Kari Lake Trial Changed EVERYTHING – Important Facts From The Case

Share This Post

YouTube player

Kari Lake is exposing the election in Arizona system. And while they did not get the ruling by the first judge, don’t think for a second this won’t be moving forward with appeals, potentially all the way to the supreme court. We are going go get into these details in a second but let me first say, the walls are crumbling. The evidence has been unleashed. Democrats can gaslight and lie to people all they want but we know of the failures in the chain of custody, we know about the ballot issues, we saw people perjure under oath and we know that Katie Hobbs was a terrible candidate that lacked the dignity to even bother to debate. We know that when it was announced a small sample of ballots would be examined that the Hobbs team knew they were screwed.

We also know that Twitter was censoring on behalf of Hobbs. On behalf of Biden. On behalf of the FBI.

Like I said, the walls are crumbling. The Emperor has no clothes.

It can be frustrating to talk to people who believe the big lies. Sure, some of the nonsense on social media is from bots. But others can include your family, friends and colleagues. The programming has gone so deep for so long that we can’t expect to save everyone from the religion of clown world corporatization.

After all there are still people who trust Fauci, Pfizer, Biden, Big Pharma, Big Government, Social Media, Corporate Media, the FBI, CIA and IRS. How the heck do you politely make these people realize how ignorant and delusional they are? Unfortunately, in many cases, you don’t.

You treat these people the same way in which you would treat someone captured by an ideological cult.

Not everyone is ready to realize the truth: that this entire system was designed to enslave us. To make us think we are free. To make us think we have a choice. A voice. A vote. The red pill is a bitter pill to swallow. It represents the blood of our ancestors and everything they have sacrificed for us.

Cognitive dissonance can only be resolved with self-reflection and self-awareness followed by seeking alternative sources of information, then contemplation, and then the willingness to admit you were fooled. That’s why it’s as rare as an inside-the-park home run.

Elon Musk is helping. He’s the worlds richest man or one of them. He makes cars, batteries and flies rockets. He’s a better messenger, because of his credentials, that most of us could ever hope to be. People look towards authority figures. Pop-Culture figures. To gauge what is normal and true. Elon encompasses both world. Similar to Trump but less divisive.

With all of that said, and I only said it to warn you that these facts won’t matter to many….

Let’s break down the Kari Lake trial. The facts. The omissions. The Perjury.

The Judge ruled that Lake will have to reimburse Hobbs $33,000 for some costs during the trial because she lost the case. But Hobbs wanted $700,000. The judge rejected her request to sanction Lake over the election lawsuit. This is important because it shows that the judge knows full well Kari Lake brought a mountain of evidence, with limited time and only two days. The judge did not care. He was never going to rule in Lake’s favor anything short of an admission of guilt. He was more than happy to kick that can to the next judge. And the next judge could do the same until eventually we end up at the Supreme Court. But listen to what he said. “There is no doubt that each side believes firmly in its position with great conviction.” He knows. He knows we know he knows. Anyone who saw the evidence and is not a complete and total BOT knows. It’s why we are allowed to talk about it on Youtube. There was a case. The evidence was presented. So it can’t be denied. Let’s examine the case. And a big credit to Tracy Beanz, who broke down court files like the champion that she is.

Lets talk about what the judges order DID NOT address, which is much more indicative of willful ignorance on the part of the judge, who even was stunned at some of what was presented, as evidenced by his reaction in open court.

Let’s start with Good ol’ Stephen Richer, the Maricopa county recorder. He’s one of those “Republicans” you keep hearing about from Democrats. And keep in mind, this is a brief overview. I’m relaying some of the bigger points but not all of them. You can find the full thread in the description.

Richer is asked about OS for ballots. He walks through the process AS IT SHOULD happen. This isn’t what happened, as we will learn in just a bit. Also, he says a “bipartisan” team. Keep in mind, Richer call himself a Republican but literally started an Anti-Kari Lake Pac, which was largely funded by top Democrat donors. So this is the bending of the truth we have to deal with.

The defense asks him directly if he purposefully sabotaged the election.Also, THEY bring up printer issues. He tells the, “Absolutely not.”

On redirect he is asked if he opposed Lake for governor. Richer doesn’t answer. Then he is asked about the PAC he started to spend money opposing Lake. He states it is 100% false that he started said PAC. Oh really?? Let’s unpack this a bit.

He is a tweet by Richer literally admitting to starting a PAC at “prodemocracygop.com.” This site is not longer active.

The Arizona Mirror even wrote an article about it.

The top donor just happened to be a top Democrat donor named Francis Najafi. He spent $174k this cycle with most going to Katie Hobbs, Act Blue and the AZ Democratic Party.

This is what we call perjury.

Next up is Robert Jarrett, the “co-elections director responsible for tabulation, and all in-person voting, as well as warehousing, training poll workers, etc. Jarrett is the man responsible for logic and accuracy testing and programming of the tabulators etc, as well as training.

Jarrett testified that they performed logic and accuracy testing before Election Day. This testimony is important.

This is VERY important. The question asked is “What would happen if a ballot was printed out of a ballot on demand printer at the vote center if it was printed with a 19” image on 20” paper and run through the tabulator?” READ THE QUESTION CAREFULLY.

Jarrett dodges the question, and Defense comes in to rescue. Defense actually states that to answer he would have to SPECULATE. We know this to be false now, he doesn’t have to speculate, and Jarrett knows that.

He says, “…the timing marks on the ballot matter…” “There was no 19-inch ballot images installed on ballot on-demand printers”

People with nothing to hide generally don’t try THIS hard to pretend there weren’t problems. Less than a minute after this he will contradict himself. He states now: “I don’t recall ballots — issues with ballots being rejected” That is implausible.

He is later asked, “Did you hear of any reports of a 19” ballot image being printed on a 20-inch paper?” A: “I DID NOT.” Q: “If that occurred would that be a failure…” A: “I’M NOT AWARE OF IT OCCURRING, AND I’D BE SURPRISED…” Save this. Bookmark it. File it.

Jarrett again doubles down. The wording here is very important. Take note of what I UNDERLINE in RED. Plaintiff asks “If a 19-inch BALLOT IMAGE was put on a 20” paper…” Jarrett: “…asking me to speculate about things.. no knowledge of occurring.”

Later he is again asked about the 19/20″ ballots. “do you have any idea how it could occur?”

“I do not.”

“Would it require two different ballot definitions to be installed on the EMS?”

The Plaintiff later wanted to get on the record that the ballot definition resides in a central location, on a laptop connected to the printers. Very important, and is one of the things this judge ignored. There’s no excuse for it. You’ll see why.

Jarrett explains “…it’s on a laptop that’s connected to our ballot on-demand printers.”

Next up is Clay Parikh’s testimony as it relates to his extensive experience, technical knowledge, security clearances, and current and former positions.

Parikh chose ballots from SIX vote centers, and was forced to look at duplicated ballots in some instances. This is where a lot was lost in confusion, purposefully IMO during cross from the Defense.

n his order, the judge made a lot of noise about how Parikh “admitted” that problem votes were, in fact, tabulated. He ignored the reason for the problem in the first place, and COMPLETELY glossed over the fact that Parikh testified that they LOST the duplicated ballots!

This is not only a huge issue with vote totals and issues there, it is a MASSIVE DEAL with Chain of Custody— And the judge just COMPLETELY ignored it.

So here we have an expert witness who inspected the ballots as per court order, testifying that NOT ONLY was there an issue with the ballots themselves (we will get there) but there is ALSO a HUGE problem with chain of custody, another count in the lawsuit AND THE JUDGE IGNORES.

And we get our first loud objection from the defense. 48 of 113 ballots (spoiled ballots) had a 19” inch image printed on a 20” paper. A 19” image printed on a 20” paper, with no COS for the tabulated ballot. That isn’t all. He asks for spoiled ballots as well as originals.

Remember, according to Jarrett, this was IMPOSSIBLE and could never happen. As a matter of fact, he had not heard of this happening even ONCE, anywhere, ever. Unheard of. Speculative, impossible, would be surprised if it ever occurred. Remember that.

Fourteen of fifteen duplicated ballots were 19” images printed on 20” paper. 14/15, with the only remaining ballot being slightly torn and not 19” on 20” paper. Remember, there exists NO chain of custody for the duped ballots. There’s no way to know WHAT they were voted.

“Would there be any way for this to happen by accident?” A: “NO SIR” Q: Why? A: “I reviewed the evidence and the printers are configured by script” FULL STOP. This was COMPLETELY ignored in the Judge’s order. As though it never happened.

Parikh testifies that this would likely cause a paper jam error, even if there was no paper in the machine. He interviewed a tech who experienced this very thing.

Again, and again- could this have been an accident? Could it be a mistake? On and on— the answer is always a very firm and definitive NO. It could not be an accident, or a mistake. It was intentional. He also testified he witnessed many more like this as ballots were shuffled.

Is there any way you could be wrong about this? A: No sir, there are only two ways it could happen, and I would need to forensically examine to figure out which of the two it was. We move to cross examination….

Defense is asking about the lack of duplicated ballots for the 19” image ballots- please NOTE he was talking DIRECTLY to Jarrett about this. The same Jarrett who said this didn’t happen. This is unbelievable.

“You heard Jarrett testify there was NO WAY a 19” image could be on a 20” paper, right?” A: Yes “There is no way those could have been tabulated, right?” A: “There is no way a 19 inch image on 20” paper would be accepted by a tabulator” …this was of course IGNORED by the judge.

Parikh examined early votes as well. There were NO 19” images on 20” paper with early voting. It didn’t happen. Only with Print on Demand (day of election votes).

This was the most IMPORTANT testimony of it all so far, because it COMPLETELY obliterates their “fit to page, shrink to fit” excuse by the defense. If there is ONLY a 20” ballot image, and ONLY 20” paper, shrinking the 20” ballot image to fit a 20” paper WOULD HAVE DONE NOTHING.

People who have nothing to hide don’t lie on the witness stand. People who have nothing to hide don’t neglect to share information that would be helpful to testimony WHEN DIRECTLY ASKED. They went from not knowing about, to oh yea, we knew about it.

The 19” ballot image on a 20” paper disenfranchised many many many voters in Maricopa county, and there was no way it could have happened if it wasn’t intentional. The judge glossed over this completely. An appeal is coming.

as Kari Lake stated, “We will move forward with our appeal. Katie Hobbs will move forward with her illegitimacy.

Also important to note, Case Law is on the side of Kari Lake. Findley v Sorenson: Irregularities can VOID an election if the results are rendered UNCERTAIN. This case was cited, but not followed by Judge Peter Thompson.


Subscribe to recieve a daily email of our top stories

Related Posts