header

header

Monday, December 26, 2022

WATCH: Maricopa Elections Director Scott Jarrett Lied Under Oath In Kari Lake’s Historic Election Trial – Admits He Knew About Ballot Printing Issues “a Few Days After Election Day”

 

A gutless Arizona judge on Saturday dismissed Kari Lake’s election lawsuit against Democrat Katie Hobbs in the stolen 2022 midterm election, despite massive voter disenfranchisement targeting Republicans and obviously false testimony by elections officials.

The Gateway Pundit reported that Maricopa County Election Director Scott Jarrett changed his testimony and likely perjured himself on day two of Kari Lake’s historic election contest trial against Maricopa County and Arizona Secretary of State Katie Hobbs.

Jarrett also admitted that the same ballot printing issues present in the 2022 General Election occurred in the 2020 Primary Election, 2020 General Election, and the 2022 Primary Election.

Following Scott Jarrett’s testimony, TGP’s Jordan Conradson and RAV’s Ben Bergquam confronted Jarrett and asked him if he was lying in court on Thursday or if he lied to authorities in 2020.

As The Gateway Pundit reported, cybersecurity expert Clay Parikh testified under oath that he inspected a sample of ballots, and it was “easily identifiable” that nearly half of them were printed with a 19-inch ballot image on 20-inch paper. He also stated that this could not have happened accidentally or by coincidence, and this caused Election Day tabulators across Maricopa County to not read ballots, creating extremely long wait times for Election Day voters.

The issue of printing a 19-inch ballot image on a 20-inch ballot with incorrect timing marks was brought up when Jarrett testified Wednesday and Thursday.

Jarrett admitted on Thursday that they learned about this issue days after the election after stating on Wednesday that it never happened.

Jarrett was asked about the 19-inch ballot image, on Wednesday, and he responded, “none of the ballots on our ballot-on-demand printers had a 19-inch ballot. They all had a 20-inch ballot.”

Jarret later said that “the most recent election” where they used a 19-inch ballot image was the August 2022 Primary Election.

Real America’s Voice correspondent Ben Bergquam shared the following video of Jarrett’s testimony, showing his materially conflicting statements under oath.

Watch below:

Day 1:

Olsen: Sir, I want to go back to the earlier question about the 19-inch ballot image being placed on a 20-inch paper. Did you hear of any reports of that occurring in the 2022 general election?

Jarrett: I did not.

Olsen: If a 19-inch ballot image was put on a 20-inch paper in the 2022 general election, would that be a failure of your election process

Jarrett: It would, if something like that happened, which I don’t know how it would, yes, it would have been a mistake.

Olsen: Could that have also been a deliberate act?

Jarrett: Again, you’re asking me to speculate about things that I have no knowledge of occurring. So I don’t know if it could have been a deliberate act or not. I don’t believe that that occurred.

On day two of the trial, Jarrett admitted that 19-inch ballot images were likely printed on the 20-inch ballot paper. Jarrett told Kurt Olsen, “I don’t know the exact measurements of a fit to paper printing. I know that it just creates a slightly smaller image of a 20-inch image on a 20-inch paper ballot.”

Olsen responded, “is 19 inches smaller than 20 inches?” and Jarrett said “yes.” When asked why Jarrett did not think it would be relevant to mention this issue the day prior, the defense objected claiming that Olsen “misstated Mr. Jarrett’s testimony.” 

The Gateway Pundit also reported that Jarrett testified on Thursday that the printer settings that caused the election day failures were changed on election day.

Day 2:

Jarrett: What I recall from yesterday’s questioning was that there was a 19-inch definition, which that did not occur, ballot definition.

Olsen: So if the back and forth between our question and answer shows me asking you specifically about a 19-inch ballot image being printed on a 20-inch piece of paper, you are now saying that you interpreted that as a ballot definition issue?

Jarrett: Yes, that’s correct.

Olsen: And you wouldn’t think it would be relevant, even in that circumstance, to say hey, we we learned about this fit to print issue. Did you know about the fit, when did you learn about this fit to print issue?

Jarrett: When we started doing the audit reconciliation of those door three ballots, we identified some of those ballots had a fit to fit to paper issue.

Olsen: And when was that?

Jarrett: I don’t remember the exact dates but a few days after Election Day.

Defense Counsel: So this fit to print issue that we’re talking about. Has this ever happened before in any previous elections?

Jarrett: Yes, it has.

Defense Counsel: When did it happen before?

Jarrett: So it happened in the August 2020 primary election, the November 2020 general election and the August 2022 primary election.

Jarrett likely changed his testimony after day one of the trial and after he was coached by his attorneys.

Following Jarrett’s testimony on Thursday, TGP’s Jordan Conradson and RAV’s Ben Bergquam followed him outside the courthouse to confront him on this printer issue. Jarrett tried to hide inside the building until he realized there was only one way out.

 https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/12/watch-maricopa-elections-director-scott-jarrett-lied-oath-kari-lakes-historic-election-trial-admits-knew-ballot-printing-issues-days-election-day/


Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)