Page 53 of 53

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 10:07 am
by Tiredretiredlawyer
Richer… :lovestruck:

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 12:36 pm
by p0rtia
I’m confused about the lawsuit Richer filed. I read it as he was the one who sued to get the 100 k voters off the rolls. So he lost the case but is happy about it. Do I read this as the lawsuit being his duty as Recorder to file, but basically just the fastest way to get a decision? In the suit he says that according to law those voters were not eligible.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 12:44 pm
by Foggy
I think according to law those voters were not eligible, but they were mostly long-term voters who had done nothing wrong, and he didn't want to be responsible for denying the franchise to 100K voters. He said the vast majority were US citizens for certain. So he felt he had a duty to bring it to the court's attention. Besides, better to do it this way than to keep his fingers crossed and stay silent about it and hope some MAGAt didn't start screaming about it after the election. This way, it's all cleaned up and ready for prime time.

I think ... :roll:

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 12:52 pm
by Dave from down under
Sometimes you need to file a case that you might want to lose to get the clarity that is needed.

Like that there was a case in Western Australia that the government funded the appeal by a person convicted under a WA law (lobster fishing), to be sure that the law was just.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 12:55 pm
by bill_g
That's my read too. He was doing a kindness and was working towards the benefit of those potentially disenfrancised, and did it without fireworks or charade while he still could. It's too bad his constituents decided he was not worthy enough to serve them any longer. I think they cut off their noses despite their faces.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:02 pm
by sugar magnolia
bill_g wrote: Sat Sep 21, 2024 12:55 pm That's my read too. He was doing a kindness and was working towards the benefit of those potentially disenfrancised, and did it without fireworks or charade while he still could. It's too bad his constituents decided he was not worthy enough to serve them any longer. I think they cut off their noses despite to spite their faces.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:21 pm
by p0rtia
Thanks, all !

So, the question arises, why didn't he file something to keep them _on_ the roles, if that's what he wanted? I guess the answer is going to be that it doesn't work that way.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:24 pm
by Foggy
p0rtia wrote: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:21 pm ... why didn't he file something to keep them _on_ the roles, if that's what he wanted?
Because he believed the law meant they were ineligible, so he argued what he thought was the law. But he's happy to be proved wrong.

:popcorn:

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:34 pm
by W. Kevin Vicklund
p0rtia wrote: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:21 pm Thanks, all !

So, the question arises, why didn't he file something to keep them _on_ the roles, if that's what he wanted? I guess the answer is going to be that it doesn't work that way.
Someone had to take the position that they weren't eligible, and SCoAZ was more likely to defer to SoS, so Richer got to play Devil's Advocate. But they can't tell the court that.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 2:26 pm
by pipistrelle
Foggy wrote: Sat Sep 21, 2024 12:44 pm I think according to law those voters were not eligible, but they were mostly long-term voters who had done nothing wrong, and he didn't want to be responsible for denying the franchise to 100K voters. He said the vast majority were US citizens for certain. So he felt he had a duty to bring it to the court's attention. Besides, better to do it this way than to keep his fingers crossed and stay silent about it and hope some MAGAt didn't start screaming about it after the election. This way, it's all cleaned up and ready for prime time.

I think ... :roll:
That's my interpretation. It was the right thing to do, which is why it's crappy he was voted out.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 2:26 pm
by pipistrelle
W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:34 pm
p0rtia wrote: Sat Sep 21, 2024 1:21 pm Thanks, all !

So, the question arises, why didn't he file something to keep them _on_ the roles, if that's what he wanted? I guess the answer is going to be that it doesn't work that way.
Someone had to take the position that they weren't eligible, and SCoAZ was more likely to defer to SoS, so Richer got to play Devil's Advocate. But they can't tell the court that.
Zactly.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Sat Sep 21, 2024 5:25 pm
by Dave from down under
Because he does the right thing is why he was voted out…

Too many people want the wrong thing to happen :(

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2024 1:03 pm
by pipistrelle

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2024 1:43 pm
by RTH10260
I assume the FBI will soon make some early morning visits ... :violin:


ps. what has financial data to do with election results?

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2024 1:47 pm
by northland10
RTH10260 wrote: Mon Oct 07, 2024 1:43 pm ps. what has financial data to do with election results?
Because the left is involving laundering money from pedofiles and China and others to help finance the election stealing or something.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2024 2:42 pm
by p0rtia
That'll end well....

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Mon Oct 07, 2024 3:00 pm
by Rolodex
Finchum is the AZ connection, but the deputy sheriff in Tennessee has been a whole story of his own. Phil Williams has been doing amazing work on this tool. Law enforcement is finally looking into him.

So this moron cop uses his access to FinCen to dig up info on all the [imagined enemies] and give it to Finchum. Depending on the details, this seems pretty clearly something illegal. And there will be digital evidence.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2024 7:47 am
by RTH10260
Phoenix officer repeatedly punch, Taser deaf Black man with cerebral palsy

ABC15 Arizona
11 Oct 2024

A Black man, who is deaf and has cerebral palsy is facing felony aggravated assault and resisting arrest charges after he was repeatedly punched and tasered by a pair of Phoenix police officers.

The violent and rapid arrest of Tyron McAlpin raises serious questions and could serve as a test case for Phoenix and the Department of Justice as the two battle over whether the police department in America’s fifth-largest city needs federal oversight.

Acting on false claims from a White man under investigation, body camera video shows officers unexpectedly go after McAlpin, punch him in the head at least 10 times, Taser him four times, and wrap their arms around his neck.

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:01 am
by neonzx
Ok another 7-figure settlement coming. When are insurance companies going to start dropping coverage for out of control police departments?

Arizona behaving badly and otherwise

Posted: Fri Oct 11, 2024 8:14 am
by Chilidog
W. Kevin Vicklund wrote: Wed Sep 18, 2024 1:38 pm The origin of the issue is that, in 1996, AZ required proof-of-citizenship for all new license registrations, and for all renewals of licenses issued or renewed prior to 1996. However, if you had your license re-issued without being renewed (if you lost your license, for example), the database would show an issued date after 1996, but you didn't have to show proof-of-citizenship. Thereafter, the system would check the date of issuance, see that it was after 1996, and assume poc had been shown. The voters themselves are not at fault, it was a bad procedure.

ETA: once you had been flagged as having shown poc, you didn't have to show it on subsequent renewals.
So basically, older voters.....