On Monday, the Maricopa County Superior Court dismissed Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake’s case. Tuesday, Lake announced the launch of the “largest ballot chasing operation” in state history, which she clarified was a voter registration initiative for the upcoming election year.
Leading the initiative, backed financially with the Save Arizona Fund, will be longtime grassroots activist Merissa Hamilton.
Lake asserted that her team had proven “beyond a shadow of a doubt” to the Maricopa County Superior Court the brokenness of the state’s election system. However, despite her court loss, Lake pledged to continue to fight for election wins. Lake said that left-wing political actors shouldn’t be the only ones that conduct voter registration.
“We’ve got to work in this rigged, corrupt system, and we can do it,” said Lake.
Lake said that while she opposes mail-in ballots, she believes that the current election system requires participation to win. She claimed that about 500,000 Republican and independent voters combined were sent a mail-in ballot that they didn’t return.
“If this is the game we have to play, if this is their rigged system, we’ll work in their rigged system,” said Lake.
The Arizona Supreme Court granted a review of Lake’s challenge in March.
In Monday’s ruling, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Peter Thompson explained that Lake failed to prove that election officials engaged in misconduct that affected the results of the gubernatorial election. Thompson ruled that Lake’s presentation of evidence that the signature review process was unlawful didn’t provide certainty that a specific number of ballots were impacted by the allegedly quick review.
Thompson cited several testimonies presented by Lake’s witnesses, who reported a preference for a more hasty and thorough signature review process but admitted that the multiple signature reviews required by law were completed. He said it was Lake’s own witnesses that confirmed the counties had abided by election law concerning signature processes, and rejected Lake’s argument based on Reyes v. Cuming that proper elections administration wasn’t adhered to and therefore hindered their ability to argue on a specific number of affected ballots.
“[T]his review was done hastily and possibly not as thoroughly as [complainants] would have liked — but it was done,” wrote Thompson. “This evidence is, in its own right, clear indicia that the comparative process was undertaken in compliance with the statute, putting us outside the scope of Reyes. There is clear and convincing evidence that the elections process for the November 8, 2022, General Election did comply with A.R.S. § 16-550 and that there was no misconduct in the process to support a claim under A.R.S. § 16-672.”
Lake’s team argued that the ballot signatures were processed much too quickly — under one second — to be in compliance with the spirit of the law. Thompson dismissed this argument, saying that time constraints weren’t outlined in the Election Procedures Manual (EPM) and therefore weren’t a standard that could be held against the counties.
“Plaintiff argues that this is so deficient for signature comparison that it amounts to no process at all. Accepting that argument would require the Court to rewrite not only the EPM but Arizona law to insert a minimum time for signature verification and specify the variables to be considered in the process,” stated Thompson. “Plaintiff asks the Court to interpret the word ‘compare’ in A.R.S. § 16-550(A) to require the Court to engage in a substantive weighing of whether Maricopa County’s signature verification process, as implemented, met some analytical baseline. But there are several problems with this. First, no such baseline appears in Section 16-550. Not one second, not three seconds, and not six seconds: no standard appears in the plain text of the statute. No reviewer is required by statute or the EPM to spend any specific length of time on any particular signature.”
Thompson stated the Lake’s witnesses were truthful in their testimonies.
“The Court makes no finding of dishonesty by any witness — and commends those signature reviewers who stepped forward to critique the process as they understood it,” said Thompson.
Thompson declared that no further matters remained on the case, save costs sought by the state and county election officials. Thompson issued a 5:00 pm Tuesday deadline for proposed form of judgment from the defendants, with a 5:00 pm Wednesday deadline for objection to those proposals by Lake’s team.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
The state of our republic is the foremost concern for Abe Hamadeh. Arizona is in a position to define it, specifically based on the outcome of Hamadeh’s election challenge.
“The idea of America, whether we are a nation that is ruled and governed by ‘we the people’ is threatened,” said Hamadeh in an interview with AZ Free News. “It’s the idea that Americans have lost faith in the idea that our elections are fair and honest. Once you lose confidence in that, you lose confidence in other aspects of America — like the rule of law.”
Hamadeh said that the recently released Durham report epitomized these concerns. The Department of Justice’s 306-page findings on the weaponization of the federal government against former President Donald Trump shined a clear light on the current nature of government and media, and the vital importance of an honest judiciary to hold them accountable.
“I sit back, and in its plainest terms: it was an attempted coup on President Trump. How there’s no accountability for that, how Hillary can collude with Russia to create a fake dossier, and this is what Durham has reported. That’s frightening,” said Hamadeh. “I recognize the power of the media, and it’s something I never thought I had a good grasp on. I thought they were generally biased but trying to be factual. But now I’ve discovered that the fourth estate has been totally corrupted, and there’s nobody holding the government accountable. The only thing we’ve got left to hold it accountable is the independent judiciary, which has been threatened by the left.”
It’s his deep concern for the direction of our nation, starting with the state of our elections, that affords him the boundless energy to continue his challenge of the 2022 attorney general election. Hamadeh engaged in oral arguments last week to argue for a new trial, based on the evidence they’ve found of disenfranchised voters.
“I think it goes much deeper than me winning. I’m fighting because I’m fighting for the truth, the people’s voice, and their votes to be honored. I think that’s a noble cause. Whether we succeed or fail, the government’s incompetence, the media’s hypocrisy, and the truth. And the truth is I won,” said Hamadeh. “How can we survive as a country when we no longer have faith in our elections or rule of law? What is the government at this point?”
Mayes was declared the winner initially with a 511-vote lead. The recount slashed that lead to 280. Yet, there are thousands of provisional votes — over 9,000, an increase from the estimated 8,000 reported in April — that weren’t included in the final count. About 70 percent of Election Day voters were for Hamadeh. Hamadeh said these additional provisional votes took as long as they did to discover because of the delay in response from the counties.
“We have to get information from 15 different government agencies, and it’s complicated,” said Hamadeh. “I wish we had access to the information that the government has. That’s why we’re asking for a new trial.”
“Statutes don’t trump the Arizona Constitution.”
Arguments from his opponents — Attorney General Kris Mayes and Secretary of State Adrian Fontes — focused mainly on how much time has passed since the election, the recount, and Mayes taking office. Hamadeh said that didn’t matter, asserting that Hunt v. Campbell ruled that the Arizona Constitution made immutably clear that the person with the most votes is deemed the legitimate officeholder.
“Even with a recount provision, even with a statutory timeline, none of that trumps the Arizona Constitution. All that allows is a statutory tool to make a process to determine who has the most votes and who is the legitimate officeholder,” said Hamadeh.
Hunt v. Campbell concerned the last major election challenge in a close race: over 100 years ago, in the 1916 gubernatorial election. Mayes’ counsel argued that the precedent was inapplicable since the ruling came before statutory timelines for elections were established. However, the judge rebutted in closing that there was a recount provision in place at the time of the Hunt v. Campbell decision.
Of all that the attorney general’s counsel did argue, they never claimed that Mayes obtained the most votes. Hamadeh’s team presented evidence of existing votes not counted, claims which went uncontested by the opposition. When given their turn to speak, Maricopa County didn’t offer any arguments of their own.
Based on what he’d witnessed, Hamadeh said he didn’t believe Mayes’ team came prepared. He believed it evinced a troubling, baseless confidence that the case was over before it had even begun, speculating that the consistency of favorable media coverage played a role as well.
“I think they were trying to treat our case the same as that of Mark Finchem or Kari Lake, or some of these cases with a larger margin,” said Hamadeh. “When they control the media and the government, they feel really emboldened to – it’s almost this hubris where they don’t think this judge will do something.”
Before Hamadeh had the complete voter data handed over from the counties to argue his case fully, The Washington Post editorial board wrote in a post-New Year’s piece that his defeat symbolized an end to election denialism.
“It brings me a lot of joy when we keep discovering the truth.”
Hamadeh pointed out that the media has trotted out the phrase “count all the votes” on repeat since 2020 — which he says is exactly what his case is all about. I’m fighting for the truth. I’m actually scared that these people are running our government and controlling our media.
“The government hasn’t counted all legitimate ballots,” said Hamadeh. “The media always argues, you have to count every single vote. I intend to show their hypocrisy. I have a lot of fun. I’m basically doing what I said I was doing as attorney general, which is exposing corruption, incompetence, and hypocrisy for the truth. I’m enjoying it.”
Hamadeh shared that he asked a group of about 100 attendees at a recent Republican Federation for Women event how many of them knew of someone who had lost faith in their elections and would no longer vote because of what happened last November. According to Hamadeh, every single hand went up.
“It breaks my heart that they’ve lost faith and confidence, and their solution — it’s not a solution — is ‘why vote?’”
It is my greatest honor fighting for democracy, fighting for the voters of Arizona, fighting for the integrity of our elections, and fighting for the rule of law.
Hamadeh claims that the 280 margin isn’t that unreasonable to question considering the myriad hiccups throughout last year’s election season. Last October, Gov. Katie Hobbs in her former capacity as secretary of state revealed that there were 6,000 Arizonans mistakenly registered as federal-only voters.
“This is 280 votes, and the government has already admitted to making these big mistakes,” said Hamadeh. “Why would Katie Hobbs not have done the right thing by telling the court and us if they didn’t have anything to gain?”
Hobbs neglected to disclose the undervotes in the attorney general race until after the December hearing. She claimed that the Maricopa County Superior Court order to prevent disclosure of the recount results prevented her from disclosing the undervotes, but Hamadeh said that wasn’t the case.
“Their actions speak louder than anything I have to say,” said Hamadeh. “We were in court arguing about undervote issues, and they [Hobbs’ team] didn’t say anything. They should not be the ones that take a side in an election contest. They should be the ones doing their jobs as government officials.”
It’s telling that criticism is focused on ad hominem attacks — in fact, no one has argued that if the ballots are counted, @krismayes prevails.https://t.co/wz6Y06xpA4
“I wish Republicans had as much a desire to save the country as Democrats have in destroying it.”
Hamadeh said that losing this case would close the door to challenging elections in the future.
“If we don’t prevail, the idea that you can’t question elections and election officials and the government itself regarding elections, is going to only get worse,” said Hamadeh. “My family came from Syria. I know from their experience what it’s like to not live in a democracy, to not be able to question your government. That’s exactly what the media, ironically, and the Democrats are leading us to right now.”
Hamadeh characterized his fight as a natural extension of a uniquely American duty: to serve as a check and balance on the government by questioning it.
“It’s not only our right to question the government, it’s also our duty. Especially when there are this many errors, this much incompetence regarding our elections,” said Hamadeh. “I’m fighting because I think questioning our government is the foundation of what being an American is; if we lose that, we basically lose our country.”
After last week’s oral arguments concluded, Mayes issued a fundraising email asking for campaign and legal fund donations.
“With regard to the never-ending lawsuit… it was more ‘we think’ drama, without factual evidence,” wrote Mayes.
Hamadeh says he hasn’t issued any similar fundraising emails.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes announced over the weekend her intent to investigate parents participating in the state’s school choice program.
The attorney general issued the announcement exclusively in an interview on “The Sunday Special” by 12 News. Mayes claimed that audits done in the past by the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) proved the prevalence of fraud, waste, and abuse in the ESA Program. The current administration has been in office less than a year.
“Clearly, there’s evidence of [fraud, waste, and abuse] already in audits that have been done in the past by the Department of Education,” said Mayes.
The last audit from the auditor general was issued in 2020. It found that former Superintendent Kathy Hoffman’s administration was slow to answer customer service phone calls and emails, provided poor quality information to ESA families, exceeded the 45-day statutory deadline for 55 percent of applicants, and releasing families’ personal information when fulfilling public records requests.
The last quarterly report was issued by ADE in September 2022 for fiscal year 2023.
Mayes accused the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) of not holding Empowerment Scholarship Account (ESA) Program parents accountable, and of wasting millions in taxpayer funding.
“There are no controls on this program. There’s no accountability, and they’re spending hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money,” said Mayes. “That needs to be looked at. I’m the state’s top law enforcement officer, and I think it’s my responsibility to do that.”
Mayes’ announcement followed Gov. Katie Hobbs’ approval of the budget, which Mayes and other legislative Democrats opposed.
Mayes pointed out that funding for the ESA Program sits at over $300 million. As of Monday, there were just over 56,900 students enrolled in the ESA Program. Since the ESA Program gives families up to $7,000 in school choice funding for alternative schooling options, such as private and home schools, the current cost to the state sits at just under $400 million.
In public schools, the cost per student is about double the cost per ESA student — about $15 billion annually.
The attorney general also claimed earlier this month that the universalized ESA Program would be a “catastrophic drain” on state resources.
“This is taxpayer money that is now going to private schools like Brophy, Xavier, and Phoenix Country Day School, and All Saints. This money is being used by wealthy parents for their kids to go to private schools. That’s not what it was designed to do,” said Mayes.
In response to Mayes’ plan, ADE Superintendent Tom Horne noted that his predecessor, Kathy Hoffman, had intentionally attempted to undermine the ESA Program through improper administration.
“Under my predecessor, who was unfriendly to universal Empowerment Scholarship Accounts (ESAs), the laws were not strictly enforced, and therefore funds were used for non-educational purposes, including restaurants and clothing stores,” stated Horne. “Because I am the defender of the ESA program, I want the laws to be strictly adhered to. I want to ensure that not one penny is used for a non-educational expense. Arizona is the first in the nation, and a model for the rest of the country. I am determined that all laws be strictly enforced, and all funds be used only for valid educational purposes. I’m disappointed that Attorney General Mayes has chosen, at every single opportunity, politics over the law.”
In March, Horne asked the State Board of Education to make four major changes to ESA Program administration to ensure better compliance with state law. The requested changes concerned modification of allowable education-related expenditures, accreditation for tutors and teaching services, access to ESA funds and debit card use, and a vendor change from ClassWallet.
As AZ Free News reported in January, the Horne administration inherited a severely understaffed ESA Program with nearly 171,600 unfulfilled expenditure requests. Of the approved expenditure requests, the administration discovered the approval list of expenditures had grown to include things like espresso machines. Hoffman inherited nearly 37,000 unfulfilled expenditure requests.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
Another FBI watchlist terrorist was apprehended crossing the border, this time one day after Title 42 ended.
The terrorist came from Pakistan and was apprehended in Ajo, according to information provided by unnamed federal sources to The Washington Examiner. The terrorist was captured within a wave of around 700 illegal immigrants crossing in the area.
There has been a significant increase in terror watchlist apprehensions under Biden. Customs and Border Patrol (CBP) disclosed on Wednesday that they’d apprehended 16 terrorists along the border in April alone — more than the total apprehensions from the 2017, 2018, 2019, and 2020 fiscal years combined.
NEW: CBP reports 16 people on the FBI’s terror watchlist were arrested by Border Patrol at the Southern border in April alone. That single month is more than all four years of FY17, FY18, FY19, and FY20 – combined (11).
According to data from December, terror watchlist arrests have increased over sixfold since Biden took office.
So far this fiscal year, there have been over 1.4 million southern border encounters. That’s nearly 134,000 more encounters than from the same time span from the last fiscal year (October 2021 through April 2022).
That brings the total border encounters under President Joe Biden to over 5.6 million.
The average of these encounters totals over 201,000. If that average sustains through the remaining 21 months of Biden’s first term, there may be over 9.8 million illegal immigrant encounters by the end of next year.
Under former President Donald Trump, there were a total of over 2.3 million encounters. There may be four times as many illegal crossings by the end of Biden’s first term.
Despite the continued onslaught of the border crisis, Arizona’s Democratic leaders have been hesitant to fully back proposed remedies.
Congressman Ruben Gallego (D-AZ-03) last week supported the termination of Title 42, but criticized the Biden administration’s lack of action on meaningful immigration reform and infrastructure.
“While the specific needs and requests of each border community varied, one similarity was clear: the administration has not done enough to meet their needs, and these local officials require additional resources, personnel, and funds to ensure our border stays secure and that the processing of asylum seekers is done in a humanitarian way,” stated Gallego.
That same day, Gallego issued another statement dismissing his Republican colleagues’ border proposals as an unserious “sham” perpetuating “cruel” Trump-era policies. The proposals included detainment of unaccompanied children, and restricting asylum outside of legal ports of entry.
Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ-07) complained last August that too many Americans were caught up in the border crisis to notice the religious disrespect of illegal immigrants. Specifically, Grijalva complained that border agents were confiscating illegal Sikh immigrants’ religious items, such as their turbans and bracelets.
“All these festering issues get overwritten because everybody starts screaming about the border and the invasion, and so these go into the background,” said Grijalva. “I don’t think they’re background issues. Border Patrol is the largest law enforcement agency with the least amount of accountability in the country. And that’s the problem.”
Democratic congressional candidate Kirsten Engel supported ending Title 42 last year as part of her prior, failed campaign, and denied the existence of the border crisis.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
On Wednesday, Riley Gaines urged Congress to pass Rep. Debbie Lesko’s (R-AZ-08) bill defining a woman.
Gaines is the former University of Kentucky swimmer forced to compete against a biological male who identifies as a transgender woman: Lia, formerly Will, Thomas. Gaines and other swimmers were also made to share private spaces with Thomas, such as locker rooms.
Gaines, who joined Lesko in a press conference on Wednesday, asserted defining the term “woman” was necessary to ensure equal protections under the law.
“Elected bureaucrats and judges and officials and administrators have altered the legal meaning of these sex-based terms to interpret it as they want, and to reflect identity rather than biology, and to require that men and women be treated not just equal but the same,” said Gaines. “The public knows what a woman is, and it’s time that our laws did, too.”
Lesko’s bill defines sex as the biological sex, either male or female, at birth. It also defines women and girls in reference to human females, and man and boy in reference to human males. Likewise, mother is defined as a “parent of the female sex,” and father is defined as a “parent of the male sex.”
“[T]here are important reasons to distinguish between the sexes with respect to athletics, prisons, domestic violence shelters, restrooms, and other areas, particularly where biology, safety, and privacy are implicated,” states the resolution.
Gaines lamented that modern political discourse has come to reckon anyone as “brave” for speaking the truth of biological reality out loud.
“In my mind, I can’t fathom how it is brave to say that men and women are different. I can’t fathom that requires courage. When I think of courage, I think of people on the front lines,” said Gaines.
Lesko noted that in one of her local school districts, two of the board members have fought to prevent boys from gaining access to girls’ bathrooms. However, the board members of the unnamed district were in the minority. Lesko noted that there have been violent assaults and rapes of girls and women in bathrooms by males pretending to be female.
“The left has declared a war on women,” said Lesko. “It is now more important than ever to affirm the biological differences between men and women to protect women’s hard-fought rights and ensure women have spaces reserved for them in society.”
Gaines also stressed that women’s feelings, privacy, safety, and self-esteem were sacrificed to spare the feelings of men suffering from gender dysphoria.
“What mattered to the left was protecting the feelings of a male at the expense of our own,” stated Gaines. “It’s 2023, we have the right to vote as women, we can own property. But we have to plead and beg for privacy in our locker rooms so we’re not violated. And when you do plead and beg, you’re called a ‘bigot,’ you’re called ‘transphobic’ for wanting safety.”
Rep. Andy Biggs (R-AZ-05) has also cosponsored the bill.
The 25 other cosponsors of the bill, titled the Women’s Bill of Rights, are Reps. Diana Harshbarger (R-TN-01), Mary Miller (R-IL-15), Kevin Hern (R-OK-01), Claudia Tenney (R-NY-24), Robert Aderholt (R-AL-04), Andrew Clyde (R-GA-09), Randy Weber (R-TX-14), Michael Guest (R-MS-03), George Santos (R-NY-03), Andrew Ogles (R-TN-05), Virginia Foxx (R-NC-05), Ralph Norman (R-SC-05), Burgess Owens (R-UT-04), Ronny Jackson (R-TX-13), Harriet Hageman (R-WY), Jeff Duncan (R-SC-03), Jake Ellzey (R-TX-06), Jim Banks (R-IN-03), Buddy Carter (R-GA-01), Greg Steube (R-FL-17), Ben Cline (R-VA-06), Doug LaMalfa (R-CA-01), Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL-13), Michael Burgess (R-TX-26), and Brian Babin (R-TX-36). The bill hasn’t gone further than its introduction in February.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
