I think these machines, plus voting after Nov 3rd are the keys to turn this thing around.
“potential” for fraud. That and two dollars will get you a small coffee at Starbucks.
Unless and until there are indictments for provable acts of vote-fixing, the vote results will not be changed.
This morning on warroom: pandemic, Rudy was complaining that the Trump campaign’s legal team was not prepared for this fight. He and his own legal team have had to do major catch-up work, quickly, to gather evidence and affidavits.
You wonder: Why were the Trump people not war-gaming for the past months, in anticipation of major fraud? Unfortunately, it’s another sign - in my opinion - of Trump’s own lack or discipline and organization. His principles and policies are great, but he never organized to carry them through - and to hire people who be allies instead of neverTrump grifters.
I think these machines, plus voting after Nov 3rd are the keys to turn this thing around.
***********
Plus manufactured ballots. But basically you’re right IMO.
Everything is HUGE and BREAKING but is anything actually happening?
btt
Most major corporations have banned the use of flash drives in their corporation because of inherent security issues. Seven years ago, the major international oil company that I worked for banned flash drive and even disabled the USB ports in all of our computers to prevent their use. But our election data is moved around with flash drives?
Bttt.
5.56mm
For those who have not seen it, this really exposed it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ztu5Y5obWPk
If the PERSON or GROUP that orchestrated this FRAUD isn't identified and interrogated (Biden is NOT smart enough to do this), then my hope for discovery of the TRUTH is diminished, sadly.
I've heard that some of the equipment used on election night have CHINESE COMPONENTS. That should've been a nonstarter right there.. makes as much sense as having Chinese-made computer chips in our F-22's!!
Since everyone supposedly has the same USB key, if any participant loses that key the integrity of the election is lost:
So this means that any participant who loses their USB key which stores the encryption key has then destroyed the integrity of the election in that district.
Someone mind telling me what was stolen in Philly again?
— Ron (@CodeMonkeyZ) November 11, 2020>>>>
finaly looks like some one competent is analyzing the machines. again all software must be open source as a requirement.
Link to Texas SOS dominion voting systems machine tests. Denied twice last year. Clicking on the Dates gives you a list of 6 pdf files, one from each inspector, which lays out the issues found.
https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/laws/dominion.shtml
Meanwhile, the States in question right now ALL used dominion machines. All part of the plandemic imho.
IF, God Forbid, Bite Me ACTRUALLY WINS, fairly and squarely, OK, but this VOTE FRAUD MUST BE ALL EXPOSED!!!!!! AND ALL PUNISHED!!!
Why does Gateway Pundit keep using words like HUGE, YUUGE and BOOM in its headlines?
It gets pretty tiresome eventually especially when nothing concrete ever comes out of it.
Bttt.
5.56mm
bkmk
on twitter, CodeMonkeyZ’s (aka Ron’s) most recent post as of now is about the use of (ieee 754) floating point data representation to store and transmit votes in the form of ratios of the total vote count (stored as an integer).
CodeMonkeyZ’s twitter is here
https://twitter.com/CodeMonkeyZ
IMHO almost any programmer would look at this and consider it (at least on first glance) a flawed way to transmit multiple discrete integer values (candidate a total, candidat b total, candidate c total, etc) ... unless the data is intended to be used as an indirect or estimated measurement, and a measurement in which ratios are considered more important than totals... IOW polls. Dominion evidently contains administrative software commands that permits shifting votes from one candidate to another. This showed up in the alleged edison data available online. Legally everything info-flow downstream of the precinct databases (perhaps down to the electronic ballot boxes themselves) can be regarded as at least to some degree non-authoritative and derivative since only the certified results are authoritative. Keeping this in mind, the software and data downstream of the ballot boxes (including edison data) is derivative. This in theory would permit development of ad hoc non authoritative data processing methods to be used in storage of data and calculation of measurements such as totals and ratios. Such methods and storage could even be leveraged from polling software. Polling software needs to account for sampling biases. One way to account for biases is to manipulate the data in ways that compensate for the biases, and have those biases reflected in final tabulation in the form of adjusted ratios. All of this might account for the seemingly ad hoc methods that CodeMonkeyZ observes. It’s just supposition based on observations, but i have not seen any other explanation posted elsewhere yet. A weak conjecture might in such cases be better than no conjecture whatsoever.