Maricopa County Election Judge: Voting Machines Were Programmed to Reject Republican Ballots

A Maricopa County election judge has revealed that she believes the voting machines used in the midterms were programmed to reject ballots in heavily Republican areas on Election Day.

Michele Swinick served as an election judge in Maricopa County, Arizona on Election Day last week.

Following the controversial election, Swinick has stepped forward to discuss what she experienced in her county, which still hasn’t finished counting the results almost one week later.

According to Swinick, who worked at a center in a heavily Republican district, the tabulators worked perfectly well the night before Election Day.

Then on Election Day, they suddenly started to fail and were unable to read ballots.

After the machines quit working, only 1 in 10 ballots were accepted through the tabulators.

The officials were told to put the defective ballots into a different section called “Door 3.”

Swinick says she believes this was all part of a well-planned operation.

She says that election officials all knew that Republicans were going to come out to vote in force on Election Day, as they did in the primary.

According to UncoverDC, Swinick worked Election Day as a judge at the Islamic Voting Center in Scottsdale, AZ.

Swinick reportedly told the outlet that the center is heavily Republican, with “no party” designated voters as the second most populous demographic, followed by very few Democrat voters.

She said this was evidenced by the fact that she checked in very few Democrat voters on Election Day.

She said she spent the entire day checking in voters.

Slay the latest News for free!

We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.

Swinick says that the tabulators all worked “perfectly” during testing on the night before the election.

The problem with scanning began immediately with the first ballots.

Voters scanned their ballots between 4 and 12 times with very minimal success.

Poll workers estimated only about 1 in 10 ballots were being read during the first three hours of voting.

Voters were given options to either spoil their ballots and try again or drop them into a different section called “Door 3.”

As per Swinick, their inspector had to empty the ballots from “Door 3” three times throughout the early afternoon because of the volume of ballots.

Typically, ballots aren’t supposed to be removed from that box until polls close, but they made an exception because the box was jamming and became too full.

Swinick reports that the technician came to the center between 3:30 pm and 4:00 pm MT and rebooted the machines.

After this, there were no further issues with ballots being run through tabulators.

She reported that one of the poll workers told her, “Everything is now going smoothly with the tabulators.”

Per Swinick’s inspector, an offsite supervisor had advised putting all “door 3” ballots, that had not been scanned through a tabulator, into a separate black bag “because of the situation.”

The ballots were then labeled as “misreads.”

As a judge, Swinick told UncoverDC that she personally signed the sticker placed over the bag’s zipper.

These bags were then sent to the tabulation center to be counted.

Swinick informed us that the normal process for a ballot that is “unread” is for poll workers to run the ballots through the tabulators one more time before sending them to the center.

As per Swinick, this was not done.

The County had set up a website to give voters the ability to check that their vote was counted.

However, Swinick has proven that the website isn’t correct and seems to be using a voter’s “check-in” as evidence their vote was tabulated rather than the actual tabulation of the vote.

Swinick offered her first-hand proof of this, saying:

My roommate ran his ballot through the tabulators 15 times as one of the 1st voters at the Islamic Center.

It did not read the ballot.

He was forced to drop it in door #3.

About an hour after I arrived home at 9 pm MT, my roommate checked the website to see if his vote had been counted.

The website reported it was.

It is mathematically impossible for his vote to have been counted by then since only an hour before, I left the center, and the ballots had not been taken from the center to the meeting point where the ballots are hand exchanged to another transport team, which takes them to the tabulation center.

For his ballot to have been counted, it would have also needed to be sorted and hand-counted by a team at that center and reported into the website —all within that hour.

In the case of In Person/Day of Voting, this proves the reporting of his ballot being received & counted is actually based on his being checked into the Voting Center and him receiving a ballot to be cast—NOT his ballot being scanned and read through the tabulator or hand counted at the tabulation center.

Swinick claims she has also been threatened by her supervisor, who she only identified as “Timothy,” for speaking out about what she has witnessed.

He called her and said they “have been scouring social media and saw posts (that Swinick) would be going on several podcasts to report information about the election.”

Swinick told UncoverDC that she was questioned about her podcast, what it’s about, and that they accused her of already appearing on other podcasts earlier in the day, even though, at the time, that was untrue.

She says her supervisor threatened her by warning: “if I find out you have gone on any podcasts, I will terminate you.”

UncoverDC asked Michele for her opinion of what was going on, given her experience.

“In my opinion, the machines were programmed to do this, and it was all planned,” Swinick warns.

“The process and narrative, both machines and people.

“It was brilliantly done.

“They isolated the ballots to replace or not count them in 223 bags.

“The hard part for them in 2020 and during the primary was getting the ballots to match their manufactured machine count.

“This way, they have everything isolated in the bags.”

join telegram


Who is the best president?

By completing this poll, you gain access to our free newsletter. Unsubscribe at any time.

By Frank Bergman

Frank Bergman is a political/economic journalist living on the east coast. Aside from news reporting, Bergman also conducts interviews with researchers and material experts and investigates influential individuals and organizations in the sociopolitical world.

Notify of


Would love your thoughts, please comment.x