By the time this is published, there is a statistically significant probability that you’ve already come across the phrase “voter fraud in Arizona” in recent news. If this is the first you’re hearing of it, kindly share your politics-blocking life hack in the comments section for posterity.

As a bit of a political junkie, I’ve been watching this conversation unfold with some fascination; it started with Facebook posts by Arizona voters and was almost immediately picked up by Bernie Sanders's social media attack dog squad (I see you, Bernie’s Dank Meme Stash). From there, it was just a matter of time before local politicians, op-ed writers, and anyone else with a vested interest in scandal began smelling the blood in the water. Voter suppression in Maricopa County is the stuff careers can be made of when spun correctly, after all.

When spun correctly. In a move that should surprise no one, the all-encompassing “they” have been so busy placing blame, forecasting doom and failing to do research that all the real information is getting lost in the mess. In fact, as of this morning, the video some would consider a smoking gun has less than 3k views… but more on that later. The best way to get everyone on the same page is start at the beginning.

While the scene that unfolded in Arizona only took place last Tuesday, the stage was set back on June 25, 2013, when the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act; this was the provision that designated regions of the country with a history of voter suppression and, therefore, required federal oversight when making any changes to voting laws. Without it, state and county officials have significantly more freedom to update policies to reflect changing voter behavior and fiscal responsibility.

That's exactly what happened in Arizona this year, with Maricopa County as the poster child for self-proclaimed good intentions gone horribly wrong. It took less than 24 hours for Maricopa County Recorder Helen Purcell to accept blame and apologize for waiting times exceeding four hours, crediting a miscalculation in voter turnout projections. It was too little too late for Phoenix Mayor Greg Stanton, however, who requested a federal investigation that same day, alleging polling location reductions were strategically implemented to disproportionately affect minority voters. As he states in his letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch, "...in Phoenix, a majority-minority city, county officials allocated one polling location for every 108,000 residents. The ratios were far more favorably in predominantly Anglo communities: In Cave Creek/Carefree, there was one polling location for 8,500 residents; in Paradise Valley, one for every 13,00 residents; in Fountain Hills, one for 22,500 residents; and in Peoria, one for every 54,000 residents.”

Regardless of the motivation behind the debacle, Arizona officials are scrambling to reassure everyone that the issue will be resolved before the general election. And if the discussion were limited to sufficient polling locations, maybe the politicians would actually do what they promised (for once). Unfortunately, for them, this one only gets more interesting the deeper you dig. Anyone who showed up on voting day was at the mercy of the computer's version of the voter registration record, which consistently failed to match up with reality. Even people who had hard copy voter IDs with the correct affiliation were denied the ability to vote a regular ballot and were instead given provisional ballots that undergo additional scrutiny. Insert smoking gun here:

Now, if you just watched the same thing I did, you might be wondering why this isn't the bigger headline. Restriction of minority voting locations is a time-honored tradition, but flat out machination of registration cards? Dude. This woman changed her political affiliation from Independent to Democrat back in late 2015, which is reflected in the government system. Strangely, the system shows another change being made in January 2016—this time from Democrat to complete unaffiliation—with the exact same signature.

That's particularly problematic when the Secretary of State confirms that provisional ballots will not be counted for anyone who is not registered as a Democrat, even if it's a mistake. As the Yavapai County Recorder's Office explains, “Every provisional ballot is checked for eligibility. If you are registered as independent, other, party not designated, or libertarian, you are not eligible for this election and therefore, by law, your vote cannot be counted. If you are registered as a Democrat, Green, or Republican, and your ballot is otherwise eligible, then your provisional ballot will be counted.” 

If you're a skeptic like me, you're probably questioning why someone would put the effort into this provisional ballot game... it can't make THAT much of a difference, right? Turns out it can, actually. According to Election Day Technician Kelly Thornton, she was forced to hand out mostly provisional ballots after the election voting software mistakenly identified roughly two-thirds of her precinct, some of whom are life-long Democrats, as Independents.

It took less than 40 hours for a White House petition requesting an official investigation to get the 100k signatures required to get a response. There's also a second petition requesting the Arizona primary be held again, though I recommend looking up powers granted to the state vs. the federal government before wasting your time in that echo chamber. Arizona Secretary of State Michele Reagan is promising bi-partisan public hearings this week, and you can bet your bottom dollar that this isn't going away any time soon. Whether due to conspiracy or gross incompetence, Americans love a good train wreck... and, per usual, Arizona delivers with flair.