Voting fraud case dismissed because of fears of what finding fraud would do to confidence in elections

[mark francis]

The reason many voting fraud cases were thrown out is that judges feared what finding massive fraud would do to American unity. America is deeply divided between the left and the right and if it is discovered or proven the left stole the 2020 election by fraud that could easily result in a massive collapse of the current fragile public peace between Americans on the two sides of the divide. To many judges, maintaining the peace between fighting factions in America required a shutdown of investigations and talk of 2020 voting fraud, thus prompting the rash of voting fraud cases thrown out on technical grounds or for false or unproven reasons.

Kari Lake fought valiantly to expose voting fraud in Arizona, but the establishment would not allow that exposure.

Judge Rules on Kari Lake’s Review Of 2022 Ballot Envelope Signatures (msn.com) 12-2-23

Judge Rules on Kari Lake’s Review Of 2022 Ballot Envelope Signatures

Judge Rules on Kari Lake’s Review Of 2022 Ballot Envelope Signatures© Provided by State Of The Union
An Arizona judge denied Kari Lake’s request to review ballot envelope signatures for the 2022 general election, citing concerns about public confidence in the electoral process.
The judge sided with Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer, who argued that releasing the signatures would compromise voter privacy and election security.

For fear of undermining confidence in elections the judge cited ambiguous reasons for dismissing the voting fraud case to prevent unearthing facts of fraud.

 

[pjmret]

yes, confidential information should be kept confidential.

there are reasons any right wing moron can't do what they feel like doing because their feelings are hurt.
releasing signatures would allow anyone to forge them duh.

right wing morons whine constantly about election security, but don't care about it if it benefits them personally. how egotistical.

so not ambiguous. just hard to understasnd for people on the right with low iqs

 

[mark francis]

yes, confidential information should be kept confidential.

there are reasons any right wing moron can't do what they feel like doing because their feelings are hurt.
releasing signatures would allow anyone to forge them duh.

right wing morons whine constantly about election security, but don't care about it if it benefits them personally. how egotistical.

so not ambiguous. just hard to understasnd for people on the right with low iqs

Of course judges feared a second Civil War if the Democrat voter fraud theft was ever exposed. It was likely that fear that motivated judges to reject voting fraud cases without even examining the evidence.

 

[pjmret]

Of course judges feared a second Civil War if the Democrat voter fraud theft was ever exposed. It was likely that fear that motivated judges to reject voting fraud cases without even examining the evidence.

no, he correctly pointed out that releasing signatures can easily lead to fraud.
its a simple concept that you seem too stupid to understand. lol

 

[pjmret]

Of course judges feared a second Civil War if the Democrat voter fraud theft was ever exposed. It was likely that fear that motivated judges to reject voting fraud cases without even examining the evidence.

what evidence didn't he hear?
list it, lying oron. lol

 

[mark francis]

no, he correctly pointed out that releasing signatures can easily lead to fraud.
its a simple concept that you seem too stupid to understand. lol

No, that is the stupid lie the left hopes stupid Americans will buy from them. The signatures could not be matched, proving there was a major breakdown in legitimate election processes. Refusing to examine the evidence does not prevent future fraud, it hides past fraud.

 

[mark francis]

what evidence didn't he hear?
list it, lying oron. lol

That is the million-dollar question. Did any US judge who rejected voting fraud cases ever take a serious look at the evidence of fraud? That seems highly doubtful.

 

[pjmret]

No, that is the stupid lie the left hopes stupid Americans will buy from them. The signatures could not be matched, proving there was a major breakdown in legitimate election processes. Refusing to examine the evidence does not prevent future fraud, it hides past fraud.

no, your post is stupid. lol.

only a true moron wouldn't understand that releasing signatures could easily lead o fraud.
but you are such a moron

 

[pjmret]

No, that is the stupid lie the left hopes stupid Americans will buy from them. The signatures could not be matched, proving there was a major breakdown in legitimate election processes. Refusing to examine the evidence does not prevent future fraud, it hides past fraud.

please post your signature for all to see. lol.
and your social security number too, why dont you, since you don't think that releasing sensitive information to the public can lead to fraud? lol

 

[pjmret]

That is the million-dollar question. Did any US judge who rejected voting fraud cases ever take a serious look at the evidence of fraud? That seems highly doubtful.

no, its the claim you made and now you can't prove.
you're a lying moron

 

[mark francis]

no, your post is stupid. lol.

only a true moron wouldn't understand that releasing signatures could easily lead o fraud.
but you are such a moron

What you are saying is that if fraud was committed and revealed in evidence of hundreds of thousands of mismatched signatures, that fraud could not be investigated because some officials claim (without proof) that such investigations will open future elections to fraud. I'm not buying that horsesh*t logic.

 

[mark francis]

please post your signature for all to see. lol.
and your social security number too, why dont you, since you don't think that releasing sensitive information to the public can lead to fraud? lol

You do not want invalid signatures to be investigated in the stolen 2020 election, so you resort to childishness. That should be embarrassing for you.

 

[pjmret]

You do not want invalid signatures to be investigated in the stolen 2020 election, so you resort to childishness. That should be embarrassing for you.

hahahahhaha

your'e busted.

you dont care if OTHER people's confidential information is released, but you wont release your own.

thanks for proving my point.

 

[pjmret]

What you are saying is that if fraud was committed and revealed in evidence of hundreds of thousands of mismatched signatures, that fraud could not be investigated because some officials claim (without proof) that such investigations will open future elections to fraud. I'm not buying that horsesh*t logic.

nope i'm not saying that at all.
you post the dumbest things. lol

 

[mark francis]

hahahahhaha

your'e busted.

you dont care if OTHER people's confidential information is released, but you wont release your own.

thanks for proving my point.

You don't know what you are talking about. The reason the law requires signature verifications is so signatures can be used to verify the legitimacy of the vote. Democrats claim it would be wrong to use signatures to verify votes in voting fraud investigations, but that is a lie.