ELECTION FRAUD - Colorado Primary Election 2026

Did Provable election Fraud Hurt Kirkmeyer?

     Rampant fraud plagued Colorado’s primary election, just not how Trump and Tina Peters might claim. Sec. of State Griswold’s office failed to get its updated election instructions posted clearly by all county election office websites.  Consequently, an estimated 75% of voters did not have access to timely and non-partisan information from county election offices on how to vote a Unity Party ballot. That might have cost Colorado Senator Barbara Kirkmeyer the election.

     Additionally, news media such as KUNC, KUSA, and Colorado Sun, excluded Unity Party candidates from forums or voter guides where “all candidates for the same office” were required to be invited. That had the “effect of favoring…a group of candidates”, namely Democrats and Republicans, in violation of IRS or FCC regulations. So, the election was not “free and fair.” Attorney General Weiser is responsible for enforcing rules to ensure “fair” elections, but he and Marx benefitted from an “unfair” election.

     My claim of election fraud due to misrepresentation or omission of critical facts is supported by irrefutable evidence. That includes my emails to Sec. of State Griswold’s office, AG Weiser’s campaign team, and various news media, urging them to obey the law. It also comes from my review of county election office websites serving at least 95% of Colorado voters. The biased and partisan information favoring the two major parties becomes clear for anyone who tries to find, on these county election websites, the same or similar information from Sec. of State Election Office FAQs #2, 7, and 10. 

     Should Weiser and Griswold be disqualified? Should the election be nullified and run again - legally and fairly? Do violating news outlets need to lose their tax-exempt status or FCC licenses? Colorado’s “gold standard” election integrity is at stake. The primary election needs an unbiased investigation and accountability. 

     Following is part of an email message to me from the Colorado Secretary of State Elections Office. It was in response to my suggestions on April 30, 2026, to correct confusing and incomplete election information on its website. The revisions closely resemble my suggestions. [Emphasis added]

June 3, 2026 - “Our office has communicated with and provided guidance to the County Clerks Offices across the state on how to administer the upcoming 2026 June Primary, including how to administer ballots for those desiring to participate in the primary contests for minor parties, such as the Unity Party."

     Following is the relevant information that should have been posted on all Colorado county election office websites, even if it was done in another format besides Q & A:

https://www.sos.state.co.us/pubs/elections/FAQs/primaryElectionsFAQ.html

Q2. Who can vote in a Primary Election?

A2. During either the Presidential or June primary:

• Voters affiliated with a major party: may cast a ballot for candidates of the party they are affiliated with.
• Voters affiliated with a minor party: if there is a minor party contest those affiliated with that minor party may cast a ballot for those candidates.
• Unaffiliated voters: An unaffiliated voter may cast a ballot for any major political party, or minor political party who allows unaffiliated voters to participate in their primary. In the June 2026 election, this means unaffiliated voters may cast a ballot in Democratic, Republican, or Unity      Party primaries. If an unaffiliated voter returns a ballot with more than one political party, the ballot will be rejected and none of the votes will be counted.

Q7. I am an unaffiliated voter. Do I have to choose in advance which party's primary ballot to vote?

A7. No. You will receive both major party ballots in the mail and may choose which one to vote and return.

If you want to vote in a minor party primary and that party allows unaffiliated voters to participate, you must contact your county clerk to request that party’s ballot.

You can also appear in person at any Voter Service and Polling Center in your county and choose the major or minor party's ballot you want to vote.

Q10. How do I vote in a minor party's primary election if I am unaffiliated?

A10. You may contact your local County Clerk's office or visit any Voter Service and Polling Center in your county and request that minor party's ballot.

For the June 2026 primary election, the only minor party that is holding a primary and that allows unaffiliated voters to participate is the Unity Party.

FCC Rules on Equal Treatment of Candidates

     The FCC’s equal opportunities rules—commonly called the “equal time” rule—are found in Section 315 of the Communications Act and implemented in FCC rules such as § 73.1941. They require that broadcast stations (radio and TV) provide comparable time and placement to all legally qualified candidates for the same office when one candidate is given access to the station’s airwaves Federal Communications Commission+1.

Core Requirement

     If a station allows a legally qualified candidate to “use” its facilities—any broadcast featuring the candidate’s identifiable voice or image—the station must offer equal opportunities to all other legally qualified candidates for that office PBS. This can include:

• Paid political advertisements
• Free on-air appearances
• Comparable time in news or public affairs programming

The goal is to prevent broadcasters from giving one candidate more favorable access than others Federal Communications Commission+1.

Who Qualifies as a “Legally Qualified Candidate”

A candidate must:

1. Be eligible under state/federal law to hold the office.
2. Have publicly announced their candidacy.
3. Qualify for the ballot or be a write-in candidate with a substantial showing of campaign activity (e.g., speeches, press releases, campaign committee, social media presence, campaign website)

IRS website

https://www.irs.gov/charities-non-profits/charitable-organizations/restriction-of-political-campaign-intervention-by-section-501c3-tax-exempt-organizations

Restriction of political campaign intervention by Section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organizations:

     Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.  

     Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Certain activities or expenditures may not be prohibited depending on the facts and circumstances.  For example, certain voter education activities (including presenting public forums and publishing voter education guides) conducted in a non-partisan manner do not constitute prohibited political campaign activity. 

In addition, other activities intended to encourage people to participate in the electoral process, such as voter registration and get-out-the-vote drives, would not be prohibited political campaign activity if conducted in a non-partisan manner. On the other hand, voter education or registration activities with evidence of bias that (a) would favor one candidate over another; (b) oppose a candidate in some manner; or (c) have the effect of favoring a candidate or group of candidates, will constitute prohibited participation or intervention.

What is the ban on political campaign activity?

     It is a requirement imposed by Congress for the privilege of being recognized as exempt from federal income tax under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. For an organization to be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) it cannot “participate in or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements) any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office.” 

Frequently asked questions about the ban on political campaign intervention by 501(c)(3) organizations: Inviting a candidate to speak

Can a section 501(c)(3) organization invite a political candidate to speak at its events without jeopardizing its tax-exempt status?

     If a candidate is invited to speak at an organization event in his or her capacity as a political candidate, the organization must take steps to ensure that:

a. It provides an equal opportunity to participate to all political candidates seeking the same office;

Frequently asked questions about the ban on political campaign intervention by 501(c)(3) organizations: scope

What types of organizations are restricted by this ban?

     Charities, educational institutions and religious organizations, including churches, are among those tax-exempt organizations restricted. [Note from Jeff: 501(c)(3) news organizations are also included] 

     Less than 10% of county elections offices posted the Secretary of State's updates in a non-partisan and clear manner. Try a simple experiment. Go to any Colorado county website and try to find information about how to vote a Unity Party ballot. Boulder, Jefferson, and Larimer counties did the best jobs of providing critical voting information. However, in most other counties, the information is either not on the website at all or is difficult to find. That makes it partisan and favoring the two major parties.  My April 30 and May 28 emails urged the Secretary of State to correct the problem of incomplete and confusing election information on county election websites. That was not achieved.

     One of the responsibilities of the Colorado Attorney General is to ensure "free and fair" elections. My two emails to AG Weiser's gubernatorial campaign team urged the Attorney General to correct the problem of incomplete and confusing election information at the county level. My emails were acknowledged by his team. However, I'm not aware of any evidence that Attorney General Weiser made an effort to correct the problem from which he benefitted. 

     Only a small number of counties made an impressive and good faith effort to include the Sec. of State's updates. Those were Jefferson, Boulder, and Larimer Counties.  Only a minor amount of information needed to be added to comply with relevant laws that are meant to ensure "free and fair elections." 

     Posting the existence of the "Unity Party" primary and its candidates for governor "Paul Noel Fiorino" and "Jeff Peckman", required adding only seven words. Even that was not done by most of the county election offices, except in the "Sample Ballot". However, again, most county election offices did not provide instructions in a timely manner for how major party members and unaffiliated voters could cast a Unity Party ballot. That made the information biased and partisan in a way that favored the two major parties.

Democratic candidate AG Phil Weiser, and Republican candidate Victor Marx, benefitted from this type of election fraud! The two-party stranglehold pervades government at all levels. 

"Concidentally", and possibly in response to my media May 30 media release, "Rampant Fraud in Colorado Election, Says Gubernatorial Candidate", a media release on June 3, 2026, stated:

"Secretary Jena Griswold Reminds Voters to Use Trusted Sources; Raises Awareness of Election Disinformation

Denver, June 3, 2026 - Ballots for the 2026 Primary Election will be sent to voters beginning next week. Secretary of State Jena Griswold is reminding voters to always use trusted election sources and remain alert to election disinformation.

     "Election disinformation continues to be used to undermine our democracy and divide our nation," said Secretary Griswold. “Coloradans should consult trusted sources, including GoVoteColorado.gov and their County Clerk’s Office, to learn more about elections in Colorado.”... 

***

     The tragic irony is that the Secretary of State's website, and over 90% of Colorado county websites, were a primary source of election disinformation, misinformation, and confusing information. 

     The Sec. of State called County Clerk's Offices a "trusted source", and yet they were clearly not a trusted source for complete and non-partisan election information. In my view, that is fraud! So, in essence, the election was "rigged" to the advantage of the two major parties and to the disadvantage of the one minor party in the primary -- the Unity Party!