Finally! Forensic Election Audit in Maricopa County (AZ) Begins Next Week

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Any Arizona legislature member can propose legislation.

Of course they can, they just can't bring it to the floor for a vote. Guess who does that?

Without the votes the president is poo.
As has been explained to you previously.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit
So back to audit being a fraud because Trump also wants one?

I didn't day it was a fraud, I said it was a waste and it shows the true reason for it. How many more times you need this repeated?

Because you think Republicans in Arizona are wasting their resources?

The Independents swing AZ - not the Republicans.

The independents in AZ take being independent seriously.

They are the reason Trump lost.

And the independents put the people into the state senate, who enacted the audit.
Samey same.
Funny how one part is bad and one part is good.
Lol

This is one I want to look back on 10 years from now.

I don't expect it to fair well.

Really?
Was it different voters that did this?
You keep reminding us of the preferences of Arizona voters, did they not put the state senators in office?
You are there, if they did not by all means let me know please.

Elections were before this.

Demographics in AZ have been changing.

I'm more interested in the fall out from this "inquisition".

From what I read the state outcomes were even at 3-3 in elections in 2020, were they not?
Same people put those senators in, right?

As I said -- before all this went down.

So -- we're now in after affect.

That is my stance on this.

I do not do circular back and forth.

Yep
Those elected to the majority, by independents according to you, enacted this audit.
Otherwise they would not have the majority.

And as much as transparency has been fought against, I also am interested in upcoming election results.

You just want to keep circle arguing that a senate was elected prior to this fiasco - - at a time voters did not have that knowledge?

Maybe they should have had a time machine to go into the future - - to witness this -- then come back and decide if they still wanted to vote the same way.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: network dude

If there isn't enough fraud to make any difference, but there still is fraud, I would like for it to be recognized and if possible, stopped from happening again. But I'm old fashioned like that.

Yeah, I'm another old stick in the mud that way!

I've brought up the adjudicated ballots many many times. I have no idea if any fraudulent votes resulted from those adjudicated ballots, but I sure as hell know the potential is there. Even potential is too much.

If fraud is minimal or is not found at all, great!!! (And I realize that is a possibility if only because some of these critters are dumber than rocks! Even if the will is there, the brains aren't.)

But we still need to fix what's broken... what could be exploited and manipulated and contorted into outright fraud.

Fixing whats broken would be good.
Hilariously there are those against such.
Luddites?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: network dude
If there isn't enough fraud to make any difference, but there still is fraud, I would like for it to be recognized and if possible, stopped from happening again. But I'm old fashioned like that.

That's all well and good but it's a rather pollyanna-ish approach. So long as there are people involved there will always be some sort of fraud committed. I'm not disputing that there is, what I'm saying, again, is that it's never been enough to be appreciable and it certainly won't change this election more than the tiniest fraction of a percent.

I'm half joking when I ask if you prepared yourself for the possibility of being wrong, but then, I know you well enough on here to know you haven't and likely won't.

You've been here as long as me, you ever see my make a knowingly false statement? You ever see me jump into something when I wasn't certain?

It's never been this situation before either. They are looking for fraud, and if it's there, it will be found. It will be documented, and it will be provable, or it won't be fraud. If it's there, it needs to be found and the only way to find it is to look for it. Again, enough people think differently than you do to have made this a reality.

And no, you have always shown integrity and are every well informed. This, however, isn't a case of how well read you are, how smart you are, or even how good of a person you are. This is an audit looking for fraud, and if it exists, it will be found, even if you claim it won't. (that is the part I continue to bring up)

a reply to: Annee
No.
Elected in the same election as being audited.
3-3 even up in the state senate.

a reply to: Boadicea
Thanks for the op and the continued updates and info.
It is appreciated!

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit
So back to audit being a fraud because Trump also wants one?

I didn't day it was a fraud, I said it was a waste and it shows the true reason for it. How many more times you need this repeated?

Because you think Republicans in Arizona are wasting their resources?

The Independents swing AZ - not the Republicans.

The independents in AZ take being independent seriously.

They are the reason Trump lost.

And the independents put the people into the state senate, who enacted the audit.
Samey same.
Funny how one part is bad and one part is good.
Lol

This is one I want to look back on 10 years from now.

I don't expect it to fair well.

Really?
Was it different voters that did this?
You keep reminding us of the preferences of Arizona voters, did they not put the state senators in office?
You are there, if they did not by all means let me know please.

Elections were before this.

Demographics in AZ have been changing.

I'm more interested in the fall out from this "inquisition".

From what I read the state outcomes were even at 3-3 in elections in 2020, were they not?
Same people put those senators in, right?

As I said -- before all this went down.

So -- we're now in after affect.

That is my stance on this.

I do not do circular back and forth.

Yep
Those elected to the majority, by independents according to you, enacted this audit.
Otherwise they would not have the majority.

And as much as transparency has been fought against, I also am interested in upcoming election results.

You just want to keep circle arguing that a senate was elected prior to this fiasco - - at a time voters did not have that knowledge?

Maybe they should have had a time machine to go into the future - - to witness this -- then come back and decide if they still wanted to vote the same way.

Or maybe Arizona citizens elected people that they trusted to handle whatever issues come up AFTER they were elected.

You know, the way elections ALWAYS work.

Is that supposed to make the Arizona Audit any less neccessary or properly conducted in your mind?


But sure, a time machine would be nice.

originally posted by: Annee

Maybe they should have had a time machine to go into the future - - to witness this -- then come back and decide if they still wanted to vote the same way.

Like all those union pipe fitters banking on the Keystone pipeline? Yep, time machines would be super.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Some? When 70% of Republicans think Trump 'got cheated' you think they'll all of a sudden go, "Oh, yeah, I was soooooo wrong about that...."?

Well, this is probably my own confirmation bias, but I don't believe for a minute that most Republican voters are diehard Republican voters. (Is there an equivalent term for Pubs like "yellow dog Democrats"? I'm wracking my brain and can't think of one right now, but that's the gist of what I mean.) I don't even think that most Republican voters are diehard Trump supporters. I also think that many many old school Republicans have already left the party, and are either now Independents or Libertarians (probably more Independents).

So, yes, I think most Trump voters can put those feelings or thoughts aside for the bigger picture.

I will bet you right now when, not if, the Arizona fiasco is over and no widespread fraud is proven that they'll be telling you that it was done wrong and if we can only do it another time, say in Michigan, we'll prove it for real.

Nope... I'm not taking that bet!!!

Of course it will happen! But I don't think it will be the majority, nor the priority for the majority at that point.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Without the votes the president is poo.

Is that your civics lesson for the day or was that just you trying to avoid saying that the Senate President is the only one who can bring a bill to the floor for a vote?

a reply to: network dude

I appreciate your honesty, and you know I like you a great deal, watching this ongoing fraud-quest saga is like watching people yelling at me that contrails are poisoning me or that we never went to the moon.

a reply to: Boadicea

Fair enough, I get where you're coming from.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: network dude

I appreciate your honesty, and you know I like you a great deal, watching this ongoing fraud-quest saga is like watching people yelling at me that contrails are poisoning me or that we never went to the moon.

Right back atcha.

Also very similar to democrat's russia hoax.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Without the votes the president is poo.

Is that your civics lesson for the day or was that just you trying to avoid saying that the Senate President is the only one who can bring a bill to the floor for a vote?

I never said he didn't, I said without the votes its poo.
With the votes it would have been brought to the floor no matter who sent what emails.

Either way, it WAS ENACTED BY THE SENATE OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA.
Which is all that really matters.
Now we await the results of the lawfully enacted audit.
Sunshine is good for everyone, even people who sent fat jerry to dc.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

You've been here as long as me, you ever see my make a knowingly false statement? You ever see me jump into something when I wasn't certain?

and just to make absolutely sure you understand where I'm coming from here, there is a chance you are totally correct, and no fraud exists. Back when I thought the Georgia "audit" was going to look at the ballots to ensure they were all legal and all, I made the statement several times that I would accept the results. But when it was just a recount of the same ballots, I felt the same threshold wasn't there.

This particular case IS looking into the aspect I feel holds the best case for fraud if it exists. And we don't know the results yet, but will soon. Again (again) I hope minimal fraud if any is found. Enough to change results in AZ would cause a sh!t storm I'd rather not be a part of, that, and the amount of ragging on your ass I'd have to commit to would take up most of my useless time as it is. I've already prepared edit statements that will make DB blush, so I hope I don't have to resort to all that.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I never said he didn't, I said without the votes its poo.

No, what you were saying was you didn't understand the process by asking questions on who could propose legislature. I never mentioned proposing legislature.

a reply to: network dude

Fair enough, Captain, I get you.