| Submit your comments on this article |
| Government Corruption |
| Arizona county was stumped by unregistered voters, old addresses, discrepant tallies, emails reveal |
| 2022-12-26 |
| [JustTheNews] Following the Nov. 8 midterm elections, officials in Pima County, Ariz., struggled to determine how to handle provisional ballots cast by unregistered voters, discrepant provisional ballot totals, and ballots cast by voters with old addresses — even asking the secretary of state's office for guidance. The confusion and uncertainty clouding county election officials' decision-making are revealed in newly released internal emails obtained through a public records request submitted by America First Legal Foundation. A week after Election Day, Pima County Recorder Gabriella Cazares-Kelly wrote to Pima County Elections Director Constance Hargrove that the Recorder's Office found that 11 unregistered voters had cast provisional ballots but was unsure what to do about them because her office was "not normally in possession of the Provisional Ballots and my team is very opposed to opening them." |
| Posted by:Skidmark |
| #7 As soon as the guy said “root cause analysis” in progress he unbuttoned the back doir of union suit and bent over the exam table…. and the doctor walked out of the room and to the nurse to write script for Motrin. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2022-12-26 20:19 |
| #6 it was a high bar that the Kari Lake team had to meet not only that bad things happened but that the bad things were intentional and also that the bad things made the difference between which candidate won and not only that, it had to be established by clear and convincing not just preponderance of evidence |
| Posted by: Lord Garth 2022-12-26 18:51 |
| #5 Intent is irrelevant SH. The law specifically states that Intent or maliciousness doesn't matter, specifically. If it happened, either they have to throw out the votes for the county, or redo the election. Stated in the Law, as written by the Legislature. This was a Judge saying "Yeah, they almost certainly did it, but I'm not touching this". Appeal will happen, though not holding breathe. Hell, the damn Elections Director stated, in changing testimony the second day, that the 20" to 19" change happened on Election Day, AKA the systems were switched on ED. lot of people fired up to Ballot Harvest and Early Vote now. We'll see if it makes a difference in 2024.Though probably not with McConnell, McCarthy, and McDonnal all looking to be in charge after 0-6. |
| Posted by: Charles 2022-12-26 16:08 |
| #4 If I were going after the Maricopa County, I would have gone after the fact that there were wrong ballot sizes available in the polling place. That is unprecedented. If you can walk the 7 why’s back to the root cause of why there was wrong sized ballots issued, you can find someone who did something. That is where the squeeze begins. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2022-12-26 14:35 |
| #3 Overwhelming circumstantial evidence of voter fraud and elections bias/trickery are insufficient to prove INTENT according to the federal judge. You need an actual confession by an elections official because all that other evidence, despite its stunningly obvious explanation, isn't compelling. In other words, FU voters, you can't prove it, even though everyone knows its true. |
| Posted by: NoMoreBS 2022-12-26 12:57 |
| #2 The general rule for ballots is a new address within the same precinct equates to a regular ballot because all the local issues would be the same. Someone who has changed address should vote provisionally at their new address and go through the cure process that will also update their registration going forward. Anyone who shows up at the precinct for and old address shown be referred to their new precinct. If they insist on voting at their old precinct, they vote provisionally and their vote is incurable and tossed. Regardless, all handling of provisional ballots is done by law. Both Pima and Maricopa County Election offices need to get the Broward County treatment after the SOS, DA and Governor’s offices return to competent management …. which will be never based on this article and everything else we have seen since 2020. |
| Posted by: Super Hose 2022-12-26 11:31 |
| #1 probably need a separate post on the decision yesterday regarding dismissal of the Lake challenge in Maricopa County. apparently, the Lake team didn't call eye witnesses, just relied on statistical analysis and 2nd hand testimony but I am not in AZ and didn't get a close and comprehensive read on the case |
| Posted by: Lord Garth 2022-12-26 10:32 |