MCSO releases 10 names on Maricopa County's Most Wanted list

Not known Details About The Real Yellow Pages® - Maricopa, AZ Directory - YP.com

The private professionals worked with by Arizona Senate President Karen Fann to audit Maricopa County's general election do not know what they are doing, and the county didn't erase any election files, county authorities fired back on Monday. Jack Sellers, county Board of Supervisors chairman, implicated Fann of attempting to legitimize "a grift camouflaged as an audit." He stated the contractors, led by a Florida-based cybersecurity firm called Cyber Ninjas that was hired to lead the audit in spite of no experience, believed files were missing because "they do not understand what they're doing.

Maricopa County Democratic Party - Posts - Facebook

Along with sending a technical action to the state Senate president's concerns, the supervisors all approved a letter to Fann that calls on her to put an end to the audit. "You, Senate President Fann, are the only one with the power to right away end it," they wrote in the letter.

It is time to end this. For the good of the Senate, for the good of the Country, and for the helpful for the Democratic organizations that define us as Americans." The hand recount of ballots began April 23 at Veterans Memorial Coliseum but only had actually counted an estimated 500,000 as of Might 14, which is when contractors originally anticipated to end up.

Maricopa County's response to questions, The directory of files that the specialists recognized as erased never ever were deleted, Richer said. Rather, county authorities assume the specialists failed to effectively download or browse the county's databases, that made it so database and directories appeared to be missing." Every file the Senate has actually asked for exists.

The 10-Second Trick For Arizona Hispanic Chamber of Commerce: Home

We deleted absolutely no no election files," Richer said. Likewise,  Official Info Here  submitted to get the county's tallies, voting machines and information did not request archived files from the database, and the county had archived some files prior to a court ruled that it had to supply the database.

The specialist and Fann likewise had questioned how the ballots were supplied to them. The county stated specialists were confused about the number of ballots that need to have been in each batch because the contractors did not subpoena logs that would have shown them when ballots were gotten rid of from their original batches for duplication due to the fact that the original tally couldn't be checked out by makers.