The Moderators have pulled a different version of this story at least three times in the last 24 hours.
Posted on 11/06/2020 9:15:16 PM PST by mbj
... * The tweets were questions for people to think about. We know that the same people who were behind the Russia collusion scam were still around and to think that they were going to allow the President to freely win the 2020 election was foolish. Of course there would be a major effort to prevent President Trump from winning. * Certainly the President’s team prepared for this year’s election and would have considered possible voter fraud on a large scale due to the current environment in the US. * Tony posed his questions and the left went crazy and based on this they must know what they are doing is unjust. * The courts will decide this election and the Constitution is on the side of the President. Any illegal votes should not be counted and when this is addressed the President will win the election. * There are many actions by the Democrats that indicate they are attempting to steal the election. (We have reported numerous stories on this subject since the election.)
(More ...)
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Debunked by the government:
https://www.cisa.gov/rumorcontrol#post
Rumor: DHS or CISA printed paper ballots with security measures and is auditing results as a countermeasure against ballot counterfeiting.
Reality: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) do not design or audit ballots, which are processes managed by state and local election officials.
Get the Facts: While DHS and CISA assist states and localities with securing election infrastructure, DHS and CISA do not design, print, or audit ballots. State and local election officials manage ballot design and printing, as well as the auditing of results.
Local election offices have security and detection measures in place that make it highly difficult to commit fraud through counterfeit ballots. While the specific measures vary, in accordance with state and local election laws and practices, ballot security measures can include signature matching, information checks, barcodes, watermarks, and precise paper weights.
DHS and CISA operate in support of state and local election officials, and do not administer elections or handle ballots. CISA’s role in election security includes sharing information, such as cyber threat indicators, with state and local election officials, as well as providing technical cybersecurity services (e.g. vulnerability scanning) upon the request of those officials.
Very encouraging :-)
Very helpful: thank you!
Nonetheless, the other points are extremely interesting weren’t they, such as point #9?
* Historically Iowa and Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Ohio and Florida and Georgia vote very similarly. What happened this year to break this connection? Why were things changed late at night in some of these states?
Praying for this.
Yes, debunked. But Schaffer is no loon. Could be a scare tactic — freak someone out enough they’ll come forward to save their skin.
Who does the actual auditing? Can the Midwestern state legislatures demand that the auditors be independent? Out of state auditors would be helpful.
THAT is exactly how they did it, the intel community has software that is capable of this they use it to effect elections in other countries!! General Flynn warned Sydney Powell about this software and she has been sounding the alarm bells!! This is WHY Ronna went into MI. today she is from there, she and the Republican house leader audited ONE precinct and found glitches of 6,000 votes FOR Trump!!! It IS the machines that need to be audited and the ballots need to be hand counted!!
That’s not how Shaffer said it could happen. You need to read the article.
> Could be a scare tactic...
:-)
I wish it would work!!!
I’ve looked at some of your posts...you have been totally negative.....its very suspicious....
Wow! They were doing in real time in front of our faces. So wicked.
It’s the job of investigators and the like to be suspicious; his post seems factual, so I wouldn’t hold this one against him.
With the GOP legislatures now in PA, MI, and WI starting investigations, some of the fraudsters must be starting to get a little nervous. If the fraud is as big as we suspect, someone is bound to crack.
The Moderators have pulled a different version of this story at least three times in the last 24 hours.
My husband either heard, or thought himself, that the moving around of ballots, flurry of ballot filling out and dumping in ditches activity were decoys to keep people from seeing the real culprits: the software. Many different software companies. Wonder where those threads lead back to, hmmm?
Maybe the state legislatures could since they are the ones who should choose electors, but do you see any state wanting someone from out-of-state when there are probably plenty of their own people in-state? I think it comes down to volunteer observers within the state; and they aren’t actual auditors if I understand correctly. Unfortunately, I don’t know enough of the details.
What story is that?
Sorry to add to it all, but even if the first point is incorrect, the other points still seem compelling. Are they all wrong?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.