ELECTION INTEGRITY RESOURCES
SUPPORT ELECTION INTEGRITY IN COLORADO
Electronic, computerized voting systems used in 62 of the 64 Colorado counties don’t comply with federal and state law. Public officials have exerted herculean efforts denying this reality. The defects conceal whether reported election results are accurate. They also open the systems to potential manipulation. Widespread knowledge of these conditions has undermined public confidence. Yet the Secretary of State’s reaction has been to hide the facts from the public. The Secretary of State is supposed to ensure our voting systems are legal. She has done the opposite. She has refused to investigate well-documented problems with the voting systems. She has issued illegal rules and orders to county clerks to intimidate them from insisting she investigate the illegal systems. She has persuaded the Colorado General Assembly to enact statutes that further hide the illegality of the systems. Accordingly, concerned citizens have filed lawsuits in three Colorado counties challenging the legality of using these systems. They have sued the Secretary over her illegal rules and orders. They are doing the job the Secretary refuses to do. They are not challenging the results of prior elections but the practices that taint current and future elections. The Secretary can continue to flout the law knowing she has unlimited free access to the Attorney General’s large staff of lawyers to defend her actions. These lawyers are only free to the Secretary. They work at the taxpayers’ expense to prevent citizens from restoring integrity to elections. How perverse. The citizens challenging the Secretary must raise funds on their own to pay the lawyers they must hire to prevail in this admittedly unfair fight. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? We know of no other group that is aggressively challenging the Secretary of State’s illegal actions. Meanwhile, her actions continue to undermine the integrity of elections and, consequently, public confidence. The Colorado General Assembly has collaborated with the Secretary rather than supporting the citizens. Frankly, the courts generally have been reluctant even to address the issues that have been presented to them. But this fight is too important for the cohesion of civil society simply to ignore and walk away. Those who are fighting this war are loathed to contemplate possible developments if illegal election practices are not stopped and reversed. HOW GOES THE FIGHT? Public officials and Colorado “election law experts” are not acting to correct this deplorable situation. Perhaps they are too invested in the current system. Maybe they don’t think the system can be reformed. It has been left to a small group of citizens and a couple of county clerks to challenge the courts to act The clerk and recorder in Elbert County challenged an election order that exceeded the Secretary’s authority. Clerks in two counties sued over illegal election rules. Citizens filed lawsuits in Mesa and El Paso Counties challenging the legality of the computer voting systems. The lawsuits challenging the Secretary’s election rules remain active. So is the lawsuit in Denver District Court challenging the computer voting systems (December trial date). Other lawsuits have been dismissed on various grounds. Even though a particular lawsuit might be thrown out or the court might not grant everything plaintiffs request, the lawsuits yield benefits that enable better results in future actions. For example, many important lessons have been learned about what type of evidence is most persuasive to Colorado judges. Even in “unsuccessful” challenges to some of the Secretary’s practices, the Secretary has admitted facts that will not have to be proved again in the lawsuit challenging the legality of the voting computers. Each legal action builds to a cumulative winning case, even if everything sought is not achieved in each individual action. What is the long-term goal? If the use of the illegal voting computers can be stopped, counties will be forced to return to hand-counting ballots. Then other harmful practices, such as mail elections, can be challenged. And the voter registration database can be fixed. CURRENT NEEDS The lawyers supporting this effort are (1) John Case, a Denver-based litigator with decades of courtroom experience, (2) Robert McGuire, a Seattle-based lawyer who practices in Washington, Colorado, and Georgia, among other states and has prosecuted many successful actions challenging illegal voting practices, and (3) Maurice Emmer, a retired lawyer residing in Colorado. Mr. Emmer is a volunteer advisor, while Messrs. Case and McGuire are acting as official counsel on a paying basis. Funds are being raised through personal appeals, internet giving, and publicity in online broadcasts. The purposes of the lawsuits are to prevent continuing illegal practices by the Colorado Secretary of State. These lawsuits qualify to be funded by a section 501(c)(3) organization, and they are. The companion organizations Campaign Constitution and Path to Reform are accepting donations to support the lawsuits.
Distrust High in Colorado
A one-page document showing the results of a February 2021 online survey regarding Colorado registered voters' level of trust in various governments and media.
Colorado: Election Fraud Test Kitchen
Published by the author at hollyataltitude.com, this is a 2600 word article expressing concerns about Dominion electronic voting manipulation, election fraud in Colorado, Colorado voter ID rules, and more, all examined through her lens as a 2020 election judge.
Concerns in El Paso County, Colorado
An open letter from four Colorado residents who are election integrity experts to Dr. John C. Eastman expressing concern over 20,000 phantom ballots in the county and requesting help from the Public Interest Legal Foundation to overcome roadblocks in the El Paso County Clerk and Recorders office.
The TRUE Election Deniers
Former State Senator Kevin Lundberg (CO)
Video revealing the hard facts that the registration lists are corrupted, ballot harvesting is rampant, the secretary of state is breaking the law, and the counting machine can be manipulated.