Whistleblower letter alleges thousands of fraudulent votes in Pima County, Arizona

A letter written last year by an anonymous whistleblower in Pima County, Arizona and addressed to the DOJ was read into the record at an “ad hoc” election integrity hearing in Tucson on Monday.

The letter, dated Nov. 10, 2020, and addressed to the Criminal Division of the Justice Department, describes a plan orchestrated by the Pima County Recorder and Democratic Party to add approximately 35,000 fraudulent votes to the vote total of each Democratic candidate on the ballot in Pima. The text of the letter, which Just the News confirmed was read at the hearing by state Rep. Mark Finchem, reads as follows:

Please be advised the Pima County Recorder, located at 240 N. Stone Avenue in Tucson, Arizona, 85701 in Pima County, Arizona, and the Democrat Party added fraud votes. In the initial count of the vote by mail (VBM) totals released at 8 pm on November 3, 2020, There are approximately 35,000 fraud votes added to each Democrat candidates’ vote totals. Candidates impacted include County, State, and Federal Election candidates. Through the utilization of the automated ballot count machines in Pima County Elections, My understanding is that 35,000 was embedded into each Democrat candidates’ total votes. Below are the meeting notes.

In a meeting I was invited to by the Democrat party in Pima County, Arizona on September 10, 2020, no phones or recording devices were allowed. A presentation was given including detailed plans to embed 35,000 votes in a spread configured distribution to each Democrat candidate’s vote totals.

When I asked, “How in the world would 35,000 votes be kept hidden, or from being discovered?” It was stated that spread distribution will be embedded across the total registered vote range and will not exceed the registered voter count. And the 35,000 was determined allowable for Pima County based on our county registered voter count.

It was also stated total voter turnout versus total registered voters determined how many votes we can embed. The embedding will also adjust based on voter turnout. Because the embedded votes are distributed sporadically, all embedded votes will not be found if audited because embeds are in groups of approximately 1,000. This is so the County Recorder can declare an oversight issue or error, as a group of 1,000 is a normal and acceptable error.

Maricopa County’s embed totals will be substantially larger than Pima, due to embeds being calculated based on the total number of registered voters. When I asked, “Has this ever been tested, and how do we know it works?” the response was, yes, this has been tested and has shown significant success in Arizona judicial retention elections, since 2014. Even undetectable in post audits because no candidate will spend the kind of funds needed to audit and contact voters to verify votes and the full potential of the total registered voters, which is more than 500,000 registered voters. This year our Secretary of State has removed precinct level detail from election night releases, so candidates can’t see precinct over-votes.

This is what I have from this meeting. Just thought I’d report this. Not sure if you can do anything since I was unable to have a recording device at this meeting. Thank You.

During Monday's hearing, a slate of speakers provided testimony about alleged voting irregularities that took place in the southern Arizona county of roughly 1 million people during thee 2020 election.

Based on the anonymous letter, Finchem said lawmakers had been able to conduct a "very quiet, but fruitful investigation."

On the status of that investigation, he told Just the News: "It appears there is ample evidence that the allegation is true, but the canvassing and census work will continue, it is not yet complete."

He added: "The fact that it was sent to the criminal division of the department of justice certainly supports the notion that people don’t usually make false police reports about such matters."

Mark Evans, the manager of the Pima County communications office, however, doubted the legitimacy of the letter's contents and its place in the public record. 

"Innuendo from some random, anonymous person being spoken about by a state legislator is not worthy of our response," he told JTN, adding, "If the senator representing District 11 (Finchem) has any evidence to support the claims of the letter, he needs to take them to the Arizona state attorney general and the U.S. attorney general."

Neither the DOJ nor the Arizona Secretary of State's office returned Just the News' requests for comment.