Arizona Election Audit

[AshG]

Did we get this news from Telegram? Tumblr? A fortune cookie? The bottom of a box of cracker jacks?

 

[VolinWayne]

The big take away to me is the ghost voter numbers. Not surprising though.

I love it how some people on here still think it’s about Trump. I don’t see him coming back unless elected again in 2024. It’s about election integrity which we apparently haven’t had for at least one to two decades. Hopefully people will continue to wake up and vote integrity laws (like in Texas) will continue to be put in place.

This is what I've been saying all along. It's all about election integrity and the canvas results have exposed a lot of things that need to be fixed. I'm so ready for the audit results to be released. It will be epic.

 

[AM64]

If Joe Biden was conducting the audit, would you have an issue with that?

How about George Soros?

Bill Nye?

That was more a tease ... low hanging fruit. I don't even know who Bill Nye is. I'm offended that Soros even breathes the air in this universe. If biden lost and had a legitimate question, no; audits should be basically routine if requested. You are working under the assumption that someone directly affected can't be unbiased. If there were no bias, then nobody would look - that's just the way it is. Should biden be part of the review. No, but not a problem at all if he commissioned an honest review. What you and others are attempting to do is portray this as a less than honest effort by character assassination even before there are results.

I come from an engineering background - years of diagnosing problems in nuclear plants. Even when working for the manufacturer, my objective was to learn what was wrong, and not find something that benefitted the company. That's simple integrity; if you don't find the real reason, you'll be back again with a tarnished reputation. After every job, you should always ask if you did it right, if you did your best, could you have done better. Honest, thorough, after election reviews should be the norm; apparently they aren't.

 

[VolinWayne]

'Decertify The Election Of 2020 & Recall The Electors': AZ Sec. Of State Candidate Finchem On Maricopa Cty Canvass Report

 

[ClearwaterVol]

And the Trump fans predictably ignore any posts about the shortcomings of the audit and praise it.

1. Why weren't affidavits from individuals from whom votes were stolen?
2. Is this report unbiased. If you believe so, address this quote - "These results are a travesty to our democracy and our voting rights. In addition to impacted local races, such as Maricopa County Board of Supervisors District 1, decided by 403 votes, key statewide race margins are well within the numbers shown above. The Presidential race was decided by 10,457 votes statewide, and the U.S. Senate election was decided by 78,886 votes statewide."
3. And why did they choose to focus more on some districts rather than others? The statistical validity of the report would require an even sampling from all districts.
4. Did they check to see if some of these lost votes were votes that were received late?
5. Statistics show that mail in votes were overwhelmingly for Biden. Probably because Trump told his voters not to trust mail in ballots.
6. There is a big incentive for Trump supporters that did not vote to now claim their vote was lost. There can be no penalty because you cannot prove it is a lie.

 

[utvolpj]

The big take away to me is the ghost voter numbers. Not surprising though.

I love it how some people on here still think it’s about Trump. I don’t see him coming back unless elected again in 2024. It’s about election integrity which we apparently haven’t had for at least one to two decades. Hopefully people will continue to wake up and vote integrity laws (like in Texas) will continue to be put in place.

Of course it's about Trump. No one actively participating in this would be doing so if Trump had won. No one would be the least bit interested in "election integrity" if Biden lost. This is a scam

 

[whodeycin85]

And the Trump fans predictably ignore any posts about the shortcomings of the audit and praise it.

1. Why weren't affidavits from individuals from whom votes were stolen?
2. Is this report unbiased. If you believe so, address this quote - "These results are a travesty to our democracy and our voting rights. In addition to impacted local races, such as Maricopa County Board of Supervisors District 1, decided by 403 votes, key statewide race margins are well within the numbers shown above. The Presidential race was decided by 10,457 votes statewide, and the U.S. Senate election was decided by 78,886 votes statewide."
3. And why did they choose to focus more on some districts rather than others? The statistical validity of the report would require an even sampling from all districts.
4. Did they check to see if some of these lost votes were votes that were received late?
5. Statistics show that mail in votes were overwhelmingly for Biden. Probably because Trump told his voters not to trust mail in ballots.
6. There is a big incentive for Trump supporters that did not vote to now claim their vote was lost. There can be no penalty because you cannot prove it is a lie.

There were affidavits presented last time and the were ignored and discredited by court, DOJ, and Dems...so how would these be treated different??

 

[USAFgolferVol]

The big take away to me is the ghost voter numbers. Not surprising though.

I love it how some people on here still think it’s about Trump. I don’t see him coming back unless elected again in 2024. It’s about election integrity which we apparently haven’t had for at least one to two decades. Hopefully people will continue to wake up and vote integrity laws (like in Texas) will continue to be put in place.

It's all about Trump

 

[ClearwaterVol]

There were affidavits presented last time and the were ignored and discredited by court, DOJ, and Dems...so how would these be treated different??

Because then you would have two affidavits. One from canvasser and one from person making the claim. Just seems like the proper way to do it. And most of those affidavits were discredited because what they were saying did not necessarily support the legal assertions being set forth.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

That was more a tease ... low hanging fruit. I don't even know who Bill Nye is. I'm offended that Soros even breathes the air in this universe. If biden lost and had a legitimate question, no; audits should be basically routine if requested. You are working under the assumption that someone directly affected can't be unbiased. If there were no bias, then nobody would look - that's just the way it is. Should biden be part of the review. No, but not a problem at all if he commissioned an honest review. What you and others are attempting to do is portray this as a less than honest effort by character assassination even before there are results.

I come from an engineering background - years of diagnosing problems in nuclear plants. Even when working for the manufacturer, my objective was to learn what was wrong, and not find something that benefitted the company. That's simple integrity; if you don't find the real reason, you'll be back again with a tarnished reputation. After every job, you should always ask if you did it right, if you did your best, could you have done better. Honest, thorough, after election reviews should be the norm; apparently they aren't.

So, you think the best approach is for a disgruntled defeated politician to run the canvassing operation and company owned by a man who constantly tweeted his support of Trump and promoted hair brained conspiracies were who should have been chosen to perform honest reviews.

 

[SlingBlayde]

It's all about Trump

In your mind

 

[clarksvol00]

There were affidavits presented last time and the were ignored and discredited by court, DOJ, and Dems...so how would these be treated different??

I posted a link to a court case out of Michigan awhile back regarding the affidavits. I think it was from the hearing about penalties for Lin Wood and Kraken. It talks about the affidavits and quotes them directly. The affidavits most heavily relied upon by the people trying to "stop the steal" were nothing but speculative assertions along the lines of "I saw a man pull up to a place and people took things out of the trunk, I assumed they were ballots." From what I can tell about the legal system, that's not proof, that's speculation.

 

[whodeycin85]

I posted a link to a court case out of Michigan awhile back regarding the affidavits. I think it was from the hearing about penalties for Lin Wood and Kraken. It talks about the affidavits and quotes them directly. The affidavits most heavily relied upon by the people trying to "stop the steal" were nothing but speculative assertions along the lines of "I saw a man pull up to a place and people took things out of the trunk, I assumed they were ballots." From what I can tell about the legal system, that's not proof, that's speculation.

1000s of affidavits saying all or similar info..and all speculation?? Seems unlikely they are all speculative. Especially when the all the people see similar or the same incidents....rarely is there smoke and no fire...

 

[clarksvol00]

1000s of affidavits saying all or similar info..and all speculation?? Seems unlikely they are all speculative. Especially when the all the people see similar or the same incidents....rarely is there smoke and no fire...

Go read the opinion. Its somewhere in this thread and the "Proof of the Election Fraud" thread. Kraken and Co should have relied on better affidavits if there were thousands to choose from.

 

[whodeycin85]

Go read the opinion. Its somewhere in this thread and the "Proof of the Election Fraud" thread. Kraken and Co should have relied on better affidavits if there were thousands to choose from.

I look for it

 

[ClearwaterVol]

1000s of affidavits saying all or similar info..and all speculation?? Seems unlikely they are all speculative. Especially when the all the people see similar or the same incidents....rarely is there smoke and no fire...

It was the leap in logic assuming that what they describe was anything nefarious. That makes it speculation and doesn't equal smoke or fire.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

And still nobody is willing to take a crack at the shortcomings I noticed in the 5 minutes I took to read over that "report."

 

[AM64]

And the Trump fans predictably ignore any posts about the shortcomings of the audit and praise it.

1. Why weren't affidavits from individuals from whom votes were stolen?
2. Is this report unbiased. If you believe so, address this quote - "These results are a travesty to our democracy and our voting rights. In addition to impacted local races, such as Maricopa County Board of Supervisors District 1, decided by 403 votes, key statewide race margins are well within the numbers shown above. The Presidential race was decided by 10,457 votes statewide, and the U.S. Senate election was decided by 78,886 votes statewide."
3. And why did they choose to focus more on some districts rather than others? The statistical validity of the report would require an even sampling from all districts.
4. Did they check to see if some of these lost votes were votes that were received late?
5. Statistics show that mail in votes were overwhelmingly for Biden. Probably because Trump told his voters not to trust mail in ballots.
6. There is a big incentive for Trump supporters that did not vote to now claim their vote was lost. There can be no penalty because you cannot prove it is a lie.

So the dem gestapo could show up at their doors? Remember all the court cases with affidavits ... the ones that were dismissed because there was no proof of wrongdoing? Why would a rational person want to provide his name on a complaint that's going to be ignored and put himself/herself in line for harassment? Yes, we realize that one dem vote lost is a tragedy but thousands of illegal votes gained or lost is just a statistic - unless it flips things not the way you want.

 

[BowlBrother85]

nm

 

[BowlBrother85]

This is from www.azcentral.com and it concerns the Liz Harris canvass report:

The original cover pictured on the canvass report appeared to be of a vacant lot in Goodyear with a caption that said, it "cast two mail-in votes." However, an aerial map of the property available online at the Maricopa County Accessor's website, shows a home with a pool on the 4.3 acre property. According to realtor.com, it has five bedrooms and 3.5 baths. Per county records, it also has two registered voters living at the address originally portrayed as being an empty lot by the Liz Harris canvass report.

A local ABC affiliate reporter named Garrett Archer, pointed this out to Liz Harris, and the cover of the canvass report was quickly changed to a vacant lot in Tempe, with a caption that read "that cast a mail-in vote." Archer then contacted the homeowners living at the first address which had originally been pictured on the cover of the canvass report. Archer asked if they had voted in the 2020 Presidential Election, and they both replied that they had voted for Donald Trump, and that they were unaware that a portion of their property was being used to make a case for voter fraud. The property owners said that they will consider taking legal action against Liz Harris for using an image of their property to make this false claim.

Does it sound like Liz Harris and her "report" are going to be difficult to discredit?

 

[VolinWayne]

And still nobody is willing to take a crack at the shortcomings I noticed in the 5 minutes I took to read over that "report."

If I had to guess I would imagine that most people have finally figured out that its a complete waste of time arguing with people like you. What's hilarious is people like you pointing out bias.

 

[lostsheep]

Get over it already.
Donnie got dat azz beat regardless of how many ways the cult tries to spin the ‘zona results.
Now, quit your bitchin and go get in line for the vaccine!!

 

[clarksvol00]

I look for it

Just got a chance to look for it. Its a long document, but if remember correctly it has a good discussion of what the affidavits say versus what they need to say to pass muster. There may be 1000s of affidavits, but if these were the ones the lawyers were relying on, the other affidavits were really bad or the lawyers were really dumb.

Looks like it would have gone better for the Kraken if the courts had actually ignored the affidavits. This has a good discussion on the reason the affidavits weren't the silver bullets people kept claiming.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/r...d.350905/gov.uscourts.mied.350905.172.0_3.pdf

 

[BowlBrother85]

If I had to guess I would imagine that most people have finally figured out that its a complete waste of time arguing with people like you. What's hilarious is people like you pointing out bias.

Who is in the wrong here?

Is it Liz Harris for taking a picture of an unused portion of a sprawling 4.3 acre property in Goodyear, Arizona and then misrepresenting the picture as being that of an entire small and completely vacant property with an address that two people had supposedly used to fraudulently cast mail-in votes?

.... or is it the people who point out the bias and dishonesty of Liz Harris?

 

[BowlBrother85]

Get over it already.
Donnie got dat azz beat regardless of how many ways the cult tries to spin the ‘zona results.
Now, quit your bitchin and go get in line for the vaccine!!

They don't care about the truth. They just want someone to tell them that Trump really won. Look at these posts from the last two pages... they were taking this canvass report at face value, with no skepticism at all. There was even talk of decertification.