Opinion: Something was ‘proved without a shadow of doubt’ in Kari Lake’s election trial, all right. And it should be followed up with sanctions, for bringing sour grapes instead of evidence.
Kari Lake’s trial is over. The Big Reveal about Arizona’s election is, well …. revealed.
Turns out there was no bombshell evidence proving that some nefarious soul over at Maricopa County schemed up a plan to rob Lake of victory.
There wasn’t even a small firecracker. Not even a party popper.
There was just Lake’s attorney, clinging to a theory that somebody shrunk the ballots to cause Election Day mayhem and cost Lake the election.
“This is about trust,” Lake’s attorney Kurt Olsen said, in his closing argument. “It’s about restoring people’s trust.”
Team Lake failed to prove either count
Actually, according to Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson’s order, it was about bringing evidence that shows someone intentionally caused the county’s ballot-on-demand printers to malfunction – and that, as a result of that, enough “identifiable” votes were lost to change the outcome of the election
it was about whether the Republican-run county intentionally played fast and loose with the rules that require them to keep track of early ballots, allowing Democrat Katie Hobbs to come away with the win.
Key facts:Behind the claims in Kari Lake’s election challenge
Team Lake didn’t even come close on either count.
Instead, her attorneys offered:
- Sworn declarations from 200 voters who said they were impacted by Election Day problems. But only three of them, according to the county, didn’t vote and that was their choice. Declining to wait in line or put your ballot in a secure box, to be counted later, is not evidence of disenfranchised voters.