The Fight for Election Integrity Continues -- Audits, Criminal Investigations, Legislative Reform

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CombatMosquito

If youre going to correct me, make a decisive statement!

Im open to either possibility however.

Among a few more....

I'll let you know which after the audit, not possible to know at this point.

But I can't find ANY historical example of so many voters ignoring the top of the ticket, it's almost always the other way around.

a reply to: CombatMosquito

No? Go check Nevada.....

Im waiting to hear from another ATSer who has different numbers.

One of us is off

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CombatMosquito

No? Go check Nevada.....

Im waiting to hear from another ATSer who has different numbers.

One of us is off

I haven't been following NV at all, and have really only paid attention to you Care and Boadicea on Arizona stuff (zero msm, or even TGP this week) as I've been busy with putin's Combat Mosquito delusions and his retreat from Kherson, what should I look up in Nevada?

Great work by all 3 of you so far btw!

* no offense to the many others that probably also did great osint work here, I just new in advance what to expect from these 3 and followed them to save time.

a reply to: CombatMosquito

As of now, 6,735 voters voted for a senator but not a governor.

Now compare to say PA, which had 13k more votes for govenor than senator.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CombatMosquito

As of now, 6,735 voters voted for a senator but not a governor.

Now compare to say PA, which had 13k more votes for govenor than senator.

So after not finding any such instances (in a 15 minute search) other than gore's 2000 hanging chads in 250 years of our history, we now have 2 such examples in a single election?

Weird.

Do you know if any counties in NV have so called 'federal only voters'?

a reply to: CombatMosquito

Being honest, you mentioning "federal only voters" is a new term to me.


I would love an explanation to why, yes 2, states have such a large margin of negative governor votes.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CombatMosquito

Being honest, you mentioning "federal only voters" is a new term to me.


I would love an explanation to why, yes 2, states have such a large margin of negative governor votes.

I'll try to pull something up on that old (unresolved) CT later. I don't recall the details, but remember them being discussed on ATS and I think TGP.

As I recall, it was something specific to maricopa county.

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: CombatMosquito

Being honest, you mentioning "federal only voters" is a new term to me.

Apparantly, 'federal only voter status' is allowed in Arizona for anyone who doesn't have any ID (non citizens) when registering to vote, and are allowed to vote on special ballots that only contain federal races.

Weird.  How is this 'legal'?

apnews.com...

www.azmirror.com...

Apparantly, katie hobbs send out an additional 6000 mail in ballots to voters that were incorrectly (fraudulently) put into the 'federal only' group a few weeks ago.  These 6000 voters SHOULD have been able to vote in both the state and federal races, but were apparently given 'federal only' ballots. I wonder how many others were incorrectly given 'federal only' ballots that haven't been discovered yet.

Even more weird.

recorder.maricopa.gov...

The REAL questions IMO, besides why this is legal in the first place, is how many 'federal only' ballots were cast in 2022, and whether that total is large enough to flip any of the state races if zero ID registrations had been allowed to vote for state candidates, and more importantly, whether the total is large enough to flip any of the federal races if these zero ID non citizen voter registrations hadn't been allowed to vote.

Long story short - we need an accurate accounting of how many zero ID non citizen registrations cast ballots and how many voters were incorrectly (fraudulently) sent 'federal only' ballots, in addition to those 'box 3' ballot mishandling and other issues.

All 50+ voter rolls urgently need a thorough cleaning & investigation ASAP.

Good morning my fellow election deniers!

So the counting is over and now we find out what Team Kari is made of. We knew going into this it would be a fight and here we are.

As of now, Kari's Twitter seems to be her public voice, where she is still calling for affected voters to cure their ballot, posting more video testimonials from voters and workers on Election Day, and she has linked to a website to provide written testimonials:

Arizonans Defending Democracy

I need to make breakfast and get some things done, but I'll be back.

a reply to: JinMI

I learned something new this morning looking for info for you on federal-only ballots. I thought it was nationwide, but it's not. Federal-only ballots are unique to Arizona as a result of federal lawsuits to stop AZ's attempts to mandate voter ID:

The Proliferation of the “Federal Only Voter” List: How Arizona Ended up with 11,600 Voters in 2020 Who Have Never Proven Their Citizenship -- azfree.org... proven-their-citizenship/

Most of this legal wrangling has taken place in the last ten years. And I've seen little to nothing reported about it. Maybe that's just me... but I doubt it.

I'm going to read this again and reconsider everything in light of it all. Especially Runbeck.

Google suppressing trending "election fraud" search counts -- unite.live...

I haven't watched yet but no surprise. I'm familiar with this guy from medical/nutritional reading I've done. I'm a little surprised to see him weighing in here.

a reply to: YellowBlueSky22

Looks like even more rigging and double ballots and fake errors than we thought 😀☠️

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: YellowBlueSky22

Looks like even more rigging and double ballots and fake errors than we thought 😀☠️

And who has the means, motive and opportunity to manufacture bogus votes?

Runbeck.

Hmmmmm....

IT BEGINS: Patriots in Arizona Call for a New Legitimate Midterm Election on December 6 -- www.thegatewaypundit.com...

The article doesn't say who these "patriots" are, or where this was originally posted/published. No link to a petition to sign or lawsuit to join.

I'm not taking this at face value. There will be many efforts to deter, distract, deflect, and corral (thanks, Xuen 😉) the real Patriots. Can't let ourselves forget that... Can't let our guards down.

So I've been reading around, trying to get a sense of some kind of plan going forward. I'm not finding any.

Kari is still pushing voters to cure ballots. She tweeted in response to someone--

What incentive did @katiehobbs have to run this election properly?

And in the days following her election day disaster, what incentive did she have to help clean up her own mess?

Fair enough to some extent, but I wish Kari would go after the election process that Katie oversaw, after refusing to recuse herself. Don't make it personal until you've made it damning.

More conspiratorially speaking (I'm making up words again) why was it so important for Katie to be in that position? Because no one else in the state government knows how to perform her election duties? Or because no one else knew how to steal it properly?

New drop --

Hobbs... 1,268,851
Lake... 1,244,850
-- 24,401 difference

Kelly... 1,302,144
Masters... 1,177,020
-- 125,124 difference
-- 33,293 more for Kelly than Hobbs

a reply to: Boadicea

If Lake keeps the .5% gap, doesn't that trigger an automatic recount?

Not that I trust that they'll actually question the process.

Call me crazy but my biggest fear right now is that Trump is going to announce for prez, with Kari as his running mate, promising to "fix" everything in DC.

Fat chance, I know, but...

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Boadicea

If Lake keeps the .5% gap, doesn't that trigger an automatic recount?

Yes.

16-661. Automatic recount; requirements

A. A recount of the vote is required when the canvass of returns in a primary or general election shows that the margin between the two candidates receiving the greatest number of votes for a particular office, or between the number of votes cast for and against initiated or referred measures or proposals to amend the Constitution of Arizona, is less than or equal to one-half of one percent of the number of votes cast for both such candidates or on such measures or proposals.

AZ Legislature

Not that I trust that they'll actually question the process.

Nor do I, but it's important to know and pay attention. If the cheating is foolproof, it may be a deliberate strategy to assure the voters that the process is fair and transparent (I just gagged a little on those words...)

originally posted by: Boadicea

Nor do I, but it's important to know and pay attention. If the cheating is foolproof, it may be a deliberate strategy to assure the voters that the process is fair and transparent (I just gagged a little on those words...)

😎 Now you're learning 😎