JUST IN: Mark Finchem Files Motion to Reconsider – New Evidence After Physical Inspection by Ballot Printing Expert CONFIRMS “an Intentional Change Was Made to The Printers Affecting the DAY OF Election ballots” in Maricopa County

Last week, Trump-Endorsed 2022 Arizona Secretary of State candidate Mark Finchem filed a Motion to Reconsider and new supplemental evidence — providing more confirmation that election day ballots were tampered with — in the Maricopa County Superior Court for his dismissed 2022 Election lawsuit.

A RINO Doug Ducey-appointed judge recently dismissed Finchem’s lawsuit despite clear collusion and election interference between Katie Hobbs, Maricopa County, and Twitter, and intentional machine failures at 60% of polling locations in Maricopa County. The judge then sanctioned Finchem because he dared to fight an obviously corrupt election in the unfair justice system.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, Abe Hamadeh is still awaiting a new trial in the Mohave County Superior Court. Kari Lake appealed her lawsuit to the Arizona Supreme Court recently, and her case was sent back to the trial court for reexamination of the improperly dismissed signature verification fraud claim.

Finchem’s request for reconsideration comes shortly after a new exit poll from Rasmussen discovered that Finchem, Hamadeh, and Lake likely won their elections. Additionally, 55% of Arizona voters believe that election problems in Maricopa County likely changed the outcome of the election, and 50% of Arizona voters believe that 2022 election irregularities in heavily Republican areas of Arizona happened intentionally to suppress Republican votes.

Finchem’s supplemental evidence includes new testimony by printing expert Bob Hughes who says he spent 16 years printing election ballots for Maricopa County and “physically inspected the [2022] ballots at MCTEC that were used in the testing of the election tabulators.” Uncover DC reported that Hughes and his team “reviewed each of the Maricopa County Voting Center certification reports and the Tabulator reports that were ‘printed during their testing.’”

Hughes’ affidavit corroborates cybersecurity expert Clay Parikh’s testimony that failures of this magnitude “could not arise absent intentional misconduct” and that 19-inch ballot images were printed on 20-inch ballot paper. Hughes also provides more evidence that Scott Jarrett perjured himself in Kari Lake’s Maricopa County Superior Court trial and that the improper ballot paper settings could not have been changed accidentally on election day, as Jarrett previously claimed they were. Hughes testifies that ballot styles are “locked style formats that cannot be revised on the fly.”

The Gateway Pundit has reported extensively on Scott Jarrett’s ever-changing testimony, where he finally claims that Maricopa County’s voting machine failures were caused by faulty ballot printer settings that were changed on election day.

It is unclear how many ballots were impacted by this unmistakable sabotage against election day voters, but it likely affected tens if not hundreds of thousands of votes.

Uncover DC reports:

New testimony from Bob Hughes confirms ballot tampering in Maricopa County’s 2022 election. Hughes states in his affidavit that “an intentional change was made to the printers affecting the DAY OF Election ballots” in the 2022 Maricopa County midterm election. Hughes’ affidavit in Exhibit K of a newly filed Motion to Reconsider in Mark Finchem’s dismissed 2022 election lawsuit confirms previous testimony from Clay Parikh. Parikh was one of several expert witnesses in the Kari Lake lawsuit.

Parikh testified there are “only two ways the printing of a 19-inch image on a 20-inch paper happened, and they are both intentional. He explained, “One way is by changing the printer adjustments. That would make the printer adjustments, and settings override the image file that was set. The other is from the application side or the operating system side.” 

Hughes has 50 years of experience in the printing industry—16 of which have been in “printing ballots for Maricopa County Elections,” according to his affidavit. He also helped “establish the auditing criteria for the printing and paper portion of the 2020 Maricopa County ballot audit and helped select and set up the equipment used during the audit to do the ballot counting.”

On Mar. 6, 2023, he and his team reviewed the Logic and Accuracy reports (L&A) for the 2022 Maricopa County Election. Hughes and his team “physically inspected the ballots at MCTEC that were used in the testing of the election tabulators.” They also reviewed each of the Maricopa County Voting Center certification reports and the Tabulator reports that were “printed during their testing.” His affidavit clarifies explicitly that “[t]he most important and notable finding is that every machine and every voting center report show that every test was passed without any failures.”

Personalized ballots were required in the Maricopa County election because of various local elections, such as school district races. Therefore “ballot styles” are created for each precinct and “are prepared for each election at MCTEC,” not at the Voting Centers. When a voter arrives at a Voting Center, his identity is verified by the poll worker. The poll worker then uses the County’s e-poll book system to “verify they have not returned a mail-in ballot.” However, on election day, mail-in ballots were also turned in to the Voting Centers, and thus, the e-poll book may not be up-to-date on the status of a given voter’s mail-in ballot.

Contrary to what many want us to believe, Hughes testified that the equipment to carry out the voter verification process and the printing of ballots “need to be networked and online at the same time.” 

Additionally, and very importantly, is that “ballot STYLES” are “stored PDFs.” They are “locked style formats that cannot be revised on the fly,” according to Hughes. They are “built ahead of each election and stored.” As such, Hughes confidently asserts that the 19-inch format seen in the 2022 Maricopa County election “was incorrectly used by mistake.” Furthermore, Hughes “was told” during his team’s review at MCTEC that “only 20-inch formats were created and no 19-inch formats were created for the 2022 election.” The use of the 19-inch ballot was NOT accidental, according to Hughes. He posits the 19-inch ballots either represent “interference…from someone at MCTEC” or “someone hacking into the MCTEC system.”

Logically, Hughes concludes that the shenanigans must have been introduced after testing because the “L&A tests showed no errors.” And, since poll workers have no access to the printer command module, the “interference had to come through the online E-poll book and then to the printers.” Many printers at multiple locations—with a “high correlation of those within Republican precincts,” leaving Hughes with the impression it was “not happenstance but an orchestrated attack on the election.”

Hughes speculates there are a number of ways ballots came to be unreadable because of the “larger margin at the top and the bottom of the page,” as captured in the screenshot below,

 

L & A testing is performed before election day with a test set of ballots. The tests are required to “perform at 100% accuracy rate,” according to Hughes. Hughes was told the Oct. 11 test decks were printed at MCTEC. However, Hughes concludes that “DAY OF Election test decks were printed at each voting center” because of several “clear factors.”

Trending: IT WAS A SETUP! – Senator Hawley: Whistleblowers Say Most of Trump Security Working Rally Were Not Even Secret Service

This assumption led Hughes to conclude that an “intentional change was made to the printers” for Election Day ballots leading to what he believed was “a perfect opportunity for interference in the election.”