What Job Is AG ‘Nunchucks’ Auditioning For With This Latest Stunt? (Updated)

Not sure what lame duck Attorney General Mark Brnovich aka “Nunchucks” is up to with this latest stunt. He must be auditioning for a new job with some right-wing think tank or law firm. How pathetic.

Brnovich hired Jennifer Wright to lead the Election Integrity Unit (EIU), a lawyer whose 2011 bid for Phoenix mayor was backed by tea party activists. From 2010 to 2014, Wright co-chaired Verify the Vote Arizona and worked closely with True the Vote, a Texas-based organization that has made uncorroborated claims of rampant election fraud around the country.

Developing story.


The Arizona Republic reports, AG’s Elections Integrity Unit asks Maricopa County to respond to ballot complaints:

The Attorney General’s Office Election Integrity Unit has requested a formal response from Maricopa County addressing election concerns, such as issues with printers and protocols for voters checking out of a voting center.

The request was conveyed in a letter dated Nov. 19 to Thomas Liddy, civil division chief at the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, and signed by assistant attorney general Jennifer Wright. The responses are due on or before Nov. 28.

State law gives county officials until Nov. 28 to send official election results to the Secretary of State’s Office.

Wright’s letter asks for answers to inquiries involving three areas, all related to the issue of some ballots being unreadable to the tabulators.

Liddy, through county spokesperson Fields Mosely, declined to comment Sunday. The Attorney General’s Office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The first area of concern involved printer settings for ballots on demand with ink too light to be read by tabulators at “at least 60” locations in the county.

Ballots at Maricopa County vote centers were printed out at polling locations after voters checked in on Election Day. The letter sites accounts by election workers who said there were no issues with the printers during trial runs the day before Election Day.

The Elections Integrity Unit’s seven questions related to ballots on demand included requests for
all the polling places that had issues with printers or with tabulators; the snags particular to each polling place; any other mishaps with printers and tabulators, the machines into which ballots are fed for counting; a list of all the settings adjustments made to the printer and the person responsible for each alteration; the printer company and the county guidelines for how the printer settings should be configured; the time that the printer settings were determined to be responsible for the voting problems; and who fixed the problem with the settings and how the problem was rectified.

The second area the unit wanted a report on involved people being unable to check out of those problematic voting centers and whether their votes were counted.

There were long lines at locations where the tabulators were unable to read some of the ballots, and some people left to go to other voting centers after checking in. In Maricopa County, voters do not have one assigned voting location where they must vote. Voters are allowed to vote in any polling location of their choice in the county.

The unit asked Liddy to respond to claims Maricopa County poll workers were not trained properly on exit procedures for voters.

“Based on sworn complaints received by the Unit, not only have poll workers reported that they were not trained and/or not provided with information on how to execute ‘check out’ procedures, but many voters have reported the second voting location required the voter to cast a provisional ballot as the e-Pollbooks maintained the voter had cast a ballot in the original voting location. In fact, Arizona law specifically prohibits provisional ballots to be counted when a voter has signed multiple pollbooks,” Wright’s letter said.

The unit asked for responses to four questions: the specific instructions provided to poll workers on how to properly “check out” voters and when that instruction was provided; why people were allowed to cast provisional ballots despite being shown as checked-in elsewhere; who was given a provisional ballot after being checked in elsewhere; and the status of the provisional ballot.

The third issue of concern for the Unit involved “Door 3,” the secure box where people were told to place ballots that were unreadable by the tabulators. County officials said those “Door 3” ballots were taken to the Maricopa County Tabulation Center for counting.

The Election Integrity Unit alleges that tabulated and untabulated ballots were commingled.

“Maricopa County appears to have failed to adhere to the statutory guidelines in segregating,counting, tabulating, tallying, and transporting the ‘Door 3’ ballots. In fact, Maricopa County hasadmitted that. in some voting locations, ‘Door 3’ non-tabulated ballots were commingled withtabulated ballots at the voting location,” Wright’s letter to Liddy said.

“Further, we have received a sworn complaint from an election observer indicating that more than 1700 ‘Door 3’ non-tabulated ballots from one voting location were placed in black duffle bags that were intended to be used for tabulated ballots,” the letter said.

The unit asked the county to report the number of tabulated and nontabulated ballots that were stored together and the “reconciliation of ballots cast against check-ins.” The unit also sought the Official Ballot Report of each polling location and the explanation of any “discrepancies.”

The letter said: “Please also provide a written statement clarifying the ‘reconciliation’ that appears to have occurred at central count on or around November 16, 2022. Finally, please provide a written report regarding how many ballots were commingled, how many ballots were placed inside the black duffle bags intended for tabulated ballots, how and when Maricopa became aware of the related problems, and how these problems were ultimately resolved.”

The Election Integrity Unit in the Attorney General’s Office was created in 2019. Democrats contend that the unit is unnecessary and created in response to Democratic wins in 2018, particularly Kyrsten Sinema’s victory in the Senate race against Republican Martha McSally. When Sinema pulled ahead in the race, then-President Donald Trump questioned the results, claiming ballots were found “in the wilderness.”

Wright is viewed by some as partisan based on her social media. Wright, who is responsible for overseeing complaints made to the unit, bolstered unproven theories of election fraud long before the 2020 election. She made an unsuccessful run for Phoenix mayor in 2011.

3 thoughts on “What Job Is AG ‘Nunchucks’ Auditioning For With This Latest Stunt? (Updated)”

  1. It’s just another instance of Brno giving election deniers a fig leaf of legitimacy when they make their wild claims about election ‘integrity’ and conspiracies. He may mollify his fascist, anti-democratic critics, but most likely they will just continue to hate him for not breaking the law and abusing his office in their cause.

  2. Appears to me that after trying to appease normal people by trying to appear as a “straight shooter” on 60 Minutes and The Problem with Jon Stewart, our soon to be former AG is simply trying to worm his way back into QAnon’s good graces.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: