Posted on 01/02/2021 7:23:36 AM PST by New Perspective
Why are so many people on FR attacking the Pulitzer guy?
He made claims without proof. It sounds like it may be too good to be true.
He has his own reasons for not showing how he hacked into Dominion.
The reasons could be good or bad. The public has no proof that Pulitzer actually hacked into Dominion. He said he did, and he said he got all the way in (think administrator rights, keys to the kingdom). If he did, January 5 could be a hacker bonanza. The possibilities are endless. Trump could present the impossible election results on Wednesday. Then again, Trump might not have much of anything that we don't know. That would beg the question of why Trump called for supporters to show up in D.C. on Wednesday. If there is to be a real fight, it is just about to begin. It promises to be an interesting couple of days.
they cannot attack the message so they attack the messenger
these crooks need to pay for their misdeeds
Thanks for the info... had not heard that before. Apparently the same as failed candidate Stacey Abrams is running the governor's office. Of course it is prob all the Cbinese.
Maybe the GA SOS should send in crowdstrike to save the day??
Absent that, perhaps they could get FIB Special Agent Stevie Wonder to go in and look around.
Maybe the GA SOS should send in crowdstrike to save the day??
Absent that, perhaps they could get FIB Special Agent Stevie Wonder to go in and look around.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
har
[#38] He made a claim about hacking.Pulitzer needs to provide the data that substantiate his claims.
[#54] Who he is or his accomplishments are irrelevant. I want his data to be publicly released. That’s the only thing that matters due to the claims he made.
Actually, no, he does not, at least not yet. Manufacturing absurd election results on Tuesday would demonstrate the ability exists without educating the entire world on how to do it. That could be done as part of a White Hat effort with governmental/presidential permission to demonstrate that the system is not, and has not been, reliable. On Tuesday night, the miscreants could receive a full pardon for anything they may have done to demonstrate that the system is broken.
Of course, if it is expected that his hacking claim is to be used to overturn election results, before such overturning there should be some demonstation showing that his hacking claims are not just blather. Pulitizer's drop dead date has not arrived yet.
As for his claims to being able to identify fraudulent, unofficial ballots, I see no reason to hide the ballots to prevent them from being subjected to his proposed methodology. The ballots are the property of the people. They should be able to have them inspected and audited.
Dominion and all other providers of election software should be required to make the source code public and available for review. Better yet, have all the software be open source and government owned. The software should not be comprised of proprietary unobtainium. All original paper ballots should be retained and available for inspection and audit. All electronic iterations of ballot images should be retained and available for inspection and audit. The record with which to perform an actual audit should be retained and available.
Something is seriously wrong when 112,000 ballots are run through the system and 106,000 of them are adjudicated, with the original image being destroyed. When the system spits out 95% of a large batch of ballots, what was the problem? How long does it take to "adjudicate" and determine the intent of the voter on 106,000 ballots? Spending 5 seconds to examine each ballot, and determine voter intent, would take almost a week. Performing a global change, as in a word processing document might go quickly. Review the first 100 or 1,000 ballots, determine 100% voter intent to vote for Biden, and just change them all to Biden. However, this would be a global change to documents one did not create and did not read or examine. How is it determined that the last 105,000 affected ballots are the same as the inspected 1,000?
They said an adjudication of 106,000 ballots was performed. Just how was the adjudication, and determination of voter intent, performed? It would seem there is a real requirement for the election workers to detail what they did, and how they did it, before their reported results are confirmed.
For example, an election worker is on video running the same stack of ballots through the machine over and over. How is the result certified without an explanation of what is on that video?
The drop dead date for these actions came and went with the state certifications of the results. The actions of responsible state officials left something to be desired.
Nowhere in his bio does he....
Nowhere in a bio does the subject of the bio need say anything. That is because it is a bio and not an auto-bio.
And the swing states need to release their data (the paper ballots) so it too can be reviewed by the public!
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.