What Powers Does a Precinct Committeeman (PC) Have?
If a member of the House or Senate resigns or is removed, PCs of the same party as that representative in their Legislative District vote for 3 names to replace them which the Maricopa Board of Supervisors then select from to fulfill the remaining term. (Legislation should be proposed to remove the MCBOS from the process entirely) This happened multiple times in 2024 and 2023. No one else can select the three names; not voters, not the governor, only PCs! See ARS 41-1202https://www.azleg.gov/ars/41/01202.htm
PCs vote for State Delegates, who then vote for National Delegates, and the National Delegates vote for who the Republican Presidential Candidate will be. The delegates can and have chosen opposite of the popular vote in the past. In 1912, William Taft ran to become the nominee and faced the opposition of former President Theodore Roosevelt. Roosevelt won most of the states and received more than half of the popular vote. He even defeated Taft in his home state of Ohio. However, Taft received more delegates than Roosevelt and thus was nominated during the convention. Roosevelt started a new “Progressive Party” and he and Taft split the vote, giving the win to Democrat Woodrow Wilson who only earned 42% of the popular vote. 1912 Republican Convention.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1912_Republican_National_Convention This is why it is so critical that true Trump supporters were elected as State Delegates which fortunately was done this year.
PCs have tremendous influence over who the candidates will be. Typically, the political elites and establishment select from their friends and allies and DICTATE who the candidates will be; immediately giving them dozens of endorsements. They COMMAND the PCs to fall in line and support, fundraise, and gather signatures and communicate to the voters for that candidate. But PCs can simply refuse this power grab and control and select a different candidate to support. When enough of the Legislative Districts and PCs support their chosen candidates, those candidates can and do win the Primary and make it to the General election ballot. Only candidates with an attitude of servant leadership who will honor their oath of office, follow the Constitution without fail, and will listen to the instruction of We The People should be supported in this way.
It is no secret that the Establishment uses red tape, rules, confusion, corrupt parliamentarians, and other tactics to silence the voice of the people. By becoming an Expert in Robert’s Rules of Order, you can take back this power and refuse to be silenced. At the bottom is a handy Quick Guide you can use and some additional information here and below:
PROXIES
Proxy Votes are NOT counted in a voice vote or rising vote as was modeled at the State Committeeman meeting. This specific question was asked and proxy votes are not counted in this type of vote.
#45:2 One Person, One Vote. It is a fundamental principle of parliamentary law that each person who is a member of a deliberative assembly is entitled to one-and only one- vote on a question.
#45:56 Absentee Voting.It is a fundamental Principle of parliamentary law that the right to vote is limited to the members of an organization who are actually present at the time the vote is taken in a regular or properly called meeting…
45:70 Proxy Voting. A proxy is a power of attorney given by one person to another to vote in his stead; the term also designates the person who holds the power of attorney. Proxy voting is not permitted in ordinary deliberative assemblies unless the laws of the state in which the society is incorporated require it, or the charter or bylaws of the organization provide for it. Ordinarily it should neither be allowed nor required, because proxy voting is incompatible with the essential characteristics of a deliberative assembly…
OBTAINING AND ASSIGNING THE FLOOR
#3:30 Before a member in an assembly can make a motion or speak in debate-the parliamentary name given to any form of discussion of the merits of a motion-he must obtain the floor, that is he must be recognized by the chair as having the exclusive rights to be heard at that time. The chair must recognize any member who seeks the floor while entitled to it.
MOTIONS WHICH ARE IN ORDER WHEN ANOTHER HAS THE FLOOR AND DO NOT REQUIRE A SECOND
t44-t45
Parliamentary Inquiry 33:3-5
Point of Order 23
Request for Information 33:6-10
OUT OF ORDER
#4:17 When a member who has legitimately obtained the floor offers a motion which is not in order, the chair may be able, in certain instances, to suggest an alternative motion which would be in order and would carry out the desired intent to the satisfaction of the maker. If the chair is obliged to rule that the motion is not in order, he says, “The chair rules that the motion is not in order because [briefly stating the reason] He must not say “You are out of order,” nor, “Your motion is out of order.” To state that a member is out of order implies that the member is guilty of a bread of decorum or other misconduct; and even in such a case, the chair does not normally address the member in the second person. If the chair rules that a motion is not in order, his decision is subject to an appeal of the judgement of the assembly.
APPEAL
#24:1 By electing a presiding officer, the assembly delegates to him the authority and duty to make necessary rulings on questions of parliamentary law. But any two members have the right to Appeal from his decision on such a question. By one member making the appeal and another seconding it, the question is taken from the chair and vested in the assembly for final decision.
In the below post, Merissa falsely claims of PBS “They didn’t give Heap the information for the debate until less than an hour before they said he needed to arrive. He could arrive 30 minutes before the debate started, but PBS refused to allow him to attend.”
There are several problems with that including that Heap put out a statement contradicting it saying: “I made a good faith effort to rearrange my schedule to attend; however, it simply wasn’t possible without disrespecting the voters who had already made plans to come and meet with me about my plans for the Recorder’s office.”
But that wasn’t true either. What was Heap really doing on June 11th? He was on the Agenda to speak at the Legislative District 3 meeting, but he didn’t attend that either. So where was Heap?
Heap was at a fundraiser with Representative Joseph Chaplik charging $250 per person and $500 per couple:
Really Heap and Hamilton, if you could try and limit yourselves to under 30 lies per day it would be really helpful.
On Tuesday, June 11, 2024, the body of the largest legislative district in the state; Legislative District 3, censured House of Representatives Matt Gress, Timothy M Dunn, and Justin Wilmeth along with Senators Shawnna Bolick and T.J. Shope. The censure passed by a large majority in a single motion with two separate pages one for the Arizona House members and one for the Arizona Senate members. It called out the legislators for voting against the Republican Party Platform and with Democrats and baby murderers saying, those “representing the Republican Party, and as such, should be aligned with the Republican Party Platform, which is; according to that platform’s stance on the 5th Amendment of the US Constitution, pertaining to protecting human life, is the Constitution’s guarantee that no one can “be deprived of life, liberty or property””. And “the Republican Party Platform deliberately echo’s the Declaration of Independence’s proclamation that “all” are “endowed by their Creator” with the inalienable right to life.”
It noted “the Republican Party Platform asserts the sanctity of human life and affirms that the unborn child has a fundamental right to life which cannot be infringed.” and“Arizona ARS § 13-1105 defines the crime of first-degree murder. This offense is committed when someone takes another person’s life by means of a premeditated and intentional act. A violation of this law is a Class 1 felony punishable by death or life imprisonment.” and “The language of ARS 13-1105 sets forth three specific ways a person can be charged with first-degree murder. A person commits this offense if: Intending or knowing that the person’s conduct will cause death, the person causes the death of another person, including an unborn child, with premeditation,”.
Finally, “THEREFORE, be it resolved that the Precinct Committeemen of Legislative District 3, censure House of Representatives, Matt Gress, Timothy M Dunn, and Justin Wilmeth for failure to uphold their Oath of Office, their total disregard of the Republican Party Platform, and deliberately defying the Constitution of the United States of America. Because of their actions, many children in the state of Arizona will NOT have the right to LIFE, as was given to Matt Gress, Timothy M Dunn, Justin Wilmeth, Shawnna Bolick and T.J. Shope.”
In a poll ran June 5th, 92.5% of the 253 respondents replied Yes, to the question “Should Merissa Hamilton immediately resign as AZGOP Member-at-Large in light of being censured for brokering a felony bribe for Jeff Dewit and violating AZGOP Bylaws publicly soliciting donations for Justin Heap while treating other Republican candidates unfairly during primary?”
It is unclear if Merissa or any of her organizations are receiving financial benefit from Heap or the Heap campaign. It is will known that Merissa and EZAZ have received financial and non financial benefits to support other candidates in the past. Merissa has continued to act as Heap’s henchman or campaign social media manager with mudslinging untrue personal attacks against Don Hiatt. At the same time she defends Justin Heap’s insults to Trump and MAGA as “out of context” when clearly the full post is shown and they are not out of context. This is a clear violation of the AZGOP bylaws as she is not treating “all Republican candidates fairly”. Membership in the AZGOP includes elected State Committeemen, elected officers such as AZGOP MAL which Merissa is, and County Chairs and 1st Vice Chairs. Those messages can be seen below:
Article IV – OFFICERS C. Method of Electing
2. The Republican Party of Arizona shall treat all Republican candidates fairly during the primary irrespective of whether the party has aided in the recruitment of such candidate or any other factor. In races without a primary election, the Republican Party of Arizona shall continue to treat all candidates fairly through the general. Notwithstanding, this paragraph does not apply to either judicial retention elections or in presidential preference elections, or potential presidential preference elections, where an incumbent Republican president is seeking re-election.
It is important to note that Precinct Committeemen are not members of the AZGOP (which has also been illegally reformed into an LLC which should be reversed) and not subject to these requirements. Were Hamilton to resign as Member at Large of the AZGOP and as a State Committeemen, she would be free to endorse, fundraise, and run Heap’s campaign without issue.
Arizona House Representative and Maricopa County Recorder Candidate Justin Heap has been caught once again in multiple lies and multiple violations of the Arizona Constitution. The video begins with a news story segment, but at 1:40 dives into the Arizona Constitution and specific issues the people have been having with Heap. Please watch the entire video. This is a pattern of behavior of an arrogant liar, violating the rights of the people on both sides: left and right. This unethical man is in complete violation of his oath of office and Constitutional duty to the People of Arizona. See the video below.
Justin Heap Violating Arizona and US Constitution and Recent US Supreme Court Ruling Against Blocking on Social Media
Heap’s @azjustinheap X/Twitter and other social media accounts are in violation of the Arizona Constitution and US Constitution First Amendment Freedom of Speech Rights. Heap’s social media is being used as a public forum where he as an elected government official is exercising his state authority in speaking. Blocking is denying the below 29 citizens their Constitutional Rights to engage in free or political speech:
The Arizona Constitution, Article II, Section 6: Freedom of Speech and Press, states “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right.”Korwin v. Cotton, CV 12-0878 (Ariz. Ct. App. May 8, 2014). The Arizona Constitution Art. 2, § 6 has a “greater scope than the first amendment.”Mountain States Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm’n, 773 P.2d 455, 459 (Ariz. 1989). “The Arizona Constitution gives the right of speech directly to the people”. Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Superior Court, 418 P.2d 594 (Ariz. 1966); Phoenix Newspapers, Inc. v. Jennings, 490 P.2d 563 (Ariz. 1971)
The United States Supreme Court ruled on March 15, 2024, that “such speech by government officials can be attributed to the state, and thus subject to First Amendment scrutiny, only if the person involved has the authority to speak on the state’s behalf and if the official purported to be exercising that authority on the social media platform. The standard set by the court Friday applies to all government officials.” The ruling upholds O’Connor-Ratcliff v. Garnier in which the San Francisco-based 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the parents, the Garniers who sued the School Board Trustees under 42 U. S. C. §1983, seeking damages and declaratory and injunctive relief for the violation of their First Amendment rights, concluding that the social media pages were a public forum protected by the First Amendment”– USA Today
Justice Amy Coney Barrett: “Social accounts viewed as official communication channels allow for lawsuits when they’re used to speak on the state’s behalf.” and “Supreme Court rules public can sue officials who block, mute them on social media” – Post Millennial. In January 2019, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed a lower court ruling in Davison v. Loudoun Cty. Bd. of Supervisorsthat blocking people on social media is viewpoint discrimination in its most natural form. The Court ruled that government officials are “strictly limited” in their ability to regulate private speech in public forums—even in forums they create on social media. Similarly, Leuthy et al. v. LePage (2018), a court ruled that blocking people who disagreed with Governor LePage of Maine, constituted not only viewpoint discrimination, but government censorship as well.
Perhaps most importantly, as it involved the nation’s highest office, in July 2019 the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a lower court decision by ruling unanimously that President Trump’s practice of blocking critics on social media violates the First Amendment. Restricting participation in social media forums such as Heap does is Unconstitutional. The vast democratic forums of the internet are essential for the exchange of views, especially political speech, which is at the core of First Amendment protections. It is crucial that members of the public remain a part of the conversation, and by doing so are protected when their views are expressed. Being denied that opportunity is significantly harmful to citizens, voters, Several Counties, Arizona, and the United States of America.
The video begins with a news story segment, but at 1:40 dives into the Arizona Constitution and specific issues the people have been having with Heap. Please watch the entire video.
Kari Lake’s endorsement and backing of Maricopa County Recorder Candidate Justin Heap was met with widespread public ridicule, confusion, and refusal in a public tweet she posted at 8:30pm on June 7th saying “Vote @azjustinheap for Maricopa County Recorder!”
What Was Don Hiatt Writing about Tump A year Ago About the Same Time?
Hiatt Recently Released a Public Statement on Election Integrity Saying “As for me and my household, we are MAGA”
Comments On Kari’s X Post Include:
“Ok. I’m confused. Why would you be doubling down on the establishment pick? The attorney who answers to the BAR and not the People? The man who is clueless as to how to protect our elections? The man who accomplished nothing to protect our elections while serving as a Representative of AZ? Don Hiatt is the grassroots choice! He has spent every day of the last four years investigating the elections. He has an IT background and can protect the elections from outside interference. He is the grassroots candidate for and of the People. This makes no sense. Who could possibly be influencing you to make such a decision?” – Gail Golec #American Patriot #MamaBear
“Come on Kari. Those of us in the Grassroots Conservative effort to clean this damn state up of the criminal McCainites are now having to watch you and Trump endorsing them. Who are you getting your info from on these people, it isn’t the people supporting you?” – WLCrow
“You need to explain this pick!!! Very concerning Kari”. – Pitt53
“You are listening to too many Rinos. Why don’t you get back to listening to the People” – ArtChicken
“I’m very disappointed that you’re backing Trash Heap. Don Hiatt is the right man for the job. Don can clean up the election fraud in Maricopa County.” – Hard Based
“Kari you’re letting the Ultra MAGA down:1) Gov. to Senator,2) Endors. Gina Swaboda-she doesn’t have the proper AZGOP status,3) Not 100% prolife, 4)Endors. Justin Heap-NOT Election Intelrigrity trenches-untruthful, coat tail rider! Are you % grassroots with no strings attached?” – Mfernandez
“I would look more closely into this guy. It seems like he is cut from the same cloth as @steven_richerI wouldn’t be surprised if they went to the same incestual clubs the government bodies in AZ have to F the people.” – RY NO
“This choice is puzzling. Please explain.” – TRUTH Seeker and Speaker
“You are backing the wrong horse in this race.” – Diana Jones
“No thanks. No, Never Trumpers for me.” – Hans Giesholt
“Very disappointing you keep endorsing Heap even after seeing the evidence he is NOT MAGA. You’ve lost all credibility!” – AZandME
“He is a NEVER TRUMPER” – Brian Staudenmaier
“No never Trumpers Kari.” – Ainphx
“WRONG Mrs Lake. DO NOT Vote @azjustinheap for Maricopa County Recorder. Heap will be worse than Richer. ARIZONA VOTE FOR Don Hiatt Make Arizona Elections FAIR and TRANSPARENT Again! MAGA” – 𝓡𝐄𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐀☆· ˖° (she posted this graphic)
During the Below video, Heap refuses to admit that the 2020 Election was stolen and falsely claims that most Republicans believe Election Integrity is only a #4-5 priority:
In the below video, Maricopa County Recorder Candidate Justin Heap takes questions from Precinct Committeemen in Legislative District 12 on May 14, 2024. See that video at the bottom below. Heap recently came under fire for several tweets he posted as recently as 1 year ago insulting President Trump and the MAGA movement including saying: “I’m not MAGA, I didn’t vote for Trump the first time and I hoped he would not run again because I believe he is too polarizing.” – Justin Heap August 1, 2023, “Trump is a serial philanderer and womanizer…” – Justin Heap April 9, 2023, “Actually cult rehabilitation is a well studied & documented field of psychology. But like I said, I’m not a Trump supporter. So your accusations are meaningless.” – Justin Heap May 10, 2023, and “Which glasses, Honey? I’m not a Trump supporter.” – Justin Heap May 10, 2023 prompting the circulation of the below graphic:
Heap released a public statement refuting his own quote, saying ” ‘The first time’ means the 2016 Primary. I voted for Ted Cruz. Then for Trump in the general.’ ”
Voting data from Navajo County and AZ State data verified with 2 reliable sources shows Justin Heap was lying and DID NOT vote in the 2016 Primary Election.
However, evidence shows he did not vote in the 2016 Primary. Therefore the first time was the 2016 General Election. There is no evidence to prove that Heap voted for Trump in the 2016 General Election; rather contrary evidence means the most likely truth is that Heap is lying now and his original statement that he didn’t vote for Trump in 2016 is correct.
During the Below video, Heap refuses to admit that the 2020 Election was stolen and falsely claims that most Republicans believe Election Integrity is only a #4-5 priority:
2. The Republican Party of Arizona shall treat all Republican candidates fairly during the primary irrespective of whether the party has aided in the recruitment of such candidate or any other factor. In races without a primary election, the Republican Party of Arizona shall continue to treat all candidates fairly through the general. Notwithstanding, this paragraph does not apply to either judicial retention elections or in presidential preference elections, or potential presidential preference elections, where an incumbent Republican president is seeking re-election.
Merissa is publicly pushing #nevertrumper Justin Heap for Recorder over the other two Republican candidates, seeking donations for him (possibly receiving monetary or non monetary compensation by Heap or his campaign) and not treating “all Republican candidates fairly”. This is a clear violation of the AZGOP bylaws, membership in which includes elected State Committeemen, elected officers such as AZGOP MAL which Merissa is, and County Chairs and 1st Vice Chairs. MERISSA HAMILTON MUST RESIGN IMMEDIATELY!
It is important to note that Precinct Committeemen are not members of the AZGOP (which has also been illegally reformed into an LLC which should be reversed) and not subject to these requirements. Were Hamilton to resign as Member at Large of the AZGOP and as a State Committeemen, she would be free to endorse, fundraise, and run Heap’s campaign without issue.
Maricopa Recorder Candidate Justin Heap was recently exposed as a “Never Trumper” posting publicly at least 4 messages saying he “was not a Trump supporter” and mocking Trump and MAGA as recently as 1 year ago. Those messages can be seen below:
“I’m not MAGA, I didn’t vote for Trump the first time and I hoped he would not run again because I believe he is too polarizing.” – Justin Heap August 1, 2023
“Trump is a serial philanderer and womanizer…” – Justin Heap April 9, 2023
“Actually cult rehabilitation is a well studied & documented field of psychology. But like I said, I’m not a Trump supporter. So your accusations are meaningless.” – Justin Heap May 10, 2023
“Which glasses, Honey? I’m not a Trump supporter.” – Justin Heap May 10, 2023
According to reliable sources: “Justin Heap was not a registered Republican during Trump’s presidency. He didn’t register as a Republican until after Biden became president. Registered on June 30, 2017 as an “OTHER” Didn’t register until May 18, 2021 as Republican. And he did NOT VOTE in the 2016 presidential preference election. “
I would love to question Heap on this, but he is a coward and illegally blocks me on X in violation of the Arizona Constitution, US Constitution, and recent US Supreme Court Ruling on social media blocking. Heap does the same illegally to scores of voters. One Precinct Committeeman said “At least 4 others so far have reported that @azjustinheap has blocked them on “X”. So much for openness and transparency. He blocks people from social media, his guys block people from the door, and it seems like Merissa only accepts people who change parties if she is on their payroll.”
Another said “Its a shame, though J.Heap has been caught in multiple líes & though he claims he doesn’t remember all the LIES. IT Lets US know He’s NOT ONLY UNqualified as RECORDER, BUT HES ALSO A lying Heap of ”
One PC said “Heap literally took off his name tag and pretended he wasn’t heap! I was asking him about my 2022 ballot, at a Kari lake town hall. He hoped I didn’t see his name. He literally reaches up, takes OFF his name tag, does a whole lot of nodding as i talk to him, and he passed the buck, saying I should talk to Kari Lake’s people or Maricopa. Then, he stepped away from his table to blend in with the crowd. He literally ran away! So heap, who wants to be recorder…. can’t handle even basic questions about this, or even form an intelligent sentence about it …. If he isn’t curious in the least bit on 2022 (or 2020, it seems) was stolen when someone literally put the evidence in his hand and he walked away, ducked and ran, what is his purpose as recorder?”
On Tuesday May 14, 2024, the body of Legislative District 3 censured AZGOP CD1 Member at Large Merissa Hamilton and demanded she resign that position immediately. The censure referenced the below evidence that Hamilton committed a felony bribe, acting as the broker in an illegal document titled the “LD3 Peace Accord” proposing the creation of two separate legislative districts in violation of A.R.S. §16-823. Legislative district committee; organization. Hamilton and former AZGOP Chair Jeff Dewit (who has since resigned) both attempted to push for and offered a felony bribe, violating A.R.S. Title 13. Criminal Code § 13-2602. Bribery of a public servant or party officer. Hamilton admitted to that crime in the below audio recording. The below censure demands that Merissa Hamilton resign from her position as AZGOP MAL immediately. Read the full censure below.
Audio Recording of Merissa Hamilton Admitting Her Crime:
Documented evidence including emails, draft agreement, audio recording, and first hand witness account prove AZGOP Chair Jeff Dewit has committed a class 4 felony and is openly violating Arizona Law in a bribery scheme designed to create more division of the Republican Party. This was corroborated by a first hand witness and admitted by Candace Czarny in an email.
A. A person commits bribery of a public servant or party officer if with corrupt intent:
1. Such person offers, confers or agrees to confer any benefit upon a public servant or party officer with the intent to influence the public servant’s or party officer’s vote, opinion, judgment, exercise of discretion or other action in his official capacity as a public servant or party officer; or
2. While a public servant or party officer, such person solicits, accepts or agrees to accept any benefit upon an agreement or understanding that his vote, opinion, judgment, exercise of discretion or other action as a public servant or party officer may thereby be influenced.
B. It is no defense to a prosecution under this section that a person sought to be influenced was not qualified to act in the desired way because such person had not yet assumed office, lacked jurisdiction or for any other reason.
C. Bribery of a public servant or party officer is a class 4 felony.
On December 19, 2023 at 11:10:23 PM MST, AZGOP Member-at-Large Merissa Hamilton sent an email referencing a document titled the “LD3 Peace Accord”. Hamilton was acting as the broker in this deal, which AZGOP Chair later called by phone to push for and offer the bribe. That call was recorded.
Recording of Jeff Dewit Discussing Felony Bribe to Party Officers
”
