(TheLibertyRevolution.com)- Just days after she was unsuccessful in her attempt to have the results of her race in Arizona overturned or a new election held in Maricopa County, former gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake is drawing attention to a recent ruling in Georgia ordering a new election after officials discovered many “systemic irregularities” that may have affected the outcome.
The case involved a rural Screven County county commission race, where several candidates filed a lawsuit alleging that at least twenty voters received incorrect ballots, potentially changing the outcome of a county commission race decided by just seven votes.
Up to 1,000 Arizona voters received incorrect ballots during early voting in the fall, which led to the discovery that some voters had been assigned ballots for districts in which they did not reside. As a result, some voters were effectively denied the right to vote in their home districts, according to Lake.
The judge in Screven County ultimately ruled that a new election be held. This is what Lake has been advocating for in Arizona.
Without elaborating, Lake merely stated on Twitter, “WORTH NOTHING.”
Although Lake’s attorneys argued in court that a printer error prevented some ballots from being counted by a machine, the votes that were cast were ultimately counted by hand and had no bearing on how people could cast their votes.
Additionally, Lake’s attorneys could not show that any of the issues she raised were significant enough to have affected the election in any way, nor were they able to show that the mistakes made on Election Day were malicious and intentional.
The Screven County case, however, did, and a judge only needed 17 minutes to conclude that the distribution of ballots, which appeared to be accidental, might have resulted in an incorrect outcome.
There’s a law that states that if there were systemic irregularities in the voting process that were deemed “sufficiently egregious” to call into question the outcome or if the number of illegal votes exceeded the margin of victory.
In this case, the plaintiffs contesting the election results found more than 20 votes cast illegally for the incorrect candidate, a number large enough to be deemed “sufficiently egregious” and raising questions about the outcome. Attorneys for Lake could not demonstrate that a similar incident occurred in Arizona.
