General Discussion

The only evidence they have in a precinct where Sare only received 5 votes however 8 have sworn affidavits claiming to have voted for Sare leading SMART Elections to determine she would have had a minimum of 9 votes... Not only is the sample size far too small to be considered seriously and affidavits hold little to no water especially when between the 8, only 2 are willing to swear under oath in court and participate as plaintiffs in the lawsuit, including Adam Mocio, a chronic election denier and avid Trump supporter.

They also assert in their argument they only “interviewed” 3% of voters, giving the idea they went door to door when it is truthfully just coalition members and acquaintances. They suggest that because 97% of the population was not interviewed, they suspect they will find more. They filed that in December 2024, they have had half of a year to find more and have not. Furthermore, once this case took social media by storm, one would think people would be coming out of the woodwork.

Despite incredibly misleading information circulating the internet, no expert affidavit by a statistician was provided to the court supporting evidence of election fraud. Lulu Friesdat the co-founder of SMART Legislation, provided an affidavit. She describes herself as an election journalist, and stated that SMART Legislation is an “unincorporated action partner of SMART Elections. Friesdat, despite many efforts around the country, has never had a favorable court ruling.

I stand firmly behind organizations with a proven track record of advancing fair, accessible elections — groups like the NAACP, the Brennan Center for Justice, the ACLU, and the Campaign Legal Center. These groups understand the real threats: voter suppression, dark money, and policies designed to silence marginalized communities — and they have the legal victories to show for it.