Democratic Senators Mark Kelly and Kyrsten Sinema will likely support the Biden Administration and Democrats’ $3.5 trillion tax plan, causing Americans to pay more in corporate taxes in Arizona than in China. The bill was derived from President Joe Biden’s Build Back Better Plan, and it would be the largest spending bill in American history.
If the bill passes, the federal-state corporate tax rate in Arizona would jump to over 30 percent, while China’s tax rate would be around 25 percent. That’s not including those enterprises in certain industries supported heavily by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which could receive a tax rate as low as 10 to 15 percent. Additionally, the bill would cause capital gains tax in Arizona to rise up over 35 percent, while China’s would ring in around 20 percent. This data was compiled by Americans for Tax Reform.
Back in July, Sinema expressed lack of support for the bill in July over its price tag, but not its content. At that point, Kelly hadn’t made a commitment to the bill either.
“I have also made clear that while I will support beginning this process, I do not support a bill that costs $3.5 trillion,” said Sinema. “And in the coming months, I will work in good faith to develop this legislation with my colleagues and the administration to strengthen Arizona’s economy and help Arizona’s everyday families get ahead.”
However, both Sinema and Kelly voted in favor of the framework for the $3.5 trillion plan last month.
The Biden Administration and Democratic Party’s proposed tax increases would cause the U.S. to have one of the highest capital gains taxes in the world.
Analysts with the Tax Foundation estimated that the impact of this policy would reduce the GDP by about one percent: more than $2 for every $1 in new tax revenue, or about $332 billion of lost output annually. Over the course of a decade, the cumulative GDP would reduce by nearly $1.2 to $1.8 trillion, which they stated would far exceed the amount of revenue the plan would raise in the same amount of time.
All while eliminating an estimated 303,000 full-time jobs. The primary cause for these projected negative changes comes from the proposed corporate tax rate. They estimate that this alone would reduce the GDP by .6 percent and eliminate 107,000 jobs.
As for after-tax incomes, they estimated that individual taxpayers would see an average reduction of $800 each year.
The Tax Foundation’s Senior Policy Analyst, Garrett Watson, assessed that ultimately, low- and middle-income families would feel these repercussions the most.
“The economic harm caused by the tax increases would claw back some of the plan’s expanded tax credits aimed at low- and middle-income families. For those in the bottom 30 percent, it would reduce the average net benefit of the plan per filer from $341 to $233, a 30 percent reduction,” wrote Watson. “Before accounting for economic effects, filers in the middle quintile would see a decrease in average after-tax income of about $38 – mostly due to the corporate tax increases – but that would rise to a $493 drop in average after-tax income every year when including the negative economic effects. The top quintile would see a $1,287 drop in average after-tax income, rising to a $3,861 drop in average after-tax income on a dynamic basis.”
They also noted that these proposed changes would raise a net federal revenue of around $1.1 trillion from next year to 2031, without accounting for dynamic factors like the estimated reduction in economy size. However, that revenue would be reduced by $1 trillion in tax credits. If dynamic factors weren’t excluded, federal revenue would ring in around $804 billion in revenue net of tax credits.
Per a poll released by Navigator Research earlier this week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi claimed that an overwhelming majority of Americans supported the Build Back Better Act. The results meted out to 66 percent of Americans, 61 percent of independents, and 39 percent of Republicans.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Members of the Multicultural Solidarity Coalition (MSC), a student-led activist group that’s been advocating for the establishment of a multicultural center at Arizona State University (ASU), targeted and harassed two students on video for being white males in a room they’d established as their “multicultural center.” The room in question was the ASU Tempe Campus’s Student Success Center in the Student Pavilion, room 321. It has not officially been designated as a multicultural center – ASU says that efforts for such a center are underway, but the university hasn’t indicated where or when the center will be established. MSC posted the eight minute video of them harassing the two white male students with the caption “Defending the Space” on Instagram. It has since been removed.
The MSC members took offense to the two white male students for their race, sex, and display of conservative-leaning political messages. One of the students had a “Police Lives Matter” sticker on their laptop, while the other wore a “Did Not Vote for Biden” shirt. MSC members told the two students to leave the room and “shut the f*** up” repeatedly, said that they were promoting murderers and white supremacy by supporting police, called them “Karens” for being upset, and ridiculed them for insinuating that diversity or multiculturalism included white people. Out of all the other students in the room, only one individual spoke out in defense of the two white male students: an Asian male student.
The two most outspoken MSC members in the video were an ASU undergraduate studentnamedMastaani Qureshi and an ASU graduate student named Zarra Teacola. Qureshi is a member of Omega Phi Alpha (OPA), a national service sorority, and enrolled in ASU’s honors college, Barrett. In addition to being MSC’s founder, Teacola is the co-minister of activism for Black Lives Matter (BLM) Phoenix Metro and a PhD Candidate in ASU’s School of Sustainability. Teacola was arrested last October with seven other BLM protestors; they were indicted for charges related to rioting, aggravated assault, obstructing roads, and street gang involvement.
We attempted to contact MSC for comment. They didn’t respond by press time.
According to Teacola, ASU has been complicit with MSC’s claim of the public space to segregate or discriminate against individuals based on their race or creed, especially “white, cis[gender] males.” According to Teacola, ASU President Michael Crow recently gave them the space to use as a multicultural center. Teacola explained that the BLM movements following George Floyd’s death last year caused Crow to change his mind – he’d originally been hesitant to give them a space that excluded certain students based on skin color or gender. No official press release or notice has been issued to reflect this purported agreement for a multicultural center.
“Michael Crow told us that a multicultural center wasn’t inclusive toward white cis males, you know, that’s what he said in 2019. Then come the uprising, the tone really changed, right? And they’re like ‘Okay, okay, you can have your center,’ right?” said Teacola.
It appears that ASU is complicit in MSC’s newly-established authority over this room. ASU told AZ Free News that the incident was a “disagreement” highlighting “differences of opinion” that were “part of the university experience.”
“The Dean of Students Office is aware of the disagreement between a handful of students that was captured in a video circulated on social media. The Dean of Students Office will be discussing it with all involved,” stated an ASU spokesperson. “ASU is a community of more than 100,000 people from all 50 states and more than 150 countries. Differences of opinion are part of the university experience. The university expects respectful dialogue between students in all engagements.”
The university later posted the statement on their website. It is unclear who, if any, will face disciplinary action.
Late Friday afternoon, MSC removed the video of their members harassing the two students. In its place, they issued a statement blaming ASU for not adequately preparing the room for their multicultural space so that the confrontation would’ve been avoided.
MSC defined “inclusion” as securing areas for marginalized people, and “blue lives matter” as a threat to black individuals. Though MSC didn’t use the term “hate speech,” they indicated that certain speech they believed to be wrong was prohibited in their multicultural center. They said that the death threats they received following the video were indicative of pervasive systemic racism and white supremacy.
MSC included links for clarity on their position: “Why People of Color Need Spaces Without White People” a publication from the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts; a Los Angeles Times opinion piece titled “We Need to Talk About Racism and ‘Blue Lives Matter’”; “The Myth of Reverse Racism” from Canada’s Alberta Civil Liberties Research Centre; and a USA Today article titled “What is Systemic Racism? Here is What it Means and How You Can Help Dismantle It.”
The Multicultural Solidarity Coalition (MSC) is a group of graduate and undergraduate students from marginalized and oppressed communities who have been trying to create a space for our community members to exist on campus without the ubiquitous threat of racial and gender-based violence that we experience on campus. We have been working toward this goal since 2016 and, as of 2020, we have been coordinating with ASU administrators to establish a multicultural center. The multicultural center is currently housed in one room on campus that was opened this semester and has not yet been fully launched. You can read our full proposal here.
The incident that took place on Thursday, September 23rd is a result of ASU not taking seriously our safety concerns, especially in regards to the multicultural center. Despite repeatedly expressing our concerns during biweekly meetings with Dean Aska last semester, administrators did not adequately prepare the multicultural center before the start of this semester to avoid these types of confrontations.
We believe that inclusion means making spaces safer for the most marginalized students. We understand “blue lives matter” to be an explicit rejection of the Black Lives Matter movement and therefore an overt threat to Black lives. In the new multicultural centers, we will not tolerate people entering with racist slogans to intimidate and antagonize historically and currently marginalized students.
Inclusion does not mean we accommodate white supremacists, their slogans, and behaviors at the cost of endangering all other community members. This has been made overwhelmingly clear by the many death threats we have received. These racially-charged threats are directed at the two MSC members from BIPOC communities who confronted the two white men with a “Police lives matter” sticker and a “Did Not Vote For Biden” shirt who were in the multicultural center making students uncomfortable.
If you do not understand the purpose of a multicultural center, click here.
If you do not understand why “blue lives matter” is racist, click here.
If you do not understand that reverse racism doesn’t exist, click here.
If you do not understand what racism is, click here.
The Multicultural Solidarity Coalition will keep advocating for students from marginalized communities until we have fully-supported and fully-staffed multicultural centers on every ASU campus and we call on students to join us in defending these spaces and to #defendMSC.
(emphasis added, original links maintained)
Read the entire transcript of the incident below, or watch the verbal altercation here. “MALE 1” is the student with the “Police Lives Matter” sticker. “MALE 2” is the student with the black t-shirt reading, “Did Not Vote For Biden.”
MALE 1: What did I do wrong?
TEACOLA: You’re offensive. Police lives matter?
MALE 1: You have the same sticker …?
MALE 2: We’re just trying to do school.
TEACOLA: What?
MALE 1: You have the same sticker as the other –
TEACOLA: But this is our space.
MALE 2: We’ve got a ‘Police Lives Matter’ sticker and we’re getting kicked out, can’t do school.
UNKNOWN MALE IN BACKGROUND: Nobody’s kicking you out.
MALE 2: You just said we have to leave!
QURESHI: No, I said –
TEACOLA: You’re making this space feel uncomfortable.
MALE 2: You’re making me feel uncomfortable.
TEACOLA: But you’re white! Do you understand what a multicultural space [is]? It means you’re not being centered.
MALE 2: White’s not a culture?
TEACOLA: No, it’s not a culture! White is not a culture! Say it again to the camera! You think this is a culture?
MALE 2: This is insane.
TEACOLA: So anyway, this is the violence that ASU does and this is the type of people that they protect, okay? This white man thinks that he can take up our space. This is why we need a multicultural space, because they think that they can get away with this s***.
MALE 2: I’m going to sit here the whole time and you can find somebody to care.
TEACOLA: That’s cool. We will.
QURESHI: We’re not kicking you out. We’re asking you to leave. If you have any consideration for people of color and our marginalization.
TEACOLA: They clearly don’t.
MALE 1: Is there anywhere I can go?
TEACOLA: Yeah! The whole rest of the campus! The second floor, the first floor, the whole MU – every single part of the campus centers you! This is the only space that you’re not centered and you’re still trying to center yourself which is peak cis-white-male bulls***!
MALE 1: I’m not racist, I’m just studying.
TEACOLA: You are racist! Your sticker is racist because police, that’s a job! You can choose to be police. I don’t choose to be black! Okay, no – you can choose to be a cop, you can choose to kill people with a badge, and you’re protecting that s*** which means that you’re racist!
MALE 1: I’m sorry. I wasn’t trying to offend you guys or anything –
QURESHI: I know, I know, but this offends us automatically because these people kill people like me and like us, right? So you’re promoting our murderers. So please just don’t do that.
UNKNOWN MALE IN FOREGROUND: Why is that sticker affecting you negatively? They’re just trying to do their work.
MALE 2: Thank you! Thank you!
UNKNOWN MALE IN FOREGROUND: So, why should that bother you?
TEACOLA: Because! Do you understand that police lives matter was in response to black lives matter?
MALE 1: I pay the same f****** tuition as you!
QURESHI: But you get more advantages.
MALE 1: I don’t! I’m working 60 hours a week while going to school because my parents don’t just give me money.
TEACOLA: Okay! Doesn’t matter! You have the second floor!
MALE 1: You guys are f****** bulls****. F*** you – I don’t care about what color your skin is!
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: You can get out of here if you’re going to be yelling at people because –
[overlapping voices]
QURESHI: We make this f****** space! We had to work for five years to make this space.
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: Guess what we did? We worked for five years for ASU to build a multicultural space. […] ‘Police Lives Matter’ is saying white supremacist narratives –
MALE 2: We’re not white supremacists!
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: ‘Police Lives Matter’ is –
MALE 2: That’s not a white supremacist saying!
TEACOLA: Yes, yes it is. It’s affiliated with white nationalists.
UNKNOWN MALE IN FOREGROUND: They’re just sitting here studying and you guys went out of your way to inconvenience them.
TEACOLA & 2 UNANIMOUSLY: Yes, yes we did because it’s our space.
TEACOLA: We fought for this s*** for five years, since 2016. You have no idea about the labor that was created to create this space –
[overlapping voices]
TEACOLA: No, no we can’t. You’re violent, dude. […] F*** America bro. America was created on genocide and slavery. Look at his face.
[overlapping voices]
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: That is the point.
UNKNOWN MALE IN FOREGROUND: They were studying.
[overlapping voices]
TEACOLA: The point is that studying – this is not a space for studying. This is a space for multiculturalism.
[overlapping voices]
MALE 2: I thought we weren’t yelling anymore. You guys were going to kick us out for yelling?
QURESHI: Shut the f*** up.
[overlapping voices]
MALE 1: This is crazy to me… You guys are the racists. You’re the racists.
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: [indecipherable] You’re making people uncomfortable. You can go.
MALE 1: F*** you. I was just studying, I pay the same f****** tuition as you.
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: This is this white man telling black people ‘f*** you.’
MALE 1: Did you even buy this building?
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: Cussing out black people, way to prove yourself.
QURESHI: I work! [indecipherable]
MALE 2: I don’t care where you work!
QURESHI: I told you to shut the f*** up because you’re making me feel unsafe and you’re in my space!
TEACOLA: White people – there’s no such thing as reverse racism, so have fun saying that we’re the racists because there’s no such thing.
[overlapping voices]
TEACOLA: No, we’re not saying white people have to leave.
MALE 1: I’m going to the dean’s office. Come on.
TEACOLA: Go ahead. Go to the dean’s office. Go ahead. You can learn about this s***. You can learn about the history. Go ahead, Karen.
UNKNOWN MALE IN BACKGROUND: The big black people scared me out!
UNKNOWN FEMALE BACKGROUND: No, we didn’t.
MALE 2: You bullied us out, but…
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: No, we didn’t. You caused a scene. You caused a scene.
UNKNOWN MALE IN BACKGROUND: You are unaware of history, and it’s ridiculous.
MALE 2: I’m unaware of history? I probably have a further degree than any of you in here.
TEACOLA: So, anyways, we’re here. We had to protect the space because ASU wasn’t. And you know we fought for this space. It was years of organizing, and we’re not going to just let some white supremacists change that.
MALE 2: Oh, I’m going to.
TEACOLA: That’s why we’re here – yeah they’re going to make a scene and go talk to their Karens. But you know, it’s important to recognize why we have to do that and what a multicultural space means because multiculturalism doesn’t mean that, oh, we all come together and hold hands. It means that you provide space and you protect the most marginalized. And s*** like that makes this space uncomfortable.
QURESHI: He threatened us that he will go to the dean. We will see what he has to say to the dean and we will see how the dean reacts. And now we will see who ASU prioritizes in this – students of color and our only f****** room on campus, or white cis men who are threatening black students by saying police lives matter.
MALE 2: Uh, you’re speaking to nobody.
QURESHI: That doesn’t matter. Can you leave?
MALE 2: No.
QURESHI: Okay, you don’t want to leave? That’s fine.
MALE 2: Perfect. I’m not.
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: We’re saying to you: this is a multicultural space, you’re making us uncomfortable, and you’re saying you don’t wanna go.
[indecipherable]
QURESHI: You’re not a minority person.
UNKNOWN MALE IN BACKGROUND: What’s your culture, bro?
TEACOLA: Yeah, tell us about your culture. What’s white culture? Stealing things from people? Colonization, co-optation, theft, occupation?
MALE 2: America is like one of the most un-racist countries –
TEACOLA: Whaaa…! He just said America is one of the most un-racist countries. And this is what we mean about who we are you centering, who are you centering?
MALE 2: [indecipherable] … black people in the times of racism.
QURESHI: Don’t speak my truth –
TEACOLA: Well, you don’t even –
MALE 2: There’s no difference in what you do. Bullying me leaving this place [is no different] than what happened in the times of racism.
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: We didn’t bully you! We asked you to leave.
MALE 2: You guys – I can’t even do my school. You came over here and said that I’m offending you.
QURESHI: Bro, you can do your schoolwork anywhere in the building. Just not here.
TEACOLA: Anyways, another day of trying to defend this space.
MALE 2: If it makes you feel better about making your group less diverse – it doesn’t make any sense.
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: Oh wow, so diversity’s now about including more white people.
TEACOLA: Diversity’s now about including white men!
UNKNOWN FEMALE IN BACKGROUND: You have the whole campus, honey. You have the whole campus.
MALE 2: Angry –
(emphasis added)
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Friday afternoon, the Arizona Senate hosted a presentation on the audit of Maricopa County’s 2020 election. The audit presented dual outcomes: while the final hand count matched the county’s official machine count, the audit also discovered several issues that compelled the senate to request further investigation from Attorney General Mark Brnovich.
Arizona Senate Republicans published a complete collection of the audit report and related documents. In response to the claims, Maricopa County tweeted threads with rebuttal information and statements.
The audit presentation began with Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, who runs the artificial intelligence-focused company EchoMail and was contracted to review ballot envelope images.
He gave a separate review on the Early Voting Ballots (EVBs), which totaled around 1.92 million votes. Some of the key findings Ayyadurai presented were that he allegedly found over 17,000 duplicate ballots. He also claimed that 95 percent of mail-in ballots received by Maricopa County before election day had legible signatures, but then after election day only 5 percent of mail-in ballots had legible signatures.
Ayyadurai emphasized that his data analysis didn’t do signature matching.
Cyber Ninjas CEO Doug Logan and digital security firm CyFIR presented their findings on the county’s voter histories, ballots, certified results, and the voting machines. Some of the key findings from Cyber Ninjas included: none of the numbers from election-related systems matched, just under 28,000 ballots were possibly cast by voters who’d moved prior to the election, files were missing from the Election Management System (EMS) Server, over 284,000 EMS ballot images were corrupt or missing, logs appeared to be intentionally rolled over, election data was wiped from the database, cybersecurity best practices weren’t followed, and software and patch protocols weren’t followed.
The senate’s liaison to the audit, Ken Bennett, issued his own report of the county’s compliance with election laws and procedures. He highlighted the following as issues, some of which overlapped those presented by Ayyadurai, Cyber Ninjas, and CyFIR: missing signatures of ballot envelope affidavits, original and duplicate ballots without matching serial numbers, missing chain of custody records, shared usernames and passwords for election computers, missing serial numbers on electronically adjudicated ballots, and the possibility of ineligible voters.
CLAIM: 23,344 mail-in ballots voted from a prior address. BOTTOM LINE: Cyber Ninjas still don’t understand this is legal under federal election law. To label it a “critical” concern is either intentionally misleading or staggeringly ignorant. AZ senators should know this too. EXPLANATION: 1) Military and overseas voters can cast a “federal only ballot” despite living outside the U.S. The address tied to their ballot would be their prior address in AZ. 2) People are allowed to move from one house to another (or even one state to another) in October and November of an election year (yes, shocking!). If the driver’s license address matches the voter registration address, they are still allowed to vote. 3) For the November General Election Maricopa County had 20,933 one-time temporary address requests. In addition, snowbirds and college students tend to have forwarding addresses when they are out of the county. 4) Mail-in ballots are not forwarded to another address.
CLAIM: 10,342 potential voters that voted in multiple counties. BOTTOM LINE: There are more than 7 million people in Arizona and, yes, some of them share names & birth years. To identify this as a critical issue is laughable. EXPLANATION: 10,000+ votes in multiple counties is unlikely. More likely: different people, same name. Example: if you search for Maria Garcia born in 1980, you’ll get 7 active voters in Maricopa County and 12 statewide. And that’s just one name. If Cyber Ninjas understood data analysis, they would have performed standard processes to rule out situations that lead to faulty conclusions.
CLAIM: 9,041 more ballots returned by voters than received. BOTTOM LINE: This suggests a lack of understanding about how EV 33 files work. It’s not unusual for more ballots to be returned by voters than received. EXPLANATION: The majority of these involve cases where voters returned a ballot without a signature or with a signature discrepancy. In those cases, election staff contact the voter to ensure their vote counts. The most common reasons for a single voter having multiple entries in the EV 33 file are: a voter sent back an envelope unsigned[, or] there’s a signature discrepancy. A record for the original ballot is entered into the EV 33 file (where we track returned ballots). A second entry is recorded when a ballot envelope is signed or the signature discrepancy is resolved. The appropriate conclusion to draw from this finding is that the early voting team was performing their statutory-required responsibility by reviewing signatures on all returned mail-in ballots. […]
CLAIM: Election management database purged. BOTTOM LINE: This is misleading. Nothing was purged. Cyber Ninjas don’t understand the business of elections. We can’t keep everything on the EMS server because it has storage limits. We have data archival procedures for our elections and @MaricopaVote archived everything related to the November election on backup drives. So everything still exists. EXPLANATION: The Election Management System (EMS) database does not store election information forever. That’s what archives are for. The Feb 2nd activity referenced in the report was simply standard practice in the data archival process. The EMS server needed to be readied so our certified auditors could test the equipment for accuracy. The Senate never subpoenaed our archives.
CLAIM: Election files deleted. BOTTOM LINE: This is misleading. As stated above, servers have space limitations. Files are not deleted; they are archived. The Senate never subpoenaed our EMS archives.
CLAIM: 263,139 corrupt ballot images on the county’s EMS server. BOTTOM LINE: This is inaccurate. The server isn’t the place to find all ballot images. We provided the hard drives that contain all ballot images and confirmed these images were not corrupted and could be opened. BACKGROUND: These claims of “deleting” and “purging” are reminiscent of the false claim Cyber Ninjas made in May, accusing Maricopa County of deleting an election server. The truth was, the Ninjas looked in the wrong place for the info. It was there all along. They just didn’t know how to correctly set up a RAID server. Despite falsely [accusing] us of a crime, Senate contractors have never issued a
retraction or an apology. A note on signature validation[:] we don’t “predict” signatures. We have trained staff looking at every signature. We do a complete signature analysis, the accuracy of which has been proven in court. See Ward v. Jackson. Special bipartisan election boards assist voters who may need assistance w/ signing affidavits. Often, in case of severe medical conditions such as stroke, people may only be able to make a small mark such as an X. Our boards visually affirm the marks are the voter’s correct sig[nature.]
Re: duplicated ballots. Every time a voter has a questioned signature or a blank envelope, we work with that voter to cure the signature. That’s our staff doing their job to contact voters with questioned signatures or blank ballots. Only one ballot is counted.
So why more cured signatures in Nov. 2020? Maricopa County hired additional staff to contact valid voters and allow them the opportunity to cure their signature. That included a night shift of 40 people from Oct. 29- Nov. 10. [By the way], by law, you can cure signatures 5 business days after the election. Maricopa County is committed to following state law and helping people vote. [Fann’s] statement that we just stopped checking signatures is absolutely false. The Senate has determined the County is in full compliance w/ subpoena w/ the hiring of a special master. The County Ballot-on-Demand Printers (Poll Worker Laptop) and Accessible Voting Devices (ICX) were never subpoenaed. If they didn’t ask for it, we didn’t provide it.
[CLAIM:] official results [do] not match who voted: state statute requires that we keep addresses for certain voters protected. Election professionals know that these are not included in the VM 55 voted file. Experienced election auditors would know this too.
CLAIM: 2,382 in person voters who had moved out of Maricopa County. BOTTOM LINE: In the limited time since receiving this report, we have completed spot checks on the voter IDs provided. In the case of in-person voters who had moved out of Maricopa County, we found no discrepancies with the data in the Maricopa County voter reg[istration] system. We could not identify a single voter in this initial review who had cast more than 1 ballot.
CLAIM: 2,081 voters moved out-of-state proceeding election… and this is cause for concern. BOTTOM LINE: We performed a spot check using voter registration numbers that were associated with Cyber Ninjas’ conclusion. No discrepancies were found. Ben Cotton cannot tell you about the internet connection but we can. The tabulation equipment was never connected to a router or the internet. 2 audits confirmed this. We’ve already answered the password question[.] Only staff members who have a direct responsibility are provided access. The tabulation center is monitored by cameras 24 hours a day and seven days a week. We also use a series of passwords that provide different levels of access to tabulation systems and equipment. To access each tabulator, an operator needs a series of two passwords and a security token (key). Prior to each election, we change the password that is used to access the election program and to tabulate ballots.
[CLAIM:] we were intentionally overriding logs is disingenuous. This is part of normal Windows configuration (first in, first out). Maricopa County strongly denies claims that @maricopavote staff intentionally deleted data. As we’ve stated, staff were conducting the March election & compiling info required to comply w/ Senate subpoena. We have backups for all Nov. data & those archives were never subpoenaed. Reminder from Cyber Ninjas themselves: the tabulation equipment did its job and the certified canvass results match closely what #azaudit found on the paper ballots. Per Chairman @jacksellers earlier statement, “everything else is noise.” Despite what Cotton is saying right now, none of this matters on an air gapped network. REWEB1601 (as you might gather from the naming convention) connects to the internet because it is the server for /recorder.maricopa.gov. This is not the election system. We shouldn’t have to explain this.
Re: duplication process. This has already been decided in court in Ward v. Jackson. An excerpt: “These ballots were admitted at trial and the Court heard testimony about them & reviewed them. None of them shows an abuse of discretion on the part of the reviewer. Every one of them listed a phone number that matched a phone number already on file, either through voter registration records or from a prior ballot. The evidence does not show that these affidavits are fraudulent, or that someone other than the voter signed them. There is no evidence that the manner in which signatures were reviewed was designed to benefit one candidate or another, or that there was any misconduct, impropriety, or violation of Arizona law with respect to the review of mail-in ballots.”
In a letter submitted to Brnovich, Fann reiterated that the final audit hand count aligned with the county machine count and called it the “most important and encouraging finding of the audit.”
She noted that Cyber Ninjas spent over 100,000 hours and millions of dollars to complete this audit.
“In the history of democracies – from ancient Athens to today – ours was the most detailed, demanding, and uncompromising election audit that has ever been conducted,” said Fann. “Arizona voters had serious concerns about their election, and they were entitled to the most careful and accurate answers possible. […] The paper ballots in Maricopa County are the best evidence of voter intent because they are under 24-hour video surveillance and physical security, and there is no reliable evidence that they were altered to any material degree. This finding therefore addresses the sharpest concerns about the integrity of the certified results in the 2020 general election.”
Fann also classified several of the findings as concerning. She said that certain issues presented in the audit report needed improvement: the signature verification process for absentee ballots required improvement and additional testing, the voter rolls required better maintenance, the election technology and machinery required more professional management and oversight with better cybersecurity precautions, the counties should be required to have administrator passwords for vote-counting machines rather than a private company, and that evidence is preserved post-election (in reference to the activity log overwrite).
In a subsequent press release, Brnovich revealed that he will have his Election Integrity Unit (EIU) review the Senate’s audit. Until then, the attorney general said that he wouldn’t comment further on specific allegations until the EIU completes its review.
“I will take all necessary actions that are supported by the evidence and where I have legal authority,” stated Brnovich. “Arizonans deserve to have their votes accurately counted and protected.”
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
During Tuesday’s city council meeting, the town of Gilbert declared that racism, homophobia, transphobia, ageism, and discrimination perpetuate domestic violence. The proclamation came from Mayor Brigette Peterson while establishing this October as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
The entirety of the proclamation is reproduced below:
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH[:] WHEREAS, domestic violence is a serious crime affecting over 4 million Americans each year of all races, ages, gender, and income levels; and WHEREAS, racism, homophobia, transphobia, ageism and discrimination based on physical ability, nationality or other factors help to perpetuate domestic violence and make finding safety even more difficult for some victims; WHEREAS, in just one day, across the U.S. and its territories, nearly 75,000 victims of domestic violence sought services from domestic violence programs and shelters. That same day, more than 9,000 requests for services, including emergency shelter, housing, transportation, childcare and legal representation, could not be provided because programs lacked the resources to meet victims’ needs; and WHEREAS, domestic violence impacts millions of people each year, but it can be prevented. Preventing domestic violence requires the collective voice and power of individuals, families, institutions, and systems; and WHEREAS, Gilbert has dedicated Family Violence officers, Police Counselors and Victim Advocates saving lives every day; and WHEREAS, Gilbert joins with others across Arizona and the nation in supporting victims of domestic violence, as well as local programs, state coalitions, national organizations, and other agencies nationwide who are committed to increasing public awareness of domestic violence and sending a clear message to abusers that domestic violence is not tolerated in Gilbert; NOW THEREFORE, I, Brigette Peterson, Mayor of the Town of Gilbert, do hereby proclaim the month of October 2021 as: DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH in Gilbert, Arizona and urge our citizens to work together to eliminate domestic violence from our community. In witness thereof, I hereby set my hand and affix the Official Seal of the Office of the Mayor, Town of Gilbert, Arizona, and this 21st day of September, 2021. (emphasis added)
It is unclear how racism, homophobia, transphobia, ageism, and discrimination perpetuate domestic violence. AZ Free News requested Peterson to clarify why these four were linked to domestic violence. The mayor didn’t respond by press time.
Local and state governments have designated October as domestic violence awareness month since the 1980s.
The town of Gilbert has issued official statements condemning racism and generally notes its opposition to discrimination in any forms. It hasn’t issued any statements condemning transphobia, homophobia, or ageism.
The mayor’s stance against discrimination in any form apparently doesn’t align with her personal conduct. Last month, reports revealed that Peterson is facing a discrimination complaint from current employee. The employee, Derek Konofalski, claimed the mayor was exercising a personal vendetta against him because of her dislike for the town logo and him being part of the digital government team. The complaint tied in with other complaints against the mayor concerning ethics and conduct.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Gov. Doug Ducey announced Thursday that Tracy Uffelman is the new director of the state’s beleaguered Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, just weeks before the entry period opens for the Arizona Liquor License Lottery which will facilitate more to-go liquor services.
“I am delighted to appoint Tracy as director, and look forward to working with him to best serve our businesses and constituents,” said Ducey, who highlighted Uffelman’s more than 50 years of liquor industry experience dating back to 1969 when he started as a wine merchandiser.
Over the years, Uffelman has held a variety of positions ranging from sales to management. He is also well-versed in the political end of the business, having served as vice president of legislative and community relations for Alliance Beverage, a company he worked at for 23 years.
“Our team will work hard to foster economic growth, expand opportunities for businesses of all sizes and Arizonans, and protect public safety,” Uffelman said of DLLC in a press release.
Ducey’s announcement comes more than five months after former Director John Cocca and Deputy Director Michael Rosenberger resigned following an internal affairs review into the handling of a complaint against a DLLC detective’s conduct during an undercover investigation at a Scottsdale strip club last year.
An 815-page report of the matter was released in July, detailing how DLLC’s investigators got involved in public health issues such as whether adult-oriented businesses that held liquor licenses were violating COVID-19 protocols.
After Cocca and Rosenberger quietly resigned in April, Ducey appointed Col. Heston Silbert as DLLC’s interim director since April. Silbert, the head of the Arizona Department of Public Safety, reported in June that DLLC is “significantly underfunded” for its mission and was experiencing several “administrative challenges.”
Uffelman Concerns about how Arizona’s liquor industry is being regulated and overseen does not end at just the department. It also reaches the State Liquor Board, which has authority to approve, deny, or revoke a liquor license.
Such decisions were determined at the Liquor Board’s June, August, and September meetings by three members, the only active members at that time despite the fact Arizona law calls for a seven-member board. A fourth member is now listed on the department’s website.
Board members are appointed by the Governor and then confirmed by the Senate, with each member serving a three-year term. State law also calls for five of the seven members to have no financial interest “directly or indirectly” in a business licensed to deal with spirituous liquors.
Currently only two of the four members -Chairman Troy Campbell and Member Janice Pernice- are listed as having no financial interest, while Vice Chair Lynn Shulman listed as a retailer and Member Matt Roemer is a wholesaler.
Attention must also be paid to the political affiliation of members as well as county of residence. Three of the four members listed on the website reside in Maricopa County, the limit under state law.
