He continued to defend those positions until he died. That’s not what you said about him. You said he was a ‘virulent racist’. He wasn’t a virulent anything.

with an amendment to say “in defiance of a court desegregation order, federal funds could not be held from any school districts.” Gore sought to take the teeth out of the Act in the event it passed.”

The 1964 act dealt with commercial services. Federal aid to education was not an enforcement mechanism.

Ervin — “Between 1954 and 1974, he was Jim Crow’s most talented legal defender as the South’s constitutional expert during the congressional debates on civil rights.”

*he’s played by gerald depardieu,

[Since the post office unions often work closely with Democrats and have been identified in election shenanigans in the past, I would expect that all parts of the machine are kept apprised of when ballots are mailed, where, etc. so they can be taken right at the mail box. It wouldn’t shock me any more if we learned that the ballots never even make it to individual mailboxes. No one is likely to take the risk of complaining.]

And the author, Tracy Beanz, just got allowed back on Twitter.

https://www.uncoverdc.com/2022/12/12/analysis-kari-lake-files-az-election-integrity-lawsuit/

https://www.azsenaterepublicans.com/audit

The battle is the signatures IMO. The signature is the proxy for the voter. If the signature is declared ineligible, there is no way for the court to overlook that ballot. The vote total is reduced by one. If enough signatures are declared invalid, the court has two remedies. A proportional reduction in votes for each candidate, or a redo. Only one should be the outcome. A redo.

Chain of custody should be important. In the abstract, without provable chain of custody, the argument is only something illegal may have happened, but it’s impossible to prove something did happen.

As to the problems on the day of voting, the long lines, I think it was summed up by a leftist judge who said “show me a voter that was turned away.” Giving up and leaving and being denied the right to vote aren’t the same thing. That’s going to be the standard.

In 2020, Maricopa fought access to envelope images and it wasn’t until August, 2021 the courts finally forced Maricopa to turn over the images. They understand that’s where the provable malfeasance exists.

There never was an audit of signature matching, only an inspection of the envelope file given to the auditors.

But even without an audit of the signature verification process, the 2020 audit showed some of the problems with the process.

From the Echo Mail report:
Maricopa reported 587 “Bad Signatures,” which is 0.031% of the total EVB (early voting ballots) return envelopes received by Maricopa. Though EchoMail was not commissioned to perform Signature Verification, if EchoMail’s identification of 2,580 Scribbles were all designated as “Bad Signatures,” that would be 0.134% of Maricopa’s total EVB return envelopes received. This percentage is at least four times more than the “Bad Signatures” percentage reported by Maricopa.”

Now compare that to the audit of Washington state. King County had a rejection rate of 0.86%. Pierce County had a rejection rate of 0.63%. But the audit sample 7200 ballots and found that the rejection rate should have been closer to 2.2%. These are two of the most Democrat counties in the state. The Maricopa county cursory envelope inspection ballot assumes a rejection rate of 0.134%. The implication of all of this is the election officials are extremely generous in deciding if a signature is valid.

Only a complete audit of the signature verification process will determine the true number of ballots being counted that should be invalidated.

“EchoMail identified 34,488 EVB return envelope images being 2-copy, 3-copy and 4-copy Duplicates originating from 17,126 unique voters, while no Duplicates were reported in Maricopa”s CANVASS report.”

Page 15 of this report summarizes more of the findings of the 2020 envelope inspection audit:
https://www.azsenaterepublicans.com/_files/ugd/2f3470_05deb65815ab4d4b83938d71bc53459b.pdf