If you’ve heard this before please stop.
An Arizona judge has ruled that the candidate who lost last year’s election will not appreciate a new trial to overturn the vote.
That’s just eight months after the election.
This time, Abe Hamade did not win in the recount results, and voters who were disenfranchised said they could not prove their suffrage.
“Arizona election law does not allow for additional discovery in post-trial election litigation,” Mojave County Superior Court Judge Lee Jansen said in an eight-page ruling released Monday. rice field. “The trial should have been quick, and it did in this case.”
Translation: The fishing season is over.
Same claim but no proof yet
Of course, Hamade plans to appeal.
Of course, it’s in the national interest.
“A fair legal system does not tolerate government deception.” he tweeted Sunday, two days after Jantzen announced his verdict. “If this sets a dangerous precedent for our elections, it will be devastating and further undermine confidence in our elections. , Honesty cannot be punished.”
In the case of Hamade (unlike all others), it was at least a close call. He lost to Attorney General Chris Mays by just 280 votes out of 2.5 million votes cast.
He continues to argue that thousands of provisional votes were not counted when they should have been.
But the judge said Hamade had made similar allegations during his trial in December, but had not provided any such evidence.
Hamade thinks he has votes to find
In fact, after inspecting a sample of 2,300 ballots, he received just six votes.
“While plaintiffs have alleged problems with provisional ballots from the inception of this action, the merits hearing did not present material evidence of specific problems,” Jantsen wrote. “Plaintiffs are now requesting additional discovery to investigate whether problems exist with provisional ballots. Only limited discoveries are allowed in the campaign.”
Another lawsuit:Resigning official demands $2 million from Mays
Hamade also said that recounts in Pinal County revealed hundreds of uncounted votes — votes that narrowed the margin of victory for Chris Mays from 511 to 280 votes — and said there were no more votes in the state. They say there could be tens of thousands of uncounted votes lying around that could give him the win. .
Certainly, if you accept the idea that since Pinal County failed the election, the state as a whole must have failed.
Unsurprisingly, Mr. Hamade smells a cover-up.
There was no cover-up by Hobbes
Specifically, then-Secretary of State Katie Hobbs deliberately withheld evidence of Pinal County’s error until after Hamade’s December trial.
“Who knew what and when?‘” he tweeted on Monday. “Pinal County has certified election fraud. Pinal County and Katie Hobbs did not bring this matter to the court and covered it up until after the trial. Democracy perishes in the dark, so they say… ”
do you know what they say? That courts are governed by laws and regulations and require real evidence beyond tweets, wishes and prayers.
Judge Jantzen wrote that Mr. Hobbes had violated no rules of court and had complied with a judge’s order not to disclose the details of the statewide recount until the results were certified.
In any event, “evidence of Pinal County’s error will not be sufficient beyond speculation about other errors without evidence,” he said.
Sour grapes have no expiration date
Just don’t expect the judge’s findings to change the message to MAGA followers. People who have been tricked into believing that Hamade was robbed by an activist judge and the swamp and the media, they all seem to have conspired to get together over the weekend. To refuse him a due duty.
“As many as 76,339 votes statewide may not have been counted.” he tweeted on sunday.
Arizona law has strict deadlines for election challenges, but apparently no deadlines for sour grapes.
To contact Roberts, laurie.roberts@arizonarepublic.com. follow her on her twitter @ Laurie Roberts.
Support local journalism: Subscribe azcentral.com today.
