The Kari Lake election fraud verdict: Part III
[NOTE: This third part of the series has been sitting around in draft form too long. So even though the caravan has moved on, I’m posting it before it gets even more stale. Part I can be found here. Part II can be found here.]
How could the voting machine debacle in Maricopa County have been prevented? I really don’t see how it could have been predicted that so many machines in Maricopa would either go bonkers on Election Day or would be fiddled with to make them go bonkers on Election Day. But one of those two things happened and once it happened there was no redress because the courts wouldn’t order one, short of a smoking cannon or series of cannons that were never going to materialize.
More generally, however, let’s take a look at this article about Arizona voting security efforts from a while back. It was published the week before the 2022 election:
More than a million ballots for the Nov. 8 election already have been cast in Arizona, which was an early adopter of voting by mail. State lawmakers created the system in 1991 with bipartisan support. Three decades later, that’s how the vast majority of Arizonans cast ballots.
Note that the law establishing a vote-by-mail system was established in Arizona thirty years ago with bipartisan support. I doubt that the people voting for it back then foresaw the problems it would entail; those were very different days. Now the system is deeply entrenched there. But many of the problems alleged in 2022 in Maricopa County don’t seem to have involved that process.
On more recent voting system legal challenges in Arizona [emphasis mine]:
Fast-growing Arizona shifted from a reliably red state to choosing Democratic President Joe Biden by a narrow margin in 2020. That sparked months of lawsuits and a review of Phoenix area ballots by state Senate GOP leaders and allies of former President Donald Trump…
Arizona’s election system has survived multiple legal challenges, although some appeals continue. Lake and Finchem sued to end the use of ballot-counting machines, but a federal judge tossed the case. They appealed the ruling. And the Republican Party of Arizona lost its lawsuit claiming the long practice of early voting violated the state’s Constitution. That case now sits with the state Court of Appeals.
Remember, that was written the week before the election. Moreover:
Lawmakers have changed some of the state’s election laws in recent years, and voters on Nov. 8 will decide on a ballot measure that would tighten voter ID requirements. Here’s a look at those changes and how voting works in Arizona.
There’s much much more at the link and well worth reading. I also had described some of the Arizona efforts and what happened to them in this post and in this one as well. Suffice to say it often comes down to the courts, and they often thwart the efforts of the right to change things.
The bottom line is that voter fraud can only be prevented in a county or a state or a country in which the vast majority of people are committed to doing so, and that includes the courts. Otherwise, it will occur because the rewards are high and the chances of being meaningfully punished are exceedingly low. And it doesn’t even matter whether it does occur or whether it only strongly appears to occur; the damage to public trust is done either way.
There also was a referendum on the ballot in 2022 in Arizona that would have tightened up voter ID laws. It was rejected by a margin that is similar although not identical to the margin by which Kari Lake lost.
Also, there’s more about that ruling in October 2022, when Lake and Finchem sued to stop voting machine tabulation. Their suit was thrown out, with this statement from the judge:
In Friday’s order, Judge John J. Tuchi tossed the lawsuit in full, ruling that the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the lawsuit and that their claims are “vague,” “speculative” and ultimately amount to “conjectural allegations.” Additionally, the judge declared that the dismissal of the plaintiffs’ suit is further warranted under the 11th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which restricts individuals from bringing lawsuits against states in federal court. The judge stated that, in this case, the “plaintiffs do not plausibly allege a violation of federal law…[and their] complaint asks the federal court to oversee the administrative details of a local election. We find no constitutional basis for doing so.” Finally, the judge referenced the Purcell principle and explained that, even if the court had jurisdiction over the plaintiffs’ suit, given the imminence of the November midterm elections the plaintiffs’ “request [for] a complete overhaul of Arizona’s election procedures” is implausible. In his order, the judge wholly discredited the plaintiffs’ fallacious claims against electronic voting machines, citing numerous audits — which were undertaken following the 2020 election to assess Maricopa County’s tabulation equipment — that proved no evidence of fraud or compromised election security due to the use of the machines.
So they weren’t allowed to stop it ahead of time and they couldn’t do it afterwards. They couldn’t prove it to the court’s satisfaction back in 2020 and therefore they couldn’t allege it prior to the 2022 election. That’s lawfare for you, and one of many examples of the way in which it makes legal challenges to voting practices very difficult – unless, of course, the rule being challenged is considered by the court to have a negative effect on some minority racial group.
And here is a very important article, Rachel Alexander’s explanation of the war on attorneys who represent people on the right and who take these voting challenge cases. It takes a lot of courage to do so, and a group called “The 65 Project” is very upfront about it their program to intimidate these attorneys and prevent them from doing the job (the quote is from the Project’s website):
Following Biden’s victory, an army of Big Lie Lawyers filed 65 lawsuits based on bogus assertions to overturn the election and give Trump a second term. While the nation’s legal institutions stood up to this attempted “coup-via-courtroom,” Trump and his “Big Lie Lawyers” have “learned lessons” from 2020 and are already working to seize control of state and local election processes and to prepare for alicious election litigation efforts.
The 65 Project is a bipartisan effort to protect democracy from these once-and-future abuses by holding accountable Big Lie Lawyers who bring fraudulent and malicious lawsuits to overturn legitimate election results, and by working with bar associations to deter future abuses by establishing clear standards for conduct that punish lies about the conduct or results of elections.
“Bipartisan” – perhaps because of allied NeverTrumpers? – gives them sanctimonious cover. What they are doing is completely against all principles of the legal profession, but they feel protected.
And speaking of protecting – fortifying – future elections, lower down on their page we have this:
Protecting future elections
As the January 6th Committee’s work has confirmed, lawyers played a central role in then-President Trump’s attempt to stay in power despite losing the 2020 presidential election. Many of these lawyers, and their conduct, are subject to ethics rules. But just as Trump and his allies sought to exploit vagueness in the Electoral Count Act, so too have some lawyers evaded accountability because of gaps in the legal profession’s ethical rules. And just as Congress is rushing to fill those statutory holes, state supreme courts also must address certain weaknesses in the rules of professional conduct.
We are working closely with law professors and professional responsibility practitioners to develop model rules, and we will push state bar associations to adopt them.
Who are the fascists here? Power is everything.
I wonder whether, in a different world, the total and complete screw up of the Maricopa machines could be seen as sufficient reason for a do-over. There is no way to know what the actual vote was and what would be the point of denying an effort to do it right?
If it were not a matter of political partisanship–I know, I kid–it would seem reasonable to run the thing over again.
The other point is that, if things can be this screwed up by accident, how can we tell if it’s fraud? Or maybe fraud the next time.
I smell a strong odor of “What are you going to do about it?”
The AZ election was confused by a plethora of local elections that were all on the same ballot. The failure of printers, although they worked the day before the election, was related to the necessity of printing different ballots for each local race. My wife and I got mail-in ballots, filled them out and dropped them into a ballot box in an early voting site in Tucson. Our IDs were checked so vote fraud was probably unlikely although counting is another matter. I think the error was insisting on voting in person on election day. That gave the fraudsters a target date. Also, those “drop boxes” are an invitation to fraud.
I think a possible/partial solution is to use the mail-in ballots but have some voting places manned for several days, check ID and protect the integrity of the ballots. That, of course, does nothing to prevent ballot counting cheating but it would solve the election day issue.
Mike K, in Wake County, NC, which is large, there are something like 8-10 early voting centers, in which any voter registered in the county can vote at any center. Instead of printing the ballots to order, every early voting center has a supply of all possible ballot styles for the county, pre-printed. On election day, voters must go to the precinct in which they are registered, because that’s the only place which has their ballot style. This system allows for all those local races.
I agree that in a mess like Maricopa County, waiting until election day to vote is risky.
Kate,
Because Arizonans vote for a LOT of down ballot offices like Central Arizona Water Conservation Board (actually a very important job in a desert state), Community College board, and so on, AND because each of those offices have different district boundaries, Maricopa County has about 2000 different ballots.
I think there was enough fraud in 2020 to change the result. I think there might have been enough fraud in 2022 to change the results.
The system adopted by Maricopa County (run by nominal Republicans) has some serious vulnerabilities. That said, I can understand why they chose the system they use. I don’t like it but I understand.
If those downballot races were voted on in May, it would simplify the November ballot significantly.
it’s imax projection of course, on the mind of progs, I think their trial heist was the sheriff’s race in 2017, that was the sign they could go for the senate in 2018, not that fidel o flake was much better than synema, when we speak of trump nominees, the former is one of those they had to go past,
Kari Lake’s defeat is due to either electoral fraud and/or voter’s willful and arguably suicidal, blindness.
Gordon Scott, 2000 ballot styles is indeed a lot more than our 60 or so. Voting for the down-ballot races in May would improve the situation, but it would not allow the Democrat forces to cheat in November.
One would think – you would be wrong of course – that those states with majority republican state legislatures would enact legislation to ensure fair and honest elections.
The courts have established the template to enable election day cheating. The cheaters just need to make sure all the election day mechanical, electrical, computer mishaps appear to be random events; just coincidences, that’s all.
The fact that ALL the coincidences ALL go in the SAME direction for EVERY election, well, that’s just a coincidence too; just random, unpredictable events.
It’s sort of like seeing 40 heads in 50 flips of a “fair” coin. This is not mathematically impossible. In fact, there is a 1 / 109,606 chance that this can occur; a probability greater than zero. Therefore, one must conclude the coin is fair. After all, low probability events occur all the time (and they do).
Now, a serious gambler type would realize real quick that the coin is loaded. But that’s because he is an uneducated , ignorant , stupid moron who doesn’t know any better.
Whereas a highly educated judge would know better and rule “the coin is fair; get out of my courtroom.”
The AZ election was confused by a plethora of local elections that were all on the same ballot.
It’s not that difficult to fix this problem. A couple of state constitutional amendments and some statutory legislation will do it. Our state legislators fix nothing.
Dear Neo: You may be worried that this installment is stale.
Don’t.
It’s terrific, a splendid lesson in why relying on courts to repair election fraud is a mug’s game. You want to stop election fraud? You have to do it before it happens. That means control of the local prosecutions and preferably the state AG and SecState.
neo:
I second Leo Amery.
This A->B->C logic on election fraud must become common discourse.
Related (special edition on Kamaladroit Harrisisms and Democratic Party “transparency”):
“Arizona governor’s rocky start: Oath laugh, inaugural donation questions, and speech walkout;
“Despite promising transparency, Gov. Katie Hobbs won’t disclose amounts of individual donations to her inauguration fund.”—
https://justthenews.com/government/state-houses/gov-katie-hobbs-rocky-start-oath-laugh-undisclosed-inaugural-donations
And a bit of much-needed weekend levity…
Kamala Harris (in one of her more coherent moments)…:
https://twitter.com/realDailyWire/status/1613623426307989504
H/T Instapundit.
Lawfare by the Left requires compliant, soft, sympathetic judges, to my horror. Legal objectivity is left behind, in the dust.
The population of Maricopa County has risen from about 1 million in 1970 to 4.5 million today. And Arizonans are very stubborn and will resist changes to the election systems. I live in Mesa, which is now the 34th largest city in the U.S., and will soon pass Tucson as the second city. And trust me, Mesa is just a big town, even though it has more people than Lubbock, Atlanta or Minneapolis.
The point is that people here do not think of it being this big megalopolis. But it is and it keeps growing fast. There was an effort to reform the voting system after 2020, but it failed when two RINOs opposed the bill. They’re gone, but now with Katie Hobbs on her throne, Arizona will be the latest state to discover that school teachers make lousy executives.
Arizona has universal school choice, and one of Hobbs’ first moves is to kill that. She’s gotta dance with the lefties that brung her, but she has a Republican legislature, and if there’s anything that can bring out the pitchforks and torches, its school choice.
Meanwhile, I suspect Kari Lake et al are planning to wrest control of the state party from the hands of the McCainites. That’s going to be fun to watch.
Meanwhile, I suspect Kari Lake et al are planning to wrest control of the state party from the hands of the McCainites. That’s going to be fun to watch.
That would be #1 on my agenda. Hobbs was, of course, the Sec State so she had control of the election. The McCainites would rather have a Democrat in office than a Trump endorsed one. Lake and Masters were head and shoulders above the hacks that got elected. Ditto for the AG.
The Democrats tried to reverse school choice with a ballot measure but it was shot down before the election. She has added two Teachers’ Union lobbyists to her admin.
Arkansas Voter Integrity Initiative has gotten voting machines removed from several Arkansas counties. We need to drive out every aspect of the cheating.
https://arkansasvii.org
The AZ republican’s problem was the idiot Charley Kirk telling everyone not to mail in a ballot but vote on election day.
The guy is an idiot.
Sam, the AZ republican’s problem was an intentional sabotage of election day voting. You sound like the Maricopa elections board that blamed the problems on people voting on election day.
Until a court allows an audit of the signature verification process after an election, the chance of proving malfeasance is impossible.
Even the “forensic audit” in 2021 by Republican legislature in Arizona of the 2020 election did not include an audit of signature verification. The judge in the Lake case dismissed her verification claim by distorting her claim IMO.
The rejection rate in the 2012 election in Maricopa county was over 2.4%, dropped to 1.2% in 2016. By 2020 the rate was 0.4%. Was this improvement a result of better voter education and curing processes or more lax verification process?
Even without an actual verification audit, plenty of problems were found with the envelope signatures examined in the 2020 audit.
https://thefederalist.com/2021/09/27/arizona-2020-vote-audit-finds-potentially-election-shifting-numbers-of-illegal-ballots/