Josh Bernstein writing for the Gateway Pundit points out that voting in Arizona violates three statutes in the US constitution. Maricopa County violated the election rights including the voters’ Equal Protection rights, their First Amendment rights, and their voting rights.
Bernstein says that if anyone takes legal action, whether it be the campaigns for Republican Governor, Attorney General, or the Secretary of State they must do it on Constitutional grounds. This limits the judges from throwing out the suit on technical grounds.
Outcome determinative means that the violations were so severe that they altered the outcome of the elections. He claims that they would need affidavits from 30,000 people in order to show that.
Please go to www.savearizonanow.com and file your affidavit listing why you were unable to vote and any other problems you had at the precinct where you vote. Armed with those and the listing of the violations of constitutional rights would give the lawyers solid ground to stand on.
Article two, section twenty-one of the Arizona Constitution states, “All elections shall be free and equal, and no power, civil or military, shall at any time interfere to prevent the free exercise of the right of suffrage.” It is a fact that over seventy voting locations in Maricopa County had issues with ballot tabulator machines not being able to read voters’ ballots.
In addition, there were also reports of printers having configuration issues, and even ink settings being improperly set rendering ballots unreadable. All of these issues, whether purposeful or not violate Article two, Section twenty-one’s first sentence which states, “all elections shall be free and equal.” Having over seventy locations, which is roughly thirty percent of all of Maricopa Counties’ voting centers compromised, not working, or inoperable violates the Arizona Constitution. This election was not “fair or equal” in access to voting rights and these damages were indeed outcome determinative.
Maricopa also lied to voters when they told them they could go to another precinct because if you check into two precincts it makes it look like you voted twice and your ballot could get tossed. You may not even know that they did that. Nowhere in the Arizona election manual does it say that you can do that. Bernstein said for this reason alone the election should be redone.
I would add this. There should be poll watchers with unlimited access and a mechanism that allows for a hand recount. All machines must be tested before the new election and if they do not work the next morning in 30% of the precincts in any county, all precincts must close since those things seem to happen in Republican precincts, not Democratic ones.
If this was not bad enough, it has been revealed that the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors Bill Gates, along with the Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer started a Political Action Committee (PAC) on November seventeenth of 2021 called “The Pro Democracy Republicans of Arizona” which was designed specifically to recruit, train, and run candidates that do not question the validity of the previous election in 2020. This is a huge conflict of interest at the least and shows a clear bias against all candidates that hold an opposing view. Imagine that, those tasked with conducting free and fair non biased elections were overseeing the election of candidates whom they publicly disapproved of and active sought to defeat?
When it comes to election cases, most judges shy away from them because they don’t want to be seen as meddlesome or subject themselves to being the person who decides elections. This is why they rarely get involved in these types of cases. Typically judges will refuse to take the case or dismissed it on the grounds that those filing the case do not have “legal standing” to do so. Even when there is ample amounts of evidence of malfeasance or fraud, as was the case in many of the lawsuits filed in 2020, most judges just simply refused to even see the evidence. If these campaigns decide to file lawsuits, which they most certainly should do, they need to get past the “standing” objection that President Trump and his legal team in 2020 had difficulty doing.