Posted on 07/10/2021 11:22:11 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
BINGO!
See#16
Why does the Senate need to confirm it? And how does merely counting the votes again do that?
Thanks for the info.
Like in sports, the ruling of the official is final. Cannot go back and challenge the results and the SuperBwl gets awarded to the other team. Its over for the next four years.
However, the details of how the ruling was made matters. If the count offered to the legislature/electors WAS indeed intentionally wrong and hence the states lawful voters were disenfranchised, then those responsible should and ought be prosecuted for felony crimes.
Even if PA, AZ, MI GA and whomever else’s electoral votes get proven to be wrongly cast for Biden/Harris, they, bless their hearts, still are the de facto “potus/vpotus” ( notice all lower case...). Biden/Harris themselves “dintdoonuffin”.
Either the states’ legislatures concerned ( probably all east and left coast) stand up and be counted for right or the rule of law is dead and justice is a lie.
The ‘statists” of the “uniparty” will never accept anyone’s recount. Fact.
After all, a forensic audit is a de facto a painstaking investigation which the evidence and the process of obtaining the evidence is all well documented and recorded.
This is a prelude to the canvass.
First you prove the “official” counts had major discrepancies. Then you go into the field and look for voters at physical addresses.
The proof of the pudding wil be when the physical addresses are vacant lots, po boxes and single family homes presented as apartment complexes.
So what is the difference between the number of ballots and actual votes ?
Cool..
The only timeline you need to listen to will come from the company that did the audit...
Everything else you hear is bull....
They said this from the beginning..
It's not a matter of what they accept. It's about what the final report says. The report which will be accompanied and supported by documentary and recorded evidence.☺
That depends upon..
The format that the information is in..
The format you want the information to come out in..
And the format of the final product..
Pivot tables are fine for a preliminary raw report based upon raw data..
If it’s in excel format..
Unless there was a wild discrepancy between the total votes counted between the first two recounts, Occam's more strongly suggests they are pushing it back for #Narrative maximum when Congress returns after Labor Day, which will also be the launch date of the mid-term elections.
“If there ends up being a difference, we’d have another count.”
And the “count goes on” and “on”.
“Just relax and wait for the report..”
Exactly, the data needs to be presented in an informative way, results and conclusions need to be drawn.
Additionally, there are requested items from Maricopa County that have still not been provided to auditors, which creates a scope limitation and incomplete testing within the Audit Program.
In the case of AZ, I don’t think the absence of these items will blunt the impact of the audit findings, not in the least.
They are going to create some YUUUUUGE diversion to keep the results from consuming Biden’s regime.
This recount will show the same as the last. How many of these ballots are fake or printed on a computer. That’s what the audit will show. They have had plenty of time to screw with the ballots to make them match.
“Import it into Excel and create a Pivot Table?”
Probably using Audit Command Language, (ACL) software, much more useful to the auditor’s tasks at hand, given the volume of data.
If Nixon 1960 fights it and wins (miraculously), you don't have Ronaldus Magnus.
Nixon serves 2 terms, then RFK and LBJ square off in 1968 against VP Henry Cabot Lodge and independent George Wallace.
In this scenario, LBJ lays the hammer on the Kennedy's to keep them off the ticket, and instead craftily steals General Curtis LeMay away from Wallace's offer to LeMay of his VP slot.
This timeline fails to open China (Nixon did not meet Kissinger until 1967, and Mao would not have instructed Chao to meet with a lame duck), and the nukes fly under LBJ-LeMay in the early 70s.
LeMay was an awful candidate. From what I've heard, he couldn't stop talking about nuclear weapons. He probably didn't bring Wallace any votes and certainly wouldn't have brought any to LBJ.
A=first count
B=second count
C=third count
If A and B do not agree. Then C is done to see if A erred or B erred. It seems like a test of precision.
If A=75 and B=70 and C=71. It tell you who was more precise in their counting and most likely to be accurate.
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.