BREAKING: List of Pennsylvania voters older than USA´s oldest living person

originally posted by: carewemust
Requests for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule on PA fraud and malpractice are increasing.

www.foxnews.com...

Likely the court does not take up the case, and if they do, they will almost certainly affirm the decision below.

Here's my reply to your post in the other thread:

Excel Counts

originally posted by: peter_kandra
Here's my reply to your post in the other thread:

Excel Counts

Yes I saw it, very interesting. Thank you.

-MM

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
Sure, but you or I have no way of telling if votes were intentionally created with the birtdate 01/01/1900 to create fake ballots or if it was a software "glitch" or "clerical error" (as someone else suggested earlier in the thread) - this is all speculation, and I demand proof for any glitch or clerical error before I believe that it was - it´s just to convenient to claim this time after time imo.

It's true neither of us know that, but I do know that if you have a form with a birth date field and you allow that field to be empty when you save the form you have either to accept a NULL or empty value or assume a default date.

And I'm not saying it was a software glitch or clerical error, I'm saying that's how things work.

a reply to: MerkabaMeditation

I am not saying it was a software glitch, and that's not a bug in Excel, that's the way it works.

a reply to: peter_kandra

That's what I was going to do.

a reply to: Thenail

Well the short answer is I enjoy reading more than posting.

I’ve actually been lurking for longer than I’ve been registered, not sure of the actual date but before 2002 as that’s when I changed jobs.

originally posted by: johnnylaw16
And yet, he puts forth no evidence of it in court. Curious. It's as if it didn't really happen and he just claiming that it did . . .

The evidence is there, you just refuse to acknowledge it:

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: johnnylaw16
And yet, he puts forth no evidence of it in court. Curious. It's as if it didn't really happen and he just claiming that it did . . .

The evidence is there, you just refuse to acknowledge it:

What Gulliani says in a hears is meaningless if he doesn't repeat it in front of judge where he can be sanctioned for putting forward false evidence. Link to where he is credibly making these claims in court.

originally posted by: johnnylaw16
What Gulliani says in a hears is meaningless if he doesn't repeat it in front of judge where he can be sanctioned for putting forward false evidence. Link to where he is credibly making these claims in court.

As I thought, you're hopeless, and just trolling...

Have fun with that!

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: johnnylaw16
What Gulliani says in a hears is meaningless if he doesn't repeat it in front of judge where he can be sanctioned for putting forward false evidence. Link to where he is credibly making these claims in court.

As I thought, you're hopeless, and just trolling...

Have fun with that!

Can you offer a reason that he is not arguing fraud in court?

originally posted by: johnnylaw16
Can you offer a reason that he is not arguing fraud in court?

He (Rudy) already has... the judges are not allowing them to enter the evidence.

Of course, feel free to claim this is a lie or whatever... this is my last response to you (unless I get really bored and/or see you say something really dumb again)...

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: johnnylaw16
Can you offer a reason that he is not arguing fraud in court?

He (Rudy) already has... the judges are not allowing them to enter the evidence.

Of course, feel free to claim this is a lie or whatever... this is my last response to you (unless I get really bored and/or see you say something really dumb again)...

Ah yes, the Judges are in on it too. You've said you won't respond, so I won't be surprised if you don't, but please link to anywhere that Gulliani has even attempted to put in evidence of fraud in court. (He hasn't).

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: johnnylaw16
Can you offer a reason that he is not arguing fraud in court?

. . . the judges are not allowing them to enter the evidence.

I don’t know about you.

But, that kinda makes a go off in my head.

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
A Microsoft SQL Database Server may return 01/01/1900 if NULL is stored into a nullable date field though, but I don´t know if they used that database software or not.

-MM

This is absolutely not the case. If a NULL is stored in a datetime field an you query it, you will get a NULL. If it didn't, it would be a nightmare and almost impossible to use. It is also a key SQL standard.

If you try to convert a non-date field into a date and don't succeed, then you will end up with 01/01/1900, eg

select convert(datetime,'')

will yield the epochal date. Though trying to convert a null will still produce a null, eg

select convert(datetime,null)

It’s not an excuse, but the most logical conclusion is that this was the result of an error or glitch somewhere in some system, most likely human.

This is why people need to stop throwing around fraud allegations without hardcore proof. Incidentally, it’s why fraud has never once been claimed in court.

a reply to: tanstaafl

True, starting to sound just like the reincarnation of Phage...

I think it's now pretty obvious what his REAL full time job is...

Pennsylvania only began keeping birth and death records as a state in 1906. Before then, there are only scattered records that were kept at local court houses and few of those records remain today. www.statelibrary.pa.gov...

People with illegible birth years may have been given early 1900's birth dates during the conversion from written to digital records as a convention. This has been done in other states before.

This could also be a typo. 0 and 9 keys are right next to each other and it is very possible data was entered as 1900 when it should have been 1990.

Does anyone have evidence that a single one of these people had their vote counted? To my knowledge, errant info like this causes a manual review of the person's information before the ballot is counted.

a reply to: PeppermintButler

We don´t have to prove more that we have already done if there is becomes court case imo, they´ll have to prove all this is just clerical error or software "glithces."

-MM

originally posted by: FatherLukeDuke

originally posted by: MerkabaMeditation
A Microsoft SQL Database Server may return 01/01/1900 if NULL is stored into a nullable date field though, but I don´t know if they used that database software or not.

-MM

This is absolutely not the case. If a NULL is stored in a datetime field an you query it, you will get a NULL. If it didn't, it would be a nightmare and almost impossible to use. It is also a key SQL standard.

If you try to convert a non-date field into a date and don't succeed, then you will end up with 01/01/1900, eg

select convert(datetime,'')

will yield the epochal date. Though trying to convert a null will still produce a null, eg

select convert(datetime,null)

That is probably true in that particular case for that specific database system if you ran only SQL queries straigth into Microsoft SQL Management Studio, however, my point was that we have no idea what kind of database (if any) they use and programming language, drivers, etc. Different database systems handle dates different where an empty or NULL date field may yield different outputs depending on that particular implementation, everything from 01/01/0001 to 00/01/1970 was just some of my findings. But to address your specific case you do not take into account how drivers or entity mappers will influence how a Microsoft SQL Server NULL date is converted by the database entity data mapper for that particular programming language, there is no real standard (only best practices) for handling date conversions and a C# drivers, Java drivers, or Entity Framework etc may implement different strategies here. There are even modern programming languages that have no concept of NULL - so called non-nullsafe programming languages - such as TCL, and we don´t even know he programming language they used. So to conclude, my point was that it is pure speculation that the 01/01/1900 dates are software "glitches" because of empty date fields since we have zero knowledge about the programming language and database system that they´ve used.

-MM