Recently, Randy Pullen, who is the spokesman for the Arizona election audit, announced that the Arizona State Senate will issue a subpoena for the routers, along with the passwords, that are currently being withheld by various election officials. Pullen declared the state of Arizona’s intentions to issue this subpoena earlier in the week, observing that it has been exceedingly difficult to complete the election audit without sufficient information on the routers and passwords.
Pullen observed that the audit effort has had none of that information or hardware provided to them, which is why it has become “something that the Senate will have to go back to the county and request those items.”
Consequently, it will be “very difficult” to conduct a full and complete audit without the presence of that information, Pullen noted.
In addition, Pullen also remarked that Arizona state senators will be able to determine the appropriate timeline for examining electronic equipment that had been utilized during the 2020 elections in Arizona. He acknowledged that the ballot count is now formally complete, though some electronic data has continued to raise questions.
Pullen observes that “a few minor things still need to be done with respect to some software additions they made.” He added that some new information for the county has been obtained by the audit effort, which reveals a noticeable difference regarding the number of duplicate ballots present in each batch.
Pullen then received a new list, which resulted in the need to create software that took the new data and conducted a comparison with their other data in order to deal with the “duplicate ballots” issue.
The Arizona State Senate is likely to begin issuing subpoenas in the next few days. In addition, Maricopa County also revealed its intentions to replace all of the election equipment that it had subpoenaed, as it vows to “never use compromised equipment that could pose a risk to free and fair elections.”
Various Republicans in Arizona believe that this latest development represents another step towards the right direction, though replacing equipment will not rectify mistakes made in the past. In other words, if the equipment is not able to support a forensic audit that verifies the results of the presidential election, then the equipment never should have received approval for use in such a high-stakes election.