Replies

So, you admit that you have no qualifications to render an expert opinion on the matter. Thanks!

Actually, I believe I am qualified to render an expert opinion. But this is not about me. It’s about the attendees who were there and what they reported.

The point being discusses is the expert analysis of the 37 TB of data from the election, which you aren't qualified to discus...

See previous answer. And as noted, the only cyber experts who have reported re: the Symposium have reported that none of the pcaps (mentioned by Lindell in his two videos) were made available. So please pass along any of the attendees (not Joshua Merritt) that did report analyzing the pcaps in question and that they verify/confirm what Lindell claims.

As far as bias with the media, that’s a legitimate issue de: the media. But Alderson was being quoted in the article, so unless he is lying or the person that interviewed him made up his quotes, I’d say what Alderson said is consistent with what the two other attendees reported. The rest of your comments can be answered by referring to my above responses and my previous post.

Pretty obvious we’re not going to agree re: Lindell’s pcaps. I doubt he brings them up much any more with the claim they show election fraud.

I’m sorry Lindell did not make his pcaps available for expert or public review. I believe his heart in in the right place, but was poorly served by his staff and those who did his pcap research.

And as noted, the only cyber experts who have reported re: the Symposium have reported that none of the pcaps (mentioned by Lindell in his two videos) were made available. So please pass along any of the attendees (not Joshua Merritt) that did report analyzing the pcaps in question and that they verify/confirm what Lindell claims.

Well, you just contradicted Alderson there, because he said he did have access to P-caps, but he couldn't make sense of them. So obviously, he did get to review something. Perhaps not enough to decrypt them, but something was provided for analysis. Then you conflate him with two other guys you allege never saw anything. Why did Alderson get to see P-caps, but the two others you cite never saw anything? Something doesn't sound right there. Maybe someone like Bannon can get people who were there to give an account of who got to see the P-caps, who didn't and why?

Again, Lindell offered a reward if someone could prove that his data didn't come from the 2020 election. No one present has offered proof that it didn't. "I can't decrypt it", or "I never saw the data" proves nothing.

Actually, I believe I am qualified to render an expert opinion. But this is not about me. It’s about the attendees who were there and what they reported.

On the Internet, everyone is an expert on everything. Again, if you weren't at the event, legally, all you offer is so much hearsay. Even if you were to be qualified as an expert on interpreting P-caps, since you never saw the data, you can't analyze the data. You just repeat so much hearsay and speculation, and as noted above, contradict your alleged sources.

I’m sorry Lindell did not make his pcaps available for expert or public review. I believe his heart in in the right place, but was poorly served by his staff and those who did his pcap research.

More likely, Lindell only offered a very small sample for analysis, which was too little for those present to decrypt or conclusively analyze. That doesn't disprove his theory. Expert analysis from strangers wasn't his purpose in calling the forum. It was simply a method of drumming up interest for the event like a carnival barker. Ultimately, the matter should get decided by SCOTUS, not guys commenting on the Internet. Lindell did state that he had 12 different experts from across the U.S. confirm the data, including two government employees. When the court action is filed, that's the main event, not what happened this week.

Pretty obvious we’re not going to agree re: Lindell’s pcaps. I doubt he brings them up much any more with the claim they show election fraud.

Since Lindell has no standing to bring a petition for a writ of quo warranto, he would not be the one to use them in court. He's just the PR man working for more audits to produce conclusive evidence of the hack, i.e., the ballots themselves. You've missed the big picture here.