/www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/09/its_fake_news_that_the_maricopa_audit_proves_biden_won.html
UPDATE: The Cyber Ninjas document is not final. I’ve clarified this post to reflect that fact.
Democrats are strutting because the final Cyber Ninjas audit in Arizona showed that “[t]he auditor’s final hand count—which quadruple-checked every single one of the 2.1 million ballots—matches Maricopa County’s official machine count.” Big whoop. For those complaining about irregularities in the 2020 election, the question was never about miscounting. Instead, it was about the claim that an inordinate number of the ballots in the Joe Biden pile didn’t come from real people. Instead, they were alleged to have been faked—and the audit confirms almost 60,000 wrongfully counted ballots that could easily switch the Arizona Electoral College vote from Biden to Trump. No wonder Cyber Ninjas says the Arizona result should not have been certified.
There are two documents at issue here, one of which is a purported final draft of the executive summary from Cyber Ninjas, which I’ll get to in a moment, and the other of which is a cover letter that Karen Fann, the Arizona Senate President, sent to Mark Brnovich, the Arizona Attorney General. I quoted above from Fann’s cover letter, which offers the meaningless conclusion that a hand count matched the machine count. That’s what the MSM (including Fox, which you may remember was the first to call Arizona for Biden) is crowing about.
However, the same letter, in a small bow to honesty, also points out systemic problems with election security. The five bullet-points can be summarized this way:
absentee ballots were inadequately verified,
voter rolls do not match the ballots, as well as showing duplicate and dead people,
amateurs oversaw election technology and machinery they didn’t understand and misused,
private companies had the passwords to the vote-counting machines, and
election officials deleted material making it impossible to do a truly accurate audit (or, in legal terms, they deliberately spoliated evidence, which I’m guessing might be illegal under statutory requirements that all voting data must be preserved for 22 months after an election).