Election-fraud claims resurfaced in Nevada as Robert Beadles revises Washoe County lawsuit

• Robert Beadles withdrew a lawsuit that’d been moved to federal court and alleged election fraud against three Washoe County officials.
• The revised lawsuit takes out U.S. constitutional matters and focuses on county officials not addressing his election grievances and seeking their removal from office.
• Judge Egan Walker, who previously ruled against Beadles in a 2022 election lawsuit, has been assigned the case after Beadles challenged it having been given to Judge David Hardy.

Robert Beadles’ attempt to test his election-fraud claims in court got a reset.

On Wednesday, he withdrew a lawsuit against Washoe County officials for not addressing his belief in widespread election integrity issues — and he’s filed a second, stripped-down version of his complaint.

The Washoe County DA’s office had moved the first case to federal court. Beadles wants the second one to stay in state court. Toward that end, he removed two causes of action alleging violations of the U.S. Constitution’s 14th Amendment.

His goal with the second suit remains the same: to have a court address the validity of his election grievances and remove Washoe County Registrar of Voters Jamie Rodriguez, County Manager Eric Brown and Alexis Hill, Washoe County Commission chair.

“It’s quite simple; I need to be in state court as the 2 main causes of action I seek are the removal of the ROV (registrar of voters), County manager, and County Commission Chair and to expose our election issues, then correct them,” he wrote Wednesday on his Operation Sunlight blog.

Beadles is a member of the Washoe County Republican Party’s Central Committee and was a big donor to right-wing causes in the 2022 election cycle.

In response to the first lawsuit, the Washoe County District Attorney’s office sent Beadles a letter on Tuesday calling his claims the “inaccurate rantings of a conspiracy theorist” and warning that if he didn’t withdraw it, sanctions would be sought against him.

“The Beadles’ Complaint is disconnected from the law and from reality,” the letter said. “The Complaint and its frivolous and unfounded claims should be dismissed, Beadles should be sanctioned, and Defendants should likewise be awarded attorneys’ fees.”

In an email Thursday to the RGJ, the DA’s office said it “has no additional comments at this time.”

Disagreement over how to submit election-fraud claims

The revised lawsuit states that Beadles believes the three Washoe County officials violated their duties as well as his rights under Nevada’s Constitution by not resolving his election grievances, and therefore they should be removed from their positions.

He claims they should’ve addressed his concerns because Nevada law states: “Each voter has the right … to have complaints about elections and election contests resolved fairly, accurately and efficiently.”

The DA’s office disagrees. In its proposed “motion for sanctions” emailed Tuesday to Beadles, the DA’s office wrote that Rodriguez, Brown and Hill had no duty to respond to him.

It cites Nevada Administrative Code, which says: “A person who wishes to file a complaint concerning an alleged violation of any provision of (Nevada election laws) must submit the complaint in writing to the Secretary of State and sign the complaint.”

Claims of election fraud

Beadles’ list of grievances cover alleged problems with voter registration lists, vote counting, signature verification, “illegal function within the election system” and violations of state election law.

The DA’s office disputes his claims.

“Some of the aforementioned statements are so vague that a pointed response is difficult, but the statements are nonetheless inaccurate rantings of a conspiracy theorist disconnected from any legitimate claim,” it wrote in the proposed motion for sanctions.

Fact check:Affidavits do not show Washoe votes were cast without voters’ consent, as Beadles claims

To back up his claims, Beadles — who is representing himself — submitted to the court four legal boxes filled with documents and two flash drives of electronic files. The exhibit list shows at least two articles from the Reno Gazette Journal, a “Video Compilation of Prominent Democrats,” a graphic explainer on how to “solve the unsolvable” and numerous county documents on the voting process.

“Beadles knows or should know, based on the information Washoe County has thus far directly or indirectly provided to him, that his delusions are not accurate, yet he presents them in a court of law,” the DA’s office said in its proposed motion.

Beadles asks the court to stop Rodriguez, Brown and Hill from “using any voting and tabulation machines for elections in Washoe County” and instead to use “paper ballots at all polling locations and in every election.”

To bolster this demand, he seeks support from Vice President Kamala Harris, citing her comments on the campaign trail in 2019 saying, “The best way to conduct secure elections (is) paper ballots” because “Russia can’t hack a piece of paper.”

Washoe County and state positions on election fraud

Washoe County spokesperson Bethany Drysdale told the RGJ that the county conducts fair, transparent and accurate elections.

“There is extensive, randomized and thorough testing of machines, processes and tabulation before, during and after every election,” she said by email. “There are numerous redundancies to ensure that a single mistake cannot skew the results.”

Secretary of State Cisco Aguilar said his office had received more than 700 reports of possible 2022 election violations. His office is still investigating some individual concerns, but nothing has been found to put primary or general election results into question.

“We have seen no evidence of widespread voter fraud or voting machine errors in Nevada during the 2022 election cycle,” Aguilar testified at a February joint legislative meeting.

Beadles has a different viewpoint. In his lawsuit, he writes that because Rodriguez, Brown and Hill didn’t respond to his election complaints, they must be true, quoting the Latin legal phrase Qui non negat, fatetur, “he who does not deny, admits.”

Which judge will hear election case?

The first Beadles’ filing in this matter — July 25 — was originally assigned to District Court Judge David Hardy.

Hardy is overseeing the Hillary Schieve-Vaughn Hartung case against private investigator David McNeely for spying on them with a GPS tracker placed on their vehicles. That case is awaiting a spot on the Nevada Supreme Court’s calendar to decide whether the anonymous person who hired McNeely must be revealed.

Beadles submitted a motion asking that Judge Lynne Simons hear the case instead. It was reassigned to Judge Kathleen Sigurdson.

The revised lawsuit was again assigned to Judge Hardy.

Beadles filed a motion saying this seemed to violate a rule that cases be randomly assigned, and he asked again for Judge Simons.

“Judge Simons’ experience and expertise make her the ideal judge to preside over this case,” his motion reads.

Beadles’ case was reassigned Thursday to Judge Egan Walker.

Walker oversaw a previous Beadles’ election lawsuit last year, over observation of the vote-counting process. That suit claimed numerous people were prevented from meaningfully observing the vote count of the 2020 election.

Judge Walker rejected this, saying, “I have in front of me, in fact, no competent evidence which supports the claims.”

Mark Robison covers local government for the Reno Gazette-Journal. His wages are 100% funded by donations and grants, and his journalism is always free for all to read. If you’d like to see more stories like this one, please consider donating at RGJ.com/donate. Email comments to mrobison@rgj.com or comment on Mark’s Greater Reno Facebook page.