Arizona found 182 possible voter fraud cases among 3 million ballots

a reply to: Nunyabizisit

I never implied this has anything to with the CyberNinjas.

I have repeatedly said the figure in my OP came from Arizona elected officials who performed a recount audit of the 2020 election. This information is all in my OP.

You are out of line with your accusations that are based off your inability to comprehend what you read.

originally posted by: MykeNukem
a reply to: jrod

The cases were identified by the Associated Press?

WTF is that?

I didnt hear of a separate audit that has reported to the AP. This reeks of getting in front of bad news.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Mikemp44

The AP is not a good source? Find me a better source!(The Gateway Pundit is riddled with half truths and often flat out lies and certainly NOT a trusted source)

Is all you got is an Ad Hominem attack against the AP because it goes against your confirmation bias?


Do you think the CyberNinjas are more credible than the AP?

.

Im wondering when the AP audit was conducted, and why it wasnt reported on, while ongoing. Id like to know their methods and their report on their forensic analysis. This blip comes out of unsubstantiated left field, and ya’ll lap it up and run with it. So obvious.

originally posted by: Waterglass
a reply to: jrod

Lets just say both you and I work for the company. It was all done over seas. No one will ever find it. The next presidential election will be won by the Latino and Cuban population here in the USA. Even an illegal immigrant knows what is best for them once here in the USA

Yes. America will be a better place as we are at war right here right now with China, Russia and Iran.

Trumps issue other than being a Narcissist was that hes a dum ass. That why UNCLE wanted him out. Most of all of his issues were created by him as he spoke from his A hole.

So you feel like the country has taken a better turn now he is gone? You are happy with all thats going on in the Biden admin and America is on a solid footing now?

a reply to: network dude

I do not know what an ad hominem attack is?

Attacking the source is by definition an ad hominem attack. Especially when the attack is baseless and serves to muddy the discussion. Furthermore you will find attacks directed at me in this thread....another form of the ad hominem.


That said I do attack The Gateway Pundit because it is NOT a credible source, I even linked sources to justify my claims. I think you are intelligent enough to NOT believe most stuff published by them.

Unfortunately many on here believe the Gateway Pundit's stories that stroke their confirmation bias and reject credible information and reports from other sites if it does not align with the confirmation bias.

Whether you believe it or not, I look at several sources of information before I take something as fact. I understand that all of us can be blinded by our biases, and come to believe something false quite easily.

Unfortunately many do not, and on a site like this the truth is often drowned out in a sea of ignorance.

originally posted by: jrod

Do you think the CyberNinjas are more credible than the AP?

Is any of them credible anymore. Crap is posted on AP with zero credibility all the time.. A guy who knows a guy, who knows a guy said...level of crap, and then all the news outlets pick it up and run with it like it is the God's honest truth. When it comes out as total crap they wave a wand and say nothing to see here...lol

a reply to: BrujaRebooted

I have spelled this out several times in this thread. It is as if many you do not read the OP, or just struggle big time with reading comprehension.

The figure 182, from the OP, comes from the Arizona election officials. These are the folks who did the recount and audit back in November.

AP stands for the Association Press. That is who reported this story.

For a bunch of know it all's, I should not have to spell stuff like this out to you.

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Nunyabizisit

So all you have is an ad hominem attack, very mature.

I will write this again, this article came from The Guardian who has a pretty good reputation for factual reporting....

This figure, 182, is straight from the Arizona Election officials when they performed an audit and recount before certifying the election. It is not just some made up number, like the story from Gateway Pundit.

I know this forum is far right bias and most of the active members are part of the far right who refuse to accept the 2020 election results, so I was expecting the rejection of reality.

It is sad that a site who once had a motto of 'Deny Ignorance's, now embraces the far right ignorance, and alternative narratives that fringe group push and fake news sites like the Gateway Pundit publish.

mediabiasfactcheck.com...

This says the Guardian is leans leftist and has mixed accuracy.

Gateway Pundit does much worse in this eval, but dont be trumpetting The Guardian either.

Its possible to evaluate a newsbyte and see the problems for yourself using multiple bias sources, as there really isnt any independent news anymore.

originally posted by: MiddleInsite

But it is laughable that it's going to cost Arizona taxpayers millions to replace those machines. LOL! Good for them.

...

So what you are admitting is that the state never had a method for verifying the machines in the first place? You realize when they come from the manufacturer they are in the same potential state as if someone else touched them. They should/must go through a full verification and regression test every time they are touched.

If the county is admitting they can't do this, they are admitting that they never did.

My job is systems verification, so don't even pretend I don't know what I am talking about.

Not easy to find and detect false votes when all the activity has been covered up and bypassed before the recounts and audits😃

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: BrujaRebooted

I have spelled this out several times in this thread. It is as if many you do not read the OP, or just struggle big time with reading comprehension.

The figure 182, from the OP, comes from the Arizona election officials. These are the folks who did the recount and audit back in November.

AP stands for the Association Press. That is who reported this story.

For a bunch of know it all's, I should not have to spell stuff like this out to you.

So I ask what and who did the audit this news being reported now is based on, and you come at me with derision? Why is that?

We all know who the AP is, spelling out the abbreviation in a snide way like we didnt know is just juvenile and says everything we need to know about you. Knock that crap off with me kid.

If this number is from last Nov and done by election officials, its worth very little, but to stir the bolshies up in front of bad news coming out about the FORENSIC audit.

Insults dont intimate me.

Do better.

a reply to: BrujaRebooted

Yes, it is the results from last Nov "audit" performed by the elections officials. It's being rehashed because the actual forensic audit has found discrepancies. I know you know this, but it seems the OP is trying to play interference as well and imply this is some new deboonking.

a reply to: xuenchen

So, this is going to be the excuse now.

Typical.

But, whatever you do keep throwing money at it!!

a reply to: BrujaRebooted

Cuz capitalizing forensic makes it so legit.

Cyber ninjas lolololol.

Do better.

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: BrujaRebooted

Cuz capitalizing forensic makes it so legit.

Cyber ninjas lolololol.

Do better.

The word needs to be brought to some folks attention, clearly.

I wish CyberNinjas had a less 21st Century branding. ‘Google’ sounded ridiculous when it first came on the scene too.

If you have solid criticism of the company conducting the independent (hope that didnt need to be all caps) audit, please present for debate. Otherwise you are just making fun of the name of a contractor having subject matter expertise.

Weak attempt, keep trying.

a reply to: jrod


" Arizona Audit Shows UN-REGISTERED Voters And Evidence-Free Paper Ballots Were Both WAY More Than Biden’s Lead "


" Cyber Ninjas CEO Doug Logan said at a hearing before Arizona state senators Thursday that his election audit found more than 74,000 mail-in ballots that were counted in Maricopa County with no record of them being sent to the voters, and that the standard of verification for mail-in ballots dropped down to zero during the counting process. Logan is demanding the full library of mail-in ballot images from Maricopa County, which the county has not provided to him. Biden’s official lead in Arizona stands at only 10,457 votes."



nationalfile.com...



74,243 Ballots to be EXACT . Biden LOST Arizona and Georgia is Next..........

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: xuenchen

So, this is going to be the excuse now.

Typical.

But, whatever you do keep throwing money at it!!

It will ? ♾️🤣

originally posted by: jrod
a reply to: Mikemp44

The AP is not a good source? Find me a better source!(The Gateway Pundit is riddled with half truths and often flat out lies and certainly NOT a trusted source)

Is all you got is an Ad Hominem attack against the AP because it goes against your confirmation bias?


Do you think the CyberNinjas are more credible than the AP?

Cyber Ninjas, an award winning Information Technology company specializing in security vs the AP, a 20th century newsline that has relayed and reported false information and propaganda many times. hmmmmm. let me think a minute…

Yes. I believe Cyber Ninjas are more credible in the subject matter at hand.

a reply to: jrod

I will say it: I believe Vice President Joe Biden lost the 2020 election.

There. It is said

Gallup Polls and most others are run by corrupt organizations, for corrupt purposes.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: jrod

www.thegatewaypundit.com...

74,000 eh?
Seems a bit more than your 182?

The 74,000 was already debunked.

I live in Phoenix and was one of the 74,000. Arizona allows early in person voting. You show up at a voting center a week or two before the election day, and they print you a ballot on hand right there and you fill it out, and then they give you the same envelopes they send in the mail. You out your ballot in and drop it in the box.

The 74,000 are printed early in person votes. So even if you didn't have a mail in ballot sent out to you, you could still come in and vote early with a printed ballot.