“We call on each state to decertify its electors where it has been shown the elections were certified prematurely and inaccurately.”
92 state legislators from all across America have issued a demand letter calling for a 50 state-wide 2020 election audit and decertification following the explosive Arizona audit that revealed how “our representative republic suffered a corrupted 2020 election.”
After the comprehensive Arizona audit of Maricopa County was completed, Arizona Senator Wendy Rogers unveiled what she called the “new Declaration of Independence” in which 41 state legislators across America called for a 50-state wide 2020 election audit, and should those audits suggest a flawed election, mass decertification of the original 2020 election results, National File previously reported.
“This is our new Declaration of Independence. This is our manifesto of freedom,” Rogers declared.
This comes after the forensic audit of Arizona’s Maricopa County revealed thousands of discrepancies and issues with EV32 and EV33 ballot forms, along with a number of other serious election integrity problems, as National File reported.
Today, the number of state legislators that have signed on to the letter has more than doubled – with 92 signatories joining in calls for election integrity.
As National File Senior Reporter Patrick Howley reported on September 28, the number of voters in the 2020 Presidential election in Maricopa County, Arizona “with no record” of their existence far outnumbers the margin of “victory” that Joe Biden supposedly achieved last year, thus putting immense pressure on Arizona Senate President Karen Fann to take action and move to decertify the results of the 2020 election, as the true results of the 2020 political contest appear to be unknown.
“All voters within the Final Voted File, or VM55, was cross-checked against a commercially available data source provided by Melissa called Personator and 86,391 individuals were found with no record in the database for either their name, or anyone with the same last name at the address in the VM55 file,” according to page 56 of the report entitled “Maricopa County Forensic Election Audit: Volume III: Result Details.”
However, constitutional experts across America have indicated that decertification would be sound legal recourse for a corrupted election after-the-fact.
“We are in uncharted territory, but there are a couple of things to point to,” began Eastman. “We can point to the Hawaii Election of 1960, when the Governor subsequently certified another slate of electors after they discovered error in the initial certification.”
“We can point to Section 2 of Title 3 of the United States Code that says when a state has had an election, and has failed to make a choice on the day prescribed by law, which is, you know, the choice that was made. The assumption was that it was fraudulently given because of illegal votes. The electors may be appointed on a subsequent day in such manner as the legislature of such state may direct,” Eastman continued. “So that recognizes the authority of the Legislature to fix a problem.”
“We also have a backdrop of Common Law, which is, when you have a fraud, the actions taken pursuant to the fraud, are unraveled after discovery of the fraud. If the evidence really does come in as definitive, that the election and the electorals cast from Arizona were fraudulently given, and they should have been given in the other direction, then I think there is ample authority to fix this problem,” Eastman said. “We don’t have to live with a fraudulent election.”
The first demand letter to Maricopa County was sent from the Arizona Attorney General’s office asking for multiple documents relating to the election, in what appears to be the start of the investigation from the recently created Elections Integrity Unit following the Arizona audit report being released to the Arizona Senate, National File reported. The evidence included in the AG office’s request includes:
- Hard copies of all documents and other electronically stored information.
- Electronic communications, including emails and the devices used for messaging.
- Electronic data from computers, election systems, spreadsheets and databases, among others.
- Telephone logs and network access information.
- All the equipment used in the election, such as voting machines.
- All physical records, including ballots and voter registration forms.
- All video footage from Maricopa County’s election center.
- Access records for all buildings maintained by the county during the election.
