By Jordan Conradson
Published September 24, 2021 at 7:30 am 54 Comments
All evidence of fraud presented in the Arizona audit report on Friday will be referred to Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich.
We The People AZ Alliance drafted a report on Improper Governmental Operations of the Maricopa County Elections Department and Board of Supervisors and have presented it to the Arizona Senate to possibly be used today.
The Gateway Pundit has obtained a copy of this report which details statute and policy violations that occurred before, during, and after the 2020 election.
The report says,
TRENDING: Heartbreaking Letter from Jan. 6 Prisoner in Solitary Confinement! DC Gitmo Violates International Codes on Torture
Our team used multiple means by which to formulate this report, including interviewing witnesses, reviewing information in the public domain and reviewing hours of video footage from MCTEC nest cameras.
IGA Report by We The People… by Jordan Conradson
The report details eyewitness testimonies which show violations of Arizona statute and elections procedures.
We interviewed a Maricopa County election worker who was tasked with manning the ballot drop boxes. Her job was to collect ballots from voters at the drive-thru drop boxes, verify they contained signatures and place ballots in the drop boxes. We will refer to this worker as Witness 1. A formal affidavit can be provided to the Senate.
“I worked at multiple drop box locations in the valley. I witnessed cars with one or two people dropping off as many as 20 or 30 ballots at a time. Also, on multiple occasions, ballots were returned to them because they were missing signatures and I witnessed them pull out of line, sign all of the ballots and return through the line. I was instructed that we are not allowed to refuse to accept a ballot.”
“Ballot drop boxes at Turf Paradise location were left open and unlocked and when I reported it, I was reassigned to a different location. “
This indicates that ballot harvesting was allowed and evidence from the Maricopa County Canvass showing lost votes, ghost votes, and inaccurate voter registration data indicates that our voter rolls are not current and clean. This was County Recorder Adrian Fontes’ job to ensure voter records are accurate and up to date.
In leaked audio tapes made public earlier this week by The Gateway Pundit, Steve Chucri acknowledges these issues and says Adrian Fontes is a “scumbag”.
In an affidavit from an election worker in signature verification (known as, Witness 2), the following claims were made:
– Signature verification standards were constantly being lowered by Supervisors in order to more quickly process that higher amount of early and mail-in ballots (from approx. 15 points of similarities, to a minimum of 3, lowered to 1, and ultimately to none – “Just pass each signature verification through”) “There are too many rejections of ballots each day, so push them through.”.
– Even in the 3-person teams assigned to review REJECTED signature verification, there was pressure to approve a ballot signature with just 1 point of similarity.
– Challenged signatures on envelopes where the signature was a completely different person than the name of the listed voter, was let through and approved by supervisors.
– Challenged runs or batches of envelopes for signature verification observed by me to be the exact same handwriting on the affidavit envelopes on numerous envelopes. When I asked if the County Attorney would be alerted for possible ballot fraud, I was told no, but supervisors would take care of it (batches with book numbers can be provided by witness 2, if needed).
Witness 5 indicated that:
– I worked at #8600 (Anderson Polling Center) for a total of 6 days. During that time, the staff consisted of 8-10 poll workers and I was the only registered Republican at the center. I was made aware of this fact on Thursday, October 29th, when the poll Marshall asked voter affiliation of each worker to assist curbside voters.
Policy and Procedure adopted for early voting centers required those voting in person to provide ID to obtain a ballot on demand. Once their ballot was filled out, they were then required to place their ballot into an envelope and sign the ballot.
Ballot signature is considered a form of ID. This subjected voters to having to prove their identity twice and could have resulted in ballots/votes being rejected AFTER valid identity was previously established. This is a concern as it violates equal protection under the law (US 14th Amendment). Further analysis would need to be done to determine if any ballots from this process were rejected or if any voters were required to “cure” their ballot from early polling centers.
Witness 4 expressed similar concerns regarding possible problems with Sitebooks.
– I was working at a South Phoenix polling center and the Sitebooks software was undergoing an update. This update resulted in multiple ballots being issued to a single voter without an alert or need for override. When I questioned this with the supervisor, I was told that “there are issues with the Sitebooks currently being resolved, don’t worry as this may occur again and they will catch the problem during tabulation.”
– I sent a “yellow rod”, incident report to the IT department and when I called to follow up, I was told they had no record.
Witness 5 indicated:
– I was in charge of checking in voters at the polling location and the following incident occurred.
– “An update was made on I believe either Monday or Tuesday morning, Inspector, Judges, Marshall were out of the room. Another poll worker said we open in 5 minutes, and we do not have our site books on…we need to get ready. I turned 3 of them on before the others returned. Judges returned very upset, stated “you should not have turned them on…we are in the middle of an update. Updating the voter information.” I apologized and spoke to the Inspector and he indicated that I was not aware of an update.”
Witness 6 stated:
– There were constant problems with the Sitebooks requiring rebooting of the system and the ballot on demand printers had many issues printing properly. “They had to replace the printers 3 times in just a few days.”
We have interviewed two completely independent witnesses that state that ballots that are duplicated were loaded into a thumb drive and driven to Runbeck for printing.
Those printed ballots are then returned to MCTEC for tabulation. Our witnesses both indicated that this was done by one, unaccompanied election worker. We have identified that election worker as __________.
This is a serious chain of custody issue as electronic ballots are to be treated with the same protocols and security as paper ballots. The observers at the tabulation center were denied the right to observe this process, accompany ________ or follow her to Runbeck. One witness indicated that she made several trips to Runbeck daily and that she worked very close with the Dominion representatives in the tabulation room. Violation of A.R.S. § 16-625 and AZSOS Policy and Procedure Manual Chapter 8, Section III (C), Observation Transport of Ballots.
We have video evidence to show _____, an MCTEC IT employee who tore apart the equipment and left it out unsupervised for others to gain access for multiple days. There were no tamper evident seals placed on the equipment prior to transport and no affidavit was provided to the Senate to attest that the equipment was NOT altered or tampered with. Based on the criteria Secretary Hobbs has used, the equipment was already made unfit by employee ______ and MCTEC and they should be held accountable financially and otherwise to the voters of Maricopa County for the replacement of voting systems. (Exhibit 3, Equipment tampering video)
This video also shows lack of tamper evident seal:
Video observation of the MCTEC building as employees were packaging and prepping equipment for transport to the Senate shows that equipment was handled boxed and loaded for delivery without appropriate safety or security measures adhered to. There were no observers present at the time.
This youtube description says 11-2020, but the upload date is October prior to election day. Should the machines have been decertified then? If you went by Katie Hobbs recommendations then these systems should not have been used in the 2020 election.
Here is another view of the ballot commercial
This video is now unavailable on youtube.
SAFETY AND SECURITY
During the Senate audit, there was a question regarding files being deleted or altered. Logs showed this occurs on 4/12/2021. Video review of MTEC server room shows Subject 1 (______) using her key card to allow Subject 2 (_________) and Subject 3 (________) to enter the server room and leaving them unattended at the approximate time the log shows files being deleted/altered. (Exhibit 7, Server Room)
This is a violation of A.R.S. § 16-625. Electronic data and digital images; ballots; security, A.R.S. §16-624. Disposition of official returns and ballots, 52 USC 20701: Retention and preservation of records and USC 42-1974 Retention and preservation of records and papers by officers of elections.
Maricopa County Recorder Stephen Richer and Board of Supervisor Jack Sellers both made a public statement that they did not have the passwords necessary to provide to the auditors hired by the Senate.
They admitted that those passwords were supplied by Dominion (the vendor). Testimony by Ben Cotton, cyber auditor for Cyber Ninja testified in the Senate hearing that the passwords they did have access to had not been changed in over 2 years.
Components of the electronic voting system:
- Must be password-protected (for voting system software);
o In addition to complying with any system requirements, passwords must: (1) contain mixed-cased and non-alphabetic characters, if possible; (2) be changed on a regular basis and may not be a vendor-supplied password; and (3) may be known only by authorized users.”
In several videos we have discovered the auditors themselves do not appear to follow the election procedure manual. They often ignored clear procedures for convenience. The audits had a limited scope of machines yet drew broad conclusions. On Page 4 of the SLI Report (Exhibit 14, SLI Report) the scope is defined the following way:
“The Maricopa County forensic audit was conducted on the Dominion Democracy Suite (DS) 5.5B system and included examination of the following items per direction given by Maricopa County Elections Department:
- 100% (9) of the County’s central count tabulators (ICC) (4 Hi-Pro high speed scanners and 5 Cannon high-speed scanners), which are used for processing large quantities of ballots.
- 100% (4) workstations and (2) servers used to operate the election management system (EMS), which includes pre-election functions for creating the election definition for the specified election, as well as post-election activities including accumulating, tallying and reporting election results.
- 10% sample (35) of the County’s 350 precinct-based tabulators (ICP2s) that were utilized in the election, at the polling centers.
- 20% sample (4) of 20 adjudication stations, which allow ballots with exceptions or outstack conditions such as over-votes, blank ballots, write-ins and marginal marks, to be resolved.”
This audit is not comprehensive to a forensic audit, had a limited test sample and has unclear criteria for selection. It is not a proper examination for malware nor an exhaustive audit of all equipment. Yet with such a limited scope, many conclusions were drawn, and it raises concerns as to why the choice would be so limited and restrictive.
Violations of AZSOS Policy and Procedure Manual:
AZSOS Manuel, page 97 item 3: Electronic storage media shall be physically secured at all times. No physical access should be given to any person unless the election officer in charge of the electronic storage media specifically grants that person access. Secured locations must be provided for storing electronic media when not in use, coding an election, creating the election media, and transferring and installing the election media into the voting device.
Page 98 item 8: If a stick or device was received by mail:
- The stick or device should only be accepted from a trusted, third-party source.
- The stick or device must be encrypted by the third-party source, and the password to decrypt the stick or device may not be included with the mailing itself; and
- Upon receipt, the stick or device must be scanned with antivirus software prior to opening or otherwise executing any file contained on the stick or device.
The board of supervisors, Katie Hobbs, and Stephen Richer make a point to discuss Pro V&V and SLI as certified auditors, yet they are not certified as forensic auditors or cyber security experts. They are certified to audit the software and certify machines by the EAC.
Recorder Fontes hired Rey Valenzuela to be Director of Elections. Mr. Valenzuela is also the Chair of the Standards Board for the EAC (Election Assistance Commission). This would appear to be a direct conflict of interest.
There are 5 categories of malfeasance observed in the Maricopa County 2020 General Election with supporting evidence (attached or available upon request):
- Non-Compliance with Election Security Protocols
- Poor adherence to National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST) protocols which serve as a baseline for election security standards.
We The People AZ Alliance Preliminary Report, August 15, 2021 | 23
Influence on the finances and infrastructure and possibly the source code of Dominion’s system(s).”
The full report can be found here.
All of this evidence will be presented to the Arizona Attorney General after the Arizona Audit showcase that is scheduled today.
These violations could explain many of the discrepancies that were previously found by auditors.
The Gateway Pundit has reported on many of these discrepancies in the past.
The rest of the findings from the Arizona audit will be presented at 1 p.m. (Arizona) today.
If this was a free and fair election, then why were all of these laws broken?
** End **