We The People AZ Alliance released a new video last week, showing Maricopa County Election Director Rey Valenzuela and Maricopa County attorney Tom Liddy misleading the court with repeated conflicting statements in Kari Lake’s recent trial against the fraudulent midterm election.
The Gateway Pundit has reported extensively on Kari Lake’s fight against the stolen Arizona Midterm election and last month’s trial on signature verification fraud after the Arizona Supreme Court sent her case back to trial.
During the trial, Kari Lake attorney Kurt Olsen told the Court, “11 of the signature verification workers approved 170k signatures at a rate of less than 0 and 2.99 seconds with a 99.97% approval rating.” Later, in the closing argument, Olsen revealed that “there were approximately 274,000 ballot signatures compared and verified in less than three seconds.”
This was evidenced by Maricopa County’s own signature verification log files and video footage showing at least one Maricopa County signature reviewer, User 134, clicking through signature checks and approving them in less than two seconds each.
In one video, User 134 is seen clicking through 30 signatures in 30 seconds, without even looking to compare them.
According to Maricopa County’s data, obtained by We The People AZ Alliance, User 134 reviewed over 33,000 signatures in an average time of 2.4 seconds per signature. As seen in the chart below, when User 134 began on October 17, he was reviewing signatures much more carefully.
County attorney Tom Liddy and Maricopa County Election Director Rey Valenzuela repeatedly claimed during the trial that this individual was “taken off the line” or “reassigned from the process.” However, as The Gateway Pundit reported, the same individual was seen on the line in the same position from October 17 until the last day of work on November 15.
Liddy initially responded to the footage of User 134 clicking through signatures by telling the Judge in his opening statement, “if, in fact, the individual on the left was not doing his job, and as you’ve heard from counsel in his opening that all 155 level-one signature reviewers were being monitored by the supervisor, that individual would have been taken off the line. And, Your Honor, you’re going to hear that that individual was taken off the line.”
Valenzuela also testified, “There’s a skill set that’s required to perform this function, and if you are not meeting those marks, then we’ll move you to another task, whatever that may be, curing as an example.”
However, according to whistleblower Jacqueline Onigkeit, who testified on day one of the trial, all level-one reviewers, who were previously comparing ballot signatures, began to cure ballots on November 11.
User 134 from the videos was seen on November 10 comparing ballot signatures, and he was not seen curing ballots until November 11, when everybody else was reassigned to ballot curing.
It is clear that User 134 was not “taken off the line” or “moved to another task,” as Liddy and Valenzuela claimed he was.
In an apparent effort to change the narrative, Liddy and Valenzuela later claimed that “no supervisor found fault in what [User 134] was doing in level-one signature verification,” and he was only “reassign[ed] into different tasks as needed.” Valenzuela then confirmed to Liddy that User 134 was “perfectly qualified to continue doing level-one review,” despite Liddy’s representation that “that individual was taken off the line” because he “was not doing his job,” and Valenzuela’s testimony that he was reassigned “because of how he was performing his duties.”
Why did Maricopa County mislead the court?
The video below compiles testimony by Rey Valenzuela and statements by Tom Liddy that directly conflict with the truth.
We The People AZ Alliance write in the video description,
This is an example of how corrupt officials and their legal counsels lie and gaslight their way through everything.
At first, the story was that user 134 was doing something wrong and was “removed from the line.”
But this was a bad direction for them because it would expose how “subjective” and inept the signature verification process really is.
So then they shifted the story to he wasn’t “taken off the line”, he was “moved into doing other tasks” because he wasn’t skilled enough.
Along with this claim was the insinuation that he was shifted into performing other tasks while others continued on with signature verification when this is clearly another lie.
This also proved to be problematic to their argument, so then the story again shifted to “there was no fault found in what he was doing”.
In other words, it went from (he is clearly not doing the job properly and was removed for it) to (he didn’t do anything wrong and was not removed).
The facts are that this was only one of up to 90 people doing the same thing for over 320,000 signatures at less than 3 seconds each. Which, per statute, is clearly not enough time to make a reasonable and accurate comparison.
User 134 started his first day doing what could be considered a reasonable job but was obviously coached or encouraged to speed things up. The best-case scenario is that he was allowed to do this, and he was NOT the only one.
This user worked 18 days in signature verification and only stopped at the same time as everyone else when he and everyone else was reassigned to work on curing ballots. This is all clear to see in the video obtained through the election department’s own public camera links that are date and time-stamped.
134 was not the worst one when it came to this, he was just the easiest example of a systemic problem within the Maricopa County Elections Department.
One that they will all go to any length to cover up and make go away. Even lie in open court to a sitting judge and the public. All to uphold the illusion of public trust in elections.
The irony is that if they would just acknowledge the issues and welcome intelligent criticism then these issues could be brought out into the light of day and figured out. Honesty is the best policy when it comes to trying to maintain the trust of the public.
But instead, when a member of the public dares to question authority, they are met with ridicule and gaslighting. With all the division and mistrust in our country, this type of behavior should NOT be tolerated from our elected officials.
via thegatewaypundit
