A West Valley Republican state senator proudly displays a flag tied to Christian nationalism and other extremist movements on her desk on the floor of the Arizona Senate, though she says she has embraced the symbol for its historical meaning and doesn’t care that “fringe groups” have adopted it.

The white flag with a pine tree on it and the phrase “An Appeal to Heaven” was originally used by George Washington and the Continental Army. It was later adopted by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as its naval and maritime flag from 1776 until 1971, when it was replaced by a similar flag that did not include the phrase “An Appeal to Heaven.”

In recent years, the flag has been adopted by evangelical Christians and Christian nationalists, who see the flag as a rallying call. Christian nationalists believe that the United States is Christian nation that should base its laws and practices around the teachings of Christianity. For followers of the movement, the flag symbolizes what they view as America’s Christian roots.

The flag has also been embraced by far-right extremist organizations like the Proud Boys and some neo-Nazi groups.

Arizona Sen. Janae Shamp, R-Surprise, rejected the notion that her use of the flag indicates anything beyond her commitment to fighting to protect “our liberty and freedoms” from “the too many wanna be kings who inhabit elected office and (government) bureaucracies.”

“Something that has had a particular meaning for 250 years retains its original meaning, no matter which fringe group might seek to co-opt it,” Shamp said in an emailed response to questions about the flag. “I hope and pray that my fight enjoys a similarly favorable outcome as (George) Washington’s original struggle, and that I will succeed in restoring at least some small measure of liberty before I’m done.

“That’s why I fly the flag. I don’t know who else uses it or for what.”

Shamp did not respond to questions about whether she embraced the beliefs of Christian nationalism, and said she doesn’t know anything about Christian dominionism, a closely related belief system. She called the Arizona Mirror’s line of inquiry “lazy” and “an attempted hit.”

“I work everyday with people of all faiths and even some who hold no particular faith or even no faith at all. That’s how America works,” she wrote. “So anybody stupid enough to try to put me into some sort of discriminatory box deserves the public ridicule they’ll get for trying to convince people of something so obviously wrong.”

To investigative journalist, author and researcher David Neiwart, who has written extensively about the far-right and conspiracy theorists, the lines between many different groups have begun to blur as a “universe” of far-right groups from QAnon, militias, white supremacists and others have gained political influence, particularly among conservatives.

Most of them, however, share a few things in common, he said, including beliefs in “right-wing authoritarianism” and the alleged supremacy of Christianity.

And after looking at the various people and things Shamp has supported over the years, including various extremist and Christian nationalist figures and causes, Neiwart said it’s clear to him that Shamp ascribes to those beliefs.

“She is definitely a Christian nationalist, she is definitely QAnon, and a fully enraptured Trumpite,” Neiwert said.

While a surge in Christian nationalism in recent years has garnered media attention — due in part to high-profile conservatives like U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has explicitly declared herself a Christian nationalist, and the backing of influential leaders like white nationalist Nick Fuentes — Christian dominionism has similarly been on the rise, though with much less fanfare.

While Christian nationalism centers on the idea that God intended America to be a Christian nation — one without religious pluralism — and that Christians should control all levels of government and society, Christian dominionism holds that Christians should take total control over most aspects of society.

One of the more popular Dominionist beliefs is in the so-called “Seven Mountain Mandate,” which draws from the biblical book of Revelation and requires Christians to invade the “seven spheres” of society: family, religion, education, media, entertainment, business, and government. In doing so, American life can be reshaped to hew to conservative Christian values.

The idea has been embraced and promoted by people like Turning Point USA leader Charlie Kirk and Paula White, the televangelist who served as a “spiritual advisor” to Donald Trump while he was president.

According to Neiwart, the key difference between Christian dominionism and nationalism is that dominionists want everyone under Christian rule, while nationalists think everyone should convert to Christianity.

“Christian nationalists take it a step further than Christian Dominionists,” Neiwart said, adding that a dominionist wouldn’t care if a Muslim was present, “they just want them under the thumb of Christian leaders.”

One of the biggest promoters of Christian nationalism and dominionism has been disgraced Ret. Gen. Michael Flynn, Trump’s first national security adviser, who has claimed that he is waging “spiritual warfare” and building an “army of God.” Flynn is also known to associate with other known Dominionist groups.

Shamp is a fervent supporter of Flynn’s, and has posted praise of Flynn often on social media. The recent COVID-19 special committee she co-chaired was sponsored in part by an organization that Flynn co-founded.

“I get goosebumps every time General Flynn talks about our great Nation!” Shamp said in a December 2021 post accompanied by a video of Flynn.

At a Trump rally in Florence in January 2022, Shamp told Business Insider that the “No. 1 person standing up for ‘we, the people’ is probably Gen. Michael Flynn.”

She explained that Flynn was helping fight for the “grassroots, for citizens to get involved, for us to take our country back” from the “political elite.” Flynn later endorsed Shamp in her bid for the Arizona Senate.

Shamp, a conservative from Surprise, has also been found to have shared a number of QAnon posts on her Facebook, including some linked to Neo-Nazis and antisemites.

The flag, which Shamp displays on her desk and in her Twitter banner image, has also been connected to extremist groups and violent events. During the violent events of Jan. 6, the flag was seen being carried by a number of individuals.

It has also been adopted by groups that support the likes of Fuentes, who during protests over mask mandates and COVID vaccines, flew the flag, as well as at their annual gatherings, according to Neiwart.

That is what in part makes it hard to know who exactly was flying the flag at the riots on Jan. 6, far-right extremists or Christian nationalist types, Neiwart said, but that doesn’t change one underlying thing.

“I would say Christian nationalism as a phenomenon is one of the real undergirding movements involved in the insurrection,” Neiwart said, adding that the militias and other groups such as the OathKeepers all had underlying Christian nationalist roots or beliefs. “All these Christian patriots that formed these militias are Christian nationalists as well.”

Shamp’s flag is not the first time the flag has appeared in the Arizona Senate, either.

Last year, the Secular Coalition of Arizona pointed out that a small version of the flag was being displayed on the security desk in the Arizona Senate; it was later removed. A spokeswoman for the Arizona Senate Republican caucus did not respond to multiple requests for comment about what policies, if any, the Senate has regarding the display of flags.

A larger version of the flag was displayed in the second-floor lobby of the Arizona House of Representatives last year, as well. Again, after the Secular Coalition of Arizona inquired about the flag, it was quietly removed. The flag had previously been displayed in the chamber in 2017.

The Secular Coalition of Arizona sees the flag as a violation of the constitutional doctrine requiring a separation of church and state.

For Neiwart, the appearance of the “An Appeal to Heaven” flag in Arizona, and statehouses across the country, is troubling.

“It is a pretty clear sign that this stuff has been mainstreamed and that is not a good thing,” he said. “I don’t think Americans typically awake to an existential threat until it creates a disaster of monumental proportions.”

At the Hungarian edition of the Conservative Political Action Conference, Arizona is on center stage as U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar and failed gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake will share a stage with the leader of a far-right Austrian party founded by former Nazis.

The Freedom Party of Austria, or FPÖ, was founded in 1956 by former officers of the Schutzstaffel, or SS, the paramilitary organization under Adolf Hitler and the Nazi Party in Nazi Germany. The party has staked out far-right policies on immigration, the government and Muslim immigrants.

FPÖ Chairman Herbert Kickl and FPÖ European Parliament member Harald Vilimsky will both speak at CPAC Hungary.

Gosar spoke Thursday during the “Nations First” part of the conference, as did Vilimsky. The session also featured a video message by Arizona U.S. Rep. Debbie Lesko and speeches by antisemitic and Islamphobic former Trump aide Michael Anton and Mark Ivanyo, the director of a far-right populist organization that has organized events that have brought white nationalists and politicians together in Phoenix.

Lake will be speaking Friday after the Hungarian minister of defense.

CPAC Hungary will feature a litany of far-right ideologies. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán limited access to the event by traditional news outlets in previous years, a move which was then copied by the U.S. version, with CPAC chairman Matt Schlapp saying they were going “Hungarian” in their approach to media.

Since coming into power in 2010, Orbán has overseen deep changes to the media landscape of his country in what many say as an erosion of press freedoms.

U.S. conservative media entities and modern American conservative politics are playing a major role in the Hungarian event and Gosar, Lake and Lesko will be alongside a number of other U.S. conservatives and far-right personalities.

Former Donald Trump aide Steve Bannon will be speaking at the event, as will former acting U.S. Attorney General Matt Whitaker and Newsweek opinion editor Josh Hammer. Hammer has amplified a number of far-right conspiracy theorists since joining Newsweek.

A number of conspiracy theorists will also be present at the event, including some with ties to far-right extremists.

One of them is Jack Posobiec, who rose to fame by promoting the debunked Pizzagate conspiracy theory and also has ties to white supremacists. Posobiec has pushed antisemitic content and has met with far-right figures in other countries who have also pushed white supremacist content.

Other speakers have also embraced conspiracy theories, such as Slovenia’s far-right prime minister Janez Jansa, who has refused to admit that Trump lost his election and used his own media empire to push his own extreme views on the “deep state” into the mainstream.

Even more eccentric speakers are listed as well, such as Hiroaki “Jay” Aeba.

Aeba is part of a Japanese cult called Happy Science and has been working for years to build relationships with high power conservatives to create the Japan’s Happiness Realization Party, an ultranational political party aimed at increasing Japan’s population through childbirth.

The cult’s leader claims to be able to channel the spirits of famous people both alive and dead and has claimed that COVID-19 originated on another planet.

This is the second CPAC conference in Hungary, which borders Ukraine and has been blocking EU support for Ukraine in its war against Russia.

Gosar has been critical of the Ukraine war effort, saying that no more American money should go to the war in Ukraine. He has also promoted an antisemitic website that praised him for opposing the Ukraine conflict.

Hungary has gained international attention for its hardline stances and, in 2021, Orbán’s Fidesz party banned the depiction of homosexuality or gender reassignment in media targeting people under the age of 18. The law similarly bans information from sex-ed programs, films and ads accessible to minors.

During his speech Thursday Orbán said that, if Trump was still president, there would be no war in Ukraine and begged for him to come back and to bring “peace,” to applause from the crowd.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Harris, a real estate agent, built an online fan base by pushing unfounded conspiracy theories around the 2020 election and rose to newfound fame during the partisan hand-count of the 2020 Presidential election in Maricopa County.

Last week, the GOP precinct committeemen from Harris’ District 13, which covers Chandler and Gilbert, met to nominate three candidates to fill the vacant seat she left after she was booted from the House of Representatives for a committee hearing in which government officials and leaders of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints were accused of a litany of crimes.

Harris lied to the House Ethics Committee, telling members that she was unaware of Jacqueline Breger’s testimony, despite evidence showing she both knew what Breger would say and helped hide it from GOP leaders before the hearing as well as her own statements.

The nominees to replace Harris ended up being Harris herself, Steve Steele and Julie Willoughby.

The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors must pick among the three to select the person to fill the remainder of Harris’ term, though it’s unclear when the GOP-led board will do so. Although Harris has been nominated, there are legal questions about whether she could even be selected as a replacement.

During Harris’ tenure as a star in the world of election fraud media personalities, she would hold livestreams where she would bring on “experts” and put on the live feed cameras of the audit floor with a song dedicated to failed inventor Jovan Hutton Pulitzer on repeat for hours for audit enthusiasts to watch.

It would be on these live streams that Steele would make known his thoughts on the election and show his connections to Harris.

The canvasser

Although Steele previously refused to tell the Arizona Mirror if he was an ally of Harris’, the Mirror’s analysis finds he is close to the ex-lawmaker and shares her distrust of Arizona’s election process and has disavowed Joe Biden’s win over Donald Trump in 2020.

In a video Harris posted in April 2021, she praised Steele and the man who rummaged through a Dumpster for shredded ballots that were allegedly evidence of fraud, but in fact were never counted because they were ballots from dead voters that were returned unvoted by family members.

Harris, on top of being a semi-influencer for the election fraud world, is also known for a voter “canvass” effort in Maricopa County that was initially meant to be part of the Arizona Senate’s partisan “audit,” but was later scrapped due to intervention by the U.S. Department of Justice.

Harris ultimately did the “canvass” on her own. It was riddled with flagrantly incorrect findings, and major portions of it were shot down almost as soon as it was published. Harris’s report was full of other allegations about alleged fraud or suspicious votes in the 2020 election, though none were attached to any voters’ names or addresses that could be used to verify them

Only two claims from the report included information that could be used to verify them. Both were shown to be demonstrably false within minutes of their release.

One of those claims was featured on the cover of the report: A photo of a Goodyear address that supposedly was a vacant lot from which votes were cast. However, the large lot had a house on it — the photo focused only on a vacant portion of the lot — and county property records clearly listed the owner.

“You are spouting lies from the left-stream media,” Steele told the Mirror in a phone interview when asked about the falsehoods in the canvass report. Steele said he’d stand by the report in court.

In the livestreams with Harris, Steele also called Biden “fraudulent,” claimed that the 2020 election was a “bogus election” and brought up debunked claims of ballots in suitcases in Georgia as evidence.

When asked if he still believes these statements, Steele at first told the Mirror he didn’t believe he ever said these things. But when informed that he said it on a livestream, he recanted and said “yes,” adding that the “canvass” he conducted with Harris solidified his beliefs.

Steele has also called Democrats “communists,” falsely claimed that illegal immigrants in California can vote by getting a driver’s license and that the “deep state” has infiltrated both parties to initiate a “global agenda.”

In the phone interview, Steele also confirmed that he believes in an outlandish conspiracy theory that a November 2020 fire at a Hickman’s Family Farms chicken farm was connected to the shredded ballots.

Steele went further and said that he and the man who found the shredded ballots had allegedly spoken to a firefighter who had seen evidence of burned ballots at the Hickman farm. Steele then went on to push another conspiracy theory about Arizona House Speaker Ben Toma, asking the Mirror to inquire about a “bonfire” the Republican representative had allegedly had after the February testimony that Harris arranged, and which ultimately led to her ouster.

When the Mirror asked why Steele believed there was a bonfire at Toma’s residence, Steele ended the call.

Conspiracy theorists have latched onto the idea that ballots from the 2020 election were burned at the Hickman chicken farm due to it being owned by Maricopa County Chairman Clint Hickman. There is no evidence at all supporting those claims.

The anti-mandate nurse

Julie Willoughby ran as a team with Harris in 2022, and narrowly lost to Harris for the district’s second House seat. She also campaigned alongside failed Republican gubernatorial candidate Kari Lake and received her endorsement, as well as the backing of failed Republican secretary of state candidate Mark Finchem.

Willoughby is the chief nursing officer for Exceptional Community Hospital-Maricopa, and also ran unsuccessfully in 2018 for the legislature.

On her campaign website, Willoughby wrote that she does “not support mandates, especially for American citizens.” She added that “we are a free people and mandating requires a part, if not all, of our freedoms to be given up.”

During a short speech during Memorial Day last year alongside a plethora of other candidates, Willoughby elaborated a bit more on that stance.

“I remember when this whole COVID thing started and they were talking about two weeks to slow the curve, and I’m like, this is a take-over,” Willoughby said. “They’re not doing this for two weeks, it’s going to be way longer than two weeks.”

Willoughby also added she had friends who “lost their jobs” for not getting the vaccine.

“There was a complete overtake of our rights and our freedoms, and it all needs to be restored,” Willoughby said before adding that she was “excited” to be running with Harris.

Willoughby did not respond to a request for comment on if she still believes that COVID was a “take over.”

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Arizona Republican Congressman Paul Gosar on Sunday promoted an antisemitic website that denies the Holocaust, praises Adolf Hitler as “a man of valor” and features a large number of admittedly false articles.

In Gosar’s weekly newsletter to constituents, he included several links to stories about himself, one of which was titled “Congressman Gosar: Warmongers Nuland & Blinken ‘Are Dangerous Fools Who Can Get Us All Killed,’” referring to the on-going conflict in Ukraine.

But the headline of the actual article was edited by Gosar’s staff to remove obvious antisemitism. The article the congressman linked to was headlined “Congressman: Jewish warmongers Nuland & Blinken ‘Are Dangers Fools Who Can Get Us All Killed,’” and was published by a far-right website well known for publishing antisemitic content that includes Holocaust denialism and conspiracy theories around 9/11.

A review of the authors on the website by the Arizona Mirror found that one is currently promoting a book in which he claims the Holocaust was a “fraud,” and many of the site’s articles spread common antisemitic tropes.

The site is also heavily pro-Kremlin, often republishing articles from the Russian state-run propaganda websites Russia Today and Sputnik. The story shared by Gosar was originally published by Sputnik, but had its headline changed to reflect the antisemitic tone of the site.

Rory McShane, a spokesman for Gosar, said that the congressman uses a “third-party aggregating service” for headlines, and claimed that the website changed the article’s headline on April 17.

That’s the day Media Matters for America published a piece about Gosar’s promotion of the site, and the day the Mirror sought an explanation from Gosar’s camp. The article does not say it was updated on April 17, only that it was published on Feb. 26. McShane did not respond to follow up questions asking how Gosar knew the headline was changed on April 17.

“We will not be using this website as a reference for any future articles,” McShane told the Mirror. He added that Gosar “is well known as one of the top advocates of the State of Israel and a defender of those of the Jewish faith across the world and has regularly been asked to speak to Jewish advocacy groups like the International Raoul Wallenberg Foundation.”

But this is not the first time Gosar has promoted content from websites that are connected to white supremacists who traffic in antisemitism.

In 2021, Gosar promoted the work of known white nationalist Vincent James Foxx, who became the unofficial propagandist for a neo-Nazi fight club. Gosar spoke at the same white nationalist conference as Foxx a few years earlier, alongside Holocaust-denier and antisemite Nick Fuentes, the first sitting politician to do so.

That work mentioned the “great replacement theory,” the idea, popular among white supremacists, that white Americans are being replaced by immigrants. It has been seized upon by extremist groups such as the American Identity Movement and Generation Identity.

It has also inspired violence. Fears of immigrants undermining his vision of a white Christian Europe motivated Anders Behring Breivik’s murderous rampage in 2011 at a Norwegian youth summer camp.

In the U.S., the Tree of Life synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh in 2018 was the deadliest attack against the Jewish community in United States history. Just before it took place, the killer took to right-wing social media site Gab to say he believed that immigrants were being brought in to replace and “kill our people.”

The next year in New Zealand, 51 people would be killed and 40 injured but not before the shooter would post a 74-page manifesto titled “The Great Replacement.”

Again in 2019, in El Paso, Texas, a shooter who would kill 23 in a Walmart would cite the manifesto in one of his own saying it was a response to the “hispanic invasion of Texas.” Then again in 2022 in Buffalo, New York, where a shooter killed 10 people, most of them black.

Gosar has frequently seized on meme culture used by white supremacists and neo-nazis on his Twitter account, including the #DarkMAGA movement, which has roots in accelerationist neo-Nazi meme culture and many memes related to it often express a desire for violence against perceived enemies. In many cases, they are accompanied by neo-Nazi imagery.

Gosar’s staff said they were unaware of #DarkMAGA until it was brought to their attention by the Mirror.

“Congressman Gosar continues to show us exactly who he is and what he stands for. The man has no shame, and remains a stain on Arizona’s political landscape,” Paul Rockower, executive director for the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Phoenix, said in a statement to the Mirror.

Neither the Arizona Republican Party nor the Mohave County Republican Party responded to questions about Gosar’s promotion of an antisemitic website.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Lamb is the first Republican to enter the 2024 contest, but is unlikely to be the last. Sinema, who won in 2018 as a Democrat but last year left that party to become an independent, has already drawn a challenge from U.S. Rep. Ruben Gallego, a Phoenix Democrat.

Lamb was first elected sheriff of Pinal County in 2016, and since then has been a fixture in Arizona politics and has grown a national profile, regularly appearing on mainstream and far-right fringe media outlets. It is his appearances and alliances with those fringe outlets that could sow trouble for Lamb on the campaign trail.

Gallego has already begun noting his connections to the far right, and issued a statement Tuesday with Capitol Hill Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell condemning Lamb’s “perpetuation of the ‘Big Lie.’”

Lamb has partnered with groups like True the Vote that have pursued far-flung conspiracy theories of election fraud and lied to law enforcement.

Lamb and the political fringe

While Lamb has been making a name for himself appearing on mainstream conservative media outlets like Fox News, where he opines about immigration issues, he has also been appealing to a different audience as well.

Lamb has railed against vaccines and is part of a group known as “constitutional sheriffs.”

The movement, led by former Arizona Graham County Sheriff Richard Mack, is a sovereign-citizen group in which its leader, Mack, believes that the “New World Order” is aiming to take away guns — and that sheriffs are on the frontlines of stopping “election fraud.”

Lamb has claimed he is not a “constitutional sheriff,” though he appears as a signatory with the organization in some of their material, and Mack himself has called Lamb a constitutional sheriff.

The group takes a favorable view of armed citizen militias, including militias that are active along Arizona’s border with Mexico. Such groups are largely anti-government, and some of their leaders have been in attendance at the Jan. 6 riot.

Some of the militias also are also steeped in the QAnon conspiracy theory that a “cabal” is actively participating in sex trafficking in order to help the “elites,” often to help the Democratic party and hinder the Republicans. There is no proof to these claims.

Lamb has signaled to these conspiracy theorists, signing a copy of a book for a QAnon influencer with the QAnon slogan “WWG1WGA.”

Other QAnon proponents have claimed to have been working with Lamb, like Melody Jennings, also known as “TrumperMel,” the woman behind an effort to organize armed observers to monitor drop boxes in Arizona during the 2022 election. The courts ultimately blocked Jennings and her group, which included members of the extremist Oath Keepers, from staking out the drop boxes.

Lamb has also appeared on a number of QAnon-related shows, as well, including one that with a history of antisemitic comments. TruNews has published antisemitic rhetoric on its site, including a piece in which founder Rick Wiles spent an hour and a half saying that “seditious Jews” were “orchestrating” to impeach Trump and calling the Jewish people “tyrants.”

Wiles has also claimed that the anti-Christ will be a “homosexual Jew.” He was interviewed by Lauren Witzke and, during an episode in which Lamb also appeared, Wiles said that Jews “squash” and “crush” people. Witzke is a conspiracy theorist and has echoed white nationalist beliefs herself. During an appearance on the white nationalist podcast No White Guilt, Witzke echoed the racist “great replacement” theory.

Lamb supported Witzke when she ran for U.S. Senate in Delaware.

Lamb has also echoed the “great replacement” theory while on a QAnon talk show, saying that illegal immigration is a “benefit to their agenda.”

The racist ideology, popular among white supremacists, holds that white Americans are being replaced by immigrants. It has been seized upon by extremist groups such as the American Identity Movement and Generation Identity.

It has also stoked violence, including Anders Behring Breivik’s murderous rampage in 2011 at a Norwegian youth summer camp and the 2018 Tree of Life synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh, the deadliest attack against the Jewish community in United States history. Just before it took place, the killer took to right-wing social media site Gab to say he believed that immigrants were being brought in to replace and “kill our people.”

The next year in New Zealand, 51 people would be killed and 40 injured but not before the shooter would post a 74-page manifesto titled “The Great Replacement.”

Again in 2019, in El Paso, Texas, a shooter who killed 23 in a Walmart cited the “great replacement” in his manifesto, saying the murders were a response to the “hispanic invasion of Texas.”

While Lamb testified to Congress earlier this year said he saw “zero evidence” of widespread voter fraud, he has continued to ally and work with groups that have continued to pursue unfounded allegations of fraud in the 2020 and 2022 elections.

One of those groups is True the Vote, the group that has been behind debunked claims behind the discredited film “2000 Mules.”

Lamb partnered with TTV on an election hotline that sent voters to TTV for election issues instead of to election officials. He wrote the “Sheriff’s Toolkit” for TTV and he attended an invite-only event in Pinal County by TTV dubbed “The Pit.”

The event, which hosted QAnon influencers and other conspiracy theorists, pushed unfounded fraud allegations and allowed for many in the election fraud sphere to rub noses with the likes of Lamb and other high profile people in Arizona. In May of last year, Lamb also said he had “no doubt” that there was fraud in the 2020 election, later mentioning “2000 Mules” prior to its release.

Lamb is likely to not be the only GOP contender in the Senate race.

Duncan Colton, one of Kari Lake’s senior advisors, told the Washington Post that Lake may be eyeing a Senate run herself. Lamb endorsed Lake in her 2022 bid for governor.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Tucson Republican state Sen. Justine Wadsack said last month that she “ barely” meets with lobbyists after she faced criticism from gun control lobbyists who she refused to meet, but a copy of her legislative calendar shows the freshmen lawmaker meets regularly with lobbyists and special interest groups.

“I don’t meet with activists. I barely meet with lobbyists. I am not required to meet with either. I don’t meet with haters either. I meet with the people from my district,” Wadsack said in response to criticism on Twitter.

A public records request by the Arizona Mirror revealed that the majority of Wadsacks’ meetings were with lobbyists, many of whom do not reside in her legislative district. Wadsack’s calendar listed four meetings with voters from her district, and more than 30 meetings with lobbyists and special interest groups.

Since January, Wadsack has met a number of lobbyists and special interest groups to discuss her bills and other legislative priorities. Those lobbyists represent a wide range of special interests, from public utilities like Arizona Public Service to car dealerships.

In early March, the gun control group Moms Demand Action attempted to schedule a meeting with Wadsack on their day of advocacy, which the group said Wadsack “dodged.” On that day, Wadsack had a packed schedule that included a meeting with two lobbyists, one of which was canceled, and an interview with an AZFamily television reporter.

Members of the group took to Twitter to voice their frustrations that Wadsack would not meet with them, where the controversy gained further traction. Wadsack said she would refuse to meet with their group or pro-choice groups, adding that she would rather meet with groups “ fighting DCS,” the state Department of Child Safety.

Wadsack’s calendar does reveal that she has had a meeting on Feb. 9 about “DCS Corruption,” but no names are listed on the meeting. Wadsack has spread conspiracy theories around the child protection agency before becoming a state senator, including baselessly asserting that the agency is complicit in human trafficking and a false claim about 300 missing children, which was started by Sen. David Farnsworth, R-Mesa.

Wadsack has also claimed that DCS is involved in “ medical kidnapping,” a conspiracy theory that has ties to QAnon that has led to real world crimes of kidnapping. Wadsack herself has posted QAnon slogans in the past on her social media pages.

As well as meeting with lobbyists to discuss her bills, Wadsack also attended a number of meetings with special interest groups such as the Arizona Cattle Growers Association and the Arizona for Life Coalition.

Wadsack did not respond to multiple attempts at a request for comment for this story. Moms Demand Action also did not respond to a request for comment.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

While her predecessor used a dedicated election crimes division to investigate hundreds of bogus election fraud claims, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes says she will redirect the unit’s focus to prosecute election-related threats and protect voting rights.

“We are almost at a crisis situation in our state, in the sense that we now have a third of our counties experiencing the loss, or should I say the resignation, of a high-level election official due to death threats and harassment. That is unacceptable,” Mayes said in an interview with the Arizona Mirror.

Former AG Mark Brnovich, the Republican who Mayes replaced this year, persuaded the state legislature to create the Election Integrity Unit so his office could have a dedicated team to investigate election fraud claims. But Brnovich buried what was arguably its most important work, a 10,000-hour investigation debunking hundreds of fraud claims related to the 2020 election. Mayes released the results of that investigation earlier this month.

And the Election Integrity Unit is also investigating a much larger effort to undermine the will of the voters — one that is also under a federal investigation and has been in the spotlight of investigators in Washington, D.C.

“I’m not certain that my predecessor did an investigation into the fake electors,” Mayes said when asked about investigating schemes by Republicans to send fraudulent slates of electors for former President Donald Trump to Congress on Jan. 6 using the state’s seal. While she was secretary of state, Gov. Katie Hobbs requested Brnovich investigate the use of the state seal on non-official documents, but Brnovich largely remained silent on the issue.

There were multiple “fake elector” schemes in Arizona. One was tied to the Arizona Republican Party and was allegedly done at the request of the Trump campaign, and it involved officials including former AZGOP chairwoman Kelli Ward, state Sen. Jake Hoffman, state Sen. Anthony Kern and Turning Points USA CEO Tyler Bowyer. That fake electors scheme is also the subject of a federal investigation.

Another group, the Sovereign Citizens of the Great State of Arizona, also created an alternate slate of electors for Trump independent of the campaign’s effort to overturn the election results.

“I will investigate the fake electors’ situation, and I will take very seriously any effort to undermine our democracy,” Mayes said. “Those are the cases that I will take most seriously.”

Mayes would not elaborate on the status of the investigation or comment further.

But Mayes did speak about her plans to use her office as a “deterrent” to behavior that has created an environment where Arizona election officials have begun to leave their jobs at a rapid pace.

“We need to make sure that our election officials feel supported and safe,” Mayes said. “The fact that we have a third of our counties experiencing a resignation of an election official, it should be an alarm bell for the entire state.”

Since the 2020 election, threats to election officials nationwide have been increasing. Arizona has been at the forefront of those threats, with the FBI and U.S. Department of Justice having to get involved in multiple cases.

Most recently, veteran Cochise County Election Director Lisa Marra resigned. In her departure letter, she described a workplace that was hostile due to a monthslong saga in which Marra stood up to election conspiracists within the county’s government who sought a full hand recount that was illegal and, according to experts, would cause “ downright chaos.”

Last year, the director of elections in Yavapai County resigned prior to the midterm elections due to more than 18 months of threats she received. GOP-dominated Yavapai County has been a hotbed of hostile activity, with the anti government militia group, the Oath Keepers, originally planning to have armed ballot drop box watchers before the federal courts kept the group from getting involved.

Mayes said the images of armed men watching drop boxes “disturbed” her and set her on a path to begin speaking to law enforcement across the state. So far, Mayes said she has spoken to Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone and Yavapai County Sheriff David Rhodes and is planning over the next year and a half to speak with all 15 county sheriffs, as well as law enforcement across the state.

A spokesperson for the Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office said that Mayes spoke with Rhodes and discussed a number of law enforcement issues but the “election discussion was very minimal with no specifics discussed.”

Making sure voters feel safe and secure when using a drop box will be a major priority, Mayes said, and that if that means making sure that agents with the Attorney General’s Office are present alongside law enforcement, then that might be the case. Currently, Mayes has 60 agents working directly with her in the office.

“I’m zero tolerance when it comes to people violating the law and when it comes to people intimidating voters and those trying to count the vote,” Maricopa County Sheriff Paul Penzone told the Mirror.

MCSO deputies had to be dispatched in riot gear to deal with angry and armed crowds of election denialists during the 2020 election, when they descended upon the Maricopa County tabulation center. His deputies also have had to dedicate security to election officials who faced threats for their work, Penzone said.

During the midterms, MCSO spent approximately $675,000 on security for the elections, a number Penzone is expecting to be “substantially” higher for the next election as he and his deputies are already preparing for the next wave of threats to election officials, as well as “operations” against drop boxes.

“It has changed it to the point now that my planning for the upcoming election starts when the last election ended,” Penzone said. “We are seeing a surge and a heightened call to action where there are more actors out there looking to undermine the process.”

Penzone said that most of the threats are not ones the office has been able to act on, but there has been a lot of activity. From threats coming in through the physical mail, phone lines and social media, there is a lot to go through.

“There is a lot of chatter that has not exceeded the threshold of being a crime but it is concerning in nature,” Penzone said. “But their intentions make you concerned for the people in the community who handle elections.”

Penzone added that it is the person they are unaware of that concerns him the most — the person who will act on the violent rhetoric who may fly under the radar of law enforcement. Penzone has publicly stated in the past that he would include inflammatory comments made by public officials in charging documents by anyone charged with a crime, a statement he doubled down on in his interview with the Mirror.

The threats against drop boxes have already had impacts on voting rights groups, who saw a shift in tactics in how they communicated with voters during the midterm election. It also saw observers from the Department of Justice descend upon the state in numbers the state had not seen in years.

But for Mayes, the Election Integrity Unit can change those issues and bolster voting rights issues in the state.

“We really want to repurpose the Election Integrity Unit to be an arm of the Attorney General’s Office that is focused on protecting democracy in Arizona and, in particular, is aimed at protecting election officials against the rise of death threats and intimidation against them,” she said, adding that “we also want this unit to be thinking about how we can bolster voting rights in Arizona.”

Mayes said that the office is also still looking at what changes, if any, may need to be made to existing law to help further those goals.

“What we’re going to be doing in the next six months is taking a look at all the applicable laws in this area to see if we need any language changes or updates,” Mayes said, adding that they haven’t yet seen any need to that it will need to be done hand-in-hand with the governor, secretary of state and the legislature.

That unanimity could be difficult, given that Democrats hold the executive offices and Republicans control the legislature. And that GOP majority this year has continued its focus on unfounded conspiracy theories around the 2020 and 2022 elections, the same kind that have led to the type of threats that have led to election officials resigning from their positions.

Still, Mayes believes it is a bipartisan issue, reiterating that the threats to both volunteer workers, hired and elected officials has occurred in “red and blue counties.”

“For me, it is the top priority,” she said.

Penzone said that his office remains focused on protecting the community while also making sure that they also don’t inadvertently intimidate voters themselves by making polling sites and drop boxes appear as a “police state.” However, like Mayes, Penzone reiterated that Arizonans need to re-evaluate how they look at one another.

“Right now, I just think that we look across the aisle and judge people predicated on a single letter that they use to vote with, and I think that is a shortsighted way to judge each other,” Penzone said.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

A Republican bill would require Arizonans to submit a government-issued ID to a website operator before accessing “sexually explicit material” online, but the bill is written so broadly that critics say it could require the same of major streaming platforms like Netflix and Hulu.

The proposed law would require that websites with a “substantial portion” of sexually explicit material verify the age of Arizona users by collecting a government-issued ID or digital ID card. The measure, Senate Bill 1503, is similar to a new law that just went into effect in Louisiana at the start of this year.

The bill also prohibits websites from storing the identifying information used to confirm the identity of the users.

“The proposals that are being offered are a disaster. I think that it is going to cost the state a lot of money and it is going to make a lot of people vulnerable,” Mike Stabile, director of public affairs for the Free Speech Coalition, a non-profit that represents the pornographic industry, told the Arizona Mirror. “Ultimately, these are going to be ruled unconstitutional.”

Stabile said that, after the media attention from the Louisiana law, at least 17 other states have taken up similar measures, all with varying degrees of restrictions on how to access adult content and different definitions of what constitutes adult content. The definition in Arizona’s legislation is the most vague, he said.

Arizona’s definition defines adult content as “explicit sexual material” that depicts human genitalia or that depicts nudity, sexual activity, sexual conduct, sexual excitement or sadomasochistic abuse. The bill takes its definition from a section of Arizona law that makes it a crime for Arizona teens and children to send sexually explicit messages on social media and through text message.

That definition includes no exceptions for education or artistic use. But another section of state law criminalizing the public display of sexually explicit materials does, which is why movie theaters can show films with nudity without violating the law.

According to Stabile, this “stripped down” version of the Louisiana bill that state Sen. Wendy Rogers, R-Flagstaff, is running in Arizona creates issues. For instance, the Louisiana law includes thresholds for the amount of pornographic material on a site needed to trigger the identification requirement. In the Arizona bill, the threshold is “a substantial portion” — which is undefined, and Stabile said could be interpreted that any amount of nudity or sexual content means an ID is required.

Netflix recently got attention for its NC-17 biopic of Marilyn Monroe, which has also won and been nominated for multiple awards. The film has sexually explicit scenes and would run afoul of the law, Stabile said.

There are other unintended consequences of the bill as well, not just on sites like Netflix.

“Not everybody is Google or Facebook,” David Horowitz, executive director at the Media Coalition, said, adding that, “the idea that these are all big companies that are going to be able to enforce all these requirements, it is not that simple.”

Online book retailers may also find themselves running afoul of the new law, and Horowitz said the “requirements to meet the law may be difficult” for businesses like them. Rogers’ proposal does not make any adjustments for educational books, so books on sex education, medical books and such could likely find themselves as well in theory running into issues.

Horowitz said that the bill creates a “substantial chilling effect” on free speech. He also said that the bill also applies to a “much broader amount of material” than what the state can make illegal for minors, according to U.S. Supreme Court rulings on the matter.

Previous versions of similar laws have also already been struck down by the courts multiple times. In Louisiana, a similar law was barred from being enforced in 2015 after a lawsuit was brought by book sellers. Arizona also had a similar law in 2000 signed by then-Gov. Jane Hull which was deemed unconstitutional.

The bill was passed out of the Senate Transportation and Technology Committee on Feb. 13 with no testimony from Rogers or any speakers, and virtually no discussion from committee members.

“I was trying to think about how this would be enforced,” Sen. Theresa Hatathlie, D-Coal Mine Canyon, said in explaining her opposition.

The bill cleared the committee on a 5-2 vote with Sen. Christine Marsh, D-Phoenix, voting yes with her Republican colleagues on the bill. The Louisiana bill had largely bipartisan support when it passed.

“This is highly sensitive information, and I think the legislatures are not treating it as such,” Stabile said of how the bill would require government identification. “It is quite dangerous, anytime you have a database with sensitive information…it becomes a honeypot for hackers and anybody who wants to become an extortionist.”

Stabile said that, despite Arizona’s bill having a clause saying that the website operator cannot retain information, he is concerned about how that would actually work. In Louisiana, industry professionals have begun to see an increase in phishing attacks.

Hackers and scammers have been pretending to be websites and begin to ask for government identification, passport information or other forms of identification in order to steal people’s identities, Stabile said.

“I think they have some magical thinking on how secure databases can be,” Stabile said. “These states are passing this legislation now very quickly and do not realize the targets they are making of the American people.”

All modern personal computers, smartphones, tablets and web browsers also come pre-installed with parental controls that allow for blocking of websites for minors, and all legal adult websites are required to be labeled with RTA, or “registered for adults.”

“It is a disaster of a bill,” Stabile said.

Rogers did not respond to repeated requests for comment.

The bill will head to the full Senate for a vote next.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Gov. Katie Hobbs vetoed the Republican “skinny budget” spending package on Thursday, sharply rebuking GOP legislative leaders in the process.

“This do-nothing budget kicks the can down the road and it’s an insult to Arizonans who need their leaders to address affordable housing, invest in public education, and put money back into their pockets,” Hobbs said in a written statement. “Unfortunately, despite my call to take on these difficult choices and protect our state’s future, the budget approved by a slim, partisan majority in the legislature takes another path. An easy path.”

Republicans this week sent Hobbs a budget that merely extended much of the $18 billion spending plan passed last year — and negotiated by former Gov. Doug Ducey — for another 12 months. While the plan kept ongoing spending measures in place, it cut about $2.3 billion in one-time expenses.

Last month, before Hobbs announced her spending priorities for the year, Republican lawmakers said they would only negotiate with the Democratic governor on state spending after their continuation budget was signed into law. Though they have presented it as a way to ensure state government won’t shut down in July if the two sides fail to agree on a broader budget plan, the practical effect of doing so would all but guarantee a stalemate because there would be no incentive for GOP legislators to agree to spending any of the state’s nearly $2 billion in surplus cash.

Legislative Democrats all opposed the “skinny budget” and Hobbs’ office explicitly said last month that the bills would be vetoed.

Last year’s budget was controversial for some Republicans, and several voted against the spending, citing concerns that it was too much money. But all of those returning legislators voted for the now vetoed budget.

Sen. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, who has been in Arizona Senate promotional videos promoting the GOP “skinny budget,” was among those who rejected the proposal last year. Through a Senate spokeswoman, Hoffman said he supports the spending this year because the proposal didn’t include roughly $2.3 billion in one-time funding allocations.

In a letter to Senate President Warren Petersen, Hobbs reiterated her budget priorities laid out earlier this year both in her State of the State address and her proposed budget.

“I’m confident that we can work together on a budget that addresses our state’s housing crisis, lowers costs, prepares our workforce, and invests in public education,” Hobbs wrote. “I know that the people of Arizona didn’t send us here to do the easy thing. They sent us here to do the right thing.”

In a separate letter to Senate and House Republican leadership, Hobbs said her Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting will be reaching out to them to schedule meetings to discuss a bipartisan budget “before the end of the fiscal year,” adding that negotiating is the best way to ensure a budget is met before July 1.

If lawmakers and Hobbs do not agree on a budget before then, much of the state government would shut down.

Democratic legislative leaders did not mince words about the process or the GOP-only budget.

“Let us be clear: Republican lawmakers unilaterally introduced a sham budget that they knew would be vetoed,” Democratic House Leader Andrés Cano said in a statement. “This was a colossal waste of time by the GOP (and) involved no opportunity for compromise or negotiation.”

Cano said that their doors remain “open” to their Republican colleagues and they look forward to working on a bipartisan budget that “will invest in our schools, tackle inflation, create jobs, and combat rising housing costs.”

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Angry at lawyers being disciplined for making baseless election fraud complaints in Arizona courts, a Republican legislator says the State Bar of Arizona and the Arizona Supreme Court should be barred from punishing those attorneys and be heavily fined if they do so.

The bill from Sen. Anthony Kern, R-Glendale, prohibits both the State Bar and the Arizona Supreme Court from “infringing” or “impeding” on the “political speech” of an attorney or an attorney’s clients by disciplining them or revoking their licenses for “bringing a good faith, non frivolous claim that is based in law and fact to court.”

If they’re deemed to be in violation of the proposed law, they would forfeit 10% of their revenue. For the Bar, that would come from the money it raises through attorney membership dues, while the Supreme Court would see its budget cut as punishment. The penalties would equate to about $1 million for the Bar and nearly $10 million for the Supreme Court.

Courts typically enforce civil laws like the one Kern is proposing, but it’s unclear who would determine if the court or the Bar is in violation of this measure. The legislation is silent on the matter.

The Arizona Supreme Court and the State Bar both denounced the measure.

“Attorneys are not disciplined for bringing good faith claims,” the State Bar said in a statement provided to the Arizona Mirror. “The professional ethics rules governing the conduct of legal professionals prohibit attorneys from bringing frivolous litigation that is not in good faith.”

The Bar said the law is “unnecessary.” and noted that courts exist “to provide forums to fairly resolve disputes within the bounds of professional ethics rules” and should not be a “general forum for political expression.”

The Supreme Court also said there was no problem needing to be fixed by this proposed law.

“Lawyers are not — nor have they ever been — subject to discipline because of their political views or speech,” the Arizona Supreme Court said in a statement to the Mirror. “Current court rules are quite clear on the reasons why an attorney might be subject to disciplinary action — political speech is not one of them.

“The court is a forum with a purpose to fairly resolve disputes within the bounds of professional ethics rules. The courts are not a forum for political speech when that speech does not have a basis in fact or law.”

Kern’s Senate Bill 1092 comes as attorneys across the country and in Arizona have faced disciplinary action and revocation of their licenses for bringing challenges to the election based on frivolous claims of election fraud as well as lawsuits against political rivals.

Kern, who chairs the committee, told senators that one inspiration for his proposal is that a member in the state House of Representatives almost had his license revoked for bringing a lawsuit. He also admitted that he did not like the State Bar of Arizona.

“I don’t like what they do and I don’t like how they’re set up,” Kern said.

Newly elected state Rep. Alexander Kolodin, R-Scottsdale, has been a go-to attorney for Republicans for a number of election-related lawsuits. He was also one of nine attorneys that had Bar complaints filed against them for representing Donald Trump’s 2020 campaign in a failed lawsuit that falsely claimed overvotes impacted the Arizona election.

There’s also a personal ax to grind for Kern. Along with former state legislator Mark Finchem and U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar, he brought a lawsuit against former Democratic lawmaker Charlene Fernandez accusing her of defamation for a letter that she signed with 43 other Democratic members of the legislature asking for the Department of Justice to investigate the trios role in the January 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol.

The three Republicans lost the suit and were told to pay $75,000 in attorney fees to Fernandez. They are asking for the case to be appealed and reinstated.

Finchem himself has been sanctioned twice by the courts.

“I believe in free speech and I don’t want to see people get penalized,” Kern told his colleagues when the Senate Judiciary Committee considered his measure on Feb. 9, adding that “wokeness” creates issues for attorneys. “Your profession should not be penalized no matter what you believe.”

Democratic keyed in on Kern’s concern about “wokeness” and asked him to define what it means. He replied that it was a philosophy that aims to “ruin structures that have been in place for years…under the guise of Marxism, socialism.”

Sen. John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, used the crowdsourced website Urban Dictionary, which has been known to host racist content due to lax moderation policies, to define the word “woke.”

“I, myself, have not formulated my own personal definition,” Kavanagh admitted to the committee after reading two definitions from the website.

The bill passed along party lines and will head next to the full Senate for consideration.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

The Republican-led effort to pass a “skinny budget” has hit a momentary roadblock in the Arizona House of Representatives, where a sole Republican’s refusal to vote for the spending package doomed the budget.

Rep. Liz Harris, R-Chandler, voted no on the first bill that is part of the major Republican budget proposal that merely extends much of the $18 billion budget passed last year for another 12 months. Republicans have a one-vote majority in the chamber, so her opposition meant the bill failed.

Harris did not respond to multiple requests for comment as to why she voted no on the budget bill. Harris, a local real estate agent turned election “fraud” investigator is most famous for conducting a highly flawed canvass of the presidential election in an attempt to prove voter “fraud.”

Her vote against the GOP spending plan may be the freshman lawmaker following through on a pledge she made late last year that she would not vote for any legislation until the 2022 election is redone. Harris has been a vocal proponent of the false claims that the 2020 and 2022 elections were marred by fraud and rigged against Republicans.

There is no proof of widespread voter fraud.

Harris was joined in voting against the budget by fellow Republican David Livingston, who voted no to allow Republicans to use a procedural move to allow the bill to be reconsidered in the next 14 days.

The Republican budget proposal is a continuation of last year’s bipartisan budget and is being sold by GOP lawmakers as a way to ensure economic stability for the state as the nation is bracing for a possible economic recession.

Last month, Republican lawmakers said they would only negotiate with Hobbs, a Democrat, on state spending after their continuation budget was signed into law. Though they have presented it as a way to ensure state government won’t shut down in July if the two sides fail to agree on a broader budget plan, the practical effect of doing so would all but guarantee a stalemate because there would be no incentive for GOP legislators to agree to spending any of the state’s nearly $2 billion in surplus cash.

Hobbs’ office signaled last week that she intends to veto the budget plan, calling it a “hollow political stunt” that lacked “bipartisan input or negotiating.”

On the floor, Livingston said he was expecting a party-line vote but “not a tie,” as he quickly asked to change his vote in order to make sure there was a path to reconsider the measure. Shortly after, the House recessed and members left for their respective committee assignments.

Last year’s budget was controversial for some Republicans, and several voted against the spending, citing concerns that it was too much money. But all of those returning legislators have voted for this year’s version of the same budget.

Sen. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, who has been in Arizona Senate promotional videos promoting the GOP “skinny budget,” was among those who rejected the proposal last year. Through a Senate spokeswoman, Hoffman said he supports the spending this year because the proposal doesn’t include roughly $2.3 billion in one-time funding allocations.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

The Arizona Freedom Caucus, an offshoot of the ultra-conservative Freedom Caucus in the U.S. House of Representatives, said Monday that it plans to sue Gov. Katie Hobbs for executive orders she issued in her first week on the job.

Arizona Freedom Caucus Chairman and Queen Creek state Rep. Jake Hoffman accused Hobbs of attempting to legislate via “executive fiat.” Hobbs had issued four executive orders at the time..

“If Katie Hobbs wants to legislate, she needs to get her butt out of the Governor’s Office and run for the legislature and come back and join us and do that job,” Hoffman told reporters on the grassy lawn in front of the state Senate. A woman in the crowd shouted back that Hobbs was “illegitimate” in response to Hoffman’s statement.

Hoffman and the Arizona Freedom Caucus also vowed to “stand in (Hobbs’) way in every step of the process” if she continues to use executive orders.

“You can bet your ass that will happen,” Hoffman said.

The executive order that so enraged the Arizona Freedom Caucus is Hobbs’ first, part of her “First 100 Days Initiative,” which outlines the first 100 actions she plans to take in her first 100 days.

Under the new order, the Arizona Department of Administration will reinforce nondiscrimination laws for state agencies, guarantee equal employment opportunities and establish updated procedures by April 1. New contracts and subcontracts with the state also have to include provisions to prevent discrimination. The provisions are aimed at ensuring there is no discrimination against LGBTQ workers.

The executive order by Hobbs amends two previous executive orders from 2003 and 2009 under Republican Govs. Jan Brewer and Doug Ducey. When asked about the fact that Hobbs’ order is amending previous Republican executive orders, Hoffman said it did not matter and that the “executive branch does not get to create law that does not exist.”

Hoffman also dodged questions from the press about if he agreed with members of the public who showed up to the press conference and called Hobbs an “illegitimate” governor, a claim that has been made by Kari Lake, who was widely seen as the favorite to win the governor’s race but lost by 17,000 votes. Standing behind the members of the Arizona Freedom Caucus were counter protesters who showed up to oppose anti-LGBTQ bills at the legislature.

The Arizona Freedom Caucus also wouldn’t provide information on who was filing the suit, when it would be filed or who would represent the group in its litigation.

“We need actual protests!” anti-LGBTQ activist and provocateur Ethan Schmidt yelled over Hoffman, claiming that the entire election was “rigged.”

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

On Friday, the U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol released a slew of transcripts of depositions of individuals who had participated in interviews with the committee including Finchem. Some interviewees have chosen to invoke their Fifth Amendment right to not self-incriminate, but Finchem answered the committee’s questions with an attorney present.

Ali Alexander, the lead organizer of the Jan. 6 rally in Washington, D.C., that turned violent has said publicly that Arizona’s #StopTheSteal movement started with Mark Finchem.

“Arizona started with one man, State Representative Mark Finchem,” Alexander said in an interview on Jan. 10, 2021. “I’m very confident that the Stop The Steal movement has taken over Arizona.”

Ali Alexander and Jan 6

Finchem has built a national profile as a key proponent of misinformation about the 2020 elections, and was the driving force in Arizona for an event at a Phoenix hotel in late November 2021. At that event, Trump’s lead attorney, Rudy Giuliani, and other pro-Trump figures gathered with state GOP lawmakers and the president’s supporters to discuss baseless theories that Joe Biden won Arizona’s election by fraud.

Alexander claims that only nine prominent Arizona Republicans were involved in the movement before that meeting, but that the number had swelled to 50 afterward.

“I think he’s giving credit where it’s not due,” Finchem told the committee about Alexander’s comments. “Frankly, I think it’s probably an exaggeration. I was just a guy who was representing his constituents (and) called for a hearing to take testimony and evidence.”

Finchem said he met Alexander at the hearing, where he introduced himself to Finchem and other members of the Arizona legislature who were present. At the time, a #StopTheSteal protest had gathered outside and Alexander said that he wanted to know if protesters could come inside, Finchem said.

The GOP lawmaker said he was later invited to speak at a number of #StopTheSteal events, including one in Washington, D.C., and in Arizona. Finchem continued to deny the claim made by Alexander that he started the movement in Arizona, saying instead he was just trying to do a “purely legislative fact-finding hearing.”

“Now, if he wants to say that’s the beginning of the Stop the Steal movement, well, okay, go ahead,” Finchem said. “But… that was his thing, not mine.”

Finchem’s denials that he spurred the movement on are undercut by his social media posts in the weeks after the 2020 election. In total, Finchem used the hashtag 62 times from Nov. 19 to Jan. 6 on a Twitter account that was later permanently suspended for spreading election misinformation. After the violence of Jan. 6, Finchem stopped using the hashtag.

On Jan. 2, Finchem wrote that he would be heading to the nation’s capital.

“I will be in Washington DC on January 6 to #StopTheSteal and fight for President @realDonaldTrump,” Finchem said. “This is one of the most important days our republic has ever seen. We need all hands on deck.”

The tweet included a location and time for the event as well as a link to RSVP. The location was the U.S. Capitol.

Finchem has since said that he was in D.C. “to deliver an evidence book and letter to Vice President (Mike) Pence” to persuade him to delay presiding over the certification of the presidential election. He said he was scheduled to speak at a press conference on the Capitol steps while Congress was certifying the election, but was delayed in arriving because he attended Trump’s speech at the Ellipse and joined the march to the Capitol “at the rear of the crowd.”

In his deposition, Finchem repeatedly called the crowd “festive” and falsely claimed there were likely one to two million people in attendance. He also echoed conspiracy theories around police presence around the Capitol being overly sparse. Finchem has also historically not been truthful about how close he was to the Capitol on that day.

In text messages released by Finchem, he texted fellow #StopTheSteal advocates Alexander and Michael Coudrey that he was on his way in a golf cart.

Footage reviewed by the Arizona Mirror appears to show Finchem riding in the back of a golf cart. Finchem confirmed in his deposition that he rode to the area in a golf cart, but he did not say who it was who picked him up.

Finchem, a former police officer, also claimed that he did not see a text message from Coudrey that said that protesters were storming the Capitol and Coudrey thought it was unsafe. Finchem said he left the area because he thought the protest was becoming “disorganized” and because he saw a barricade on the ground.

“It was like, these guys are totally unprepared for what’s happening here, and I think it’s time for Mark to leave,” Finchem said.

On his suspended Twitter page, Finchem posted a photo he took of the Capitol after rioters and protesters had breached the inner areas of the Capitol grounds.

“What happens when the People feel they have been ignored, and Congress refuses to acknowledge rampant fraud,” he wrote, praising the rioters. Finchem in his deposition said this crowd was peaceful.

Finchem condemned the violent protesters, saying those that did damage to federal property were not peaceful protesters, however, he continued to push conspiracy theories that doors to the Capitol were left unlocked and that police were letting people into the building.

The Hyatt Hearing and Trump ties

Prior to Jan. 6, Finchem began gaining notoriety for holding an unofficial hearing to discuss alleged election fraud in Arizona, gathering people like Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani and election misinformation peddlers and QAnon believers like Bobby Piton.

Alexander cited the hearing as a pivotal moment for Arizona’s #StopTheSteal movement. For Finchem, it was a key moment where he connected with pivotal people within Trump’s inner circle.

Finchem said his initial point of contact was with OANN anchor and Trump campaign attorney Christina Bobb, who contacted Finchem with “credible evidence” that Giuliani and his team would like to present. When asked why a representative from the Trump legal team might want to participate in the hearing, Finchem said he “didn’t question motives.” He also didn’t inquire what their alleged evidence was.

“All I had was, you know, the statement, we’ve got evidence and testimony we’d like to present to you,” Finchem said. “Sure. Everybody is welcome as long as we can fit you in timewise.”

Finchem told investigators the hours-long testimony during the hearing was “mind-numbing.”

Some who testified at the event would later become involved in one way or another in the Arizona Senate’s partisan “audit” of the 2020 presidential election results in Maricopa County. Lyle Rapacki, a self-proclaimed “devil expert” who was also connected to far-right extremist Matt Shea, ran security for the event and would later go on to vet volunteers for the election review.

Phil Waldron, who gave incorrect testimony about electronic voting machines, was at first chosen by the Senate to lead the “audit” effort before later being replaced by Cyber Ninjas. Waldron also helped with vetting volunteers and was in communication with Cyber Ninjas CEO Doug Logan.

The reason the hearing was held at the Hyatt was due to Speaker of the House Rusty Bowers “blocking” Finchem’s request to use the House chambers, Finchem said. At the time, Bowers was being called by Trump and Giuliani personally, asking him to hold a hearing, but he refused when they would not provide him with any evidence.

Due to the delay in getting his “hearing” and the fact that elections are held close to the holidays, Finchem said that was the real reason for him wanting to delay certification in his deposition, to allow more time for “sunshine” on issues of nonexistent fraud.

“So, you’ve got Hanukkah, Christmas, New Year’s. Basically, that window of time burned, okay?” Finchem said. “Now, as an aside, I’d love to have elections during the summer as opposed to at the end of the year so that we don’t have holidays interfering with things that are major questions, but… we have the system that we have.”

Finchem also told the committee that he did not know of or speak with members of the Trump administration and did things of his own accord, though he said he spoke highly of and said he spoke with former Assistant to the President Peter Navarro as well as ex-Trump aide Garrett Ziegler.

“He’s a guy who walks around with two brains,” Finchem said of Navarro who is currently facing contempt of Congress charges.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

Finchem had been seeking to overturn his loss last month to Adrian Fontes, who won by about 5 percentage points. Finchem said his Democratic opponent only won because of massive election malfeasance at the hands of Maricopa County and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, though he provided no evidence anything affected the election outcome.

He wanted his election loss to Fontes overturned, a statewide hand-recount of all ballots and a court order that the attorney general investigate Secretary of State Katie Hobbs, who was elected governor in the same election, for what he claimed was self-dealing and threatening public officials.

In a ruling posted late Friday evening, Judge Melissa Julian dismissed what she called a “frivolous” case brought by Finchem and invited attorneys for Hobbs and Fontes to file motions seeking sanctions.

Julian issued a blistering retort to claims made by Finchem’s attorney in which she said that the claims failed on their merits, were not brought in a timely fashion or were not applicable to Arizona law.

Earlier this week, attorneys for Hobbs and Fontes filed motions to dismiss the suit. Fontes’ attorney used the motion to issue scathing criticisms of Finchem, the claims made in the election challenge and Cave Creek attorney Daniel McCauley, Finchem’s lawyer. The lawsuit is a “flimsy tantrum of conspiracy theories and outright falsities,” attorney Craig Morgan wrote, by a “twice sanctioned litigant.” The proper thing for the court to do, Morgan concluded, is to dismiss Finchem’s lawsuit and then hold a hearing on sanctioning Finchem and McCauley.

Election challenges are limited in scope by state law, and must be confined to misconduct by election boards; ineligibility of a candidate; bribery or another offense “against the election franchise”; illegal votes; or an erroneous vote count.

Julian’s ruling came after an hour-long hearing Friday morning, during which attorneys for Hobbs and Fontes said there was no legitimate reason for the courts to entertain Finchem’s challenge.

“The parties’ papers largely speak for themselves,” Andy Gaona, an attorney representing Hobbs, said during oral arguments. “The fact of the matter is that Arizonans chose someone else for that job.”

Gaona hit on the fact that Finchem’s suit falsely claims that voting equipment in Arizona is unaccredited and asked the court to end the “political sideshow” adding that “the judiciary is not the venue to air political grievances.”

Fontes’ attorney, Morgan, once again asked the court to consider sanctions against Finchem’s attorney for bringing a “frivolous lawsuit” that was not up to the standards of the court or the election contest statute.

Most of the oral argument time was spent with Finchem’s attorney, McCauley, who frequently engaged in a back-and-forth with Julian on differing interpretations of the election contest statute.

In a error-filled response to Hobbs’ and Fontes’ motions to dismiss, McCauley asserted that the court was required to hear Finchem’s case because it is an “election contest” and not a civil lawsuit, so it is governed by different procedural rules that don’t allow it to be dismissed.

Julian asked McCauley about his novel argument, bringing up the fact that the case law he cited actually used civil proceedings in its findings. McCauley argued otherwise, stating that he and Finchem intended to file a “motion for summary judgment,” a move that is used in civil proceedings, because there was evidence of “significant misbehavior.”

“Aren’t you saying that the civil rules don’t apply? So, how could you file a motion for summary judgment?” Judge Julian shot back.

McCauley said the plan was a hedge against Julian ruling the case was a civil proceeding.

Morgan interjected that he had “heard so many contradictions today my head hurts.” He noted that Finchem’s suit asks for discovery, which applies under the civil proceeding rules that McCauley and Finchem were simultaneously arguing did not apply to the case.

“I’m embarrassed for the voters, I’m embarrassed for the State of Arizona,” Morgan said.

McCauley also did not provide any further evidence to back up any of his claims that election equipment in Maricopa County, or anywhere else in the state, was not accredited, something Julian appeared to have taken note of.

“How do you then say there is no accreditation? I’m struggling with that,” Judge Julian asked McCauley.

He responded that documentation provided by the Election Assistance Commission proving the accreditation was valid was forged, though he also admitted that he and his expert had not seen any of the documentation provided by Fontes and Hobbs attorneys.

In her ruling, Julian noted McCauley’s accusations of forgery during Friday’s oral arguments.

“This allegation appears nowhere in the Amended Statement and was asserted for the first time in response to the pending motions,” the judge wrote. “This new allegation is wholly unsupported by the record.”

Julian also took aim in her ruling at Finchem’s that Hobbs engaged in “misconduct” by refusing to recuse herself during the election, her office flagging misinformation on Twitter and claiming that she “threatened” election officials for refusing to certify election results.

“These are not well-pled facts; they are legal conclusions masquerading as alleged facts,” she wrote. “As such, this court is not obliged to assume their truth. Further, and even as ‘legal conclusions,’ Arizona law does not support them.”

Julian noted that Finchem’s case did not cite a single statute, rule or appellate decision to support his claim of “misconduct” by Hobbs. Julian found the other claims made in the suit to be equally as uncompelling and lacking in evidence.

The attorneys for Hobbs and Finchem have 10 days to file motions requesting Julian sanction McCauley and Finchem. State law allows a judge to force a party to a lawsuit to pay attorney’s fees and penalties if their lawsuit “is groundless and is not made in good faith.”

In Friday’s hearing, McCauley said he was prepared to be sanctioned by the State Bar of Arizona for bringing the suit.

“I took this (case) because they needed somebody to do this,” McCauley said. “I guess it does not matter if I get sanctioned here. I’m 75, semi-retired, and it will be two years or so before they get to it.”

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.

In a filing riddled with errors and new evidence-free claims of forgery and election malfeasance, the attorney for failed GOP secretary of state candidate Mark Finchem says there are no grounds for a judge to dismiss the challenge to the election results without conducting a hearing on the claims.

Finchem is seeking to overturn his loss last month to Democrat Adrian Fontes, who won by about 5 percentage points — more than 120,000 votes in the statewide contest — making sprawling claims of election malfeasance at the hands of Maricopa County and Secretary of State Katie Hobbs. He wants his election loss to Fontes overturned, a statewide hand-recount of all ballots and a court order that the attorney general investigate Hobbs for what he claims was self-dealing and threatening public officials.

Earlier this week, attorneys for Hobbs and Fontes filed motions to dismiss the suit. Fontes’ attorney used the motion to issue scathing criticisms of Finchem, the claims made in the election challenge and Cave Creek attorney Daniel McCauley, Finchem’s lawyer. The lawsuit is a “flimsy tantrum of conspiracy theories and outright falsities,” attorney Craig Morgan wrote, by a “twice sanctioned litigant.” The proper thing for the court to do, Morgan concluded, is to dismiss Finchem’s lawsuit and then hold a hearing on sanctioning Finchem and McCauley.

Election challenges are limited in scope by state law, and must be confined to misconduct by election boards; ineligibility of a candidate; bribery or another offense “against the election franchise”; illegal votes; or an erroneous vote count.

To succeed, a challenger must prove that improprieties directly cost them more votes than they lost by. Finchem’s election challenge does not attempt to do so.

In his response to the motions to dismiss, McCauley refers to Fontes as “Fuentes” multiple times. He also repeatedly refers to Hobbs with the appellation “Ms.” even though Hobbs is a married woman. McCauley, when representing the Cochise County board of supervisors earlier this month, attempted to move the case to a nonexistent federal court in Arizona.

But grammatical errors are not the only errors within the filing.

McCauley claims within the filing that the laboratory that accredited Arizona’s election equipment was not properly accredited, which is false. The Election Assistance Commission, which verifies and performs accreditation on voting equipment, has said multiple times that all Arizona voting equipment has been certified by accredited labs.

To rebut the repeated statements from the EAC that all of Arizona’s machines are properly certified by an accredited lab, McCauley claimed without evidence that the lab “forged” its certificate of accreditation.

“Instead, it was executed by an unqualified person who may or may not even be an employee of the lab,” McCauley wrote. “The date on that referenced certificate was false and made strictly to trick anyone that might view it.”

Finchem’s attorney also appears to cite claims that have been circulating online related to the controversial “Twitter Files,” a set of internal Twitter documents billionaire Elon Musk has been releasing to hand-picked journalists who promote the long-running conspiracy theories that social media companies “censor” conservative politicians and accounts.

Among the claims made by Finchem’s attorney is that, prior to ever announcing a run for governor, Hobbs’ office emailed a partnership that was created between the Cyber and Infrastructure Security Agency and Stanford University to identify election misinformation. The post that was flagged alleged that Donald Trump had already won Arizona in 2020; he lost to Joe Biden.

McCauley claims that the actions are akin to “unconstitutional censorship” and that Hobbs “caused the removal of any constituents’ speech she disdained from public view,” but provides no evidence that occurred. McCauley also claims that the “misconduct” took place in 2021 when the emails, which were sent by a staffer in Hobbs’ office and not the secretary herself, were actually sent in 2020.

Finchem’s attorney also asserted that the motions to dismiss by Hobbs and “Fuentes” should be rejected because the case is an “election contest” and not a “civil suit,” so it is governed by different procedural rules that require a court to conduct a hearing on the claims.

Oral arguments on the motions to dismiss are scheduled for Friday at 10:30 a.m. If the case is not dismissed, Judge Melissa Julian said that an evidentiary hearing could happen as early as next week.

Arizona Mirror is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Arizona Mirror maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Jim Small for questions: info@azmirror.com. Follow Arizona Mirror on Facebook and Twitter.