Finally! Forensic Election Audit in Maricopa County (AZ) Begins Next Week

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Boadicea

Just my first find.

Most (not all) issues concerning the administration and conduct of elections are governed and regulated by state law and are best addressed by state and local election officials. Federal law enforcement and prosecutorial authorities have jurisdiction to investigate and, when appropriate, prosecute election fraud in the following circumstances:

1. In elections where a federal candidate’s name is on the ballot.

2. In any election (federal or nonfederal), when the fraud involves the necessary participation of an election official acting “under color of law.”

www.justice.gov...

Interesting.... and good to know. On the face of it, this would seem to apply to elections themselves, rather than audits.

However, I can see someone making the case that un-doing -- or potentially -- un-doing an election via an audit could fall under this authority.

I think it would be a fight tho. A big fight. (in court of course... and the media... not a literal fist fight)

a reply to: carewemust

The regular messages from former President Trump on this audit are no doubt increasing the desire of the DOJ to intervene.

I've been wondering about this. I suppose everything might have played out exactly the same whether Trump had started speaking up about it or not. No one was paying much attention to AZ at first. Now they are.

It does make ya wonder if Trump is bringing sunshine to the people re the audit and lighting a fire under the Feds.

a reply to: Byrd

And you might want to stop and consider this point.

We elected a President --

Maybe. That is a/the point of contention when you get right down to it.

-- in charge of the Federal government. That's what the Federal government role is here and since the election is for a Federal office (not state) the Feds do have the constitutional supremacy here. States have to set things up within Federal guidelines (in other words, the governor of the state can't simply appoint people.)

Every state's elections have always included federal offices, and yet the Constitution explicitly and expressly grants the power to set election policies and procedures to each state's legislative bodies. That has not changed.

I would further suggest that the people who set up and run the elections and the organization that's been doing this for the past 200+ years (or however long the state has existed)...

LOL! We're toddlers... celebrated our centennial in 2012.

...probably know more about the process than the people here on ATS and particularly more than those who haven't worked elections. I'd further maintain that arguments put forth by Youtubers (who haven't actually bothered to vote until Trump ran for office) are not a particularly good metric on how legal something is.

Fair enough... but to the best of my knowledge, no one is proclaiming ATSers as experts... I think we all know this is just a discussion.. and I especially don't know about any youtubers. Maybe I missed something, but that hasn't been part of my discussion.

a reply to: Byrd

If they change the vote, I think you'll see an uprising in the state, particularly in the cities... massive protests and more.

If we see an uprising, they will be imported for the purpose. Folks here are more likely to rise up against outside interference than anything else.

Trump was unpopular (yes, he can get the caravan of folks from other states driving in to his rallies) and never managed to get more than a 48% approval rating. People didn't want him and turned out to vote for Biden to keep Trump from another term.

There were plenty of Trump supporters going into the election... there were also plenty of others voting against Trump... but the people voting for Biden because they like and want Biden are pretty darn slim. We'll be far more angry about our elections being compromised than we will about Biden himself. I'm not sure anyone would care enough to try to remove Biden. People will want to know what's going to be done to fix our election systems... and who's going to jail.

I don't know how it will play out but this is interesting.

Yes indeedily!!! This is history in the making. I really don't know what to expect either. I'm expecting nothing and anything all at the same time.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

Exactly what the 10th ammendment was written for.
No fed jurisdiction at all.

I was thinking more of the elections clause in the Constitution, Article 1, Section 4:

The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.

However, combined with the 10th, the State has two Constitutionally enumerated powers it can stand behind.

a reply to: Boadicea
Yeah, where in that is any "audit" listed?
Oh, that's right, it is not.

And when it's not listed......


The fed and it's apologists are all wet.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Boadicea
Yeah, where in that is any "audit" listed?
Oh, that's right, it is not.

I agree. It's not. And I seriously doubt the Founding Fathers would have said, "Oh wait! Let's give the Feds the power to interfere and disrupt a state's Constitutional powers and authority to investigate and confirm/debunk suspected cheating in their elections... especially the election of a president!"

That was never going to happen. Everything -- literally everything -- in and about the Constitution has the express purpose of restricting the Feds to enumerated powers. The Constitution is intended to proscribe what the Feds can and cannot do.

And when it's not listed......

Then the Feds have no powers and no authority.

The fed and it's apologists are all wet.

I agree. I would also add that this isn't a case of the Feds suspecting wrongdoing in the election itself, and investigating that suspected wrongdoing, which might be/could be justified. This is literally the Feds trying to interfere/stop the investigation of wrongdoing by the same person (technically) in charge of the investigating agency. That's a HUGE conflict of interest on top of the violation of powers.

a reply to: Boadicea
It appears more in the barak hussain tradition of attempting to use federal agencies for political purposes, you know, like he did with the epa and irs.
Quite vile imo, par for the course with thos group of people.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Boadicea
It appears more in the barak hussain tradition of attempting to use federal agencies for political purposes, you know, like he did with the epa and irs.
Quite vile imo, par for the course with thos group of people.

Just as I knew they would at least attempt. They have to make sure evil prevails. Only the weeds are kept in those agencies.

Arizona Judge recuses himself from Election Audit in Maricopa County 4/26/2021

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Boadicea
It appears more in the barak hussain tradition of attempting to use federal agencies for political purposes, you know, like he did with the epa and irs.

Yes, this does have Obama written all over it. But then everything that's happened the last four years does.

I'd bet dollars to donuts it doesn't just appear to be Obama's playbook....

Obama's the one to watch. (And Podesta.)

originally posted by: Byrd

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Annee

Fact... because it is possible... but -- obviously -- arguable.

First, the Feds would have to establish Constitutional supremacy over each State's legislative bodies to set policy and procedure for elections..

And you might want to stop and consider this point.

We elected a President -- in charge of the Federal government. That's what the Federal government role is here and since the election is for a Federal office (not state) the Feds do have the constitutional supremacy here. States have to set things up within Federal guidelines (in other words, the governor of the state can't simply appoint people.)

It seemed pretty clear to me.

I’m trying to stay with legal process.

Not “feelz” — slinging Right/Left barbs.

Being a resident of AZ I know it’s 1/3, 1/3, 1/3, with Independents swinging the vote. And there was a massive “Blue” push campaign resulting in a significant increase of Native/Latino votes. Plus, as you said, many just wanted Trump gone.

Because of this, I think the election was/is legit.

It concerns me that they’re determined to find something, even if nothings there.

It concerns me that they’re determined to cover up something, even if organized fraud is obviously there. Not even considering looking at voter machine manipulation.

a reply to: Annee

It seemed pretty clear to me.

I’m trying to stay with legal process.

Not “feelz” — slinging Right/Left barbs.

And you've done a good job of doing exactly that -- even when prodded and taunted. Congrats on that!

Being a resident of AZ I know it’s 1/3, 1/3, 1/3, with Independents swinging the vote. And there was a massive “Blue” push campaign resulting in a significant increase of Native/Latino votes. Plus, as you said, many just wanted Trump gone.

I agree with the 1/3-1/3-1/3 analysis generally speaking. I did not see any support for Biden, but I did see a lack of support for Trump. And I tend to think those who could not support Trump but couldn't support Biden either voted Jorgensen. But there was also a big "Blue" push as you said, which also increased support for Biden.

Because of this, I think the election was/is legit.

I have to parse my thoughts a little here and separate Maricopa from the state as a whole because of Fontes' rule changes, which inevitably and undoubtedly resulted in too many ballots "adjudicated." That never should have happened. The totality of its effect is unknown, but that it had some effect is known.

It also seems to me that if all claims are true, then Trump won by a HUGE margin in Maricopa, and I just don't see that. Not to introduce new conspiracy theories here, but it seems to me that perhaps many of the non-Trump votes went to Jorgensen, but were likewise switched to Biden, which might explain it. But that's speculation on my part right now. Just trying to think if/how multiple things could be true...

It concerns me that they’re determined to find something, even if nothings there.

This concerns me also, although they saw Fontes' tricks as well as me, so there's that. In the big picture, I'm more inclined to suspect the Senate of wanting to prove wrongdoing for their own political careers, not to get rid of Biden. If they can prove the Republican critters in Maricopa are guilty of something, it's that much less local competition for the Republican critters in the Senate.

a reply to: Boadicea
Still stunned at those opposed to sunshine.
An audit would only bolster a fairly conducted election, right?

ELECTION AUDIT HITS JACKPOT! ALL eyes on MARICOPA County

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Byrd
President Trump's approval rating was higher than Obama's. In fact, Trump replaced Obama as the most admired man in America.

Trump surpasses Obama: thehill.com...

I'm afraid you've conflated two different things. What you pointed to was "Gallup's List of Most Admired Man in America" and not "presidential approval rating." Obama had been #1 on the list for 12 straight years, which would be all of his terms and all of Trump's term as well... and I can assure you that Obama was NOT the President of the US during Trump's term!

You can find polls all over the place, but the best site to see ALL the polls for each week (not just selected ones... this covers both conservative and liberal) is FiveThirtyEight Presidential Approval Polls

You can see that as he approached the November elections, his approval rating went up a bit but never reached 50%. The approval rating average was pretty much in line with the number of popular votes cast, with Trump taking only 46% of all votes cast

No turnout of Biden fans.

You guys keep mistaking crowd rally size (a few thousand people) with the mandate of 200 million people. Trump rallies got fewer people than a Dallas Cowboys home game (91,000 average for every single game.)

If you want to google unpopularity, look at the size of the inauguration crowd for Trump and the size of the crowd for the next day's women's March (which protested Trump.) I was in DC and although I didn't go to the inauguration I was at the Women's March and posted live updates here. The majority of people in the US didn't like him and didn't want him as president in the first place (he lost the popular vote for that election.)

This time around, we voted "anybody but Trump"

No alignment of the stars. No statistical predictions.

I don't think you looked at all the predictions. Even Fox News commented last summer that Trump was lagging in the polls and didn't seem to care. Statistical predictions showed a close race but most showed Biden winning.

Even bookies that were taking bets on the US election said Biden was favored and that the race would be close.

FACT: JOE BIDEN DID NOT LEGITIMATELY WIN IN NOV 2020.

I realize that you and 74,000,000 people don't like it but 81,000,000 people (including me) disagree with you. And since America is a representative Republic, our majority vote here overrules your minority vote.

a reply to: Boadicea

Don’t forget — Arpaio no longer has a grip on Maricopa.

There’s a lot of built up resentment in Maricopa.

I think the Blue Wave got these people to the polls.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Boadicea
Still stunned at those opposed to sunshine.
An audit would only bolster a fairly conducted election, right?

It sure as hell should!

That's why I can understand -- and welcome -- reasonable and practical suggestions and recommendations and requests which are intended to ensure the integrity and fairness of the auditing process... just like the elections themselves. I don't have a problem with that.

I have a problem with those wanting to shut it all down and just nuke that sun right out of the sky!

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: Boadicea

Don’t forget — Arpaio no longer has a grip on Maricopa.

There’s a lot of built up resentment in Maricopa.

I think the Blue Wave got these people to the polls.

Good point about Arpaio. I don't want to discount Arpaio's lingering effects...

Adding to the blue vote, we can also add in the never-ending stream of Cali refugees and developers coming here.

I don't know if it was enough to push Joe over the top, but you're right -- it's here.

a reply to: Byrd

I'm afraid you've conflated two different things. What you pointed to was "Gallup's List of Most Admired Man in America" and not "presidential approval rating." Obama had been #1 on the list for 12 straight years,

An organization controlled by DNC to give credit to and legitimize members of their criminal cabal. Remember Obama getting all those sickening awards like the Nobel Peace Prize before he was actually in control?

Nobody would even go to Obama speeches during the last Trump election.

Trump won by 11 million votes by voter machine fraud alone.