Detailed as it is, the fact-check by USA Today does not square with the BBC’s fact-check, which calls the vote dump a “data entry error” (as opposed to a “reporting error”); nor does it address the fact that Trump’s lead in Michigan, which the vote dump erased, was not restored after the correction of that “error” (whatever kind it was).
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/11/04/fact-check-typo-led-false-post-michigan-votes-biden/6164385002/
These points were raised by Paul Craig Roberts, so it’s appropriate to quote him:
The BBC claims this was a “data entry error” that was corrected. The “data entry error” was not corrected, if it was, until it became an issue. How does the BBC know that the sudden jump in votes for Biden wasn’t fraud that when exposed was explained away by crooked officials as a “data entry error.”
https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2020-54811410Note also that the exact same thing occurred in neighboring Wisconsin at about the same time. So we had two simultaneous “data entry errors” in two critical contested states that wiped out Trump’s lead? How likely is that?
Note also that correcting the “data entry error” did not result in the reappearance of Trump’s lead. So how was the error corrected?
https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2020/11/05/press-prostitutes-make-fools-of-themselves-trying-to-cover-up-vote-fraud-for-democrats/
It is, of course, unlikely that these subtle observations will be heard amid the propaganda hurricane now raging—and which, therefore, will likely have exactly the effect that it was (geo)engineered to have: Biden/Harris’ installment in the White House. But those of us who care about such things as fair elections, and the truth, are obligated to make these points anyway, and to keep studying what really happened on Election Night.