Replies

This is the title and some extended excerpts, but not the whole piece.

Trump Loses Arizona—Again
He still cries ‘fraud’ even after the audit he demanded found none.

1. Hand recount of Maricopa by the cyber ninjas added 500 votes to Biden's lead.

2."True to his nature, Mr. Trump is claiming vindication based on the audit’s analysis of voter files. As the biggest example, he says Arizona’s results include “23,344 mail-in ballots, despite the person no longer living at that address. Phantom voters!” No. Did he read the report? This figure comes from comparing voter records to a commercial database on change-of-address filings, but look at the caveats:
Cyber Ninjas says errors are normal when using commercial data. Most of these voters barely moved: 15,035 stayed in Maricopa County, and another 1,718 went somewhere else in Arizona. Only 40% were Democrats and 33% Republicans. The audit also admits there are “ways that a voter could receive their ballot which in some cases would not violate the law.”
College students move often, but they could easily pick up ballots that were inadvertently sent home or to old roommates. What about people serving in the military, taking extended vacations, or working remotely? Address changes were probably noisier than usual last year, given how the pandemic scrambled life. The report offers no evidence that any of these people voted illegally.

3.The audit takes aim at other alleged discrepancies, but without providing conclusive explanations, much less proof of wrongdoing. The state’s official results, the report claims, show 3,432 more ballots than can be accounted for using the voter files. Yet in the middle of his presentation Friday, the CEO of Cyber Ninjas, Doug Logan, said Maricopa County recently gave a benign explanation: Arizona has a separate protected voter list, which is used to shield the locations of judges, battered women, and so forth.

4. Another set of 9,041 voters, 34% Democrats to 30% Republicans, show up in the data as having returned multiple ballots. This “could be explained in any of the possible ways,” Cyber Ninjas speculates, ranging from clerical error to fraud. Or not. “The majority of these,” says a spokeswoman for the Maricopa County Elections Department, “are voters that had questionable signatures that were cured or blank signatures that were eventually signed.” In other words: “This shows our Early Voting team was doing their job.”

The tell is that the Journal opened with the ludicrously meaningless assertion that the audit showed that Trump “actually lost the state by 360 more votes than originally reported.”

From there it’s a straight assumption that the Maricopa County response is valid.

Paul Gigot has his head of the Bush/Romney/Chamber/globalist/Never Trump pipeline, so this editorial is entirely expected.

It’s pretty clear that the different groups of ballots have different levels of certainty. The voters who moved, certainly have *some* of the circumstances the WSJ described, and this is one of the more uncertain categories. That does not mean that the category should not have been identified, but it does mean that people should not treat it as certitude. It is something which needs to *actually* be explained, rather than throwing guesses over the walls with no sense of what proportion of the questions are answered by that explanation, and specific legal action was taken to prevent such certitude in this step.

So what ballot envelopes were cured? How many? The County should have that information at their fingertips.

The WSJ overlooked several of the categories that are considerably more difficult to explain and pretended they aren’t there at all.