Arizona Audit Finds Potentially Election-Shifting Numbers Of Illegal Ballots
submitted 2 years ago by [deleted] from (thefederalist.com)
view the rest of the comments →
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (10 children)
No it didn't. It found 99 additional votes for Biden and 261 fewer votes for Trump.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/nicholasreimann/2021/09/24/arizona-audit-cost-trump-supporters-nearly-6-million-only-to-assert-biden-won-by-even-more/?sh=4f5dd4fa2410
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/arizona-republicans-release-findings-widely-panned-election-audit-2021-09-24/
Ken Bennett's report is not the audit.
[–]Questionable 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (9 children)
Of which seventy thousand of those votes were fraudulent. But I guess you're not going to mention that part are you? No, of course not.
You're a good person after all.
Ĥ̅͛ǝ̮̺͕̲̰llo ʍoɹlp' I,m Qnǝsʇᴉouɐqlǝ.̬̘̟ͅ
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (8 children)
Of which seventy thousand of those votes were fraudulent.
The audit is quite clear in its findings. 99 additional votes for Biden and 261 fewer votes for Trump.
https://www.azfamily.com/full-report-cyber-ninjas-results-on-election-audit/pdf_e1967608-1d99-11ec-9f0f-c394f7c3dc5f.html
[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (7 children)
Right. Because if you repeat the same lie, adding in the words "Quite Clear", that changes reality.
You know what does change reality? Arson.
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (6 children)
"Quite clear" is not my argument. I link to the report in question. The results regarding the presidential election are on page 2 on the table in section 4.1
It is quite clear.
There were no missing ballots for Maricopa county. Cyber-ninjas within 300 votes as the original count.
Your stories about there being ballots at that fire are lies. Did you know that?
[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (5 children)
Did you just use a "Fact Check" as a source? You have got to be fucking kidding me.
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (4 children)
Did you just use a "Fact Check" as a source?
Yes.
You have got to be fucking kidding me.
What is your specific objection?
[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - 2 years ago (3 children)
https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/reuters-fact-check-covid-social-media-pfizer-world-economic-forum/
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago* (2 children)
I'm not following. Your specific objection to Reuters fact-check on the Arizona audit is that the owners of Reuters have an interest in Pfizer.
I assume that you realize that Pfizer aren't doing the audit.
They have the same finding in this case as PolitiFact, Snopes, Daily Advent, and International Business times as well as common sense.
On the other hand you've got a tweet by they guy who reckons he invented a "kinematic artifact detection process for detecting fraudulent ballots", which is noted for having no evidence that it works.
[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - 2 years ago (1 child)
"I'm not following. Your specific objection to Reuters fact-check
Of course you are not. As you specifically leave out the mention of the World Economic Forum, and then go on to mention a list of known paid and compromised fact checkers. You don't follow anyone who isn't paid for their opinions to be pushed through the main stream media. Because you only trust the establishment.
use the following search parameters to narrow your results:
e.g. sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
sub:pics site:imgur.com dog
advanced search: by author, sub...
~1 user here now
It's All Politics
view the rest of the comments →
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (10 children)
[–]Questionable 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun - (9 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (8 children)
[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (7 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (6 children)
[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (5 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (4 children)
[–]Questionable 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun - (3 children)
[–]ActuallyNot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun - (2 children)
[–]Questionable 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun - (1 child)