Still not 'duly elected' ... anything -- Kari Lake, TFG Endorsee

[bob]

I think they left off a couple "0's"

Indeed, but I'd like to think that getting sanctioned for lying to court makes a pretty heavy black mark on one's reputation.

I would not be surprised if counsel now has to self-tattle to the Arizona State Bar.

[northland10]

I think they left off a couple "0's"

Indeed, but I'd like to think that getting sanctioned for lying to court makes a pretty heavy black mark on one's reputation.

I would not be surprised if counsel now has to self-tattle to the Arizona State Bar.

Since the court mentioned revoking PHV if it is not paid, does this mean that Kurt Olsen needs to self-tattle to his bar?

[raison de arizona]

Just wanted to point out that the Lake crew is claiming the sanctions against them as a victory. Because of course they are.

"All but one minor sanction requested to be imposed on Lake’s legal team were shot down & the court ordered the signature verification audit to be expedited. Other than the minor $2,000 fine over poor legal wording, today was a victory for Team Kari."

[Chilidog]

Lake's legal team playing games again.

They need to up the sanctions by an order of magnitude.

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-cont ... -final.pdf

[raison de arizona]

UPDATE: Kari Lake Tells Judge She May File New Lawsuits To Overturn Election; Status Conference Set For Monday (READ filing, Order)

Within hours of being sanctioned by the Arizona Supreme Court for repeatedly making "unequivocally false" statements to the Justices, Kari Lake's attorneys informed Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson that they are "contemplating" a new lawsuit to allege her constitutional rights have been violated, and that they may re-challenge Maricopa County's logic and accuracy testing.

Judge Thompson has set aside 30 minutes for a status conference this coming Monday afternoon (2pm).

Lake's attorneys also indicated that they will try to consolidate the long-running Election Contest case with a recently-filed public records lawsuit to get the early-voting ballot envelopes from the County.

These three possible actions to extend Lake's legal battle to claim victory in last November's gubernatorial election were set forth in the Motion for a Status Conference.

"Plaintiff-Contestant Lake is also contemplating a motion to reconsider the dismissal of Count IV (logic-and-accuracy testing) under ARCP 60(b)(3) within the same likely time frame as the proceedings remand. Indeed, she may also bring a new and separate action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and state law to press her federal and Arizona constitutional claims." (The U.S. Code section cited deals with claims that constitutional rights have been violated.)

Moar with many docs linked: https://arizonaslaw.blogspot.com/2023/0 ... e-may.html

[RTH10260]

"contemplate" all you want

[Phoenix520]

Man, she must have been an absolute terror as a child.

NO, I WONT. I DO NOT ASEPT YOUR BOSSOF ME.

[Chilidog]

4:00 pm central time.

[raison de arizona]

[Chilidog]

Two assholes

[Sam the Centipede]

Two assholes

Piers Moron is from the land of Shakespeare, soooo…

What a pair of shit-stained tossers!

Two assholes, both alike in duplicity, on fake news we lay our scene, from imagined grudge break to new mutiny, where lying words make all unclean.

Apologies to William S.

[Phoenix520]

[Chilidog]

I think old Bill was describing Kari Lake's handwriting...

By my life, this is my lady’s hand. These be her very c’s, her u’s, and her t’s, and thus makes she her great P’s. It is in contempt of question her hand.

[raison de arizona]

Lake's case is moving.

Motions due tomorrow. Responses due on the tenth. Replies on the eleventh.

https://twitter.com/Garrett_Archer/stat ... 4038249473

[Chilidog]

Tried to listen.

It sounds like the judge is letting this go back to trial.

[bob]

It sounds like the judge is letting this go back to trial.

Maybe. But setting dates also sets fires under counsel. The dates could be means to move things along, control the docket, etc.

[johnpcapitalist]

I think old Bill was describing Kari Lake's handwriting...

By my life, this is my lady’s hand. These be her very c’s, her u’s, and her t’s, and thus makes she her great P’s. It is in contempt of question her hand.

Ah, my favorite Shakespeare: Twelfth Night.

[Tiredretiredlawyer]

Kudos to our Shakespeare parody commentators!

[p0rtia]

Tried to listen.

It sounds like the judge is letting this go back to trial.

Didn't listen, but... I do know that the AZSC ruled that one of Lake's complaints (that the county's signature verification rules were not strictly followed) had to go back to the County (?) judge to be considered. The signature thingy was one of her issues that the County judge had rejected for consideration. Pretty much housekeeping, and in no way gonna affect her claims. So maybe that was what she was talking about?

Sorry for IANAL terminology!

[raison de arizona]

Hasn't decided yet if it will go to trial, but the door is open. Arguments Friday morning.
https://twitter.com/arizonaslaw/status/ ... 08032?s=20

RECAP: Both sides must file any Motions by tomorrow. Response by Wednesday, Replies by Thursday.

Oral argument, 9am on FRIDAY.

If he proceeds to trial, it will be MAY 17-19.

PW

We EXPECT:
1) Defendants to re-package/re-file Motions to Dismiss Count 3 (sig verification)
2) Lake to Move for Reconsideration of the dismissal of Count 4 (logic and accuracy)
3) Lake to Move to Consolidate this case with their public records lawsuit re: ballot envelopes
PW

[p0rtia]

Good luck with (2) and (3), Ms. Lake.

[Luke]

Here's video of the hearing from a RWNJ Rumble channel. Jordan "Spunky" Conradson from Gateway House of Boys is on it. The host tongue bathes him as "the best reporter in AZ". Kurt Olsen is his usual ridiculous self, trying to testify during a status hearing with a bunch of conspiracy theories and lies. Kari Lake is on camera seeming to be chatting and clueless.

[bob]

[raison de arizona]

Lake is no fan of the CDC. Ignore the text, just the video.

[Chilidog]

So.....

As I understand it, the AZSC reframed Lake's original complaint to be that the county failed to follow pre-established policies and proceedures for signature validation, AFTER the election. That is why they determined that Laches doesn't apply to her complaint.

Based on that, (again, as I understand it) ..

1) Lake is not allowed to question or challenge those policies and proceedures themselves. That is still barred by laches.

2) Lake can only challenge that those policies and proceedures were NOT followed starting November 9 and afterwards, and because of the alleged failure of the county to follow those policies and proceedures after November 8, she lost.

What are the odds that in the next round of motions to be filed, Lake's lawyers will try to make at least one argument that is barred by laches and or by the instructions given by the AZSC.