A Comprehensive Guide to the Lake v. Hobbs Trial

Topic: Research

Yesterday, patriots who have followed the election integrity movement for two years got a tremendous victory.  Or a big one.  I mean, a solid victory, we think.

Okay, there is no telling how things are going to shake out yet, but in a striking break from the heartbreaking precedent established in 2020, in which key election lawsuits were tossed for procedural grounds, standing, and other legal nonsense put forward as an excuse to install a controllable chief executive, Kari Lake’s lawsuit against Katie Hobbs and company is advancing to trial beginning Wednesday, December 21.  I had anticipated in 2020 that courts may issue the wrong rulings regarding that year’s “election,” and was shocked to see cases tossed without a single hearing, including Texas v. Pennsylvania, which alleged Pennsylvania’s misconduct and violation of election law disenfranchised Texas’s 38 electors.  With that in mind, yesterday’s election-related news was welcome news, indeed.

The mainstream media has rushed to cover up any semblance of meaning pertaining to Lake v. Hobbs, with many propaganda outlets speaking only in terms of technicalities, pointing out how most of the case was thrown out.  Yes, technically, Judge Peter Thompson ordered the two-day trial to cover just two of ten claims presented in the original suit, but the point is, there is a trial about to happen over two of Lake’s claims pertaining to an illegal election that has, so far, yielded illegitimate prospective winners, particularly Hobbs (Governor), Kris Mayes (Attorney General), Adrian Fontes (Secretary of State), and Mark Kelly (U.S. Senate).  To make the focus of an article that most of a case like this one was thrown out would be akin to pointing out that most votes in the 2020 election were legitimate votes, although it was the ten percent (roughly) rate of ghost votes that determined the outcome.

Thompson’s ruling allows for Counts II and IV of Lake’s lawsuit to be heard, while dismissing the other eight entirely.  Thompson ruled out the following counts from trial consideration:

Count I – Violation of Freedom of Speech

Thompson rules that Lake’s view of censorship is vague, and even if it were legitimately censorship, it would not represent “misconduct.”  Thompson writes, “Nor does the First Amendment restrain the government from engaging in speech contrary to the views of some constituents – a proposition which defeats the claim against the Recorder for his presentation to CISA.”  Make no mistake, Stephen Richer is a dirtbag and is completely out of line to be taking such a political role in manipulating outcomes, but Thompson didn’t see a need to hear more on Count I.

Count III – Invalid Signatures on Mail-In Ballots

This is a big hit to the Lake team, and one that Thompson should have ruled in their favor on.  The 2020 Maricopa County audit showed serious problems with signature verfication and the impossible timeframes in which signatures were supposedly verified on an enormous quantity of mail-in ballots.  Lake is barred from this count because of technicality, that since signature verification is an election procedure, which takes placeduring an election, it cannot be addressed after the election.  In other words, “we know this is a disaster, but the rules say we can’t touch it after the election is over.”  The blame lies with Attorney General Mark Brnovich and the corrupt Arizona legislature for not rectifying this problem after it came to light following the 2020 “election.”

Counts V and VI – Equal Protection and Due Process

Thompson’s decision lists these two in tandem.  He rules that violation of either count does not qualify as an ingredient to succeed in an election contest under applicable laws.  These two counts appear to be irrelevant to the judge and the final outcome he envisions or intends to steer the trial toward.

Count VII – Secrecy Clause

Lake claimed mail-in ballots do not satisfy Arizona’s ballot secrecy laws, and points out that the Arizona GOP filed suit before the 2022 election.  The court system has likely deliberately slow-walked the case, as it is pending in the Court of Appeals.  Thompson dismisses this out of hand and writes since the current absentee laws have been on the books since 1991, “Lake could have brought this challenge at any time in the last 30 years.  To do so now is to invite confusion and prejudice when absolutely no explanation has been given for the unreasonable delay.”

Count VIII – Incorrect Certification

Thompson sides with Hobbs and rules Count VIII contains no new factual allegations not already presented in the lawsuit and its counts.  The count is dismissed for not being “a cause of action in itself,” but rather a statement of incorrect certification should the previous counts be decided in Lake’s favor.

Count IX – Inadequate Remedy

Thompson rules his court lacks the ability to provide relief on this count and that its inclusion is unnecessary in the suit.

County X – Constitutional Rights

Thompson writes that the court is not outfitted to hear Lake’s “civil rights claims” in the scope of the election contest, and dismisses it outright.

Thompson will be hearing Counts II and IV:

Count II – Illegal Tabulator Configurations

Count II, above, pertains to the election day debacle related to machine malfunctions and tabulator errors.  The challenge will be to prove that said debacle was deliberately incurred and given that Maricopa County apparently maintained a Republican voter “heat map” and its magistrates have openly opposed Kari Lake, Donald Trump, and the America First agenda, this may be possible.

An excerpt from cyber-expert Clay Parikh’s testimony is below:

As I wrote in my article outlining Kari Lake’s lawsuit last week, polling expert Richard Baris also has sworn testimony attesting to the impact of Republican disenfranchisement on the final tallies.  It appears that the burden for this count will be on proving misconduct on behalf of Maricopa County election administrators and evidence of a pre-meditated plan to destroy the integrity of the election.

Count IV – Invalid Chain of Custody

Onlookers have correctly stated in that what amounts to a “high hurdle” of proof for Lake’s team to show, Count IV is the best shot.  Recently, a Runbeck whistleblower has alleged as many as 300,000 ballots were added to the count, with no transparency available to determine fact from fiction, and plenty of fluctuation present in election reporting.

From my original lawsuit article:

Pages 45-51 outline the countless chain of custody failures in the 2022 election, and further implicates Runbeck.  An example of the pathetic misconduct is below, from page 50:

Throughout the 2022 election cycle Runbeck printed duplicate ballots.  These are duplicates of ballots that had been damaged in some way or could not be read by the tabulator.  The selections from the voter were supposed to be filled in and a new, duplicate ballot printed.  The Runbeck employee stated that there were at least 9,530 duplicate ballots printed.  When these ballots were picked up by Maricopa County, there was no documentation – no delivery/shipping receipt, no chain of custody document, no signature.  They were simply handed over to the delivery driver.

Page 51 highlights an increase of 25,000 in Maricopa County’s tally after Election Day, which highlights a critical chain of custody failure. 

CONCLUSION

There is no jury – so, what could go wrong?  America’s election integrity picture is in the hands of a single judge, who happens to be a ten-year veteran of the United States Army.  My hope is that he remembers his oath and does what is right.  Given that 72% of Americans agreed with Lake’s statement that Maricopa County botched the election and disenfranchised voters, there was a good chance a jury pool would represent some pissed-off people.

To the letter, the ruling is a mixed bag.  I think it is critical that the trial include Count III, which pertains to signature verification, so I consider that a big hit to getting to the bottom of Maricopa County’s corruption.  Still, the tabulator issues on Election Day (3:1 Republican turnout edge) should put plenty of heat on the hot seat for anyone called to testify, especially Hobbs, Richer, and any of the miscreants that make up the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors.

If whistleblower testimony or any major exposure of Runbeck’s corruption in this election rocks the boat, we could be in for a big ruling.  Keep in mind, requests for relief include declaring Lake the winner, or for a new election in Maricopa County to be called.  Should the latter be chosen, it would certainly implicate all races in the county, allowing for do-overs for very critical positions.  Should the judge rule in favor of the criminal cartel, Lake’s team is poised to take the case all the way to the Supreme Court.  Yesterday’s ruling references the brief time allotted for this trial in part because appeal may be needed by either party.

My hope is that Judge Thompson resists all pressure and the state’s corrupt bureaucrats, and delivers a ruling that will finally bring relief to the elections crisis.