@FannKfann Here's the relevant section of the indemnification agreement, signed by Fann on April 20, just before @maricopacounty turned over the materials she subpoenaed:
Not sure if this link will work for everyone, but it appears the @AZSenateGOP's media event is up and running. Follow here: azleg.gov/videoplayer/?c…
@AZSenateGOP No one was allowed to attend in person, so sorry to those who can't watch the feed reliably (me included -- it's cut in and out several times already.)
.@AZSenateDems weren't allowed in either. This isn't your usual "hearing" at the #azleg. There's no specific committee hosting this, just Senate President @FannKfann and Judiciary Chair @votewarren.
Arizona Republican elected officials have reacted to the siege at the U.S. Capitol by blaming, and this is not a comprehensive list, Democrats, Doug Ducey, other Republicans, Antifa, and Congress.
Here's a look back at the last 24 hours in tweets...
In this tweet, @RepGosar repeats baseless allegations that the presidential election was stolen and hints that leftists maybe had a role in the mob?
.@RepGosar reaction to the mob varied, depending on what platform you follow him on. @nickmartin points out the discrepancy between Gosar on Twitter and Gosar on conservative-friendly Parler.
Kory Langhofer, attorney for the Trump campaign, acknowledges that the number of overvotes their case would address "may not make a difference" in the race their interested in: @realDonaldTrump's re-election.
@realDonaldTrump An attorney for @katiehobbs said, and this was fuzzy so I'm not 100% sure, that there aren't a lot of overvotes at stake...
She said an exact number but I couldn't make it out.
Wow OK the numbers were repeated by Thomas Liddy, the atty for Maricopa County:
155,850 votes were cast on election.
Tabulation machines identified just 180 overvotes in the presidential race.
Attorneys withdrew that case on Saturday. But since then they've tried to get the case merged with the Trump campaign's new complaint about "overvotes."
BUT, at a hearing happening now, the judge is skeptical of allowing that...
The timeline is interesting. HOURS AFTER attorneys for the Sharpie plaintiffs withdrew their case, the Trump campaign filed a complaint about overvotes.
The Sharpie attorneys then filed a motion to transfer with the judge handling the Sharpie case.
That judge denied it.
Now the Sharpie plaintiffs have filed a motion to intervene in the Trump campaign's "overvote" case.
There's a different judge overseeing this case. He sounds skeptical of allowing intervention given that the plaintiffs had scheduled hearings in the original case, but gave up.