Lying in the advancement of your agenda being a "nothing burger" has nothing to do with science, it's a categorization error. People like you think that the truth is subservient to politics so you simply can't be trusted. This issue may not be visible to your conscience, but believe me the rest of the world gets it.
I agree. Watching a hand-picked video from an source with no established credentials is a waste of time. What I do in such a case is do a Google search on the objective headline, "Kari Lake charges dismissed" and find an authoritative source for what really happened. I did that, and the closest thing I could find to anything like that from a somewhat reputable source was this from the Daily Independent, dated today, May 16, 2023:
Wrong.
To be fair, sometimes it's hard to find authoritative sources that say what you want them to say.
Yup! That's why they have to resort to non-authoritative sources, and then claim that all the authoritative ones are suspect.
Just as I predicted! The only way to elevate the apparent reliability of extremist sources is to drag down all the others. This leads to the belief that you can choose to follow any source that "seems" right to you subjectively - i.e. confirmation bias.
Your disengeniousness, now creating a narrative that only the right makes claims of stolen elections, is par for the course for you. You are simply partisan. And as you have been informed, this nation is a Constitutional Republic, NOT a democracy.
It's kind of moot at this point, because the judge has (again) dismissed that particular claim, but the governor's lawyers did a pretty good job here (starting on page 6) of showing that Jarrett didn't lie, and didn't change his testimony. So much for it being indisputable.
The only ones who are known to have lied in this case are Kari Lake's lawyers, as concluded by the Arizona Supreme Court.
kdminer.com
I bet
Her actual goal may have been Trump's VP, but he really does not like losers...
That may be correct. If you look at the judges framing of the issue prior to the decision it was almost a fait accompli. If you however compare his jury instruction for the necessary findings of fact to any reasonable standard of what anyone would recognize as "justice" there is simply no correlation whatsoever. There is a balancing act and apparently the priority of "not upsetting the applecart" was given great significance over the consideration of the fact that "justice was not served."
At some point, excessive reading of the tea leaves turns into making **** up.
There's no real downside to continuing the fight with other people's money.
Very true.
Go ahead and just give me your interpretation of the jury instructions. What exactly with the jury have had to conclude in order to find it in favor of Kari Lake?