Arizona Election Audit

#877
#877
clarksvol00 said:
It could result in findings of fraud, however those findings will be suspect because the people conducting the audit are already known to be in league with Sidney Powell. Should have hired a legit firm.
Click to expand...

I feel certain if the left feel a re-audit is in order they will certainly find a qualified and non biased accounting firm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NCFisher, RavinDave, StarRaider and 1 other person
#882
#882
clarksvol00 said:
It could result in findings of fraud, however those findings will be suspect because the people conducting the audit are already known to be in league with Sidney Powell. Should have hired a legit firm.
Click to expand...
^^^^100% spot on^^^^

I have said this a hundred times. Those Republicans in Arizona who hired Doug Logan's firm to conduct their audit, aren't trying to establish what the accurate vote total was, and alleviate any public doubt over who really won the state of Arizona in the 2020 Presidential Election. The mission of the Arizona state legislature is just the opposite, in fact. They are trying to undermine the public's trust in our democratic system of elections, so they can justify passing more stringent voting restrictions, raise money from bitter Republican voters, and salve Donald Trump's bruised ego.
 
#883
#883
clarksvol00 said:
Its not a partisan issue though. If you're gonna audit, get somebody legit to do it.
Click to expand...

You are right; it shouldn't be a partisan issue, and there should be unannounced audits all around the country pre and post-election. Every time I see videos of the counting process and other behind the scenes operations during an election I'm left completely uninspired that things are being done right. It's an absurdly unprofessional look ... "slovenly" would be kind.
 
#884
#884
Orangeslice13 said:
I’m not sure you guys can decide on a “legitimate “ auditor.
Edit: By you guys I mean Republicans and Democrats
Click to expand...
It damn sure isn't someone who has been spreading disinformation on the website of an attorney linked to one of the two campaigns involved in the election... and who has already called the election "rigged", before his firm's audit even began. Republicans in Arizona would have had a hard time finding any firm more biased than that of Doug Logan's. Logan's agenda is as clear as his vested interest in the outcome of this audit.
 
#885
#885
clarksvol00 said:
Its not a partisan issue though. If you're gonna audit, get somebody legit to do it.
Click to expand...

It is as partisan as it gets. They have filed 50+ lawsuits, when is enough enough?

The only reason you are on board with it is because its a partisan fight. In general, if I told you some sore loser wont give it up and files lawsuit after lawsuit you would laugh at that clown
 
#886
#886
Orangeslice13 said:
I’m not sure you guys can decide on a “legitimate “ auditor.
Edit: By you guys I mean Republicans and Democrats
Click to expand...

There's obviously going to be debate on the credentials for anybody they select, but if this is the same bunch I've read about in the past (think they tried to get involved in MI), they're knowingly asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
 
#887
#887
Tastylicks said:
It is as partisan as it gets. They have filed 50+ lawsuits, when is enough enough?

The only reason you are on board with it is because its a partisan fight. In general, if I told you some sore loser wont give it up and files lawsuit after lawsuit you would laugh at that clown
Click to expand...

I'm not on board with this firm.
 
#888
#888
clarksvol00 said:
It could result in findings of fraud, however those findings will be suspect because the people conducting the audit are already known to be in league with Sidney Powell. Should have hired a legit firm.
Click to expand...

It matters not a whit; it's not as though they can lock it up and yell "FRAUD" the way Democrats apply "RACIST" to rebut arguments they can't. Any findings of fraud will be publicly, loudly peer-reviewed.

If I were a party in such a dispute, I'd be licking my chops to have the opponent hand-pick his audit team, claim fraud, then my team publicly dismantle it. Unless there's actual fraud, in which case it is what it is.

There's no downside here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#889
#889
clarksvol00 said:
There's obviously going to be debate on the credentials for anybody they select, but if this is the same bunch I've read about in the past (think they tried to get involved in MI), they're knowingly asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
Click to expand...
So let’s audit the results.
If the loser of the audit doesn’t like it hire another firm.
Post the results and let’s get to the bottom of this.

I am no longer willing to just take my governments word for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NurseGoodVol, BreatheUT, Vol737 and 2 others
#890
#890
NCFisher said:
It matters not one whit; it's not as though they can lock it up and yell "FRAUD" the way Democrats apply "RACIST" to rebut arguments they can't. Any findings of fraud will be publicly, loudly peer-reviewed.

If I were a party in such a dispute, I'd be licking my chops to have the opponent hand-pick his audit team, claim fraud, then my team publicly dismantle it. Unless there's actual fraud, in which case it is what it is.

There's no downside here.
Click to expand...

So you're are or are not in favor of another auditor?
 
#893
#893
Orangeslice13 said:
So let’s audit the results.
If the loser of the audit doesn’t like it hire another firm.
Post the results and let’s get to the bottom of this.

I am no longer willing to just take my governments word for it.
Click to expand...

My understanding is the Republicans in the Arizona legislature have instituted the audit and voted to selected the auditor. If I'm right the dems have no say because they don't control the legislature and if they picked an auditor they wouldn't actually have standing to conduct an audit. They'd be kind of like the Republicans that met in a Ramada Inn after the election.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BowlBrother85
#894
#894
clarksvol00 said:
My understanding is the Republicans in the Arizona legislature have instituted the audit and voted to selected the auditor. If I'm right the dems have no say because they don't control the legislature and if they picked an auditor they wouldn't actually have standing to conduct an audit. They'd be kind of like the Republicans that met in a Ramada Inn after the election.
Click to expand...

They met at Four Seasons Landscaping. Not the Ramada Inn
 
#895
#895
clarksvol00 said:
My understanding is the Republicans in the Arizona legislature have instituted the audit and voted to selected the auditor. If I'm right the dems have no say because they don't control the legislature and if they picked an auditor they wouldn't actually have standing to conduct an audit. They'd be kind of like the Republicans that met in a Ramada Inn after the election.
Click to expand...
Once the audits are concluded and made public then they certainly have grounds to challenge....and if they see a problem they should
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#896
#896
clarksvol00 said:
So you're are or are not in favor of another auditor?
Click to expand...

If the partisan auditor finds no fraud, it's done. If they claim fraud, their finding will be peer-reviewed by Dem partisan and independent entities; that is the "another auditor". If they review and contest the finding, review will broaden and become even more public.

Neither side can hide this; it's perfect. Dems should stop trying to derail it and let it run.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orangeslice13 and AM64
#898
#898
NCFisher said:
If the partisan auditor finds no fraud, it's done. If they claim fraud, their finding will be peer-reviewed by Dem partisan and independent entities; that is the "another auditor". If they review and contest the finding, review will broaden and become even more public.

Neither side can hide this; it's perfect. Dems should stop trying to derail it and let it run.
Click to expand...

Is that how it works though? My understanding is this is a legislative event. Its an audit requested by the (republican) state legislature and that is why the legislature selected auditor. I thought if the auditors find fraud, the AZ legislature will vote along party lines to endorse or not endorse the results. That will be the end of it. It will not overturn the election. It will not be appealable by the other side. That's just my limited understanding. My understanding is they need that legislative authority to conduct the audit so there is no subsequent rebuttal investigation.

@Orangeslice13 I think that addresses your post too.
 
#899
#899
Orangeslice13 said:
Your standard post
Click to expand...
Sure.

Only a politically partisan hack would believe that a group of people who are supposedly seeking valid results from an audit, should hire a firm whose owner hasn't already publicly announced a conclusive determination of those results before the audit even began.
 
#900
#900
NCFisher said:
If the partisan auditor finds no fraud, it's done. If they claim fraud, their finding will be peer-reviewed by Dem partisan and independent entities; that is the "another auditor". If they review and contest the finding, review will broaden and become even more public.

Neither side can hide this; it's perfect. Dems should stop trying to derail it and let it run.
Click to expand...
Why not just hire an objective, independent auditor the first time around? They do exist.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top