The Columbus Dispatch

Experts cite issues with Ariz. audit

Bias of contractor­s and funders among concerns

- Jonathan J. Cooper

PHOENIX – A cybersecur­ity firm plucked from relative obscurity to conduct an unpreceden­ted review of ballots in Arizona’s largest county is readying to present its findings to Republican lawmakers.

Experts say there should be little anticipati­on about the revelation­s from the Maricopa County audit – and whatever those revelation­s are, they cannot be taken seriously.

“There are too many flaws in the way this review was conducted to trust it,” said Tray Grayson, a former Republican secretary of state in Kentucky who was the coauthor of a paper outlining the extensive problems.

Grayson cites a series of red flags, from biased and inexperien­ced contractor­s to conspiracy-chasing funders and bizarre, unreliable methods.

The report by Cyber Ninjas, a small cybersecur­ity firm based in Sarasota, Florida, to lead the audit, is scheduled to be handed over Monday, but the findings will not immediatel­y be made public.

Republican­s in the state Senate launched the review of the county ballots in April in an effort to find irregulari­ties that could support former President Donald Trump’s false claims of a stolen election.

The lawmakers did so despite the fact that the ballots had been counted and audited twice already. Courts in Arizona and other 2020 battlegrou­nd states have rejected dozens of election suits as judges found no evidence to support claims of fraud.

A broad coalition of government and industry officials called the presidenti­al election “the most secure in American history.”

Trump’s attorney general, Bill Barr, said, “to date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”

In Arizona, the number of problemati­c ballots reported was nowhere near Democrat Joe Biden’s winning margin

of 10,400 votes.

The state Senate president, Republican Karen Fann, insists the review was meant only to determine whether Arizona’s election laws were good enough.

Still, leaders of the review have a history of making misleading claims about their findings, and those claims are amplified by Trump and his allies.

A look at what election experts cite as the top troubles with the election review in Maricopa County:

Biased contractor­s

Fann selected Cyber Ninjas even though it had no prior experience in elections and never submitted a formal bid for the work. Its owner, Doug Logan, had tweeted support for conspiracy theories claiming Biden’s victory was illegitima­te. Logan deleted his Twitter account before his Arizona contract was announced.

“I’m tired of hearing people say there was no fraud,” read one tweet that Logan retweeted. “It happened, it’s real, and people better get wise fast.”

The auditors recruited workers from Republican activist groups and did not live up to promises to screen them for

biased social media posts. A former Republican state lawmaker who was at the riot at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 was spotted counting ballots for several days. His unsuccessf­ul state House race was on thousands of the recounted ballots.

For a time, the official Twitter account tied to the audit leaders published attacks on Democrats and journalist­s covering the process. The account was later banned for violating Twitter’s rules.

Standard election reviews are conducted by bipartisan teams following rigid procedures designed to prevent bias and human error from corrupting the results, said Jennifer Morrell, a former Utah elections official and partner at The Elections Group, a consulting firm.

“They’re done in a way that’s observable, that’s independen­t, that’s public,” Morrell said.

Biased funding sources

The review was funded almost exclusivel­y by groups led by prominent Trump supporters active in the movement to cast doubt on the 2020 election results.

As of July, five groups had raised nearly $5.7 million for the effort. Among those leading the fundraisin­g groups are Michael Flynn, Trump’s former national security advisor; Sydney Powell, his attorney who filed a number of baseless lawsuits challengin­g election results; Patrick Byrne, a former chief executive of Overstock.com; and correspond­ents from the pro-trump One America News Network.

The money from pro-trump groups dwarfs the $150,000 contribute­d by the Arizona Senate, which commission­ed the audit and hired Cyber Ninjas.

Funding the audit with cash from interested parties who would like to see the effort replicated in other states raises serious doubts about the validity of the findings, said Ben Ginsberg, a prominent Republican election attorney.

“The audience is the funders,” Ginsberg said. “The outside funding sources is really important to concentrat­e on in terms of talking about the legitimacy of the audit.”

Inaccurate claims

The findings discussed publicly so far have fallen apart under scrutiny, but not before taking hold with Trump and many of his supporters who believe his false claims of fraud.

The auditors claimed a database directory was deleted from an election management server, alleging the potential illegal destructio­n of data.

But after Maricopa County’s technical staff explained how the hard drives on the servers were arranged, the audit’s lead digital analyst, Ben Cotton of the firm CYFIR, acknowledg­ed that he had located all of the allegedly deleted files.

Logan has made a variety of claims about supposed irregulari­ties that he said merited further research. He claimed there were thousands of mail ballots for which there was no record of a ballot being requested, and alleged that problems with paper and printers could allow for errors in counting ballots marked with Sharpies. Trump parroted the claims as evidence the election results are tainted. But all of them were wrong.

 ?? ROSS D. FRANKLIN/AP FILE ?? Experts say there should be little anticipati­on about the revelation­s from the unpreceden­ted review of ballots in Arizona’s largest county.
ROSS D. FRANKLIN/AP FILE Experts say there should be little anticipati­on about the revelation­s from the unpreceden­ted review of ballots in Arizona’s largest county.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States