Kari Lake Just Got Told There Is Definite Evidence That….


In a high-stakes courtroom battle for the future of Arizona, compelling new evidence shakes up the accepted narrative, hinting at potential misconduct that could change the future of a key political race.

Kari Lake, the GOP’s 2022 gubernatorial candidate, is standing firm against allegations of election misconduct. Her legal representative presented powerful arguments to Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson, demonstrating the fervor with which conservatives are fighting to uphold the integrity of our elections.

Judge Thompson is presently weighing the Motions to Dismiss submitted by the defendants, as well as a robust 263-page Motion for Relief from Judgment lodged by Lake’s legal team. This extensive motion advocate for the reinstatement of Lake’s second count related to “illegal BOD printer/tabulator configurations.”

Notably, these were issues that Thompson had previously dismissed, but the state Supreme Court urged him to reconsider, particularly in light of signature verification issues.

Lake’s attorney, Kurt Olsen, argued persuasively that new evidence indicates “clear misconduct and intent.” He boldly stated, “This evidence supports our allegation that the election was rigged,” challenging the democratic narrative that denies any form of election misconduct.

Olsen revealed that recently obtained evidence, specifically system log files and tabulator records, had only been made available to Lake’s legal team months after the trial ended. This new evidence, he argued, uncovers vital information that disputes the testimony of Maricopa County Elections Director Scott Jarrett regarding issues with ballot printing.

Olsen pointed out inconsistencies in Jarrett’s testimonies. Jarrett initially denied any problems with ballot printing, only to later admit such issues existed. He further claimed that unauthorized techs made changes to the printer configurations on-site, a claim that Olsen firmly refuted based on the newly obtained evidence.

Lake’s motion included a declaration from cyber expert Clay Parikh, challenging the defendant’s claims. Furthermore, Olsen referred to a report by former Arizona Supreme Court Justice Ruth McGregor, which scrutinized the printing issue. The report suggested that unexplained misprinting incidents might have been caused by malware or remote access, implying potential foul play.

Olsen questioned the integrity of Jarrett’s claim that the printing problem only occurred in three vote centers, arguing that it actually happened in at least four. These inconsistencies further underscore the need for rigorous scrutiny of the election process.

Furthermore, Olsen provided “new and compelling evidence” suggesting that Maricopa falsely certified the passing of Logic and Accuracy testing. He pointed out that the county secretly tested all vote center tabulators after the certification and found that many would fail on Election Day.

The county’s recent admission that they had not initially configured the tabulators to accept early and provisional ballots was another point of contention. Olsen argued that the county violated A.R.S. 16-449 by reconfiguring the tabulators without conducting the necessary testing.

Olsen contended that the county’s delayed disclosure of this crucial information rendered all tabulators null and void, further undermining the election’s credibility.

Adding to the mounting evidence of procedural mishandling, Maricopa County’s attorney, Joseph La Rue, admitted to inconsistencies in the county’s signature verification process. His concession that signature verification is not a “hard and fast science” exposes the critical vulnerabilities in our election system that demand immediate attention and rectification.

This ongoing struggle in Arizona serves as a stark reminder of the importance of election integrity and the urgency for conservatives to remain vigilant in defending our democratic principles against liberal agendas.

Sources: Conservativebrief, ArizonaSun-Times,

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *