3746
Comments (1971)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
20
Deplorable92 20 points ago +21 / -1

From Fann to the AG:

"The auditor’s final hand count—which quadruple-checked every single one of the 2.1 million ballots—matches Maricopa County’s official machine count. This is the most important and encouraging finding of the audit. The paper ballots in Maricopa County are the best evidence of voter intent because they are under 24-hour video surveillance and physical security, and there is no reliable evidence that they were altered to any material degree. This finding therefore addresses the sharpest concerns about the integrity of the certified results in the 2020 general election."

So apparently, the 30k+ DUPLICATE ballots don't matter in an election that was won by 10k votes?! Fann thinks the 2020 results are justified because the recount totals match Maricopas. Horseshit.

www.azsenaterepublicans.com for details

26
chillerspoon 26 points ago +26 / -0

The duplicate votes are a big fat red herring - this is not where Maricopa County's vote was stolen. The 25% of duplicate votes after election day would indicate edge software errors, leading to double envelopes - Trump needs to stay away from this. I guarantee if the duplicate votes are opened and counted they will split fairly evenly if not even more will break for Trump lowering his vote further.

EDIT: Supposedly of duplicate envelopes matched to a paper ballot they did indeed break in favor of Trump, not where the steal happened period.

The steal happened in ADJUDICATION and this is why all the logs were cleared the day before the audit began. ~12% of the vote was adjudicated and ~12% of the ballot images on the EMS were CORRUPTED and unable to be linked to a paper ballot. You have over 250,000 paper ballots that do not have matching ballot images - this is where the steal was, all machines tied to the election should have been seized the second the vote count ended, it's going to be very hard to prove the steal now without an insider - and you only need a small team to pull a steal through adjudication off, especially when remote access was enabled. (team of 4 could have done this easily)

EDIT: https://c692f527-da75-4c86-b5d1-8b3d5d4d5b43.filesusr.com/ugd/2f3470_d36cb5eaca56435d84171b4fe7ee6919.pdf Page 70; 263,139 corrupt ballot images, all after November 1st and they determine NONE of these went through "official" adjudication....likely because it was all done remotely. It's pretty clear this was an intentional process but good luck proving it.

1
Deplorable92 1 point ago +1 / -0

So there’s a note at the bottom of pg. 70 that says Maricopa was asked to provide copies of the corrupted ballot images. Could Maricopa be forced to provide them if this case is handed over to the Attorney General, or are they unrecoverable?

2
Colonel_Chestbridge 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly this. Duplicate is a red herring. Easiest thing to find, just put there so the media can say “duplicate votes favor Trump, he loses again”

It’s the machines, fake ballots, and complete lack of signature verification.

The fact that admins and users share usernames and passwords should be enough for someone to go to jail even if no one took advantage of it. But they definitely did, even caught on camera illegally deleting thousands of files.

4
GlacialSpeed 4 points ago +4 / -0

^ THIS

This is what the Antrim County audit uncovered also.

Large amount of adjudicated votes (manually selected by machine admin). Then the adjudication logs ONLY for 2020 were wiped from the machines while leaving previous year's logs intact.

This is how they've really been stealing elections for a very long time

2
shill273 2 points ago +2 / -0

You're right on the money. ADJUDICATION was a mess. No chain of custody, no logs, no peer review. A singler person was sitting in front of a PC and could adjudicate (aka alter) ballots willingly with the click of a button and THAT ALTERED VERSION would become the final, counted ballot!!!, the original source got deleted. Now couple that with some reports of adjudication rates as high as 30% and all you need is one bad actor in a key position to swing the entire election...

7
GBA4ever 7 points ago +7 / -0

I wanted to hear more about that. For the first time ever in Cook County Il on Election Day I was given a sharpie to mark my ballot. I wonder how widespread the sharpie/adjudication thing was.

22
maga_mama_757 22 points ago +22 / -0

I'm really disappointed with the first paragraph of that letter. It makes me wonder if Fann missed the whole point. Of course the counts matched; they made damn sure of that. That was never the point.

1
ShyRipley 1 point ago +1 / -0

Right?

What the hell... all this time she seemed a champion of the truth and now this. I mean... if there are fraudulent ballots/votes in the pile and you count them twice and the number is the same both times, you are just counting pieces of paper at that point.

She is totally missing the "process error" illegal votes already outlined. And we have yet to see the paper inspection results...

omgosh I was feeling pretty hyped right after the hearing, but now this. It almost feels like somebody got to her or something. My paranoia just got Big. :/

2
maga_mama_757 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly, and all that leaves me baffled. I refuse to believe that she just didn't "get it." She knows the count doesn't matter much if some of the ballots counted were illegitimate. So that leaves us with what?

I don't know if someone got to her, or if she was just unwilling to go the distance. But it leaves me feeling defeated, and feeling like there isn't really anywhere to go from here.

3
ShyRipley 3 points ago +3 / -0

Good morning!

Take a deflated day. Decompress day. Chill moment. I think we all earned that.

Although ProfessorOak just pinged us with a new post so maybe just take a chill morning and be recharged by this afternoon? :D

6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
6
deleted 6 points ago +6 / -0
1
Yahyeetw 1 point ago +1 / -0

Da fuq

4
AccipiterQ 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think his point was that outside parties couldn't say they rejiggered the number of ballots, or had lost things.