by Jordan Conradson at thegatewaypundit.com
Newly selected Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes filed a lawsuit against Cochise County Supervisors last month, alleging that “Defendants recently have made and executed an illegal agreement” delegating elections administration duties to the County Recorder.
The agreement can be found in Exhibit A of Kris Mayes’ complaint.
Mayes’ reportedly won the rigged election by just 280 votes after a shady vote recount discovered hundreds of uncounted ballots for Abe Hamadeh in rural Pinal County. Additionally, multiple election anomalies in Maricopa County put a large number of ballots in question. The number of ballots in question far outnumbers the margin of victory.
As The Gateway Pundit reported, at least 517 voters left the long lines on Election Day in Maricopa County after the polls closed and were unable to cast a ballot. An estimated 8,327 were unable to cast a ballot due to the tabulator failures and extremely long wait times at nearly 60% of Maricopa County voting locations.
Now Kris Mayes is targeting officials who decline to accept fraudulent elections.
Remember, Katie Hobbs, the Governor installed by the same fraudulent midterm election, also previously sued Cochise County for not certifying the election. Cochise County Chairwoman Peggy Judd and Supervisor Ann English voted to certify the elections in Cochise under duress. The third Supervisor, Tom Crosby, refused to show up and vote on the forced, corrupt meeting agenda.
As The Gateway Pundit recently reported, Abe Hamadeh’s Motion for New Trial was granted with new Oral Arguments, scheduled for May 16, and a review of the roughly 8,000 provisional ballots will likely overturn the Arizona Attorney General race.
Kari Lake is currently fighting in the Arizona Supreme Court against Katie Hobbs to take her rightful place in the Arizona Governor’s office.
On March 7, Kris Mayes put out the following press release, claiming that the Board of Supervisors violated the law by delegating election duties to the County Recorder.
“Today, my office filed a lawsuit against Cochise County, the members of the Cochise County Board of Supervisors, and the County Recorder for their unlawful agreement to delegate nearly all of the Board’s election duties to the Recorder. The Agreement is essentially an unqualified handover from the Board to the Recorder, not one that would allow both entities to work hand in hand to fulfill their statutory duties openly and transparently.
While counties may appropriately enter into cooperative agreements with their recorders to manage elections, Cochise County’s agreement steps far over the legal line. In addition to this broad transfer of power, I am deeply concerned this move might shield or obscure actions and deliberations the Board would typically conduct publicly under open meeting law.
Suing other public officials is not something I take lightly–but it is my job as Attorney General to bring action when public officials unlawfully exercise their power or act outside the confines of their authority.”
A judge rejected a request from Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes to block the Cochise County Board of Supervisors from handing over its election administration to the elected county recorder.
On Tuesday, Santa Cruz County Superior Court Judge Thomas Fink turned aside Mayes’ request for an injunction blocking the February agreement from being implemented. Mayes had argued in her lawsuit that the board illegally delegated its oversight of elections to Recorder David Stevens.
But Fink said the agreement the board signed gives it sufficient oversight to meet the law’s requirements, including regular reports from Stevens to the board and its ability to overturn any decisions it finds objectionable.
“If there is a problem with the recorder’s performance of his election duties, these provisions are safeguards that are in the court’s opinion sufficient to ensure that the board means authority over the conduct of elections in Cochise County,” Fink said.
The decision came after an hour-long court hearing in which Solicitor General Josh Bendor, representing Mayes, tried to persuade Fink that the county was illegally delegating its authority to Stevens.
The county’s hired outside attorney, Timothy La Sota, said the Attorney General’s Office was nitpicking the agreement to find faults that weren’t there.
“If you look at the state’s critique of the agreement, it looks more like what a lawyer would put together for a client when they’re just kind of looking for things to pick out about something they don’t like,” La Sota told the judge. “’I don’t like how this is written,’ ‘I don’t like how that’s written.’”
La Sota pointed out that the county board, made up of two Republicans and one Democrat, retained the power to review decisions made by Stevens and replace him if it wants.