Feds Want Answers From AZ Senate President On Sketchy ‘Audit’ Practices | Talking Points Memo

[danny]

YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE FREE ARTICLES.

(This is a complete sentence.)

[visionseeker]

I imagine there will be many opportunities for AZ defense attorneys in the foreseeable future. These ballot vandals deserve every ounce of pain the DOJ may visit upon them.

[brian512]

@danny

YOU CAN’T HANDLE THE FREE ARTICLES.

If Col. Jessup is handling the site’s IT, that would explain a number of things.

[danny]

The comment software was made for a simpler, slower-paced time.

[lastroth]

Some things bear repeating, too.

[zenicetus]

@txlawyer

Of course they do. Voter registrations are public records, as are the records of who voted in each election. Anybody in the world who knows my name can search the Dallas County Elections website to find my address and my voting history, including the early voting sites that I used and the days I showed up to cast my ballot.

Right, but the question that came up yesterday was to what extent a “questionable” ballot could be checked by contacting the voter who filled it out.

Here in WA the voter ID and signature for mail-in ballots is on the outer sleeve, which is separated from the ballot inside during the count. I don’t think there’s anything on the ballot itself that ties it back to me as the voter who filled it out. I don’t know how Arizona’s ballots work, maybe there is a voter ID on the actual ballot? Or maybe it’s the same system and they’re questioning the info on the outer sleeve without reference to the ballot.

[becauseofjunk]

We know how this turns out, just look at the 17 Benghazi Investigations that they could never get to the answer they wanted.

[leftcoaster]

Laws? We don’t need to follow no stinkin’ laws.

“We have concern that Maricopa County election records, which are required by federal law to be retained and preserved, are no longer under the ultimate control of elections officials, are not being adequately safeguarded by contractors, and are at risk of damage or loss,”

[tindalos]

@discobot

“Arizona has the authority to conduct this audit without interference from the Feds!”

That may be but I suspect neither the Feds nor AZ Secretary of State are under any particular obligation to accept the results much less certify them.

[Scoutmom]

Every time I see this described as a Sketchy ‘Audit’, I think of the Discover turtle commercial. Except this is a good turtle.

I think that sketchy website I got my turtle from stole all my data!

- YouTube

[txlawyer]

@zenicetus

Right, but the question that came up yesterday was to what extent a “questionable” ballot could be checked by contacting the voter who filled it out.

To no extent whatsoever. Ballots are anonymous. If they were not anonymous, everyone who mistakenly voted for Pat Buchanan in Palm Beach County could have clarified who they intended to vote for and Al Gore would be president instead of George W. Bush.

[godwit]

@danny

Somewhat ironic that the election lawsuit rejected by the Supreme Court was larded with crazy stories of security failures surrounding a South Korean dropoff of election ballots at the airport.

I don’t think it’s ironic, they’ve been clear that that’s where they got the idea. The fact that even this court wouldn’t touch it with a ten foot pole should have laid it to rest, but that’s not how conspiracy theories work.

[erik_t]

@mattinpa

The whole thing is engineered to produce one result—a loudly blared announcement that whattaya know they found massive voter fraud after all.

I’m not convinced that there’s any actual motivation other than grift. There definitely could be, but I think it’s just as likely that fleecing the rubes is the end goal.

[tena]

How can they get from the ballots to the id of who voted them? There are no names on the ballots, just the envelopes that I thought got thrown away.

[danny]

I want to know who put the Petitioner up to this? It’s of a piece with all the affidavits cited by Giuliani et al of imagined ballot shenanigans. Who organized and funded this effort to make stuff up, just so Trump could take a lead early on election night and preemptively declare victory? This is what a 1/6 commission might well expose.

[txlawyer]

@tena

How can they get from the ballots to the id of who voted them?

They can’t. That’s the point.

[tena]

@tindalos

neither the Feds nor AZ Secretary of State are under any particular obligation to accept the results much less certify them.

How could they certify these results when the actual results were already certified?

[paulw]

@tena

How can they get from the ballots to the id of who voted them? There are no names on the ballots, just the envelopes that I thought got thrown away.

My impression is that at least some envelopes have been preserved – they certainly were during various state lawsuits. And then you could use fingerprints or folding patterns or indentations or blah blah blah to try and link them. If the purpose is intimidation the accuracy doesn’t really matter.

Meanwhile, I’m a little surprised that no leaks aka preliminary statements have come out about anything they claim to be finding. Probably because that would give more time to refute.

[tena]

This whole thing is such a farce to me.

[jchaus]

Good news, and about time. It does not get better than Pamela Karlan, who is a superstar among academic and professional litigators. It will be interesting to see where this goes, but at least there can be charges of incompetence, or worse. And it may be interesting to see how many officials are willing to defend themselves on felony charges that can lead to jail terms.