Fraud: Democrats reveal their hand in Arizona vote recount debacle

Democrats have a way of revealing themselves and their agenda, any time one of their truisms are just a tiny bit challenged.

So no surprise, they opposed a hand-recount of the 2020 voting ballots in Maricopa County, Arizona, which includes large or at least well known cities such as Phoenix, Scottsdale, Tempe, Chandler, and Mesa.  The vote went to Joe Biden.

Somehow, they didn't want them recounted.

According to the Washington Post:

Earlier this week, Senate Republicans exercised a subpoena to move voting equipment and ballots from county storage to the floor of the Arizona Veterans Memorial Coliseum, where they have said a team of private companies will spend the next four weeks conducting a hand recount of ballots and a forensic audit of voting machines.

Senate leaders have said the process is intended only to explore ways to improve the state’s elections, rather than to cast doubt on Biden's 10,457-vote victory in Arizona over Donald Trump.

But the recount has come under sharp criticism from election observers, voting rights advocates and Democrats, who have said it lacks independent oversight and could be used to further baseless claims about the 2020 election.

Yeah, and what if the recount does show fraud, as the Washington Post assures it does not?  How is it that the in-the-tank paper of record for the Democratic Party would actually know how the recount would come out unless they already knew the fix was in?

Gotcha.  Revealed your hand, lapdogs, and among Democrats themselves, the reveal was even worse:

According to AZCentral:

Just before the Arizona Senate Republicans' hand count of all Maricopa County ballots cast in the November presidential election begins, Democrats are suing to try to stop it.

The Arizona Democratic Party and Maricopa County Supervisor Steve Gallardo filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court on Thursday saying that the audit is unlawful and asking a judge to stop it from proceeding.

The complaint alleges the Senate's audit, which is set to begin Friday, is violating state election law in numerous ways, including by not setting up proper security to protect ballots, voting machines and voter information.

Since when do Democrats care about election security, or identification for participants (which was part of the lawsuit), or valid voter information?

Up until now, all we have heard is that those things are Republican plots.  The judge, however, agreed with their election security concerns (AZCentral describes several of them, and yes, some seem valid) but explained to them that his role was as part of the interpret-the-law Judicial Branch, not the legislative one, which they didn't seem to know.  Citing the Senate's authority to do the recount, he asked the Democrats in objection to post a $1-million bond to cover for any losses should their suit not succeed and their delay add costs.  It made sense, because any Senate maneuver could be subject to just such junk suits effectively halting the work of the elected legislators and subjecting representative democracy itself to the desires of left-wing lawyers. 

They curiously refused, saying they didn't like the law.

That left the process open to the recount.

Why was their objection so vehement? 

It seems they want to hold on to that "narrative" that there is no such thing as election fraud and can't allow any room for questioning that, for one.  Why might that be?  This being politics, one can surmise that they benefited from such fraud, if there was any.  There really isn't any other explanation.

Certain things amplify that thesis considerably.  Number one, the Republicans said it wouldn't change the outcome of the election.  In fact, they said, truly or not, that they only wanted to find ways to make the system better, and, yes, a forensic audit might be a good place to start. 

So in theory, even if there was fraud, Democrats should have nothing to worry about.

Yet they are worried, and that raises questions as to why.

After all, a Republican outcome in the recount is highly unlikely, given that Phoenix is a big city that's full of leftists.  It's not as bad as other places, but if the recount showed a blue result, nobody would be surprised.  So Democrats would have plenty of reason not to worry.

Yet worry they do.

You'd think they'd like to celebrate the vote recount, as it would prove their claims that the 2020 election had no fraud.  But they don't.

If the recount in fact showed what they feared — a red result, then look out: the fraud was probably there if the result recorded was blue, and there might have been fraud in other places when Arizona as a state unexpectedly went blue for Joe Biden.  The fix could have been in, particularly since some of the news media appeared to be in on it.  Remember: a huge conspiracy to "fortify" the 2020 election was described by Time magazine involving hundreds of elitist players involved in various means of rigging.  All of that could come tumbling down if the recount didn't match the reported result.

I agree with the Dems and the judge that there should be strong transparency in this, with everyone who wants to permitted to watch.  But Democrats refused to put their money where their mouth is on this argument.  They couldn't cough up $1 million for a short period of time to comply with the judge's order?  This sounds as though this isn't a matter of transparency.  A normal entity concerned about fraud in the recount would shell that cash out fast to make sure the recount was halted if security grounds were that important.  These guys didn't.  That signals that something else is going on, something else we can't tell.

All we know now is that they don't want a recount, and the Washington Post says they fear any fueling of talk that the election did have fraud.

Well, did it?  All we know for now is that they don't even want us to ask.  And that says more than anything they could say about election fraud charges being "baseless."  Anyone who wanted to show that would pay for the recount himself.

Image: User: Huebi, via Wikimedia CommonsCC BY-SA 3.0

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.