, the proof is right there in the videos. All somebody has to do is watch them for the proof. Oh, and they have to have a brain first or they won't comprehend anything. Kind of like what we've got going right here.

a reply to: Annee
One doesn’t need legal expertise nor am I offering testimony. I simply summarized the qualified expert’s testimony, that the election and its paperwork showing chain of custody is the best she’s ever seen and done perfectly other than the fact the one thing that is missing is the papers showing how many ballots went from each locations drop box for Election Day. She testifies the day of slips should be kept with all the others which are kept for every day of the election period where drop boxes are available. The lady who is charged with keeping those papers said she couldn’t find the day of slips after a freedom of information act request was made and the very next day, without having provided them, her voicemail informed the world she had left for vacation.

The only part I am editorializing on is that I can see how the election and others around the country could be stolen like this since you just make sure to count in a way which gives your candidate the lead, in maricopas situation by calculating ballots which are more likely democratic decided by geography or when/how the ballot was cast and then only take day of ballots to be counted if needed and only from your candidate, as multiple witnesses testify the election workers were seen just discarding day of ballots without counting them and I think that is because they had the number needed and so forget the rest, nobody will even know more ballots existed to count without the mandatory day of ballot count slip which is the one thing missing in an otherwise immaculately and organized election which, I’m sorry, makes me so sick of coincidences at this point with elections...(the judge stops her but she even begins saying she saw the same type of total disregard for chain of custody for the presidential election in 2020, surprise surprise)but always coincidences...

Where trump gets an out of this world record number of votes in 2020 but coincidentally, no campaign and 4% in the primaries Biden, it turns out, is the most popular man in US history, bigger than Jesus Christ without campaigning,

Katie Hobbs running the election and winning dispute not campaigning and magically an election where the chain of custody is ruined,

the one and only paper needed to prove the results are reliable CANT be found before the one person with access to them leaves on an international vacation. What are the odds what are the odds what are the odds. There’s always a convenient and coincidental issue JUST where it needs to be to give results which go against polling, against historic voting records, etc.

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind
posted by Annee on Dec, 24 2022 @ 01:57 PM:

"You have fact links to any of that?"

posted by AlexandrosTheGreat on Dec, 24 2022 @ 04:34 PM:

"For those requesting sources..."

posted by Annee on Dec, 24 2022 @ 05:50 PM

"Do you have legal expertise?"
.
.
.
.
.
Just ignore her. She's old and senile and can never remember what she said or questions she's asked. When she asks for links, people provide them and then she simply deflects with another nonsensical reply. I worry about her mental health, she seems to get all worked up when posting here. It would probably be better if nobody excites her, it might be bad for her heart. So, just ignore her, for her own benefit.

As to what you posted, the proof is right there in the videos. All somebody has to do is watch them for the proof. Oh, and they have to have a brain first or they won't comprehend anything. Kind of like what we've got going right here.

Do you have legal expertise?

I don't. I know if I watch a court preceding -- I will probably have an opinion and "hear what I want to hear".

But know that I do not know the law.

------------------------------

Oh, and if all you have is insults -- you've already lost the battle. Clearly you have nothing of value to add to the discussion.

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind
posted by Annee on Dec, 24 2022 @ 01:57 PM:

"You have fact links to any of that?"

posted by AlexandrosTheGreat on Dec, 24 2022 @ 04:34 PM:

"For those requesting sources..."

posted by Annee on Dec, 24 2022 @ 05:50 PM

"Do you have legal expertise?"
.
.
.
.
.
Just ignore her. She's old and senile and can never remember what she said or questions she's asked. When she asks for links, people provide them and then she simply deflects with another nonsensical reply. I worry about her mental health, she seems to get all worked up when posting here. It would probably be better if nobody excites her, it might be bad for her heart. So, just ignore her, for her own benefit.

As to what you posted, the proof is right there in the videos. All somebody has to do is watch them for the proof. Oh, and they have to have a brain first or they won't comprehend anything. Kind of like what we've got going right here.

Oh shoot lol I didn’t see this until after I replied already. Whoops

originally posted by: Enduro
If they were duplicated on standard ballots and corrected then how were 48 out of 100 random ballots ( or whatever number) still found to be the wrong size?

Where in the chain of events do you claim that this occurred? Where did you get that number? Do you imagine that the 1200 ballots that were duplicated DID NOT include those '48 out of 100 random ballots'? Do you have evidence that those '48 out of 100' were not duplicated and counted?

Look: If a ballot had a too small image on it and could not be read by the polling place scanner, it was transferred to the central site in the 'slot 3' boxes for processing. Every single one.

There were around 1200 ballots found with a small image, which were ALL duplicated by the bipartisan duplication team and counted.

Where do you get '48 out of 100' and what do you think happened to them?

originally posted by: Cymatic

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
a reply to: Annee

I watched all four parts of testimony on YouTube twice. Part one and two are all that matter though.

For those requesting sources...

55:30 or so on on second video is the gold...actually just watch the whole second video. If you forward through breaks and all it’s not as long as it looks and the whole thing is entertaining if you can get over how angry and disbelieving you feel the entire time she testifies. Just watch it all. part one not as interesting. Part two proves they withheld day of ballots and used them to control the final count and now that the documents showing ballot count on Election Day are missing, every last one. They say they couldn’t find them before trial started and the lady who is in charge of them went on vacation the day after she received the request for them. In your face type cheating.

One either has to be completely stupid, or just ok with cheating to overlook this kind of stuff. We are beyond the "oops I made a mistake" kind of bs now

You have to have the actual communications (text msg, or phone recording, or e-mail, or a witness) proving that someone, or a group, plotted to commit fraud.

The same "lack of concrete proof" that protects Katie Hobbs, is also protecting Donald Trump, in regard to the Jan 6th insurrection accusations against him. No communications of him ordering a storming of the Capitol.

a reply to: carewemust
Legal side of it be darned, do you... does the left condone a person winning an election when the entire process is pointless when you are missing or unable to provide the count of the number of votes cast? When even the county agrees 275,000 have no trail you can follow to see that they were counted? Why is that ok with you? We point fingers all the time but I know myself enough to guarantee had I seen the right hold back papers from the left which are the sole proof the election was legit, I would be condemning my side and saying, “you’re making a mockery of democracy, cheapening our party, embarrassing your supporters, and we aren’t gonna be winners by sleaze ball mismanagement and running away to Hawaii when asked in a limited sliver of time to produce proof.” Why can that never occur with other members?

a reply to: AlexandrosTheGreat

It's not "OK" with me. I've just accepted it for what it is, and learned how to "play the game" to best benefit my family.

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Cymatic

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
a reply to: Annee

I watched all four parts of testimony on YouTube twice. Part one and two are all that matter though.

For those requesting sources...

55:30 or so on on second video is the gold...actually just watch the whole second video. If you forward through breaks and all it’s not as long as it looks and the whole thing is entertaining if you can get over how angry and disbelieving you feel the entire time she testifies. Just watch it all. part one not as interesting. Part two proves they withheld day of ballots and used them to control the final count and now that the documents showing ballot count on Election Day are missing, every last one. They say they couldn’t find them before trial started and the lady who is in charge of them went on vacation the day after she received the request for them. In your face type cheating.

One either has to be completely stupid, or just ok with cheating to overlook this kind of stuff. We are beyond the "oops I made a mistake" kind of bs now

You have to have the actual communications (text msg, or phone recording, or e-mail, or a witness) proving that someone, or a group, plotted to commit fraud.

The same "lack of concrete proof" that protects Katie Hobbs, is also protecting Donald Trump, in regard to the Jan 6th insurrection accusations against him. No communications of him ordering a storming of the Capitol.

Apples and oranges to the nth degree. There is concrete proof that they have no chain of custody on over 200k votes. There is concrete proof that county officials who did not want to certify the election, because there were so many issues that had to be addressed, were threatened with a felony by the person running for office. There is concrete proof we use voting machines owned by a private company who will not release the source code to the public. There is concrete proof that someone changed the printer settings after the machines were test but before polls were open.

If you think any of that is ok, then you don't care about free and fair elections, period. Demanding that we track down the individuals responsible, while just allowing the unverifiable results to stand is a very convenient loophole.

a reply to: Annee

We’re you able to watch the second of those two videos where I marked the time or in their entirety? What do you think? Don’t you agree that it is black and white no question a fatal flaw in this election’s procedure? What’s your take, my good friend?

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
a reply to: Annee

We’re you able to watch the second of those two videos where I marked the time or in their entirety? What do you think? Don’t you agree that it is black and white no question a fatal flaw in this election’s procedure? What’s your take, my good friend?

I think you see what you want to see. I think you hear what you want to hear.

When it comes to Legalese (legal language) -- I find it very confusing. It often sounds like the opposite of what it means. It's not something I ever guess at.

I do not play "armchair lawyer".

ADD: the woman on the stand is extremely credible. That's what I got out of the video. And I found the lawyer's hair distracting (shallow, perhaps).

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: AlexandrosTheGreat
a reply to: Annee

We’re you able to watch the second of those two videos where I marked the time or in their entirety? What do you think? Don’t you agree that it is black and white no question a fatal flaw in this election’s procedure? What’s your take, my good friend?

I think you see what you want to see. I think you hear what you want to hear.

When it comes to Legalese (legal language) -- I find it very confusing. It often sounds like the opposite of what it means. It's not something I ever guess at.

I do not play "armchair lawyer".

ADD: the woman on the stand is extremely credible. That's what I got out of the video. And I found the lawyer's hair distracting (shallow, perhaps).

Do you agree though that the missing day of slips create a hole too big to ignore?

Hobbs should be kicked out of office for extreme neglance of handling the election. If she is incapable do that correctly, then she is incapable fulfilling her other duties properly. She she also be charged/sanctioned (if sanctions does any good) for harassment for threatening to jail others for doing their job as they see fit. No work place I know of would tolerate what she did.