Arizona Audit Results Reveal Donald Trump Lost to Joe Biden by Even Bigger Margin

A hand recount of Maricopa County's 2020 presidential election vote has reiterated official results that showed Joe Biden won, an election audit draft report has said.

Auditors in Arizona found that the county's election had not been stolen from Donald Trump, as some of his supporter had claimed, and that the former president had lost by more votes than earlier official results declared.

The hand count found Trump won 45,469 fewer votes than Biden, whereas earlier county results showed he lost by 45,109—a relatively small discrepancy of 360.

It also gave Biden an extra 99 votes—up from 1,040,774 to 1,040,873.

Overall, the draft report shows there was less than a 1,000-vote difference between the county's certified ballot count and the hand count.

The report compiled by Cyber Ninjas, the Arizona Senate's lead contractor, and other subcontractors was obtained and reviewed by The Arizona Republic.

The 110-page report titled "Maricopa County Forensic Audit" recommends changes to state elections law and suggestions on how the county could better keep voter information updated, how it handles ballots and maintain voting machine security.

Cyber Ninjas were paid millions of dollars to carry out the audit by nonprofits set up Trump's allies and those in the "Stop the Steal" movement. Cyber Ninjas CEO, Doug Logan, has maintained that any payments would not influence the audit.

The final report is set to be given to state senators at about 1 p.m. E.T. on Friday.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: Wish a nigga would, AmateurComedicTaxidermist, Flaming Insignias and 3 others
Click to expand...
It's time to do the humane thing.

Screen Shot 2021-09-25 at 8.54.56 AM.png
 
  • Dislike
  • Like
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Karlheinz Hynkel, Baroque and 2 others
RandomTwitterGuy said:
You retards have claimed fuckery with no evidence for more than a year now.
Click to expand...
I love that you’re placing the onus of proof on me personally, when multiple attempts to present proof of fuckery in a court of law have been quashed prior to the evidentiary presentation.
It’s almost like you’re saying ‘heh, so fraud allegations are bullshit, and we know this because the lower courts that Democrats have been stacking for twenty years are refusing to allow evidence to be tabled’. As if people theoretically conspiring to rig the world’s most important election would somehow fail to also cover their ass at the most basic levels.
Ask yourself why Shaky Joe has shown absolutely zero interest in assessing the legitimacy of what is arguably the least trusted election in American history. You’d think he’d love to crush that doubt by throwing open the doors to a transparent and independent audit. But no… don’t doubt the process or the reluctance of the establishment to quash doubts about its legitimacy; just ask random fuckwits on a cyberautist e-celeb stalking board to personally reveal the entirety of the conspiracy or GTFO.
 
  • Like
  • Dislike
Reactions: Autistic Joe, Flaming Insignias, OllieOllieKickflip and 5 others
SITHRAK! said:
I love that you’re placing the onus of proof on me personally, when multiple attempts to present proof of fuckery in a court of law have been quashed prior to the evidentiary presentation.
It’s almost like you’re saying ‘heh, so fraud allegations are bullshit, and we know this because the lower courts that Democrats have been stacking for twenty years are refusing to allow evidence to be tabled’. As if people theoretically conspiring to rig the world’s most important election would somehow fail to also cover their ass at the most basic levels.
Ask yourself why Shaky Joe has shown absolutely zero interest in assessing the legitimacy of what is arguably the least trusted election in American history. You’d think he’d love to crush that doubt by throwing open the doors to a transparent and independent audit. But no… don’t doubt the process or the reluctance of the establishment to quash doubts about its legitimacy; just ask random fuckwits on a cyberautist e-celeb stalking board to personally reveal the entirety of the conspiracy or GTFO.
Click to expand...
This is coming from a guy who has never read any of the court filing. Shame on you.

FYI the majority of court rejections came from Republican judges - many of whom Trump appointed.
 
  • Dislike
  • Agree
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Karlheinz Hynkel, Baroque and 3 others
Menotaur said:
This is coming from a guy who has never read any of the court filing. Shame on you.

FYI the majority of court rejections came from Republican judges - many of whom Trump appointed.
Click to expand...
Interesting if true. Funny how you’re claiming Republicans have appointed people that aren’t obligated to follow a party line.
 
SITHRAK! said:
Interesting if true. Funny how you’re claiming a Republicans have appointed people that aren’t obligated to follow a party line.
Click to expand...
They aren't obligated to follow party lines and the ones that do are usually the exception and not the rule.

What happens in a court is entirely different from the political stage, much as the SC while it tends to lean left or right depending on who has stacked it, still manages somehow to remain "neutral enough" to be a working body. You can say anything on TV and even in a non-court hearing and for the most part Rudi, Trump, Sidney and Mike did. I even recall Rudi nearly crying into the microphone saying "these affidavits are signed by citizens under penalty of perjury" but in reality this was not really the case, the affidavits were so vague on purpose (some were actually written by the layers and cut and paste) that almost anything could be summarized from the affidavit.

For anyone doubting the election, there could be no better research than reading all the court filings, all the affidavits and all the judges opinions to understand what transpired in 2020. The real evidence was given in the court documents and it was revealed for what it was - not merely inadequate, but fictional in most accounts and the reason why Sidney Powell and her lawyers that filed some of these matters have been sanctioned is because they knowingly violated ethics and twisted the cases to suit.

One must remember, the stated fraud and how it happened was actually stated prior to any investigation and they attempted to create lawsuits to fit the narrative that had already been disseminated. When they knew of evidence that showed their cases were actually false, they still filed the "evidence" knowing it was false because they were pegged into a corner with the narrative or filed evidence that was so wishy washy it could have meant anything.

The Court cases would take most people about a week or two to study and would provide invaluable information to the reader. It is important to know what the GOP put into the courts and what the democrats put into the courts. It is more startling to find out what the GOP put into the courts to fight back against their own parties lawsuits where Secretaries of States and State Administrations that were GOP were forced to defend their policies and procedures and even the falsehoods presented by their own party!

Remember, most of the defendants in the court cases were NOT Democrats - they were Republicans!
 
  • Dislike
  • Informative
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Karlheinz Hynkel, Leslie Nielsen and 3 others
NekoRightsActivist said:
lol really? For every A&N thread that has liberals or minorities they don't like, there would be at least one autist tardraging about "kill muh degenerate" or posting some edgy jokes.
Click to expand...
pretty decent signal-to-noise ratio
Click to expand...
I gotta ask, do you have reading comprehension issues?
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Autistic Joe, Flaming Insignias, derpherp2 and 8 others
More AWS-8Q Than You said:
I gotta ask, do you have reading comprehension issues?
Click to expand...
Sorry but I just can't see where the "signal" you refered to is, I just click on a random article about a completely random game journalist who made a ranting on guns in vidyas, here's how it goes:
>people who mad at the journalist, because apparently you are not allowed to have a different opinion that you disagree with.
>people who made harmless, normal replies, nothing wrong with that but not very informative neither.
There's like only 4 replies that I would actually consider "signal" and I've already set my bar really low. And I just can't see that how "A&H regulars have decent signal-noise ratio" when it isn't better than youtube comments.
 
  • Dislike
Reactions: Flaming Insignias and Pissmaster
NekoRightsActivist said:
Sorry but I just can't see where the "signal" you refered to is, I just click on a random article about a completely random game journalist who made a ranting on guns in vidyas, here's how it goes:
>people who mad at the journalist, because apparently you are not allowed to have a different opinion that you disagree with.
>people who made harmless, normal replies, nothing wrong with that but not very informative neither.
There's like only 4 replies that I would actually consider "signal" and I've already set my bar really low. And I just can't see that how "A&H regulars have decent signal-noise ratio" when it isn't better than youtube comments.
Click to expand...
I was actually referring to the qualifiers in my statement, not every post is going to be more than shitting on a games "journalist" who's bitching about people liking guns, because the article wasn't about guns in video games, it was about the people who enjoy guns and people who like accuracy in the guns in video games. There's other threads on here where there's plenty of diversity of opinion, constructive discussion, and lots of "Signal," and there's threads that are shit fests, that we can actually have the former is growing rarity on the internet. That's "pretty decent, most of the time."
 
  • Feels
  • Like
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, Leslie Nielsen and NekoRightsActivist
NekoRightsActivist said:
Sorry but I just can't see where the "signal" you refered to is, I just click on a random article about a completely random game journalist who made a ranting on guns in vidyas, here's how it goes:
>people who mad at the journalist, because apparently you are not allowed to have a different opinion that you disagree with.
>people who made harmless, normal replies, nothing wrong with that but not very informative neither.
There's like only 4 replies that I would actually consider "signal" and I've already set my bar really low. And I just can't see that how "A&H regulars have decent signal-noise ratio" when it isn't better than youtube comments.
Click to expand...
how can one man be this autistic
 
  • Agree
  • Like
Reactions: Flaming Insignias, derpherp2, Leslie Nielsen and 1 other person
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back