Thread: 2022 US Mid-term elections

DOJ denies House GOP request for information on ongoing investigations

The Department of Justice signaled Friday that it's not going to share information about ongoing investigations with the GOP-led House, per a letter obtained by Politico.

Driving the news: The letter to House Judiciary Chair Rep. Jim Jordan comes after the Ohio Republican announced that the GOP-led committee is seeking to conduct "an oversight of the Justice Department's actions" related to President Biden's handling of classified documents.

• In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland last week, Jordan requested a number of documents and communications, including between the DOJ, the FBI and Biden's office.

What they're saying: The DOJ's letter states that "any oversight requests must be weighed against the department’s interests in protecting the integrity of its work,” Carlos Uriarte, DOJ’s legislative affairs chief, wrote.

• “Longstanding Department policy prevents us from confirming or denying the existence of pending investigations in response to congressional requests or providing non-public information about our investigations.”
• "The Department’s mission to independently and impartially uphold the rule of law requires us to maintain the integrity of our investigations, prosecutions, and civil actions, and to avoid even a perception that our efforts are influenced by anything but the law and the facts," Uriarte continued.

The other side: "Why’s DOJ scared to cooperate with our investigations?" the House Judiciary Committee questioned on Twitter Friday.

• "Why can’t the White House just be honest with us about Joe Biden’s classified documents and the border crisis?" Jordan echoed.

Some of the twitter responses are good: https://twitter.com/JudiciaryGOP/sta...45207608115200

She needs a rubber room.

• Kari Lake Accuses Republicans of Rigging Election

Kari Lake's baseless campaign to overturn her 2022 loss in Arizona's governor's race now has a new target: members of her own party.

In a tweet Friday afternoon, Lake—who has insisted she won her election despite numerous failed attempts in court to overturn the result—claimed a coalition of Democrats and "Republicans in name only" colluded to manipulate the final result in favor of sitting Democratic Governor Katie Hobbs, who defeated Lake by roughly half a point.

"The Red Wave happened in AZ," tweeted Lake, who has consistently teased "shocking" proof of fraud that has so far failed to deliver. "Crooked Dems and RINOs rigged our Elections. EVERYONE knows Arizonans did NOT vote for Cartel-controlled goons like Hobbs, Fontes & Mayes. Frauds stole Arizona's state Government."

Her evidence? A report detailing the "real" state-level results of a number of key battleground states in the 2020 presidential election authored by noted conspiracy theorist Greg Rubini, a so-called intelligence expert on social media whom Buzzfeed News reported in 2020 to be "just a random Italian guy."

Rubini, nonetheless, has risen up in the ranks of the right-wing social media ecosystem thanks to explosive, and often evidence-free, claims about COVID-19 and D.C. politics that made him a favorite of the QAnon crowd at the height of the pandemic.

According to Rubini, former President Donald Trump—who narrowly lost Arizona to Democrat Joe Biden in 2020 by just under 11,000 votes—actually dominated the result there by more than 13 points, a fact he discovered by reverse engineering the results "using the scientific method."

His Twitter thread does not explain how he did it, nor does it compensate for the fact Arizona and other swing states mentioned in his report—such as Pennsylvania and Georgia—have been growing increasingly competitive in recent years.

He also has a legacy of not explaining how he reaches his conclusions. According to a report by the Associated Press after his account was suspended from Twitter for repeated violations of the website's policies, a social media user asked Rubini, "Where and what is your proof?" to which Rubini responded, "And my question is: why should I give it to you?"

On Twitter this week, he encouraged social media users to buy his self-published 89-page book from his website for $12 per copy.

"Don't complain that I cannot give them out for free," he wrote in the thread Lake cited. "Until today I recovered just $1,300 from the sales. Which means I am still $58,700 in the red."

As far as blaming "RINOs" for her loss, Lake is relying on her old playbook. In an appearance last week with conservative commentator Charlie Kirk, Lake—who is now reportedly weighing a run for U.S. Senate in 2024—insisted the "RINO side of the party" was "panicked," and that her movement was "alive and well."

"When you're in politics, you are working for the people. You're not the boss; the people are the boss, and we need to get back to that," Lake told Kirk. "And right now, we're watching this RINO class of our party try to go into all of these small legislative districts and claw back control. And I want the grassroots to know: Don't give them a damn inch."

Lake, notably, was the first Republican to lose a governor's race in Arizona since 2004. She is currently appealing her most recent court loss.

• Here’s what you need to know about the GOP bill to abolish the tax code

House conservatives are breathing new life into an old proposal to do away with income taxes, payroll taxes, estate taxes and even the IRS itself in favor of a supersized sales tax that would account for nearly all government revenues.

Versions of the far-reaching plan have been around for decades, and with Democrats controlling both the White House and Senate, the proposal has little chance of making it into law. But frustration over the $80 billion funding boost for the IRS passed by Democrats last year has Republicans wanting to make bold statements about changing the tax code — including scrapping it altogether.

The Fair Tax Act introduced by Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) and supported by 30 other Republicans would institute a massive 30 percent sales tax on all purchases in exchange for doing away with income, Social Security and Medicare taxes.

That means workers would get to keep the entirety of their paychecks without having to pay out anything to the government. But it also means that buying everything from groceries to automobiles would be hugely more expensive.

Critics of the proposal say it’s impractical and unfairly benefits the rich, while its proponents say it would provide a much-needed simplification of the U.S. tax code, the pages of which numbers in the tens of thousands.

Here are four major things to know about the GOP proposal:

• The plan would increase the tax burden on the middle class

Having a sales tax as the only source of public revenue would put a higher tax burden on people making less money. That’s because those with lower incomes tend to spend more of what they make while richer people tend to save more of their incomes, investing in retirement accounts, securities and other types of assets.

“Let’s say you’re a family of four. You need at least $50,000 a year to live before you can save a dime. Under this proposal, every dollar of that income is going to be taxed. On the other hand, if you’re making $1 million a year and you’re saving a portion of that, not all of that income is going to end up being taxed as a sales tax,” Frank Clemente, director of tax advocacy organization Americans for Tax Fairness, said in an interview.

• The IRS would cease to exist in its current form

Supporters of the bill are cheering on the fact that it would drastically curtail the role of the IRS in collecting taxes. Instead, it would be the responsibility of state governments to collect the sales tax and then remit it to the Treasury.

• Some conservatives are worried about the message the bill sends

The Fair Tax Act is just one of many bills now being considered in the Republican-led House that have little chance of getting President Biden’s signature but are designed to send a message to voters about Republican priorities.

• The bill would represent an enormous change to the tax system

Doing away with income and payroll taxes in favor of a large and pervasive sales tax would be a fundamental shift in the way the American tax system works and would likely have unforeseen economic consequences.

Some of those may be positive. Getting rid of income taxes would likely make it harder for rich tax cheats to stow their money in places where the IRS can’t find it. Instead, that dark money would be automatically taxed every time it was used to make a purchase.

Marc E. Elias - BREAKING: Arizona Supreme Court DENIES Kari Lake's petition to transfer her election contest appeal from the appeals court to the state's highest court. This is the second time Lake has made this motion and had it denied. https://twitter.com/marceelias/statu...05525540200448

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-c...-4678881-0.pdf

Marjorie Taylor Greene's amendment to bar Biden from selling oil goes down in massive bipartisan defeat

For the last year, President Joe Biden has released a record amount of oil from America's petroleum reserves in order to increase oil supply and lower the price of gasoline that skyrocketed at the start of Russia's invasion of Ukraine.

Some Republican lawmakers, however, have criticized Biden for selling so much oil, even though his administration has begun buying it back in recent months to restock the reserves.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) on Thursday proposed an amendment that would have prevented Biden from selling oil in the future to combat high gas prices.

In justifying the amendment, Greene argued that "we need to chart a path back to energy independence and ensure President Biden is not able to sell our critical oil supplies to China and other enemy nations," this is why she wants to "prevent Biden from claiming an emergency to further reduce our strategic oil supplies."

It seems that the vast majority of members of Congress -- including the vast majority of her Republican colleagues -- thought that this was a bad idea, as a vote on the amendment ended with just 14 votes in favor and a whopping 418 votes opposed.

• DOJ declines to release communication on Biden docs to House Judiciary

The Department of Justice (DOJ) on Monday rebuffed a broad request from the House Judiciary Committee to provide further details about the special counsel investigation into the mishandling of documents during President Biden’s time as vice president, saying that doing so would risk releasing information central to the case.

The response follows a request from the panel, now led by Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), seeking all documents and communications related to the investigation, including correspondence with Biden’s attorneys and those related to the appointment of a special counsel.

“Your letter also requests non-public information that is central to the ongoing Special Counsel investigation. The Department’s longstanding policy is to maintain the confidentiality of such information regarding open matters,” the DOJ says in the letter obtained by The Hill.

“Disclosures to Congress about active investigations risk jeopardizing those investigations and creating the appearance that Congress may be exerting improper political pressure or attempting to influence Department decisions in certain cases.”

Attorney General Merrick Garland earlier this month appointed Robert Hur to serve as the special counsel in an investigation into classified records that were found in an office Biden used following his tenure in the Obama administration as well as in his Delaware home and garage.

Garland has similarly appointed a special counsel to review the mishandling of classified records recovered from former President Trump’s home during the execution of a search warrant after authorities determined there could still be materials on site despite multiple requests to return them.

The request from Jordan would require a significant disclosure during an ongoing investigation, something the DOJ says clashes with its internal policies as well as special counsel regulations limiting what information can be shared with Congress.

“Disclosing non-public information about ongoing investigations could violate statutory requirements or court orders, reveal road maps of our investigations, and interfere with the Department’s ability to gather facts, interview witnesses, and bring criminal prosecutions where warranted,” the department continued, noting it needs to protect the confidentiality of those “implicated by, or who assist in, our investigations.”

Russell Dye, a spokesman for Jordan, couched the response as a lack of cooperation from the DOJ.

“Our Members are rightly concerned about the Justice Department’s double standard here, after all, some of the Biden documents were found at a think tank that’s received funds from communist China. It’s concerning, to say the least, that the Department is more interested in playing politics than cooperating,” he said in a statement.

The claim involving China is one the Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement denies.

The GOP has pointed to the number of donations to the University of Pennsylvania from China after the formation of the center bearing Biden’s name.

But the center has denied any improper connection, noting the gifts were not made directly to the center.

“One hundred percent of the budget for the Penn Biden Center comes from university funds,” a spokesman for the university told CBS News.

“The Penn Biden Center for Diplomacy and Global Engagement was founded on the principle that a democratic, open, secure, tolerant, and interconnected world benefits all Americans,” the spokesman said. “It is important to reiterate that the Penn Biden Center has never solicited or received any gifts from any Chinese or other foreign entity. In fact, the University has never solicited any gifts for the Center.”

• Pennsylvania Democrats Win State House Majority After Months of Uncertainty

On Tuesday, Feb. 7, Democratic candidates in Pennsylvania won three special elections for state House in Allegheny County, home to Pittsburgh. With these victories, Democrats will now have a razor thin, one-vote majority in the Pennsylvania state House for the first time in 12 years.

Tuesday’s special election caps several months of confusion over who controlled the lower chamber of the Pennsylvania Legislature. After the November 2022 elections, Democrats held 102 seats, while Republicans held 101, but two members subsequently resigned, giving Republicans a nominal majority when the Legislature reconvened in January and resulting in confusion over which party controlled the lower chamber. Republican leaders and Democrats in the state House rallied around a consensus candidate and elected Rep. Mark Rozzi (D) as speaker, but further disagreements over rules led to the chamber recessing indefinitely in January. At the same time, Republicans tried to delay last night’s special elections, but a court rejected their request. With the Democratic majority now confirmed, we should expect the chamber to organize itself and begin considering legislation.

While Republicans still control the Pennsylvania state Senate, Democrats’ victory in the state House means further attempts by Republicans to restrict access to abortion or make voting more difficult are likely doomed. Senate Republicans passed an amendment to require proof of ID to vote in January, but this proposal is now unlikely to succeed in the state House.

• Senate Democrats unveil resolution condemning Republicans’ national sales tax proposal

Two Senate Democrats introduced a resolution on Wednesday condemning a proposal that House Republicans issued last month to raise sales taxes to 30 percent and repeal other taxes like income, payroll and estate.

The resolution from Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) and Jon Tester (D-Mont.) would declare that the Senate opposes the Fair Tax Act of 2023 and supports the passage of a “responsible tax cut” that would benefit working families, grow the middle class and make the wealthiest individuals and billion-dollar corporations pay “their fair share” of taxes.

It would also declare that the Senate opposes paying for tax cuts with cuts for Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid or pay and benefits cuts for servicemembers, veterans or law enforcement.

Rep. Buddy Carter (R-Ga.) introduced the bill, which has been co-sponsored by 25 Republicans, to significantly raise sales tax to account for almost all of the federal government’s revenue in exchange for other taxes being withdrawn.

The proposal would allow workers to keep their paychecks without the government taking out any money, but they would need to pay significantly more when buying products, including groceries.

“A national sales tax is an awful idea—we don’t have one in Montana, and we don’t need the federal government imposing one on us,” Tester said in the release. “At a time when working families are getting killed by inflation along with rising health care and housing costs, the last thing we need is to raise prices on everything from gas to groceries.”

Different versions of the tax proposal have been introduced in Congress in past years, but the proposal this term comes as House Republicans have pushed to repeal funding that was given to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to hire 87,000 employees over the next decade as part of the Inflation Reduction Act.

The IRS funding and new hires were intended to increase tax enforcement on individuals earning higher incomes who have been getting away with not paying as much as they should be.

The Fair Tax Act would also significantly limit the role that the IRS plays in collecting taxes.

Although supporters of the legislation have heralded it as a way for people to keep their money without the government taking it through the various taxes, finance experts have said the proposal would increase taxes on the middle class overall.

“I urge the full Senate to join me in rejecting this new tax and, instead, work toward a tax cut for the middle class to give hardworking families more breathing room,” Rosen said in the release.

Tester and Rosen cited an analysis from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center that said the bill would take more money from lower-income and middle-class families than the current system and “increasingly” burden parents.

Even if the Fair Tax Act passes in the Republican-controlled House, it is unlikely to make progress in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Tester previously vowed to oppose the measure in a letter to Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) last month.

• Kari Lake loses appeal in Arizona governor race challenge

An Arizona appeals court has rejected Republican Kari Lake’s challenge of her defeat in the Arizona governor’s race to Democrat Katie Hobbs, denying her request to throw out election results in the state’s most populous county and hold the election again.

In a ruling on Thursday, the Arizona Court of Appeals wrote Lake, who claimed problems with ballot printers at some police places on Election Day were the result of intentional misconduct, presented no evidence that voters whose ballots were unreadable by tabulators at polling places were not able to vote. The court said that even a witness called by Lake to testify had confirmed that ballots that couldn’t initially be read at polling places could still ultimately have their vote counted.

And while a pollster who testified on behalf of Lake claimed the polling place problems had disenfranchised enough voters to change the outcome in Lake’s favor, the court said his conclusion were baseless.

The appeals court wrote Lake’s appeal failed because the evidence supports the conclusion that “voters were able to cast their ballots, that votes were counted correctly, and that no other basis justifies setting aside the election results.”

Shortly after the ruling, Lake tweeted: “I told you we would take this case all the way to the Arizona Supreme Court, and that’s exactly what we are going to do. Buckle up, America!”

Lake, who lost to Hobbs by just over 17,000 votes, was among the most vocal 2022 Republicans promoting former President Donald Trump’s election lies, which she made the centerpiece of her campaign. While most of the other election deniers around the country conceded after losing their races in November, Lake did not.

Lawyers for Lake focused on problems with ballot printers at some polling places in Maricopa County, home to more than 60% of the state’s voters. The defective printers produced ballots that were too light to be read by the on-site tabulators at polling places. Lines backed up in some areas amid the confusion.

County officials say everyone had a chance to vote and all ballots were counted since ballots affected by the printers were taken to more sophisticated counters at the elections department headquarters.

Lake’s attorneys also claim the chain of custody for ballots was broken at an off-site facility, where a contractor scans mail ballots to prepare them for processing. They claim workers at the facility put their own mail ballots into the pile, rather than returning them through normal channels, and also that paperwork documenting the transfer of ballots was missing. The county disputes the claim.

Hobbs’ attorneys said Lake was trying to sow distrust in Arizona’s election results and offered no proof to back up her allegations of election misconduct.

Lake faced extremely long odds in her challenge, needing to prove not only that misconduct occurred, but also that it was intended to deny her victory and did in fact result in the wrong woman being declared the winner. In her appeal, her lawyers argued a trial court judge applied the wrong standard of proof in deciding the case.

Hobbs took office as governor on Jan. 2.

_________

• Marc E. Elias - BREAKING: A unanimous Arizona Court of Appeals REJECTS @KariLake's election contest appeal.

"We affirm the superior court’s ruling confirming Hobbs’s election as governor.": https://twitter.com/marceelias/statu...78352797052928

https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-c...COA-Ruling.pdf

Democrats target Republicans on proposed food stamps cuts

After fighting with Republicans over Social Security and Medicare, Democrats are now singling out another GOP budget proposal: cuts to the federal food stamp program.

Why it matters: With House Democrats in the minority, the role they will be able to play in final budget deficit decisions is limited. But they are jumping at opportunities to distinguish themselves.

What they're saying: House Minority Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.) told Axios that the idea shows which demographic the GOP prioritizes most.

• "This is just one more example of the MAGA extremists putting the rich over working families," she said.
• “The fight to end food insecurity is personal to me – my siblings and I relied on free meals at school and during the summer to stay healthy and fed," Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Cal.), chair of the Congressional Dads Caucus, told Axios.

Details: Rep. Jodey Arrington (R-Tex.), chair of the House Budget Committee, recently listed food stamps as a potential target to cut costs to balance the budget.]

• "A Republican majority will make work, not government handouts, the best financial option for able-bodied citizens," Arrington wrote in a Washington Examiner op-ed last month.
• Last year, more than $119 billion went toward food stamps for about 41 million people across the country, with households receiving an average of nearly $240 a month prior to COVID-era boosts to food stamp payouts.
• Those expire at the end of February, and activists credit them for helping reduce child hunger.

The pushback: Democrats note that many states already require work requirements to receive food stamps. Others argue that decreasing food stamps could exacerbate ongoing financial issues for families already struggling to meet their needs.

• Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), ranking Democrat on the House Budget Committee, told Axios: "If Republicans really wanted to reduce families reliance on SNAP, they wouldn't block efforts to raise the minimum wage, extend the Child Tax Credit and lower the cost of child care."
• Rep. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) praised food stamps while pointing to his journey from poverty to Congress. "I know firsthand the benefit of having a strong safety net and I'm grateful for the programs that helped my family get by," he told Axios.

What's next: Gomez plans to re-introduce legislation that not only goes against plans to cut SNAP but would expand eligibility to include college students.

‘We will prosecute death threats’: Arizona’s new attorney general fights to protect election workers

In less than two months on the job, Arizona’s Democratic attorney general, Kris Mayes, reassigned a unit tasked with investigating election fraud to instead focus on protecting voting rights. She then publicly took former attorney general Mark Brnovich, a Republican, to task for hiding documents that showed the 2020 election was free from widespread fraud.

“Obviously, there are clear differences between me and my predecessor on these issues,” Mayes said.

In Arizona, where a Democratic governor and Republican-controlled legislature are unlikely to agree on any major alterations to election law, the biggest changes for democracy could instead come from the attorney general’s office. As the state’s top prosecutor, Mayes has the power to investigate voting crimes and bring charges against those who break election laws.

Before winning the attorney general’s office, Mayes was a reporter and an attorney and a member of former Democratic governor Janet Napolitano’s administration. A Republican until 2019, Mayes said she switched parties because the GOP’s embrace of Trumpism left her and other moderate Republicans behind.

Her perspective on elections differs greatly from her predecessor. In his last two years in office, Brnovich tried to play both sides of election issues, seeking to appease the far-right flank of his party in pursuit of a US Senate seat while not filing charges for widespread fraud. At first, he defended Joe Biden’s victory in the state, but over time, cast doubt on Maricopa county’s elections.

Mayes also contrasted strongly with her Republican challenger in the 2022 race, Abe Hamadeh, who she narrowly beat. Hamadeh embraced the falsehood that Trump won the 2020 election and was one of several election deniers who lost their statewide races in the increasingly purple state.

The attorney general’s race was among the closest in the state’s history. It went to an automatic recount, where her lead of 511 votes fell to 280 votes because of human errors in one Arizona county. Hamadeh has sued over the election, and his case is still ongoing.

Since taking office in January, Mayes has dramatically shifted the office’s priorities. She announced that an election integrity unit created by the state legislature at Brnovich’s behest to investigate voter fraud will instead focus on voting rights and protecting elections officials.

She also released documents that Brnovich concealed from the public that showed his office’s investigation into the 2020 election in the state’s largest county did not find widespread fraud. Mayes said she released the documents because Arizonans had a right to know the results and because her office has a “solemn duty to be honest and transparent”.

Several major election cases hang in the balance, including prosecutions for ballot collection in a border community, potential charges against county supervisors who initially refused to certify the 2022 election and inquiries into people who publicly posted voter signatures. Mayes wouldn’t comment on these ongoing issues.

Mayes spoke with the Guardian about her office’s plans for election protection and prosecution. The interview has been condensed for length and clarity.

Questions and answers in the link.

• Tina Peters: Former Mesa County clerk county clerk found guilty

Tina Peters convicted of obstruction charge related to iPad recordings

A Mesa County jury on Friday returned a split verdict against former county clerk Tina Peters, who was arrested on multiple obstruction charges in February 2022.

Jurors found Peters guilty of obstruction of government operations but acquitted her on a charge of obstruction of a peace officer. She's scheduled for sentencing April 10.

Grand Junction Police approached Peters in a bagel shop in Feb. 8, 2022, to execute a warrant related to her iPad, on which she is suspected of improperly recording a court hearing for her deputy clerk.

An arrest affidavit says that when officers tried to seize the iPad, people sitting at the table with her started passing around the tablet. Police detained Peters as she allegedly tried to stop an officer from taking the iPad.

Video shows Peters yell at and struggle with the officers who detained her.

"At this point the suspect attempted to kick back with her right leg to strike Officer Tafoya," the affidavit says. "She missed Officer Tafoya's body, but did contact Officer Tafoya's Taser and magazine pouch where they were located on Officer Tafoya's belt. I told the suspect, 'Do not kick! Do you understand!?' Sgt. Church also asked the suspect to 'please relax,' which she yelled, 'No!'"

The affidavit states a district attorney investigator did seize the iPad, though Peters claimed it did not belong to her.

The verdict on Friday only applies to Peters' obstruction case. She still faces felony criminal charges in a separate case related to her alleged involvement in a data security breach involving the county's election equipment.

Election denier Mark Finchem sanctioned by Arizona judge for 'groundless' challenge of 2022 defeat

A judge on Monday ordered sanctions against Republican Mark Finchem, the losing candidate in Arizona’s secretary of state race who challenged the election results in court.

In granting the sanctions, Maricopa County Superior Court Judge Melissa Iyer Julian said Finchem and his attorney, Daniel McCauley III, filed their lawsuit “without substantial justification.”

Finchem lost the election to Democrat Adrian Fontes by 120,208 votes.

Julian in December dismissed Finchem's lawsuit, which requested a new election, alleged that then-Secretary of State Katie Hobbs had engaged in misconduct and claimed that illegal votes were cast because of errors in the laboratory testing of voting machines and voting software issues.

After the dismissal, Hobbes joined Fontes in filing a motion for sanctions against Finchem and his lawyer.

Julian’s order Monday asked Fontes and Hobbs, who is now governor, to submit an application for an award of attorney’s fees and statement of costs. The order did not impose additional penalty damages.

The order said that while Arizona courts recommend that sanctions be awarded only in "rare cases" to avoid discouraging legitimate lawsuits, Finchem's election challenge was one of those rarities.

"None of Contestant Finchem’s allegations, even if true, would have changed the vote count enough to overcome the 120,000 votes he needed to affect the result of this election," Julian wrote. "The Court finds that this lawsuit was groundless and not brought in good faith."

Julian noted that Finchem withdrew his request to inspect ballots, "suggesting that he had no expectation that an inspection would yield a favorable outcome." Doing so, the judge said, "demonstrates that Finchem challenged his election loss despite knowing that his claims regarding misconduct and procedural irregularities were insufficient under the law to sustain the contest."

Finchem's attorney said Finchem plans to appeal but did not provide additional comment.

NBC News has asked the offices of Fontes and Hobbs for comment.

Finchem was among several GOP candidates for statewide office in Arizona who repeatedly cast doubt on Joe Biden’s presidential victory or falsely claimed that the 2020 election was stolen from former President Donald Trump.

Prominent election deniers such as Arizona attorney general candidate Abraham Hamadeh and gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake lost their bids last year.

Lake, who also mounted an election challenge in court, has repeatedly claimed that she lost because of illegal votes and misconduct by election officials. An appeals court last month upheld a lower court ruling that said Lake had not provided evidence to support her claims.

Hobbs filed for sanctions against Lake after the lawsuit was dismissed in December; a judge rejected Hobbs' request.

Arizona court declines most of Kari Lake’s appeal over governor's race

The Arizona Supreme Court has declined to hear most of Republican Kari Lake’s appeal in a challenge of her defeat in the governor’s race, but revived a claim that was dismissed by a trial court.

In an order Wednesday, the state’s highest court said a lower-court had erroneously dismissed Lake’s claim challenging the application of signature verification procedures on early ballots in Maricopa County. The court sent the claim back to a trial court to consider.

Lake, who lost to Democrat Katie Hobbs by just over 17,000 votes, was among the most vocal 2022 Republican candidates promoting former President Donald Trump’s election lies, which she made the centerpiece of her campaign. While most other election deniers around the country conceded after losing their races in November, Lake did not.

In her challenge, the former TV anchor focused on problems with ballot printers at some polling places in Maricopa County, home to more than 60% of the state’s voters.

The defective printers produced ballots that were too light to be read by the on-site tabulators at polling places. Lines backed up in some areas amid the confusion. Lake alleged ballot printer problems were the result of intentional misconduct.

County officials say everyone had a chance to vote, and all ballots were counted because those affected by the printers were taken to more sophisticated counters at election headquarters.

In mid-February, the Arizona Court of Appeal rejected Lake’s assertions, concluding she presented no evidence that voters whose ballots were unreadable by tabulators at polling places were not able to vote.

Jim Justice delivers his annual State of the State address in the House Chambers at the state capitol in Charleston, W.Va.

The appeals court noted that even a witness called to testify on Lake’s behalf confirmed ballots that couldn’t initially be read at polling places may ultimately have been counted. And while a pollster testified that the polling place problems disenfranchised enough voters to change the election’s outcome, the appeals court said his conclusion was baseless.

Lake’s attorneys also said the chain of custody for ballots was broken at an off-site facility where a contractor scans mail-in ballots to prepare them for processing. The lawyers asserted that workers put their own mail-in ballots into the pile rather than returning them through normal channels, and that paperwork documenting ballot transfers was missing. The county disputes the claims.

Hobbs’ attorneys have said Lake was trying to sow distrust in Arizona’s election results and offered no proof to back up her allegations.

Lake faced extremely long odds in her challenge, which required proving misconduct specifically intended to deny her victory and that it resulted in the wrong woman being declared the winner.

Hobbs took office as governor on Jan. 2.

_______

Democracy Docket - NEW: Arizona Supreme Court rejects the majority of claims in Kari Lake's lawsuit contesting her loss in the 2022 gubernatorial election. The court sends one claim about mail--in ballot signature matching back to the trial court for further review.: https://twitter.com/DemocracyDocket/...11419432435712

• Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs' veto stamp gets a workout

After just three months in office, Gov. Katie Hobbs has vetoed more bills than any Arizona governor not named Janet Napolitano.

State of play: Hobbs has now vetoed 37 bills, the third-most in a single session of any governor in Arizona history.

• She nixed 17 bills this week, pushing her above the totals from former Republican Govs. Jane Hull, Jan Brewer and Doug Ducey.
• The top two spots on the all-time veto list belong to Napolitano, who set the record of 58 in 2005 and vetoed 43 in 2006.

Details: Hobbs struck down eight bills on Thursday, including:

• SB 1600, which would have required doctors to provide "medically appropriate and reasonable care and treatment" to any infant born alive, regardless of its chances of survival, and that they "be treated as a legal person." State law already requires such medical care for a baby born alive during an abortion, while the bill doesn't limit medical care to those circumstances.
• Hobbs said she vetoed the bill, which faced opposition from the medical community, because it interferes with doctor-patient relationships and because it's not the state's role to make medically difficult decisions.
• She vetoed SB 1009, which would have stiffened penalties for damaging or vandalizing monuments and statues.
• And Hobbs, Arizona's former secretary of state, vetoed HB 2322, which would have codified requirements for verifying voters' signatures on early ballots, saying those guidelines are already in state policy and should be developed by state and county election officials.

Zoom out: Earlier this week, Hobbs vetoed bills that would have increased penalties for domestic violence against pregnant women, barred banks from using "social credit scores" for borrowers, affirmed support for the Electoral College and limited regulations on home-based businesses.

• And she vetoed legislation that would bar the Arizona Department of Transportation from putting most messages unrelated to traffic or highway safety on its electronic freeway signs, a move that was inspired by some GOP lawmakers' frustration over COVID safety and pro-vaccine messages.

Of note: Thirteen of the bills Hobbs vetoed this week got to her desk without a single Democratic vote.

In other news………

• Lake on 2024 hopefuls who don’t believe her Arizona election was stolen: ‘a big red flag’

Former Arizona GOP gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake said on Thursday that it would be a “big red flag” if any 2024 Republican presidential candidate did not believe her 2022 Arizona election was stolen.

“I ask you that every candidate who comes through — when they stand on this stage, when they’re shaking your hand, when they’re walking through town, taking your questions — that you ask them where they stand on election integrity,” Lake said at a local GOP event in Nevada, Iowa.

“And I think you should get even more specific, ‘Was the 2022 election for governor in Arizona stolen?’ And if they won’t say ‘Absolutely, yes,’ that’s a big red flag,” she added. “That’s a big red flag. Ask all of them.”

Lake lost the Arizona’s governor’s race to then-Secretary of State Katie Hobbs (D) by about 17,000 votes, according to the Associated Press. However, the Trump-endorsed candidate has refused to accept the results and has continued to challenge the election in court.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...-big-red-flag/

Fvckin’ republicans

Mitt Romney scolds George Santos -'You don't belong here'

• George Santos in custody on 13 federal charges

Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.) is in custody Wednesday after being indicted on 13 federal charges over accusations that he misled donors and misrepresented his finances to the public and government agencies.

The charges comprise seven counts of wire fraud, three counts of money laundering, one count of theft of public funds and two counts of making materially false statements to the House of Representatives.

He is in custody at the federal courthouse on Long Island, according to a spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York. Santos will be arraigned around 1 p.m.

• Judge grants request for George Santos’s bond sponsors to be unsealed

A federal judge Tuesday granted media organizations’ requests to unseal the names of the people who cosigned Rep. George Santos’s (R-N.Y.) $500,000 bond in his criminal fraud case.

The order is a blow to Santos, whose attorney Monday asked a judge to keep the names of the bond cosigners sealed. The congressman’s lawyer, Joseph Murray, expressed concern for the sponsors should their identities be revealed, citing a “media frenzy” around the Santos case.

“If this Court is so inclined to unseal the sureties, we truly fear for their health, safety and well being,” Murray said.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Anne Shields gave Santos until noon Friday to appeal the ruling, ordering the names to remain under seal in the meantime.

Murray previously indicated Santos would rather go to jail ahead of trial rather than allow the suretors to face the public attention.

“My client would rather surrender to pretrial detainment than subject these suretors to what will inevitably come,” Murray said.

Judge orders unsealing of Santos’s bond sponsor names on Thursday

A federal judge on Tuesday denied Rep. George Santos’s (R-N.Y.) latest attempt to keep sealed the identities of the people who financially backed his criminal bond.

U.S. District Judge Joanna Seybert, an appointee of former President Clinton, ordered the names be unsealed at noon ET on Thursday, giving the bond sureties a window to withdraw beforehand.

A coalition of media organizations pushed to make the filings public, but Joe Murray, Santos’s attorney, previously indicated the embattled congressman would rather be detained ahead of trial than allow their identities to be unsealed.

Murray has repeatedly cited a “media frenzy” in attempting to keep the bond sureties names’ private, saying the congressman fears for their health and safety. Murray has also suggested at least one of Santos’s bond sponsors is a relative.

“Defendant may move to modify the conditions of his release, should the Suretors seek to withdraw from serving as suretors,” Seybert wrote in the brief ruling, although her attached opinion remains under seal.

The order marks the second denial of Santos’s attempt. After a magistrate judge denied his request, Santos appealed to Seybert, who is assigned to oversee the case if it reaches trial.

The Hill reached out to Santos’s attorney for comment. His congressional office told The Hill that it does not comment on personal or campaign-related matters pertaining to the congressman.

Santos — who was elected to Congress in November — has been a target of scrutiny since before he was sworn into the House amid questions about his background and finances. The then-congressman-elect admitted to embellishing parts of his resume in December, but more questions have been raised since.

The House Ethics Committee opened an investigation into Santos in March to look into whether or not the New York Republican “engaged in unlawful activity with respect to his 2022 congressional campaign; failed to properly disclose required information on statements filed with the House; violated federal conflict of interest laws in connection with his role in a firm providing fiduciary services; and/or engaged in sexual misconduct towards an individual seeking employment in his congressional office.”

The committee also appears to be looking into the suretors of Santos’s bond; last month, the panel requested information on those individuals. It specifically asked that the congressman identify the individuals who co-signed his bond, inform the committee of any payments made on his behalf to the co-signers as compensation, lay out any exceptions to House rules that the congressman believes applies to the bond guarantors and provide all documents related to the bond, including communications with the co-signers.

In a May 31 letter, Murray asked for a 30-day extension on the request while also noting that he was unable to share the requested information with the panel until it was unsealed by the court.

But if it were to be unsealed — which it was ordered to be on Tuesday — he said he would share the information with the committee.

“Please understand that unless or until such time that the Court unseals the identities of the suretors, the surety records, and proceedings, I cannot share that information with this Honorable House Ethics Committee,” Murray told the committee at the time.

“If the Court decides to unseal the identities of the sureties, the surety records and proceedings, I will share that information with the Committee. If, however, the Court upholds the sealing, I will also share that Order with this Committee,” he added.

Santos faces 13 federal charges accusing him of misleading campaign donors, fraudulently receiving unemployment benefits and lying on financial disclosures. Santos pleaded not guilty. He pleaded not guilty, and his next court appearance is set for June 30.

Faces up to 20 years in prison

• Santos appears in court for first time since pleading not guilty in criminal fraud case

Embattled Rep. George Santos appeared in federal court on Friday, where prosecutors unveiled they had delivered the defense roughly 80,000 pages of documents earlier this week.

Santos – back in court for the first time since pleading not guilty to a 13-count indictment alleging fraud related to Covid-19 unemployment benefits, misusing campaign funds and lying about his personal finances – showed no emotion throughout the hearing in Long Island, sitting with his hands folded in front of him.

Santos’ attorney, Joseph Murray, noted that Congress’ August recess would be a good time to review the cache of documents.

The next hearing will take place on September 7, one week before Congress is back in session. Murray argued he wanted his client to be able to return to session.

Murray told the judge that the defense and prosecutors had a “good working relationship,” when discussing when to set a next court date.

As he left the table, Santos wished prosecutors a “happy fourth of July” as he walked out of the courtroom.

He wore a gray suit jacket with gray slacks and a red tie. After court, he was escorted to an elevator by court officers, saying nothing to reporters who peppered him with questions.

Santos was released on bond and ordered to surrender his passport in May after pleading not guilty to 13 federal charges – seven counts of wire fraud, three counts of money laundering, one count of theft of public funds, and two counts of making materially false statements to the House of Representatives.

Santos is currently in his first term representing New York’s 3rd Congressional District, which includes parts of Long Island. His astonishing pattern of lies and fabrications, which stunned even hardened politicos, led top Democrats and some New York Republicans to call for his resignation earlier this year. But Santos has rebuffed those calls and said he plans to seek reelection next year.

Outside of the courthouse on Friday, several constituents from his district spoke about the “firehose of garbage and deceit” from their representative, calling on Congress to oust him.

“We are the victims,” Jody Kass Finkel, founder and representative of Concerned Citizens of NY-03, said at a news conference, calling Santos’ actions a “premeditated con.”

“We fully expect George Santos to go to prison, but that doesn’t solve our immediate problem,” she added.

Santos has been out on a $500,000 bond since pleading not guilty. A federal judge unsealed the identities of the co-signers of the bond, who were revealed to be his father, Gercino Dos Santos, and his, aunt Elma Santos Preven, court records show.

Neither relative secured the bond with cash or property, but both relatives “agreed to be personally responsible” for the congressman’s compliance with the terms of his release, records show. Both were told that Santos had restrictions he could not violate, including on his travel and not having any communication with four unidentified people. A violation could damage their credit and hinder them from getting a mortgage, and they would owe the government $500,000, according to the court records.

Prosecutors In Rep. George Santos’ Case Turn In Over 80,000 Pages Of Evidence Against Him

• George Santos charged with conspiracy, wire fraud and more

Embattled New York Rep. George Santos was indicted on new federal charges on Tuesday in a superseding indictment — including conspiracy, wire fraud, aggravated identity theft and credit card fraud — just days after his former campaign treasurer pleaded guilty and admitted to much of the conduct, according to court documents.

Prosecutors in the Eastern District of New York newly alleged that Santos and ex-campaign treasurer Nancy Marks submitted false financial reports to the Federal Election Commission that inflated the campaign's fundraising numbers in an effort to qualify for certain perks, benefits, and support from Republican Party leaders.

The 10 new charges included in the superseding indictment unsealed Tuesday also include fresh allegations that Santos used individuals' personal credit card information to make unauthorized charges in support of his political campaign. The victims, according to the charges, were previous donors to the campaign who had provided their personal information when contributing funds to Santos.

In one instance, the court documents unsealed Tuesday reveal Santos allegedly racked up $15,800 in charges on a contributor's credit card, a sum far higher than federal campaign laws permit. That donor "did not know of or authorize charges exceeding such limits," prosecutors said.

Santos pleaded not guilty earlier this year to a slew of charges from an original indictment that included accusations that he devised an alleged scheme to defraud prospective supporters of his 2022 congressional campaign. Prosecutors alleged he used solicited campaign donations on personal expenses including luxury designer clothes, credit card and car payments, and payments on personal debts.

The congressman is set to appear in federal court on October 27, where he will likely be arraigned on the new charges against him. Representatives for Santos' office did not respond to CBS News' request for comment. Santos' attorney, Joseph Murray, declined to comment.

Investigators alleged that Santos, Marks, and others were aware in 2021 of a $250,000 fundraising threshold that the campaign had to meet to qualify for Republican Party backing.

"We're going to do this a little differently. I got it," Santos allegedly said in a text message responding to questions about the funding qualification, court documents reveal, and subsequently hatched a plan with Marks to falsely claim that 10 donors, including some of his family members, contributed thousands of dollars to his campaign when in fact, they had not.

Those false donations, according to the superseding indictment, were then allegedly included on a Federal Election Commission year-end report. Santos and Marks, the new charging documents alleged, "knew that none of these reported contributions were true."

The pair also allegedly lied about a loan they said Santos had provided to his campaign in an effort to bolster the campaign's prospects heading into the election. In April 2022, according to the superseding indictment, the Santos campaign published fake fundraising totals and reported to both national party officials and the FEC that Santos had loaned his campaign $500,000. Prosecutors say Santos "had less than $8,000 in his personal and business bank accounts" at the time.

The alleged scheme, according to prosecutors, was carried out in an effort to make Santos' campaign "appear more financially sound than it was."

Last week, Marks pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit offenses against the United States, which included much of the new alleged conduct charge against Santos.

While it is unclear from court documents whether the plea agreement Marks entered requires her to cooperate with prosecutors, her attorney said outside the courthouse last week that she would testify in Santos' prosecution if subpoenaed.

Santos, a freshman congressman who represents New York's 3rd Congressional District, has been dogged by allegations that he inflated his resume and lied about his past experience to bolster his election chances in his 2022 political campaign. He has admitted that he "embellished" his resume. He has spent much of his tenure in Congress haunted by questions about his education and professional experience, as well as his finances and campaign spending.

https://www.documentcloud.org/docume...ing-indictment

• Group of New York Republicans move to expel George Santos from House after latest charges

A group of New York Republicans is seeking to expel GOP Rep. George Santos from the House, one day after the New York congressman was hit with new federal charges accusing him of identity theft, credit card fraud and more.

"Today, I'll be introducing an expulsion resolution to rid the People's House of [a] fraudster, George Santos," GOP Rep. Anthony D'Esposito wrote on social media on Wednesday. He said the measure is being co-sponsored by Reps. Nick LaLota, Mike Lawler, Marc Molinaro, Nick Langworthy and Brandon Williams.

_______

• George Santos charged with conspiracy, wire fraud and more

The congressman is set to appear in federal court on Oct. 27, where he will likely be arraigned on the new charges against him.