Because of what we have seen over the past 4 + years, we should have seen it coming. The Maricopa Board of Elections from 2020. That includes all of the election information from the database. The worst part is that no one will go to prison over the cover up. Destruction of evidence is a serious crime, especially when it is under subpoena. By now it should be apparent that some major cheating went on in Maricopa County.
If there had been no cheating there would be no need to destroy every bit of evidence of what went down during the election. The problem is that there might not be any way of being able to discover what happened. However, since all election material must be saved for 22 months and Maricopa didn’t, charges should be brought if for no other reason that to bankrupt the members of the election board like the Democrats did with Gen Flynn.
Here is the partial letter to Maricopa County Supervisor Chairman Jack Sellers from Arizona Senate President Karen Fann:
I am writing to seek your assistance and cooperation in the resolution of three (3) serious issues that have arisen in the course of the Senate’s ongoing audit of the returns of the November 3, 2020, general election in Maricopa County.
I. Ongoing Non-Compliance with the Legislative Subpoenas
The first issue concerns Maricopa County’s apparent intent to renege on its previous commitment to comply fully with the legislative subpoenas issued on January 13, 2021, which, as you know, Judge Thomason found were valid and enforceable.
To date, attorneys for Maricopa County have refused to produce virtual images of routers used in connection with the general election, relying on a conclusory and unsupported assertion that providing the routers would somehow “endanger the lives of law enforcement officers, their operations, or the protected health information and personal data of Maricopa County’s citizens.”If true, the fact that Maricopa County stores on its routers substantial quantities of citizens’ and employees’ highly sensitive personal information is an alarming indictment of the County’s lax data security practices, rather than of the legislative subpoenas.
Similarly, the County’s assertion that producing the internet routers for inspection would cost up to $6,000,000 seems at odds with Deputy County Attorney Joseph La Rue’s prior representation to Audit Liaison Ken Bennett that the routers already had been disconnected from the County’s network and were prepared for imminent delivery to the Senate.
As the audit has progressed, the Senate’s contractors have become aware of apparent omissions, inconsistencies, and anomalies relating to Maricopa County’s handling, organization, and storage of ballots. We hope you can assist us in understanding these issues, including specifically the following:
- The County has not provided any chain-of-custody documentation for the ballots.Does such documentation exist, and if so, will it be produced?
- The bags in which the ballots were stored are not sealed, although the audit team has found at the bottom of many boxes cut seals of the type that would have sealed a ballot bag. Why were these seals placed at the bottom of the boxes?
- Batches within a box are frequently separated by only a divider without any indication of the corresponding batch numbers.In some cases, the batch dividers are missing altogether.This lack of organization has significantly complicated and delayed the audit team’s ballot processing efforts.What are the County’s procedures for sorting, organizing, and packaging ballot batches?
- Most of the ballot boxes were sealed merely with regular tape and not secured by any kind of tamper-evident seal.Is that the County’s customary practice for storing ballots?
- The audit team has encountered a significant number of instances in which there is a disparity between the actual number of ballots contained in a batch and the total denoted on the pink report slip accompanying the batch.In most of these instances, the total on the pink report slip is greater than the number of ballots in the batch, although there are a few instances in which the total is lower.What are the reasons for these discrepancies?For your reference, please see several illustrative (i.e., not comprehensive) examples in the table below:
We have recently discovered that the entire “Database” directory from the D drive of the machine “EMSPrimary” has been deleted. This removes election related details that appear to have been covered by the subpoena. In addition, the main database for the Election Management System (EMS) Software, “Results Tally and Reporting,” is not located anywhere on the EMSPrimary machine, even though all of the EMS Clients reference that machine as the location of the database. This suggests that the main database for all election-related data for the November 2020 General Election has been removed. Can you please advise as to why these folders were deleted, and whether there are any backups that may contain the deleted folders?
The image below shows the location of the files known to be deleted. In addition, the main database for “Results Tally and Reporting” is not present.