Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"A lie machine"? Really? She was attacked as an an election deniar, That's it. If she played her hand like Sinema as an Independant she could have easily won against her Racist opponent Kati Hobbs. Her mistake imo was not attacking Hobbs for the Racist that she is. You noticed Lake was never sued for calling Hobbs a Racist, because she is
Dems and their Racists, they just cant get away from them: Obama and Farrakhan, Byrd and his KKK, Biden locking up 100,000 black men, Hobbs firing a black whistle blower because she dared come forward about being discriminated against by Hobbs
Hobbs still won the election as a direct result of Kari Lake. If Karrin Robson had won the GOP primary she would have beaten Hobbs. Robson supporters didn't vote for Lake they likely left that blank on the ballot. The race was MAGA vr Democrats in the General election. Kari Lake decided to go down the election conspiracy hole and it lead to a lawsuit where she will end up with a judgment of millions against her.
“I didn’t surrender, I simply cut-to-the-chase. We filed papers demanding a hearing in 30 days for Stephen to prove how my words harmed him. I am ready to go to court now, Stephen. Are you?” she wrote in a Twitter post.
Her lawyers surrendered, but not Lake. Definitely not Lake. She'd never do that. Crazy as ever.
"A lie machine"? Really? She was attacked as an an election deniar, That's it.
No that is not it. She claimed Richter, the Maricopa County Recorder changed votes from her to Hobbs and handed the race to Hobbs without any evidence. Richter has a right to defend his character. She can deny till she is blue in the face that she lost the election. No one cares. But you name specific people and claim they committed serious crimes you better have the evidence to back it up. She has nothing. Now after this lawsuit she will literally have nothing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS Jaun
If she played her hand like Sinema as an Independant she could have easily won against her Racist opponent Kati Hobbs. Her mistake imo was not attacking Hobbs for the Racist that she is. You noticed Lake was never sued for calling Hobbs a Racist, because she is
So you are admitting that Kari Lake lied? And how many politicians sue other politicians for being called a racist? Its a very subjective accusation. Lake might believe Hobbs is a racist like you do. No one is suing your or her over one's opinion.
Her lawyers surrendered, but not Lake. Definitely not Lake. She'd never do that. Crazy as ever.
What counts is what is filed in court and she surrendered. However Lake has a first amendment right to say whatever crazy stuff she wants to try to save face. And she is taking full advantage of that.
Richer filed the defamation suit last June, after dealing with months of unfounded claims from Lake and her supporters that he was involved in election fraud in Maricopa County's 2022 election, in which Lake lost her bid for Arizona governor to Democrat Katie Hobbs.
Lake had no evidence, continued to harass Richter and got served with a lawsuit. She lost various motions, lost her challenge for the election, and finally conceded she did defame Mr. Richter. She/her attorneys gave up and defaulted. "In a case like this, it's tantamount to “unconditional surrender,” said personal injury attorney, Tom Ryan.
The only thing Lake and her attorneys can legally dispute now is the amount of damages they will owe Richer.
Lake is a proven liar.
This is a pretty good summary. Words have consequences and all the morons who continued to make false claims with no proof are being found liable and big judgements are being awarded. As they should be.
What counts is what is filed in court and she surrendered. However Lake has a first amendment right to say whatever crazy stuff she wants to try to save face. And she is taking full advantage of that.
Like with Trump though, her out of court antics will matter in court.
No that is not it. She claimed Richter, the Maricopa County Recorder changed votes from her to Hobbs and handed the race to Hobbs without any evidence. Richter has a right to defend his character. She can deny till she is blue in the face that she lost the election. No one cares. But you name specific people and claim they committed serious crimes you better have the evidence to back it up. She has nothing. Now after this lawsuit she will literally have nothing.
So you are admitting that Kari Lake lied? And how many politicians sue other politicians for being called a racist? Its a very subjective accusation. Lake might believe Hobbs is a racist like you do. No one is suing your or her over one's opinion.
"Subjective" "believe"?
She was sued and Lost in court for Racial discrimination and sex discrimination! Its not like this is some big secret
Not sure why dems cover for their Racists, but they do, again and again From Farrakhan to Biden's archaic Crime bill
This is a pretty good summary. Words have consequences and all the morons who continued to make false claims with no proof are being found liable and big judgements are being awarded. As they should be.
"Words have consequences"
Not if your a Democrat and fire black people for being black
Imagine if Kari Lake had lost in court for discrimination against an unfairly fired black woman, which is what Katie Hobbs did. She would have not even received her parties nomination.
"Words have consequences"
Not if your a Democrat and fire black people for being black
Imagine if Kari Lake had lost in court for discrimination against an unfairly fired black woman, which is what Katie Hobbs did. She would have not even received her parties nomination.
No the same thing. Not even close to the same thing. Lake lied and claimed election officials broke the law and changed votes. That's hardly the same thing as a wrongful termination.
Thing is, if this suit had gone forward to a civil court trial, her emails, calls and texts were going to be subpoenaed and a lot of it would have been made public. As soon as that came up, she rolled over and signed sworn statements that she had acted with actual malice and defamed the plaintiff and so on and so forth.
Now she's telling everybody that no, actually, she didn't do anything wrong at all, she just capitulated so that she can get on with her life and her campaign and the whole thing was "lawfare" ("witch hunt" much?) and blah blah...
Way I see it, she's put herself in a double bind here. Either she expects us all to believe what she's saying in front of cameras, in which case she's saying that she lied on sworn statements and made a false confession. OR, she told the truth on the sworn statements but is now lying in front of the cameras. One of these things can carry legal consequences, generally speaking, and one not so much...so I tend to believe what someone tells a court under oath rather than what they say to the media, if the two are in conflict.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
