re: Breaking: Kari Lake loses trial to overturn Arizona Governor election - Vows to appeal

quote:

---

I think that we live in a federal system (in which the states run the elections) and that each state will make its election process as "secure" as is desired by the residents of THAT state.

Florida may have airtight systems and Wisconsin less so.

As it should be in such a federal system.

---

Good in theory, but how much of election laws/procedures are the result of federal involvement? I know AZ has been sued more than once by DOJ over restrictive voter registration/voter ID requirements.

quote:

---

But ballot harvesting and the way ballots are mailed out/distributed is like having strict drug laws, and then putting gov't funded crystal meth vending machines on every corner.

---

Well, no. It's like Florida having strict drug laws, and California puts government funded meth vending machines on every corner.

quote:

---

I'm asking if the potential for fraud should be considered in the design of a voting system.

---

You don't think election law addresses the potential for fraud?

quote:

---

This seems to be the standard after a loss now.

---

It isn't really new, though, or even unique to Cultists.

Clinton flip-flopping was particularly amusing.

This isn't directed at you specifically, but here is the link to the written decision by the Judge. Apologies if this has already been posted....I haven't gone through all 30 pages here yet

https://www.clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4531/638074764564181393

quote:

---

Yes, we have laws. Great. But ballot harvesting and the way ballots are mailed out/distributed is like having strict drug laws, and then putting gov't funded crystal meth vending machines on every corner. I'm asking if the potential for fraud should be considered in the design of a voting system.

---

I would hope that fraud was a consideration. Based on the voting process the state created it appears it definitely was. This the requiring observers from both parties, signed chain of custody, the whole vote adjudication process is setup like a mass control to ensure 1 vote 1 person. It's probably not perfect but it's definitely not a weak process

quote:

---

What chain of custody documents were into evidence?

---

So we don't get off the same page. This is what you posted that I responded to:

quote:

---

The lack of chain of custody of 17,000 ballots mixed in with 250000 ballots for which no chain of custody documents were produced places the result in doubt.

---

1. There wasn't 17,000 ballots mixed in with the 250,000 ballots. There were 2 voting centers where this happened. That's 2 out of 223 voting centers, or more relevant - 2 out 70 voting centers where they had problems tabulating ballots for a while. So we're talking about hundreds of ballots in question, not 17K or even thousands.

2. Moreover, the county isolated the commingled ballots and did an audit reconciliation on them in the presence of Dem and Rep observers, and confirmed that all ballots were counted, and no ballots were counted twice.

3. Chain of custody documents were not introduced into evidence, however, KL's own witness acknowledged they exit. The judge cited that in his ruling -

Ms. Honey agreed during cross examination that, while she has not received the Maricopa County Delivery Receipt forms – she knows that these forms do, in fact, exist.

So as far as the unresponded to FOIA is concerned, it was a non-issue for the court given plaintiffs acknowledged that the documentation does exist, and the FOIA request itself was outside of the purview the court.

quote:

---

Or wing nuts that dont believe the other side got more votes.

---

I've never offered an opinion on who got more votes, mensa.

I'm merely talking about video footage of people taking pictures of a stack of ballots before they put them in a drop box. I know why they did that and I suspect you do as well.

quote:

---

I would hope that fraud was a consideration.

---

It most definitely was, but not in the way you're hoping it was.

quote:

---

Did they need to be if the Plaintiff's claim was they simply didn't exist?

---

Ummmmmm. You serious?