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

a reply to: Annee

Especially when they transport ballots to new locations before counting 🤣🤣

originally posted by: Boadicea
Dotting all their I's and crossing all their T's --

I'm thinking our best bet for knowing what they could be finding in the audit is to look at the election reform bills they are trying to pass right now, before adjourning, so that these laws can take effect in 90 days as scheduled. With plenty of time to execute before the next election.

I'm thinking there is no hint of electronic vote switching.

Only an idiot (or a complicit traitor) would order replacement voting equipment from the same company that possibly perpetrated electronic vote fraud with their equipment, and is refusing to hand over their routers and SSID passwords.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Arizona2

Dominion corporation warned Az/Ga/Mi officials that if an examination of the machines were conducted by "non-approved" auditors, the machines' warranty would be voided.

I wonder who owns the machines? I read in some reports and documents that Dominion is merely leasing them to the states.

Makes any normal person wonder just what could possibly be under "Warranty" that could be *damaged* by (fr)auditors ?
😃🚬❄️

Only thing that should need a warranty is a warrant-y for their arrest.

originally posted by: Kaiju666

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Arizona2

Dominion corporation warned Az/Ga/Mi officials that if an examination of the machines were conducted by "non-approved" auditors, the machines' warranty would be voided.

I wonder who owns the machines? I read in some reports and documents that Dominion is merely leasing them to the states.

Makes any normal person wonder just what could possibly be under "Warranty" that could be *damaged* by (fr)auditors ?
😃🚬❄️

Only thing that should need a warranty is a warrant-y for their arrest.

On what charges?

Facts only.

a reply to: Annee

Maybe obstruction for starters. Let's see what it leads to

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: Byrd

Awwww.... you went to all the trouble of commenting to point that out?

Thank you!

My mistake. Yes, indeed, we all voted on paper ballots. That was a silly thing for me to say. I will correct myself:

Hand counts only for all ballots!!!

And I will add:

Dominion for no ballots!!!

No machines for any ballots!!!

Human hand counting will take a lot longer. Twenty five days in the 1700s-1800s when it was hand counted and a race was close Note that they only had a few thousands of votes to count since women and minorities couldn't vote, nor could indentured servants (or a lot of other men who were disqualified for many reasons)

Right now, they have trouble filling judge and clerk spots for an election. I think it will be very difficult to hire enough people to count ballots (I've done something similar; grading tests for CAT) -- it's a brutal and excessively boring task, and in addition to counting the presidential votes they also have to tally anything else on the ballots (which would be local elections, various local issue)

So they'll have to raise taxes (we judges get about $200 for what amounts to 24+ hours of work; clerks get less but work fewer hours) to cover temporarily hiring thousands of local workers, and frankly I'm not sure that small towns and cities can afford to hire them.

It will be extremely expensive since you will want the same ballot looked at by both parties (or more if there's more than two parties in the race), and with hundreds of human hands on the ballots, there's quite a risk of interference.

So it'd be quite literally months before we knew any election result, and if there's local demands for recounts the entire process could drag out for a very long time.

Heck, look how long it's taking cyberninjuas to count Maricopa county.

So they'd have to change the election date (which would be interesting) to allow time for the count to take place...

Which moves the campaigning back...

...etc.

Also, with human handcounting, it*eliminates* one of the big protections we have -- that we have triplicate records stored in three places: the county has one, the state has one -- but the judges (me!) have one also. All three also have tapes that verify the counts were all set to zero before the vote AND all three have records of who voted for what from what precinct. All anyone had to do to check counts is demand that the judges show up with their counts and compare against the other tapes.

So.... how would your "hand counting" work to get results that can be checked from multiple sources -- and gives results in less than a week on a national election? I'll admit I can't come up with some sort of scheme that works.

a reply to: Byrd


Are you suggesting that if election fraud is confirmed, it was was planned, organized, committed, and covered up by people, and not machines?

I agree.

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: Annee

Maybe obstruction for starters. Let's see what it leads to

Legal process.

That’s how it’s done.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: Annee

Maybe obstruction for starters. Let's see what it leads to

Legal process.

That’s how it’s done.

So you now support the AZ Audit?

As a part of the legal process?

Progress.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: Annee

Maybe obstruction for starters. Let's see what it leads to

Legal process.

That’s how it’s done.

So you now support the AZ Audit?

As a part of the legal process?

Progress.

Where did I say I didn’t.

Am I salivating over every Right opinion piece? No.

However, was responding to obstruction.

If this were reversed, the Reps would be using every legal method to stop it. Which would be their legal right of process.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: onthedownlow
a reply to: Annee

Maybe obstruction for starters. Let's see what it leads to

Legal process.

That’s how it’s done.

So you now support the AZ Audit?

As a part of the legal process?

Progress.

Where did I say I didn’t.

Am I salivating over every Right opinion piece? No.

However, was responding to obstruction.

If this were reversed, the Reps would be using every legal method to stop it. Which would be their legal right of process.

I understand.

Logic isn't easy for democrats.


Hint:

Audit is part of the legal process that you suddenly claimed support for.

And no other legal process is possible without the audit.

Claiming to support a legal process for investigating elections while being against any audit of same elections is blatantly dishonest.

And is the core of democrat coverup strategy.

a reply to: Annee

"If this were reversed, the Reps would be using every legal method to stop it"


Absolute nonsense.

Reps DID try to investigate 2016 election, which they won.

Fought pretty hard for it in fact.

For at least a year.

Democrats were successful in preventing that effort.



Might be easier to just own it.

But I understand that panicked desperation to spread misinformation 'seems' like the only option for brainwashed dems.

a reply to: Nunyabizisit

youtu.be...

Have you seen this? Apparently it’s 4 months old but I’m just seeing it.
Defy Logic-the new woke mantra.
I gotta admit....it’s still cooler than No Malarkey

originally posted by: NotGuilty
a reply to: Nunyabizisit

youtu.be...

Have you seen this? Apparently it’s 4 months old but I’m just seeing it.
Defy Logic-the new woke mantra.
I gotta admit....it’s still cooler than No Malarkey

When choosing 'truth' over 'facts', logic is the enemy.

Thanks for the video!

a reply to: Nunyabizisit

Audit team appeared to finish most activity before midnight, but a couple people continued work verifying spreadsheets until 2 am.

a reply to: carewemust

I'm thinking there is no hint of electronic vote switching.

Perhaps. It may be that there is a hint, but no way to confirm or prove without the routers and passwords.

Only an idiot (or a complicit traitor) would order replacement voting equipment from the same company that possibly perpetrated electronic vote fraud with their equipment, and is refusing to hand over their routers and SSID passwords.

Or they are both idiots and complicit. That combination of ignorance and arrogance that lets them think they can get away with it. Still. So they're playing the game to the end, come hell or high water.

There's a reason that the Senate has refused to allow Hobbs to be involved in any election lawsuits. They have literally stopped her from filing any lawsuits against the audit or the results, and have also stopped her from using the law/courts to protect the Maricopa County officials. They would not do that for no reason. They have some reason to suspect that she cannot be trusted.

Karen Fann herself is saying very very little. I think she has a strategy and is playing the long game too. It's almost like watching a high stakes poker game, and we have no idea what's in their hands as they each up the ante.

a reply to: Byrd

So.... how would your "hand counting" work to get results that can be checked from multiple sources -- and gives results in less than a week on a national election? I'll admit I can't come up with some sort of scheme that works.

You make good points, although I do not think it's as time-consuming as you present it.

My first thought is that machines would not be the problem they are if there were more transparency and access. Perhaps what we need are simple counting machines -- no other software or nonsense on them -- just counters. My next thought is live cameras for anyone and everyone to watch the counting in real time, with a recording for checking after the fact. The ballot would be clearly visible as it is fed into the machine, and the counter clearly visible as it adds those votes. Basically the job of observers, who were denied the ability to actually observe. Everyone watching would be an observer.

Another thought is that all precincts have partyline ballots/votes. So if someone wants to vote straight party candidates, they tick a box and all of their party's candidates get the vote -- much faster and easier to count than counting each and every office on the ballot. We could also have federal only ballots, for those who only want to vote for prez and senators. And a local only ballot, for those who don't want to vote for prez or senators and only local offices. A voter could request that ballot specifically, either at the polls or by mail for absentee voting.

I would also completely eliminate -- and forbid -- adjudicated ballots. There is no place for this in our system. Will that mean some votes will not be counted? Probably. But this removes any possibility of the wrong person getting a vote, whether by human error or deliberate act.

All of the above would save time and manpower. And there's plenty more ideas out there -- from people with more knowledge and experience than I have. This really isn't rocket science. Simplicity and transparency is the key. It can be done if there is a will to do so.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit
a reply to: Nunyabizisit

Audit team appeared to finish most activity before midnight, but a couple people continued work verifying spreadsheets until 2 am.

Thank you!

Were they packing up and clearing out when they were done? Or did it look like they had more work to do?

I realize you probably couldn't tell... but I had to ask!

a reply to: Annee

If this were reversed, the Reps would be using every legal method to stop it. Which would be their legal right of process.

You may be right. But that's not a good thing. It doesn't make it right or wrong because the other guy is doing it. I never let my kids get away with, "Well, Johnny did it!" Same for politicians. Dems and Pubs both suck. Both are dirty, corrupt and in it for themselves. The end result, and my opinion, is the same.

If the positions were reversed, I'd be saying and thinking the same about the Pubs and the Dems. When Jill Stein contested the 2016 election, I was all for it. For the same reason I'm all for this one.

I didn't vote for Trump nor Biden. I didn't vote for Stein. My interest is in election integrity no matter which party is cheating this time or any time. The critters can choose to be part of the problem or part of the solution... and then be judged according to their choice.

Hand counting isn't a big deal. You just break the problem down. No matter how the population changes, the ratio of people to counters can be the same and you will always have more population to get counters from if your population grows.

It would be easy enough to use the registered voter rolls in the same way juries are requested. If they need 10 counters for a precinct, 100 are randomly selected a month prior and the first 10 to volunteer get it with the rest that respond on deck as alternates.

It would require a sense of civic duty to be restored, but if it was done before machines, it can absolutely be done again. The logistics just scale.