header pic

Area51 Board (non-moderated) at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

The 'Old' Scout-Tennessee a51 Crowd- Enjoy ROWDY discussion covering politics, religion, current events, and all things under the sun

Anyone is welcomed and encouraged to join our FREE site and to take part in our community- a community with you- the user, the fan, -and the person- will be protected from intrusive actions and with a clean place to interact.


Author

Topic: Risking it all. For what?

 (Read 1750 times)

Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 45858
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #56 on: December 02, 2020, 01:40:25 PM »
I personally think that all this talk about overseas servers, Dominion software changing votes and the military seizing voting servers is all just a bunch of crazy conspiracy theories with no basis in fact, and no evidence for it.  Even if some of it was true, all of the votes were backed up by paper ballots, voter recounts would have caught any discrepancies in the vote count and corrected it.  There has been nothing from the recounts that would point to anything like that.
The stories about overseas servers strike me as coming from unsupported claims, same with Dominion being some Venezuelan conspiracy with Kemp et al. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, not just some oddball claiming he saw something.  And did any of the law suits allege anything like that? (Aside from the Sydney lady who I think  has gone round the bend.)


roadvol

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 6756
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #57 on: December 02, 2020, 02:09:22 PM »
The stories about overseas servers strike me as coming from unsupported claims, same with Dominion being some Venezuelan conspiracy with Kemp et al. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof, not just some oddball claiming he saw something.  And did any of the law suits allege anything like that? (Aside from the Sydney lady who I think  has gone round the bend.)


I assume you are making that statement after watching all of the  various state hearings and listening to all of the eyewitness accounts. If you haven't then you're just bloviating as usual.

fuzzynavol

  • seeker of passage
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Posts: 11905
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #58 on: December 02, 2020, 02:22:24 PM »

Don't ever talk to us again about how voter ID is an attempt to suppress the vote. 
Okay, fair enough.  If you guys will accept the fairness of the 2020 POTUS election, then I will never talk about Voter ID's again.  


Cincydawg

  • Ombudsman for the Secret Order of the Odd Fellows
  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 45858
  • Liked:

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 7441
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #60 on: December 02, 2020, 06:18:44 PM »
Now see, that is ridicule... it is taking a fact and making it so fantastical it can't possibly be true... and it isnt.  Its rediculous... at least 99.9% of it, that is.  

I've little doubt the server was, though, snatched.  I've little doubt several at various locations were snatched.  Special forces? I can believe that, too... but not in the case of ninja like operatives armed to the teeth and bloodthirsty... special forces cyber command... the type with desks tiered and circling a massive monitor and which can infiltrate any data at rest point on the planet that is connected to the web... or monitor data in transit as it enters and leaves those points.  

I have ZERO doubt that happened.  None.  Absolutely zilch.  It has been said, prepared and executed openly in effort to thwart Russian interference... thank you dems... you were caught in the cover of your own trap.  

But back to the point of ninjas and blue on blue fighting- its dumb... stupid... beyond any reasonable basis whatsoever.  You know what else it is? "Protecting the truth with legions of lies".  An old Churchill tactic. 

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 7441
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #61 on: December 02, 2020, 06:22:45 PM »
And... those machines were networked.  They were explicitly forbidden to be connected.  

That is proven. The media downplays it.  The problem is the data can't be trusted- demonstrating with certainty there was OPPORTUNITY for fraud.  That is all that has to be proven. Additional evidence is just icing.  

This will go to congress.  Only the media and big tech are certain of the outcome.  They want you to believe what they say, desperately.  

I dont.  

I will believe what SCOTUS says, and what congress does about it. 

katmai

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1417
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #62 on: December 02, 2020, 10:12:50 PM »
I'm floored that you're attempting to claim there was no evidence. After watching hearings in 4 states with 100's actual eyewitness testimony of massive fraud there's zero doubt that a coordinated and successful attempt to steal the election.
BTW...had you been paying attention you would know that Dominion software is designed to make it impossible to determine voter intent in case of audit.
You're simply parroting the CNN talking points. Highly unusual for a "moderate Republican"
I watched the Giuliani-Powell press conference at the RNC Headquarters, and I saw enough to conclude that Giuliani has gone completely batsh*t crazy, and he was full of wild accusations and conspiracy theories that had no facts to back them up.  Why should I waste my time watching a crazy lawyer talk about eyewitnesses in a staged setting that doesn't have the power of the courts to compel honest testimony.  If he gets people to testify in court to actual fraud, where they can be cross-examined, then I will listen.   I would be interested in hearing what you think was the most compelling evidence of fraud that Rudy presented at these events, so I can look forward to them being used in a court case.
I don't know what you mean about voter intent.  Dominion Software is supposed to count the votes from the paper ballots that a voter selected, so why would it need to determine voter intent?  Could you explain what you meant?
You don't have to call me a Republican, because I don't consider myself one anymore.  I am a fiscal conservative, free trader, that believes our national debt to be the primary long-term issue of our country.   None of that is of any concern to the Republican Party today, and their complete capitulation to the whims of an incompetent, life-long Democratic narcissist like Trump has soured me on almost every leader in the party.  In doing so, they have demonstrated their complete lack of principles.  I have no interest in the ignorant, thoughtless, xenophobic nationalism that is espoused by Trump and his followers.  There are few Republican leaders I still respect, and their numbers are growing smaller every day.  I proudly supported Corker and Alexander, but I am embarrassed by Blackburn.  

roadvol

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 6756
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #63 on: December 02, 2020, 10:53:08 PM »
I watched the Giuliani-Powell press conference at the RNC Headquarters, and I saw enough to conclude that Giuliani has gone completely batsh*t crazy, and he was full of wild accusations and conspiracy theories that had no facts to back them up.  Why should I waste my time watching a crazy lawyer talk about eyewitnesses in a staged setting that doesn't have the power of the courts to compel honest testimony.  If he gets people to testify in court to actual fraud, where they can be cross-examined, then I will listen.  I would be interested in hearing what you think was the most compelling evidence of fraud that Rudy presented at these events, so I can look forward to them being used in a court case.
I don't know what you mean about voter intent.  Dominion Software is supposed to count the votes from the paper ballots that a voter selected, so why would it need to determine voter intent?  Could you explain what you meant?
You don't have to call me a Republican, because I don't consider myself one anymore.  I am a fiscal conservative, free trader, that believes our national debt to be the primary long-term issue of our country.  None of that is of any concern to the Republican Party today, and their complete capitulation to the whims of an incompetent, life-long Democratic narcissist like Trump has soured me on almost every leader in the party.  In doing so, they have demonstrated their complete lack of principles.  I have no interest in the ignorant, thoughtless, xenophobic nationalism that is espoused by Trump and his followers.  There are few Republican leaders I still respect, and their numbers are growing smaller every day.  I proudly supported Corker and Alexander, but I am embarrassed by Blackburn. 
The Guliani press conference has zero to do with the hearings held in four states over the past week. All your doing is deflecting the fact that you have no clue as to the evidence presented.
FYI...The witnesses giving evidence tonight in Michigan were cross examined by Democrat Committee members. Again,all you're proving is you have no clue regarding evidence presented

katmai

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1417
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #64 on: December 02, 2020, 10:55:36 PM »
And... those machines were networked.  They were explicitly forbidden to be connected. 

That is proven. The media downplays it.  The problem is the data can't be trusted- demonstrating with certainty there was OPPORTUNITY for fraud.  That is all that has to be proven. Additional evidence is just icing. 

This will go to congress.  Only the media and big tech are certain of the outcome.  They want you to believe what they say, desperately. 

I dont. 

I will believe what SCOTUS says, and what congress does about it.
@Drew4UTk , I understand the potential that someone could hack a networked system, and that you could get incorrect results.   After 2016, Congress looked into election security very closely and took measures to ensure the safety of the polling places.  If someone didn't follow the proper procedures, whether accidental or not, they should be held accountable.   However, it is my understanding that all of the battleground states had paper ballots as backup, so the original vote information is still available for recount.  How does a recount not catch a situation where somehow the vote was incorrect (whether intentional or accidental, through hacking, counting ballots multiple times, etc.)?   I understand that not all elections were subject to recount, but it applied to the 2020 Presidential Election battleground states.  What am I missing?

roadvol

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 6756
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #65 on: December 02, 2020, 11:08:58 PM »
@Drew4UTk , I understand the potential that someone could hack a networked system, and that you could get incorrect results.  After 2016, Congress looked into election security very closely and took measures to ensure the safety of the polling places.  If someone didn't follow the proper procedures, whether accidental or not, they should be held accountable.  However, it is my understanding that all of the battleground states had paper ballots as backup, so the original vote information is still available for recount.  How does a recount not catch a situation where somehow the vote was incorrect (whether intentional or accidental, through hacking, counting ballots multiple times, etc.)?  I understand that not all elections were subject to recount, but it applied to the 2020 Presidential Election battleground states.  What am I missing?
Rather than guess why not take the time to watch the hearings. A IT forensics experts who had been in charge IT security for the Army testified tonight and he answered all of your questions.
He said the Dominion voting machines were extremely easy to compromise and anyone with a minimum of training could hack in.
Contrary to what was reported the Dominion voting machines are linked to the internet and additionally all anyone had to do was to insert a thumb drive and completely control the vote count.
Another interesting fact that the forensics expert testified  was that several Michigan counties reported that 100% of those registered voted and six counties reported in excess of 120% of registered votes...hmmm..





roadvol

  • Team Captain
  • *******
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 6756
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #66 on: December 02, 2020, 11:25:54 PM »
One of the more interesting facts given by the forensics expert was that in Wayne County
(Detroit) from  5:00- 6:15 AM the morning after the election when the poll watchers had been sent home. The vote tabulation suddenly spiked.
220,000 votes suddenly showed up in spite of the fact that the Dominion machines only had a capacity of slightly over 100,000 over that time period.
Oh..btw...all of the 220,000 votes were for Biden.
This was hard evidence due to the voting machine history that was stored.




katmai

  • Starter
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 1417
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #67 on: December 02, 2020, 11:29:08 PM »
Rather than guess why not take the time to watch the hearings. A IT forensics experts who had been in charge IT security for the Army testified tonight and he answered all of your questions.
He said the Dominion voting machines were extremely easy to compromise and anyone with a minimum of training could hack in.
Contrary to what was reported the Dominion voting machines are linked to the internet and additionally all anyone had to do was to insert a thumb drive and completely control the vote count.
Another interesting fact that the forensics expert testified  was that several Michigan counties reported that 100% of those registered voted and six counties reported in excess of 120% of registered votes...hmmm..
And what did they say about the availability of paper ballots to provide an accurate count on the election?  Sure I could theoretically hack into a Dominion and change the vote count, but the paper ballots would still accurately reflect the true vote, and a recount would address that.   Were those actually Michigan counties, or do they still have all of those Minnesota counties mixed in with their Michigan "fraud" claims?   I would like to hear an explanation for the 120% participation, but wouldn't be surprised to hear it is sloppy math on someone's part.  Trump's team has been really bad at getting facts straight, which probably isn't that big of a deal when your main objective is just to cast as much doubt on the results as possible.  
I am being honest, I would like to hear what you think are the most compelling instances of fraud that have been presented.  Was that it?   I am willing to listen, but I am not convinced by mere speculation, which is what you listed above.   

Drew4UTk

  • Administrator
  • Team Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 7441
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #68 on: December 02, 2020, 11:36:52 PM »
the number of ballots. 

the question if ballots were destroyed... the question of stacks of ballots being submitted several times... the question of what appeared to be photocopied ballots... 

^all of which rely on people's testimony.... which 'they' have.  but which is also being ridiculed and attacked in the courts- making the likelihood of anything being done about it next to notta- at least prior to the 12th and the inauguration. 

what isn't being talked about in the media (big gasp imagine that) is the number of votes is consistent, but the ratio changed inexplicably and with just enough margin to move joe ahead between the ceasing of counting and the restart... the suggestion is the ballots were collected and tallied but not reported until metrics were established to know how many to alter in effort to move joe ahead.  the counting stopped at around midnight in the states required by either candidate... it reconvened four to five hours later... and at what point the needle jumped blue... 

so... the number, statistically speaking, was discovered, that was needed to move joe ahead.  then the very next drop of data gave him precisely what he needed in each state to take the lead- a number that had him ahead, after that data was dumped, in each state and by a similar margin... 

that is clear evidence, according to statisticians, the results were known the night of the election- though not all the votes were tallied, enough were known to indicate how many of the remaining 'officially' uncounted votes were needed to set joe ahead.  that is where the ridiculously unbalanced and trend breaking ratio's occurred- the number required to move joe ahead gave him something like 91% of the votes uncounted before officially 'stopping' and then restarting the counting... 

the support of Trump, or better said the lack of support for joe was so wildly unbalanced they HAD to give a massive amount (in ratio) to joe of the uncounted ballots. .... and that's where they fuggered up.  they were unprepared for the trump support.  they thought they could keep it closer... they had to lie in a big way to move joes needle enough to give him even a slight margin.  

but back to machines and networks:  the number was known that was required to give Joe the lead- not in actual counts, but in percentages... that couldn't be done without knowledge about what the actual number of votes in each state/precinct... and how did 'they' know? because it was being zapped all over the planet- the seven stop drop (if you're at all familiar with that) - and coming back to the commissioner as 'raw counts'- unbeknownst to them that there was a man in the middle allowing the raw data through... data that had been altered to match their formula.    

also unbeknownst to them, though they should have figured it would happen, the US special forces cyber command was watching... they were watching machines transmit data real time to servers outside the country and then back to the precincts they originated... machines that were lawfully not supposed to do that- but were purposely configured to do JUST that. 

and that is where shit is really interesting right now because the media- who i never trusted and have nothing but disdain for prior to even this- is complicit.  they know what i've said to be fact... what nobody knows is if this will be pursued- because if it is? this nation will be rocked to its core.... if it isn't? we may or may not survive a harris administration.  

now is all of that accurate?  i don't know... i think much of it is... and i think the hiding of counts at various places was to try to reconcile the screwby count... which means there were a lot of people involved that couldn't possibly been vetted by the parties performing this screwby... and more involved means more to squeal... and they are squealing- but the media is ignoring that while shouting "where is the evidence?" in their arrogant way- which many here are copying and imitating. 


HK_Vol

  • Global Moderator
  • Hall of Fame
  • *****
  • Default Avatar
  • Posts: 27982
  • Liked:
Re: Risking it all. For what?
« Reply #69 on: December 02, 2020, 11:37:09 PM »

 

Support the Site!
Purchase of every item listed here DIRECTLY supports the site.