Blessings on you and your family, and from all the Huckabee staff! These are the top stories that ran this week on our website.
Today's newsletter includes:
- More Election Audit Fallout
- “Shut up and obey” is not a strategy for anything
- Who edited the Maricopa County final audit report?
- Arizona presidential vote audit update
More Election Audit Fallout
By Mike Huckabee
On Monday, Dan Bongino provided an overview of the numbers that came out of the Maricopa County election audit and presented some of his “major concerns.” Keep in mind that in the entire state of Arizona, the so-called margin of victory between Biden and Trump was just over 10,000 votes. It’s impossible to overstate how important accuracy was in this unbelievably close election, especially in a huge metropolitan area such as Maricopa County.
Bongino introduced his discussion by explaining the difference between RELIABILITY and VALIDITY. If a scale is calibrated to measure 10 pounds over what the real weight is, that is a reliable measure, even if it’s wrong. You know it’s always going to be 10 pounds heavier than what the scale says. “Something can be reliable but reliably wrong,” he said. So the result it's giving you is not VALID. It’s inaccurate, and you’d have to take that into account.
Likewise, even if you know that elections are reliably off by one or two percentage points because of fraud, that doesn’t mean the results are valid. In a case where the “winner” is shown to be ahead by less than the reliable margin of error, there is NO valid measure of the outcome. I would add that in an election as close as Arizona’s, that would seem to be the case.
Let’s look at a few of these numbers. At first glance, they are staggering. Just in Maricopa County, roughly 23,300 mail-in ballots came from people who were not residing at the address from which they voted.
Also, there were 17,300 duplicate ballots, as well as 2,300 voters who cast a vote in Maricopa County but had moved out of that county.
But voting officials say they can explain at least some of this. For example, of the 23,000 mail-in voters who didn’t reside at the address the ballots had been mailed from, it appears that about 15,000 had simply moved within the county and put the old address on the envelope. So those 15,000 weren’t necessarily from people who voted twice, and they do count. Even so, and very importantly, that still leaves 8,000 ballots.
Officials also say that about 1,700 of those 23,000 had moved out of Maricopa County entirely and were living elsewhere in Arizona, so they were still entitled to vote for President. They weren’t necessarily committing fraud (unless they voted again in their new county; we don’t know).
Officials also determined, he said, that about 33 percent of those mail-in ballots with different addresses were from Republican voters. The rest, presumably, came from Democrats. (I could make a joke here about Democrats being twice as likely not to even know their own addresses, but I will refrain.)
There were also 3,432 “excess” votes. That means they were part of the count but didn’t show up as actual votes. County election officials have offered an explanation: that those votes might have been cast might by victims of domestic abuse who were under protective orders and whose records were not publicly available for the audit. That does seem like a great many people, county-wide, to be under protective orders; I’m sure that figure will be looked at more closely in coming days. Could officials not make available the redacted records, just to show there really were that many?
Of the more than 17,000 duplicate ballots, officials say that about 9,000 were “cured.” In other words, about 9,000 people submitted one ballot but were called back because of some problem with it. Then they submitted a new, corrected ballot, and presumably, that was the only one counted. I don’t know how auditors check that; maybe there’s a way. But even if those are explained, that still leaves about 8,000 cases of duplicate balloting that are NOT explained. Combine that with the roughly 8,000 ballots that had unexplained incorrect addresses and you’ve got 16,000 potential tabulation errors in Maricopa County alone. Again, the margin for the ENTIRE STATE was just over 10,000.
“Arizona’s got some explaining to do,” Bongino said, wondering what it is about facts and data that seem to bother people so much when you bring them up. “If there was fraud, wouldn’t you want to know that?” he asked.
Well, I'd say that if you’re a Democrat --- or an anti-Trump Republican --- and the discovery of the fraud might mean the Democrat didn’t really win, the answer to that question is a hearty NO. You would not want to find that out. It’s quite simple, really.
And in battleground states such as Arizona, state officials are fighting tooth-and-nail to avoid election audits. What does this tell us? Even if the fraud isn’t to the level that would prove Trump actually won, Bongino said, “the Democrats still don’t want you to see the extent to which our elections are a mess without really good, strong voter I.D. where it’s easy to vote and hard to cheat.”
Of course, this audit didn’t even get into the accuracy of the voting machines. Not that the auditors hadn't hoped to, but neither government officials nor Dominion Voting Systems cooperated. Apparently there’s one master administrative password that Dominion won’t relinquish. They’ve tried to have it both ways by withholding supposedly exculpatory evidence AND suing their critics.
So far, they’ve sued or threatened to sue a host of entities, including NEWSMAX, OAN, OAN CEO Robert Herring and his son, OAN president Charles Herring, FOX NEWS, Lou Dobbs, Judge Jeanine Pirro, Rudy Giuliani, Patrick Byrne (who was working with the Arizona audit), Mike Lindell and others. They say they’re considering suing Donald Trump. They’ve sent out over 150 cease-and-desist letters. Smartmatic, another electronic voting systems company, is suing Lou Dobbs, Judge Pirro and Maria Bartiromo.
Dominion made a splash suing Sidney Powell, hoping that would silence her, and the litigation did dramatically lessen her media presence. But now Powell is countersuing Dominion, saying that company has adopted litigation as a public relations strategy. As part of its “lawfare” campaign, she says, Dominion has “filed billion-dollar-plus lawsuits against separate defendants at critical and strategically planned times.” She claims that this behavior is an abuse of process and demands $10 million in damages, plus punitive damages. She also warns that “continued scrutiny of the vulnerabilities of the Dominion voting systems would likely open its executives to criminal and civil liability.” Despite executives’ sworn statements and assurances, she says, “the Dominion patents and manuals expressly provide for remote access to real-time election results, to adjudicate or flip votes, to delete audit logs and votes and other vulnerabilities.”
Powell hits them with no less than 25 different affirmative defenses. Details here.
Please note that unlike the linked-to opinion piece detailing Powell’s defense, we are not calling the Dominion executives “illegal fraudsters.” Certainly not. But there is still no valid reason we have seen to discount the possibility that they are. Perhaps if they gave auditors the password and allowed a transparent analysis of their system, that would give us a reason. In the meantime, they do seem to be using offensive tactics as their defense, which strongly suggests that they HAVE no real defense besides "lawfare" and withholding evidence that auditors need.
“Shut up and obey” is not a strategy for anything
By Mike Huckabee
The Bible tells us in Luke 8:17 (NAS version), “For nothing is concealed that will not become evident, nor anything hidden that will not be known and come to light.” Or as Shakespeare put it in “The Merchant of Venice,” “Truth will come to light; murder cannot be hid long; a man's son may, but at the length, truth will out.” (By the way, “a man’s son” was not a reference to Hunter Biden and his laptops.)
Despite all the power and influence of the government, media and social media, you can only fool the people for so long and hold the lid down on discussion of your chicanery before the under-the-radar chatter finally explodes into the public sphere. We’re seeing that happening all around us these days, with erupting backlash against attempts to censor everything from discussion of vaccine side effects to the origins of COVID-19 to the efficacy of natural immunity to questions about the 2020 election.
Attacking those who speak up only works for so long, particularly when influential people start speaking up, whether it be Eric Clapton, Nikki Minaj or French tennis pro Jeremy Chardy, who says he’s suffering intense pain after getting vaccinated and it's derailed his tennis career.
As noted in the story, that’s not meant to discourage vaccination, since the potential side effects are still less of a risk than COVID. But if you’re asking everyone to take a shot that might have even a tiny chance of serious side effects, then you can’t just order them to shut up and take it without question or else lose their job and all their rights, which is the autocratic method this Administration has chosen. Right now, Americans are scared enough of COVID to go along with that, but “Shut up and obey” is not a strategy that will work longterm in this country.
Likewise, after being silenced and shamed for months into not questioning any aspects of the 2020 election, the findings of various audits and investigations, coupled with the indictment of a top Democrat lawyer on charges related to lying to the FBI to frame Trump and his people for Russian collusion, has many people finally speaking up. Some are even prominent Trump-hating liberals who suddenly seem to have taken the red pill and awakened to what we’ve been telling you here for years now.
Here are two stunning examples: liberal British comedian Russell Brand admitted he was “in awe, gobsmacked, flabbergasted and startled” by the indictment of Michael Sussman and the realization that Trump was right about a conspiracy to frame him. Like too many people, Brand was getting his news from outlets that went on 24/7 about “Russian collusion” as “absolute fact,” so he assumed it must be true (a rookie mistake when watching CNN.)
Brand said he wanted to believe that the Democratic Party is the party of “inclusivity, and diversity and truth and social justice and all great, positive ideas” (yep, that's the image they push, like putting a bouquet of flowers on a pack of cigarettes.) But, he said, “To discover that this was propaganda, a construct, a confection by the Democratic Party — who, of course, are now in government — is kind of beyond disappointing, because you begin to question and query what other things may not be true.”
Yes, and you should! Good for you, Russell. Embrace the truth, and it shall set you free. For a start, you’re welcome to subscribe to my newsletter, which is also free.
Another example, again from Britain, but let’s hope this reflects what’s happening here, too: writer Rob Liddle in the Sunday Times of London is still a Trump hater (as you can tell from his article), but his blinders have started to slip. He admits, “So Trump was right” about the election being rigged against him, and “The American public is slowly waking up to the fact that they are being led by an ineffectually devious, senile halfwit.”
Maybe someday, he'll wake up to the fact that Trump wasn't just a victim of the cabal, he was the only person standing between it and the rest of us and fighting it. But that might take a handful of red pills for some people to see.
Note that he makes the same point that I have made repeatedly: you don’t even have to go into conspiracy theories about hijacked voting machines or stuffed ballot boxes. Just the collusion between Deep State operatives, leftist billionaires, the media, political figures, lawyers, Big Tech and social media to make sure voters heard only one side of the story was enough to unfairly tilt the election – and they’ve openly bragged about how successful that was. They even hail themselves as heroes for making sure the “right” person won by suppressing “unwanted elements of US political conversation” – as determined by them, of course.
Liddle points out that Time magazine said this cabal wasn’t subverting democracy by rigging the election, they were “fortifying” the election. We all need to start speaking up to make sure they don’t “fortify” any more elections. They do it the way cereal makers used to claim their sugary cereals were “fortified” with vitamins. They claim it’s good for you, but it’s just a thin coating over a bowl of junk.
Who edited the Maricopa County final audit report?
By Mike Huckabee
There’s something odd about the Maricopa County, Arizona, Final Audit Report. We’re making no accusations at this point but would like some answers.
It has been reported that part of the Executive Summary has undergone some editing. A draft that was released by Patrick Byrne before the final presentation on Friday contained this passage:
“In the 2020 presidential election, the margin of victory was only 10,457 votes, a small fraction of the 57,734 ballots with known issues. Again, this is almost 6 times the margin of victory in the presidential race and is multiples of the margin of victory in other races. Based on these factual findings, the election should not be certified, and the reported results are not reliable.”
That last statement about certification was apparently edited out of the final report. If that’s the case, we would just like to know who was responsible for this change and why they did it, given the accuracy of the statements that preceded it. Do the reported results sound reliable to you? Really?
Again, no accusations, just a call for answers. It would also be nice to know what else might have been altered. THEN we might have some accusations…
THE EPOCH TIMES has an updated report on what was presented Friday during the Arizona Senate hearing. It has details regarding the anomalies that were found. Highly recommended reading...
Senate President Karen Fann sent a letter Friday to Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich, calling for further investigation and outlining her concerns about the following:
--- signature verification for mail-in ballots
--- voter roll accuracy
--- security of election systems
--- record-keeping of evidence after elections
Brnovich’s office issued a statement that said they had no comment on specific allegations at this time and that they would “thoroughly review the Senate’s information and evidence.” We’ll see.
The recount that was done as one part of the audit found little difference in the vote tallies, but that was just recounting the same ballots over again. Nevertheless, mainstream media reports picked up on that as if it were the only finding, because that’s the story they wanted to tell. Sen. Fann said evidence was found of numerous problems that affected tens of thousands of ballots, including laws being broken and chain of custody not being maintained.
Arizona Democrats responded by (what else?) attacking Cyber Ninjas, one of the teams working on the audit. Democrats obviously have no interest in identifying problems and reforming the system, no matter how much of a mess it is shown to be, as long as that system benefits them.
RELATED READING: OKAY, ONE MORE: Answer to comment re: "fake" Maricopa report
Arizona presidential vote audit update
By Mike Huckabee
Friday, the findings were announced from the Arizona Senate audit of the 2020 Presidential vote in Maricopa County. The way it was reported reminded me of the classic movie “Rashomon,” which invented the concept of completely different versions of the same story being told by different narrators.
Conservative outlets focused on the many irregularities that the audit turned up, such as over 17,000 duplicate ballots, 23,344 mail-in ballots voted from people’s prior addresses, 2,382 in-person voters who’d moved out of the county outside the window of eligibility, and other issues. The total ballots that had something questionable about them was 57,734, far more than Biden’s 10,457-vote margin of victory in Arizona.
Meanwhile, liberal outlets trumpeted the finding that the hand recount of ballots that were accepted in the county showed Biden did win, even picking up a few hundred more votes than originally reported. This wasn’t unexpected, since they were just recounting votes that had already been recounted (and I’ve noticed that whenever you do that, the Democrat total always increases for some reason.)
Incidentally, does anyone else find it amusing that after months of attacking the auditors as crazy, unqualified, unreliable hacks who shouldn’t be listened to, that when they produced a finding Democrats liked, liberal media outlets trumpeted the news as, “Audit vindicates Biden!”
So what conclusion can be drawn from this? Frankly, nothing solid, other than that Arizona needs to get a firm grip on its election procedures going forward. The auditors were blocked from obtaining all the data they needed, and while they found a lot of suspicious irregularities, they also found no hard proof that Biden didn’t win. None of this is going to undo the 2020 election results, no matter how much a growing number of Americans wish it would.
So I’ll just remind you of what I’ve said on several occasions since the November election: it’s not necessary to believe in rigged voting machines or stuffed ballot boxes or any other elaborate chicanery with the altered voting rules to conclude that this was not a fair election. Even if you put all that aside, we know it wasn’t fair because the people who ensured it was unfair not only admitted it, they bragged about it.
We’ve all read about how news outlets and social media platforms proudly threw out any pretense of objectivity to become organs of the Biden campaign, censoring conservative voices, trumpeting any negative news (even fake) about Trump and casting doubt on anything positive about him. Meanwhile, they promoted Biden relentlessly and hid damaging stories like the Hunter Biden laptop revelations from the voters (they called that “disinformation” until Biden was safely elected, and now it’s just “information.”) The media collusion with the Democrats alone was enough to certify this as a blatantly unfair election.
And if anyone on the left protests that their collusion with the Democrats is not rigging an election, remember: they still cling to the claim that the 2016 election was rigged because Trump colluded with Russia to manipulate the media, and that didn’t even turn out to be true.