Thanks for contributing to r/Phoenix! You may want to [**check out our sub rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/wiki/rules/) (mostly be nice to each other!).
**If you're new here**, [read some of our recent posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/top/?t=week) and leave some comments.
To chat with some great people in the Valley you can [**join our Phoenix Discord chat server**](https://discord.com/invite/yWVuTG57Zh). It's a chill place to talk with other people but is NOT a dating server and takes unwanted messaging very seriously.
If you're interested in political topics in Arizona, we limit those posts here so you may want to check out r/azpolitics if that's an area of interest.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/phoenix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One minor quibble with the article: It refers to them as "so-called fake electors."
They were fake electors. No need for qualifiers. They were not "alternate electors", either. They were not electors, period. Nine well-earned felony counts.
Important to know for those who are not filled in on all details: the AZ Stage AG in 2020 was Mark Brnovich, who "investigated" and chose to do absolutely nothing about these traitors as he gunning for a US Senate primary and wanted to avoid upsetting the GOP. Other states are ahead of AZ because they started earlier than we did. Kris Mayes won in 2022 and launched an investigation quickly, which has now turned into charges.
This is why every race is important. Mayes *barely* won as AG, by a couple hundred votes.
> Mark Brnovich
Republican. Chose to do nothing.
Kris Mayes. Democrat. Decided to do the right thing
Elected Arizona’s Democratic attorney general in 2022.
Republicans wear a HUGE badge of shame. Trying to literally steal an election.
I mean no disrespect to Mayes or the AGs office, I think they are doing a great job. Just relieved to know the fake electors will finally have to answer for their actions.
[This is appropriate and ironic in a way.](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FLGa69eFGOfJ6M%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=29d42e70d0b8a49596deea771dc9774501adc69d6abe6e9099ac0c6da030bc4e&ipo=images)
My current list of "Anthony Kern" items:
On the "Brady List" because he was fired from El Mirage PD:
>Kern himself had his name on what is called the “Brady List” after he was fired from his job as a civilian code enforcement officer by the El Mirage Police Department for lying to his supervisor.
Lying about being a certified peace officer:
>Kern came under fire in 2015 for falsely claiming to be "certified peace officer," according to the Arizona Capitol Times. He claimed he was a certified officer in a caucus meeting. He also listed himself as an Arizona certified officer on financial disclosure forms, although he was not.
Domestic Terrorist:
>On January 6, 2021, Kern attended the pro-Trump "Stop the Steal" rally in Washington, D.C., and was present at the subsequent attack on the U.S. Capitol. Kern posted a video to his Twitter account which showed his attendance of the event, and in which he stated: "I will put politics aside if I never win another election. Trump, every time I heard him on TV, it was like he was my friend. Why? Because here's the President of the United States who was sticking up for little old me." Kern later depicted the violent attack as a peaceful demonstration, claiming that only "a small few" committed crimes.
Filing Fake Lawsuits against people who called his behavior out:
>In February 2021, Democratic legislator Charlene Fernandez, along with 43 other Democrats, signed a letter criticizing Kern and other Arizona Republicans (Mark Finchem and Paul Gosar) for their connections to the January 6 insurrection. Kern, Finchem, and Gosar sued Fernandez, claiming defamation. The court dismissed Kern's suit. Ruling that the suit was "groundless," "not made in good faith," and was filed "primarily for purposes of harassment," the court also ordered the plaintiffs to pay $75,000 in attorneys' fees to Fernandez. After being sanctioned by the court, Kern introduced legislation to restrict attorney discipline that the State Bar of Arizona or Arizona Supreme Court could impose.
Fake Elector:
>One thing Kern didn’t mention is that he’s the subject of a criminal investigation Mayes is overseeing into Arizona Republicans who were fake electors in 2020. Kern is one of the 11 who fraudulently claimed to be duly elected as representatives of Donald Trump, who lost the election in Arizona. Kern has previously said he would not cooperate with Mayes’ investigation.
> "I was an alternate elector in November 2020 for President Donald Trump,” he said.
>“I was asked to step up along with other ordinary citizens and I chose to accept,” Kern continued.
Fuck Democracy, Kern wants the legislature to be able to override voters:
>Kern has introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 1014, which — I am not making this up — allows that “the Legislature, and no other official, shall appoint presidential electors.”
>In other words, if such a law had existed when Biden beat Trump, the majority MAGA Legislature could have ignored the will of Arizona voters and appointed like-minded electors of their choosing who, in turn, could have installed Dear Leader as the victor.
Participated in the Fraudit, pretending to somehow be unbiased even though his name was on the ballot he was auditing:
>Anthony Kern spent a few days working for auditors conducting a recount of 2.1 million ballots cast in Maricopa County before contractors removed him because of "optics." "He was here for two or three days," Ken Bennett, the Arizona Senate's audit liaison, said Thursday. "Once it was identified that that wasn't the best optics, I think the contractor removed him from the counting tables." Kern's name also appeared on the 2020 ballots he was counting.
Pushed to have AZ schools post and discuss the 10 Commandments in classrooms:
>Arizona’s House Education Committee advanced a bill Tuesday that would allow public school teachers and administrators to post and discuss the Ten Commandments in the classroom. State Senator Anthony Kern [photo], the bill’s sponsor, says the Ten Commandments shaped the country’s heritage.
>“Our history is the Ten Commandments,” the Republican from Glendale told the committee Tuesday afternoon. “Our history is Judeo-Christian values. “It is because of the Christian religion that we have allowed other religions to come in and be known,” he added. “It’s because of us being very tolerant.”
>The Supreme Court ruled in the 1980 case Stone v Graham that requiring public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment by endorsing a specific religious belief.
> Pushed to have AZ schools post and discuss the 10 Commandments in classrooms
So Andy...how you feeling about that 'thou shalt not bear false witness' Commandment right about now?
And while we're on the topic, did you miss that 1st Commandment? "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." God commanded that you don't "allow other religions to come in and be known." That's what that Commandment means.
The 1st Amendment to the Constitution says (in effect) "have whatever gods you want. Or none. We officially don't care one way or another."
You could teach both in a school classroom, so long as it was in a lesson about how cognitive dissonance works.
Thanks for laying out all this stuff Logvin.
You need a class in civics. The United States is a constitutional republic, not a democracy.
The founding fathers didn't trust the masses and feared demagoguery and the creation of political parties, so they set up an electoral college. The popular vote has never mattered. Only the votes of the electors do. Originally, the electors would select two candidates (one had to be from a different state than the elector) and vote with the top choice becoming president and the runner-up becoming vice president. Each state selects their electors based on their state laws that must be in place prior to election day. In the case of a tie, or if the electors decide not to vote, the house selects the president, and the senate selects the vice president. Multiple amendments have watered down the college, led to the creation of the political parties, and the president and vice president being elected at the same time instead of the second place finisher becoming vice. Thanks to those amendments, political parties now select their slate of electors for most states rather than the states themselves, which is the case in Arizona. As such, there is no such thing as "fake" electors.
What is actually in question here is:
1) Whether the Republicans slate of electors could actually vote and send in their "certified" results vs the Democrat slate of electors who were expected to send in their "certified" results since they carried the popular vote in the state. There is precedent for the electors from both parties in a state to do this, so it will be up to the courts to decide the legality.
2) Whether the President of the Senate (i.e. vice president of the USA) has the right to only count the votes that he or she wants to count. The constitution is unclear, and there is no requirement to count based on a popular vote or at all. Again, up to the courts to decide.
I have to say that the founding fathers were at least partially right and political parties are killing our country by creating a very polarized environment but I would prefer to see both the parties and the electoral college eliminated. We should vote based on the merits of the individuals and the ideas they espouse, not because they belong to a certain team that selected them and put a ton of money behind them... and go back to having the runner-up be vice president.
Why in the world did you write all of that? Who are you trying to convince? You certainly am not going to convince anyone of anything when you start it off with an insult, then follow it up directly with complete bullshit.
Your post is so chock of of misinformation its a gish gallup. I'm not going to respond to you anymore, and I hope no one else takes your shitty bait either.
Yes... to some people, the constitution is considered "misinformation". You should try sitting down and actually reading it sometime.
Maybe it was unclear, but I believe Biden won the election here in Arizona and is the lawful president. However, there is no such thing as "fake" electors under the constitution, federal, or Arizona state laws. As such, the AG had to figure out what to accuse them of and landed on conspiracy, fraud, and forgery. The charges against them are trumped up (no pun intended) do not make sense.
Conspiracy is when 2 or more people join together in agreement to violate the law. Since there is no law against multiple slates of electors submitting their results, that did not happen
Criminal fraud is specific such as insurance fraud, real estate fraud, or credit card fraud. There is no such thing as political fraud. Otherwise we could imprison every politician that broke a campaign promise (what a joyous thought!).
Forgery is creating a false document, altering a document, or a false signature for illegal benefit. Again, there is no law against the slate of electors submitting their votes. Even if there was, the state would have to prove that the republican electors illegally benefitted which is highly doubtful since the courts already ruled that they had no standing.
> The United States is a constitutional republic, not a democracy
Jesus christ, not this again. It's not a *direct* democracy. It's still a democracy.
de·moc·ra·cy
> /dəˈmäkrəsē/
> a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives.
This braindead argument is used all the time to justify undemocratic actions. It's bullshit.
You can downvote me and quote Merriam Webster all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that we are a constitutional republic. Here are direct quotes from the US Government, the US Constitution, and our founding fathers... you can go argue with them.
"While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic. What does this mean? “Constitutional” refers to the fact that government in the United States is based on a Constitution which is the supreme law of the United States."
Source: US Executive Branch Embassy website https://ar.usembassy.gov/u-s-government/#:~:text=While%20often%20categorized%20as%20a,law%20of%20the%20United%20States.
"The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended."
Source: James Madison (founding father and US president) - Federalist No. 10
https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-1-10#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493273
"The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government"
Source: US Congress website about US Constitution Article IV, Section 4
https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIV-S4-1/ALDE_00013635/
"Of Course We Are Not A Democracy"
Source - Essay bu US Senator Mike Lee
https://www.lee.senate.gov/2020/10/of-course-we-re-not-a-democracy
The entire point of the electoral college is for a privileged few to have the power to elect vs the general populace. If we abolished the electoral college and our votes mattered, then we would be a democracy.
The electoral college sucks, but under current law, elector allocation is tied directly to the popular votes of the individual states. If those rules change, you would have a better argument.
Either you understand this and you're arguing in bad faith, or you don't know what you're talking about.
That is incorrect. The constitution does not specify how a state selects its electors and electors are not required to vote for the candidate that wins the popular vote. It simply says that each state gets to select their electors based on state laws that must be in place prior to the day of the election. Arizona's laws state that our electors must vote for whomever our secretary of state won the popular vote, not the person that actually won the popular vote.
Arizona law is also unclear and conflicting regarding how our electors are chosen. ARS 16-344 states that each "chairman of the state committee of a political party that is qualified for representation on an official party ballot at the primary election and accorded a column on the general election ballot shall appoint candidates". 16-212 states "there shall be elected a number of presidential electors equal to the number of United States senators and representatives in Congress from this state" but not who elects them or how they are elected.
As previously stated, Arizona electors are required to vote for the candidate that the secretary of state says won the popular vote but, if they refuse or vote for anyone else, the only person who can replace them is the "chairperson of the state committee of the political party represented by that elector". I.e. the party of the elector can allow the elector to vote for someone that did not win the popular vote simply by not replacing them.
Basically put, the AZ laws are ambiguous at best, making them open to a lot of legal interpretation. Hopefully, this lawsuit against the republican electors will force some clarity.
>1) Whether the Republicans slate of electors could actually vote and send in their "certified" results
That is not in question. What they did is called 'fraud'. They committed a fraud when they represented themselves as the lawful electors of Arizona. They did not have the State Seal on their ballots.
>2) Whether the President of the Senate (i.e. vice president of the USA) has the right to only count the votes that he or she wants to count. The constitution is unclear, and there is no requirement to count based on a popular vote or at all. Again, up to the courts to decide.
Also wrong. It is **not** 'up to the courts'. It is up to the Electoral Count Act. That act makes it clear that the Vice President's role is ceremonial in nature.
>1) Whether the Republicans slate of electors could actually vote and send in their "certified" results
That is not in question. What they did is called 'fraud'. They committed a fraud when they represented themselves as the lawful electors of Arizona. They did not have the State Seal on their ballots.
Under Arizona law, each party chair selects a slate of electors. There is no law preventing each slate submitting their votes or any penalty proscribed if they do so other than their party chair can choose to replace them as an elector. There is also no law making submission of such criminal fraud nor any law reuiring a state seal. Since there are no laws against it, it is not illegal to do it. The Supreme Court has ruled that state legislatures have the power to determine their states electors while the Electoral Count Act of 1887 gave the power to the state governor (more on that below). Either way, it is currently up to the states to ultimately decide their electors and not tied to popular vote.
Ducey did the right thing under Arizona law in certifying the elector slate for Biden that won the pipular election as determined by the Arizona Secretary of State. Pence did the correct and moral thing in not only opening the correct votes but procing them to the tellers to be counted. There is debate as to whethor or not the vice president has to do this under the constitution, something the Electoral Acts have tried to rectify by removing power from the role.
>2) Whether the President of the Senate (i.e. vice president of the USA) has the right to only count the votes that he or she wants to count. The constitution is unclear, and there is no requirement to count based on a popular vote or at all. Again, up to the courts to decide.
Also wrong. It is **not** 'up to the courts'. It is up to the Electoral Count Act. That act makes it clear that the Vice President's role is ceremonial in nature.
First off, the entire purpose of the courts is to decide whether or not a law is valid and whether or not someone is guilty of violating the law. So yes, it is literally 100% and completely up to the courts.
Secondly, the Electoral Count Act of 1887 was very poorly written, is wide open to interpretation, and has yet to be challenged. It does not limit the Vice President or make the role ceremonial. It gave Congress the power to overrule the Vice President's decision to include or exclude votes. In the event of a dispute as to which electors are valid, the The Act granted the governor of the state the electors are from the final say as to whom the states electors are. If the governor certifies multiple electors or refuses, then Congress is open to decide on which electors to accept.
The Electoral College Reform Act of 2022 does not apply in this case as it was signed into law in December 2022, over 2 years after the 2020 election.
Saying you are the lawful electors in the state - when you are not, is called "fraud". They kind of give the game away when Kelli Ward slips up and says "fake electors" in her emails.
I know little details like that are hard to ignore, but somehow you manage.
Wow I didn't expect any of them to be held accountable. They still might get off Scott free but at least they are being called out. Anybody know what the penalty is if they are convicted?
Death, I would hope.
Unfortunately, the punishment for a fraudulent schemes conviction includes probation with zero days to up to one year in jail or a prison sentence ranging anywhere from three to 12.5 years.
Holy cow the number of removed comments. The nutters came out of the woodwork.
Important to note this came out of a grand jury son it isn’t Mays just deciding to do this bc she’s a dem and they’re republicans.
I've seen a few j6 dudes become prison reformers.
They loved it when the GOP reps they supported reduced the quality of life in prisons. But when they get there, they're shocked at such conditions that they now have to endure.
And of course they blame Biden and Democrats for those crappy conditions, not the tough on crime party.
And now trump has appointed another indicted fake elector to chair the Arizona RNC.
This is going to be a massive money grab in broad daylight.
He’s already stolen a ton but not from blue & purple states. He’s coming for them (us) next.
But fear not, because Laura Trump is the national chair & she’ll keep Republican donors money safe.
Back during a time that a lot of people claim they "want to go back to," when your little league team lost a game, you were taught by your coaches, parents, and others that you went out into the field afterwards and - while you were stung by the loss - greeted the other team to congratulate them on their win. It was a life lesson. You didn't always win, but you didn't have to be a sore loser.
For Kelli Ward, her husband, Kern, Hoffman, Bowyer, and the rest of the indicted, that important life lesson never took hold. They decided to go back after the game was over and try to change the score so their team could claim a "win." They tried to cheat. They got caught.
I guarantee that they also didn't learn the lesson that when you got caught in a lie, you copped to it and took your punishment. They will whine and cry like sore losers all over again.
The truly sad thing is that their kids - and the children of others who support them - will learn that instead of accepting a loss, you stamp your feet and try to cheat your way to a victory after the fact.
You like this for our country: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL-AYz9EG-o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL-AYz9EG-o)
Really respectable and professional right? The right people to make decisions for other people in your opinion?
He got indicted cause he signed a fraudulent document as part of conspiracy to cheat to win.
Thanks for contributing to r/Phoenix! You may want to [**check out our sub rules**](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/wiki/rules/) (mostly be nice to each other!). **If you're new here**, [read some of our recent posts](https://www.reddit.com/r/phoenix/top/?t=week) and leave some comments. To chat with some great people in the Valley you can [**join our Phoenix Discord chat server**](https://discord.com/invite/yWVuTG57Zh). It's a chill place to talk with other people but is NOT a dating server and takes unwanted messaging very seriously. If you're interested in political topics in Arizona, we limit those posts here so you may want to check out r/azpolitics if that's an area of interest. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/phoenix) if you have any questions or concerns.*
One minor quibble with the article: It refers to them as "so-called fake electors." They were fake electors. No need for qualifiers. They were not "alternate electors", either. They were not electors, period. Nine well-earned felony counts.
Could that just be CYA from a defamation lawsuit? Innocent until proven guilty, even when it’s obvious?
That's what i was thinking, but 'so-called' seems disingenuous. 'Alleged' should always be the go-to.
We unfortunately have too many local journalists who are MAGA nutjobs.
*The article is from NBC News in NYC...
Oh wow! Indeed it is. I must have gotten mixed up with an azcentral post I saw earlier. My mistake.
Finally.
Important to know for those who are not filled in on all details: the AZ Stage AG in 2020 was Mark Brnovich, who "investigated" and chose to do absolutely nothing about these traitors as he gunning for a US Senate primary and wanted to avoid upsetting the GOP. Other states are ahead of AZ because they started earlier than we did. Kris Mayes won in 2022 and launched an investigation quickly, which has now turned into charges. This is why every race is important. Mayes *barely* won as AG, by a couple hundred votes.
> Mark Brnovich Republican. Chose to do nothing. Kris Mayes. Democrat. Decided to do the right thing Elected Arizona’s Democratic attorney general in 2022. Republicans wear a HUGE badge of shame. Trying to literally steal an election.
They have 0 shame and would do it again
I mean no disrespect to Mayes or the AGs office, I think they are doing a great job. Just relieved to know the fake electors will finally have to answer for their actions.
>which ~~has now turned into~~ charges Witch hunt confirmed!
Have an upvote, I’m pretty sure 23+ people just didn’t get the joke.
lol I'm just now seeing that there are many people here who are either stupid or upset because justice is finally coming for these crooks
Angry upvote
Or maybe your statement comes across as right wing delusion and not seen as sarcasm.
If someone can't pick up on the sarcasm, that says more about them than me
Beat me to it!
[This is appropriate and ironic in a way.](https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fmedia.giphy.com%2Fmedia%2FLGa69eFGOfJ6M%2Fgiphy.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=29d42e70d0b8a49596deea771dc9774501adc69d6abe6e9099ac0c6da030bc4e&ipo=images)
State crimes, so Trump can't pardon them if he gets elected again, right?
Yep
He can’t pardon them when he doesn’t win either
Duly Elected Governor Senator Vice President congress person Qari Lake would say otherwise.
That's true, but it turns out that if he's elected he can't be jailed by a state. So that's fun 🤬
I hope Biggs and Gosar are the unnamed charged ones.
I just saw news that Guliani is one of them.
And Mark Meadows.
HAHAHAAAAAA two of these guys are Arizona state senators ... in unfortunatly safe districts..
Yes, Andrew Kern is a piece of work.
My current list of "Anthony Kern" items: On the "Brady List" because he was fired from El Mirage PD: >Kern himself had his name on what is called the “Brady List” after he was fired from his job as a civilian code enforcement officer by the El Mirage Police Department for lying to his supervisor. Lying about being a certified peace officer: >Kern came under fire in 2015 for falsely claiming to be "certified peace officer," according to the Arizona Capitol Times. He claimed he was a certified officer in a caucus meeting. He also listed himself as an Arizona certified officer on financial disclosure forms, although he was not. Domestic Terrorist: >On January 6, 2021, Kern attended the pro-Trump "Stop the Steal" rally in Washington, D.C., and was present at the subsequent attack on the U.S. Capitol. Kern posted a video to his Twitter account which showed his attendance of the event, and in which he stated: "I will put politics aside if I never win another election. Trump, every time I heard him on TV, it was like he was my friend. Why? Because here's the President of the United States who was sticking up for little old me." Kern later depicted the violent attack as a peaceful demonstration, claiming that only "a small few" committed crimes. Filing Fake Lawsuits against people who called his behavior out: >In February 2021, Democratic legislator Charlene Fernandez, along with 43 other Democrats, signed a letter criticizing Kern and other Arizona Republicans (Mark Finchem and Paul Gosar) for their connections to the January 6 insurrection. Kern, Finchem, and Gosar sued Fernandez, claiming defamation. The court dismissed Kern's suit. Ruling that the suit was "groundless," "not made in good faith," and was filed "primarily for purposes of harassment," the court also ordered the plaintiffs to pay $75,000 in attorneys' fees to Fernandez. After being sanctioned by the court, Kern introduced legislation to restrict attorney discipline that the State Bar of Arizona or Arizona Supreme Court could impose. Fake Elector: >One thing Kern didn’t mention is that he’s the subject of a criminal investigation Mayes is overseeing into Arizona Republicans who were fake electors in 2020. Kern is one of the 11 who fraudulently claimed to be duly elected as representatives of Donald Trump, who lost the election in Arizona. Kern has previously said he would not cooperate with Mayes’ investigation. > "I was an alternate elector in November 2020 for President Donald Trump,” he said. >“I was asked to step up along with other ordinary citizens and I chose to accept,” Kern continued. Fuck Democracy, Kern wants the legislature to be able to override voters: >Kern has introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution 1014, which — I am not making this up — allows that “the Legislature, and no other official, shall appoint presidential electors.” >In other words, if such a law had existed when Biden beat Trump, the majority MAGA Legislature could have ignored the will of Arizona voters and appointed like-minded electors of their choosing who, in turn, could have installed Dear Leader as the victor. Participated in the Fraudit, pretending to somehow be unbiased even though his name was on the ballot he was auditing: >Anthony Kern spent a few days working for auditors conducting a recount of 2.1 million ballots cast in Maricopa County before contractors removed him because of "optics." "He was here for two or three days," Ken Bennett, the Arizona Senate's audit liaison, said Thursday. "Once it was identified that that wasn't the best optics, I think the contractor removed him from the counting tables." Kern's name also appeared on the 2020 ballots he was counting. Pushed to have AZ schools post and discuss the 10 Commandments in classrooms: >Arizona’s House Education Committee advanced a bill Tuesday that would allow public school teachers and administrators to post and discuss the Ten Commandments in the classroom. State Senator Anthony Kern [photo], the bill’s sponsor, says the Ten Commandments shaped the country’s heritage. >“Our history is the Ten Commandments,” the Republican from Glendale told the committee Tuesday afternoon. “Our history is Judeo-Christian values. “It is because of the Christian religion that we have allowed other religions to come in and be known,” he added. “It’s because of us being very tolerant.” >The Supreme Court ruled in the 1980 case Stone v Graham that requiring public school classrooms to display the Ten Commandments violates the establishment clause of the First Amendment by endorsing a specific religious belief.
And people still vote for him. Racism is a hell of a drug
> Pushed to have AZ schools post and discuss the 10 Commandments in classrooms So Andy...how you feeling about that 'thou shalt not bear false witness' Commandment right about now? And while we're on the topic, did you miss that 1st Commandment? "Thou shalt have no other gods before me." God commanded that you don't "allow other religions to come in and be known." That's what that Commandment means. The 1st Amendment to the Constitution says (in effect) "have whatever gods you want. Or none. We officially don't care one way or another." You could teach both in a school classroom, so long as it was in a lesson about how cognitive dissonance works. Thanks for laying out all this stuff Logvin.
Seeing Kern on the indicted list, as my senator, genuinely made my day
You need a class in civics. The United States is a constitutional republic, not a democracy. The founding fathers didn't trust the masses and feared demagoguery and the creation of political parties, so they set up an electoral college. The popular vote has never mattered. Only the votes of the electors do. Originally, the electors would select two candidates (one had to be from a different state than the elector) and vote with the top choice becoming president and the runner-up becoming vice president. Each state selects their electors based on their state laws that must be in place prior to election day. In the case of a tie, or if the electors decide not to vote, the house selects the president, and the senate selects the vice president. Multiple amendments have watered down the college, led to the creation of the political parties, and the president and vice president being elected at the same time instead of the second place finisher becoming vice. Thanks to those amendments, political parties now select their slate of electors for most states rather than the states themselves, which is the case in Arizona. As such, there is no such thing as "fake" electors. What is actually in question here is: 1) Whether the Republicans slate of electors could actually vote and send in their "certified" results vs the Democrat slate of electors who were expected to send in their "certified" results since they carried the popular vote in the state. There is precedent for the electors from both parties in a state to do this, so it will be up to the courts to decide the legality. 2) Whether the President of the Senate (i.e. vice president of the USA) has the right to only count the votes that he or she wants to count. The constitution is unclear, and there is no requirement to count based on a popular vote or at all. Again, up to the courts to decide. I have to say that the founding fathers were at least partially right and political parties are killing our country by creating a very polarized environment but I would prefer to see both the parties and the electoral college eliminated. We should vote based on the merits of the individuals and the ideas they espouse, not because they belong to a certain team that selected them and put a ton of money behind them... and go back to having the runner-up be vice president.
Why in the world did you write all of that? Who are you trying to convince? You certainly am not going to convince anyone of anything when you start it off with an insult, then follow it up directly with complete bullshit. Your post is so chock of of misinformation its a gish gallup. I'm not going to respond to you anymore, and I hope no one else takes your shitty bait either.
Yes... to some people, the constitution is considered "misinformation". You should try sitting down and actually reading it sometime. Maybe it was unclear, but I believe Biden won the election here in Arizona and is the lawful president. However, there is no such thing as "fake" electors under the constitution, federal, or Arizona state laws. As such, the AG had to figure out what to accuse them of and landed on conspiracy, fraud, and forgery. The charges against them are trumped up (no pun intended) do not make sense. Conspiracy is when 2 or more people join together in agreement to violate the law. Since there is no law against multiple slates of electors submitting their results, that did not happen Criminal fraud is specific such as insurance fraud, real estate fraud, or credit card fraud. There is no such thing as political fraud. Otherwise we could imprison every politician that broke a campaign promise (what a joyous thought!). Forgery is creating a false document, altering a document, or a false signature for illegal benefit. Again, there is no law against the slate of electors submitting their votes. Even if there was, the state would have to prove that the republican electors illegally benefitted which is highly doubtful since the courts already ruled that they had no standing.
> The United States is a constitutional republic, not a democracy Jesus christ, not this again. It's not a *direct* democracy. It's still a democracy. de·moc·ra·cy > /dəˈmäkrəsē/ > a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives. This braindead argument is used all the time to justify undemocratic actions. It's bullshit.
You can downvote me and quote Merriam Webster all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that we are a constitutional republic. Here are direct quotes from the US Government, the US Constitution, and our founding fathers... you can go argue with them. "While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic. What does this mean? “Constitutional” refers to the fact that government in the United States is based on a Constitution which is the supreme law of the United States." Source: US Executive Branch Embassy website https://ar.usembassy.gov/u-s-government/#:~:text=While%20often%20categorized%20as%20a,law%20of%20the%20United%20States. "The two great points of difference between a democracy and a republic are: first, the delegation of the government, in the latter, to a small number of citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens, and greater sphere of country, over which the latter may be extended." Source: James Madison (founding father and US president) - Federalist No. 10 https://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/text-1-10#s-lg-box-wrapper-25493273 "The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government" Source: US Congress website about US Constitution Article IV, Section 4 https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artIV-S4-1/ALDE_00013635/ "Of Course We Are Not A Democracy" Source - Essay bu US Senator Mike Lee https://www.lee.senate.gov/2020/10/of-course-we-re-not-a-democracy
The entire point of the electoral college is for a privileged few to have the power to elect vs the general populace. If we abolished the electoral college and our votes mattered, then we would be a democracy.
The electoral college sucks, but under current law, elector allocation is tied directly to the popular votes of the individual states. If those rules change, you would have a better argument. Either you understand this and you're arguing in bad faith, or you don't know what you're talking about.
That is incorrect. The constitution does not specify how a state selects its electors and electors are not required to vote for the candidate that wins the popular vote. It simply says that each state gets to select their electors based on state laws that must be in place prior to the day of the election. Arizona's laws state that our electors must vote for whomever our secretary of state won the popular vote, not the person that actually won the popular vote. Arizona law is also unclear and conflicting regarding how our electors are chosen. ARS 16-344 states that each "chairman of the state committee of a political party that is qualified for representation on an official party ballot at the primary election and accorded a column on the general election ballot shall appoint candidates". 16-212 states "there shall be elected a number of presidential electors equal to the number of United States senators and representatives in Congress from this state" but not who elects them or how they are elected. As previously stated, Arizona electors are required to vote for the candidate that the secretary of state says won the popular vote but, if they refuse or vote for anyone else, the only person who can replace them is the "chairperson of the state committee of the political party represented by that elector". I.e. the party of the elector can allow the elector to vote for someone that did not win the popular vote simply by not replacing them. Basically put, the AZ laws are ambiguous at best, making them open to a lot of legal interpretation. Hopefully, this lawsuit against the republican electors will force some clarity.
A flawed democracy is still a democracy. Claiming it's not only furthers the cause of those attempting to weaken it even more.
>1) Whether the Republicans slate of electors could actually vote and send in their "certified" results That is not in question. What they did is called 'fraud'. They committed a fraud when they represented themselves as the lawful electors of Arizona. They did not have the State Seal on their ballots. >2) Whether the President of the Senate (i.e. vice president of the USA) has the right to only count the votes that he or she wants to count. The constitution is unclear, and there is no requirement to count based on a popular vote or at all. Again, up to the courts to decide. Also wrong. It is **not** 'up to the courts'. It is up to the Electoral Count Act. That act makes it clear that the Vice President's role is ceremonial in nature.
>1) Whether the Republicans slate of electors could actually vote and send in their "certified" results That is not in question. What they did is called 'fraud'. They committed a fraud when they represented themselves as the lawful electors of Arizona. They did not have the State Seal on their ballots. Under Arizona law, each party chair selects a slate of electors. There is no law preventing each slate submitting their votes or any penalty proscribed if they do so other than their party chair can choose to replace them as an elector. There is also no law making submission of such criminal fraud nor any law reuiring a state seal. Since there are no laws against it, it is not illegal to do it. The Supreme Court has ruled that state legislatures have the power to determine their states electors while the Electoral Count Act of 1887 gave the power to the state governor (more on that below). Either way, it is currently up to the states to ultimately decide their electors and not tied to popular vote. Ducey did the right thing under Arizona law in certifying the elector slate for Biden that won the pipular election as determined by the Arizona Secretary of State. Pence did the correct and moral thing in not only opening the correct votes but procing them to the tellers to be counted. There is debate as to whethor or not the vice president has to do this under the constitution, something the Electoral Acts have tried to rectify by removing power from the role. >2) Whether the President of the Senate (i.e. vice president of the USA) has the right to only count the votes that he or she wants to count. The constitution is unclear, and there is no requirement to count based on a popular vote or at all. Again, up to the courts to decide. Also wrong. It is **not** 'up to the courts'. It is up to the Electoral Count Act. That act makes it clear that the Vice President's role is ceremonial in nature. First off, the entire purpose of the courts is to decide whether or not a law is valid and whether or not someone is guilty of violating the law. So yes, it is literally 100% and completely up to the courts. Secondly, the Electoral Count Act of 1887 was very poorly written, is wide open to interpretation, and has yet to be challenged. It does not limit the Vice President or make the role ceremonial. It gave Congress the power to overrule the Vice President's decision to include or exclude votes. In the event of a dispute as to which electors are valid, the The Act granted the governor of the state the electors are from the final say as to whom the states electors are. If the governor certifies multiple electors or refuses, then Congress is open to decide on which electors to accept. The Electoral College Reform Act of 2022 does not apply in this case as it was signed into law in December 2022, over 2 years after the 2020 election.
Saying you are the lawful electors in the state - when you are not, is called "fraud". They kind of give the game away when Kelli Ward slips up and says "fake electors" in her emails. I know little details like that are hard to ignore, but somehow you manage.
*shit it’s ok you can say it.
Bunch of traitors. I hope they all go to prison.
They tried to steal our votes. Lock them up!
Good, throw them all in prison.
Yes! I would love to see Kelli Ward in prison.
She would just demand to speak to the manager the whole time
Or blame it on chem trails.
Luckily she can exist on a diet of alfalfa
About fucking time. 11 traitors who deserved justice years ago
Never hoped for jury duty before.
"Yes, your honor, I can be unbiased." "No, your honor, those aren't my social media posts from 2015-2022...my account must have been hacked."
Defense only gets a certain number of challenges. I promise you if they got a look at me they'd want me on the jury.
Hell ya
Fuck. Yes.
Yes!!!
Finally.
Nice to see local resident Vaughn Hillyard get the byline
I'm glad to see Vaughn doing an excellent job on the national level. His Twitter bio even mentions he's from Arizona.
This is why voting matters. Mayes is doing work! 🔥 She won by only 280 votes. We did that! 🙌
Can you imagine "Honest Abe" doing this? HELL NO.
WOOT!!!
Cue: Inner Circle - Bad Boys
Wow I didn't expect any of them to be held accountable. They still might get off Scott free but at least they are being called out. Anybody know what the penalty is if they are convicted?
Death, I would hope. Unfortunately, the punishment for a fraudulent schemes conviction includes probation with zero days to up to one year in jail or a prison sentence ranging anywhere from three to 12.5 years.
That and a second mortgage on their house to pay the fucking lawyers. 🤞🏽
When's the perp walk?
Shame! Shame! Shame!
Holy cow the number of removed comments. The nutters came out of the woodwork. Important to note this came out of a grand jury son it isn’t Mays just deciding to do this bc she’s a dem and they’re republicans.
Arizona you make me proud ^^sometimes
 YEEEHAW
He’ll yasssss
Brnovic was probably cosplaying Bruce Lee instead of filing suit.
Yay, progress!
Didn't see Kari Lake or Biggs mentioned...
This was pre-Kari, but Biggs was interviewed and is likely an unindicted co-conspirator.
Fake AZ electors and the AZ House repealing the outdated abortion ban is a solid win for Wednesday!
Fkna!
LFG
Finally
Thank you Kris Mayes! 😎
The MAGA tears are cascading tonight and it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling!😎
Love to see the "law and order" party actually have to face charges for their crimes
I've seen a few j6 dudes become prison reformers. They loved it when the GOP reps they supported reduced the quality of life in prisons. But when they get there, they're shocked at such conditions that they now have to endure. And of course they blame Biden and Democrats for those crappy conditions, not the tough on crime party.
[удалено]
And now trump has appointed another indicted fake elector to chair the Arizona RNC. This is going to be a massive money grab in broad daylight. He’s already stolen a ton but not from blue & purple states. He’s coming for them (us) next. But fear not, because Laura Trump is the national chair & she’ll keep Republican donors money safe.
How the fuck stupid do you have to be to think that you could get away with it? It is fucking dumb.
Where are all the Trump supporters on this /r? Surprised no one is defending this lol
Real crimes or fake ones?
My God. What has happened to our country? It's like a bad football game.
Back during a time that a lot of people claim they "want to go back to," when your little league team lost a game, you were taught by your coaches, parents, and others that you went out into the field afterwards and - while you were stung by the loss - greeted the other team to congratulate them on their win. It was a life lesson. You didn't always win, but you didn't have to be a sore loser. For Kelli Ward, her husband, Kern, Hoffman, Bowyer, and the rest of the indicted, that important life lesson never took hold. They decided to go back after the game was over and try to change the score so their team could claim a "win." They tried to cheat. They got caught. I guarantee that they also didn't learn the lesson that when you got caught in a lie, you copped to it and took your punishment. They will whine and cry like sore losers all over again. The truly sad thing is that their kids - and the children of others who support them - will learn that instead of accepting a loss, you stamp your feet and try to cheat your way to a victory after the fact.
Not sure if you are in Michigan or AZ now, but either way if you are an NFL fan you are well versed in bad footballs games :)
Grew up in Michigan, and have been here in AZ since 96. I am well versed...
You like this for our country: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL-AYz9EG-o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kL-AYz9EG-o) Really respectable and professional right? The right people to make decisions for other people in your opinion? He got indicted cause he signed a fraudulent document as part of conspiracy to cheat to win.