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

Update out of Pennsylvania:

The Senate has issued subpoenas.

www.forbes.com... y-voter-in-state/?sh=1a2887254930

The 17 subpoenas include requests for communications between state and local elections officials and details on every state voter, including their name, birth date, address, drivers license number, last four digits of their Social Security number and how their ballot was cast.

WHAT WE DON’T KNOW Republican state Sen. Cris Dush, who’s been tapped to lead the election investigation, declined to answer questions from Democrats on Wednesday on how the voter information would be used, who may have access to it and who the third party will be that will conduct the investigation. Dush did not rule out the possibility the third parties conducting the investigation could have ties to far-right attorney Sidney Powell, who has pushed baseless claims of election fraud, or any relationships with political candidates such as former President Donald Trump. The Republican lawmaker also did not provide details on how much the investigation will cost, though unlike a similar audit in Maricopa County, Arizona, that’s drawn widespread controversy, the probe is expected to rely on Senate funds instead of private donations.

WHAT TO WATCH FOR Wolf, a Democrat, is not expected to comply with the subpoenas, with spokesperson Lyndsay Kensinger telling Spotlight PA on Monday the governor’s office would “continue to strongly oppose any effort which would compromise the security and integrity of election materials and infrastructure, and undermine confidence in our elections by bringing an Arizona style circus to Pennsylvania.” Republicans’ attempt to get the election materials will likely be drawn out by the impending court battle over whether their requests are permissible, with a spokesperson for Corman telling Spotlight PA on Monday that Republicans are prepared to take any litigation over the subpoenas to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court.

a reply to: opethPA

Democrats ran two audits (Iowa and I think New Hampshire), because they felt their person won in Nov 2020. Turns out he/she did not win. The audits quietly ended. Rarely are they "neutral".

originally posted by: Charliebrowndog
a reply to: Nunyabizisit

A lot of this depends on whether or not the EOs that were signed by Trump towards the end of his Administration are in fact serious and were acted upon. If there is proof of foreign interference then the "Normal" legal system would not be the route it is going to happen and could be happening on the military side of things and would not be as public.

Again I do not claim to know any truths but I do know EOs were created and signed for a reason and its my belief that things are happening that are legal but not necessarily in the conventional methods.

Secret audits authorized by any method are still secret audits.

Absolutely useless to anyone.

And probably illegal everywhere.

An EO does not override state election laws.

If that were the case we would have seen the ballots a long time ago.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: opethPA

Democrats ran two audits (Iowa and I think New Hampshire), because they felt their person won in Nov 2020. Turns out he/she did not win. The audits quietly ended. Rarely are they "neutral".

Did Republicans refuse to show democrats the actual ballots?

Obviously not.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: opethPA

Democrats ran two audits (Iowa and I think New Hampshire), because they felt their person won in Nov 2020. Turns out he/she did not win. The audits quietly ended. Rarely are they "neutral".

Did Republicans refuse to show democrats the actual ballots?

Obviously not.

Republicans in those two states let Democrats run the audit, with their full cooperation. Totally opposite of what we're seeing out of Arizona...where Democrats are giving new meaning to the word "obstruction".

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: opethPA

Democrats ran two audits (Iowa and I think New Hampshire), because they felt their person won in Nov 2020. Turns out he/she did not win. The audits quietly ended. Rarely are they "neutral".

Did Republicans refuse to show democrats the actual ballots?

Obviously not.

Republicans in those two states let Democrats run the audit, with their full cooperation. Totally opposite of what we're seeing out of Arizona...where Democrats are giving new meaning to the word "obstruction".

I didn't even need an answer to know the answer.


ONLY. DEMOCRATS. ARE. HIDING. BALLOTS.


BY. ANY. MEANS. NECESSARY.


But thank you for providing even more FACTS.

Flashback 2014

Hacking Democracy - The Hack

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA
The PA Audit is a partisan investigation which is interesting as I would think any such investigation needs to be neutral.

"- More than 9 months after Pennyslvania certified the 2020 election, Republican lawmakers in the state are launching a partisan probe into the vote by soliciting sworn testimony on "irregularities" and scheduling a hearing for next week."

www.reuters.com...

Partisan because democrats are refusing to allow anyone to look at the actual ballots.

The ONLY reason this became partisan in the first place.

And the ONLY reason it is STILL partisan today.

Show us the ballots and this issue ends.

One way or the other.

The ballots will tell us which.

It doesn't make a difference to me if its Republican or Democrat, I don't think either should audit the other but rather a truly neutral party with no vested interest. If that isn't feasible then a group comprised equally of both parties.

In regards to the Democrats refusing to show ballots everything I can find states the opposite. Do you have something I can read backing the claim you are making?

"Pennsylvania has already conducted a so-called risk-limiting audit of the November election, andall counties also audited a sample of their votes as mandated by law. Neither effort turned up widespread fraud to put in question Trump's loss to President Joe Biden in the state by 81,000 votes."

www.reuters.com...

a reply to: opethPA

I remember hearing that Georgia couldn't produce a large number of paper ballots, but news about the 2020 election is extremely bias and one-sided, so I can't say that I can find a source for that. I may have heard it in one of the many election hearings, but federal law requires all election materials to be held for 22 months. I have a strong feeling that other states would also have a hard time supplying all of their paper ballots, but they are needed in order to do proper audits.

a reply to: IndieA

Yes and right after the election there were numerous reports of ballots being shredded, burned, and disposed of in different ways. There were videos from reporters I think just days/hours after the election concluded of shredding trucks and waste trucks dumping bins and bins of ballots at the storage locations.

This is where a very easy red flag will come from the total ballot count and what ballots can actually be produced. If I remember correctly I think in some states it was well estimated over 100,000 ballots that could not be accounted for then factor in the chain of custody issues it was a big issue for several states.

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA
The PA Audit is a partisan investigation which is interesting as I would think any such investigation needs to be neutral.

"- More than 9 months after Pennyslvania certified the 2020 election, Republican lawmakers in the state are launching a partisan probe into the vote by soliciting sworn testimony on "irregularities" and scheduling a hearing for next week."

www.reuters.com...

Partisan because democrats are refusing to allow anyone to look at the actual ballots.

The ONLY reason this became partisan in the first place.

And the ONLY reason it is STILL partisan today.

Show us the ballots and this issue ends.

One way or the other.

The ballots will tell us which.

It doesn't make a difference to me if its Republican or Democrat, I don't think either should audit the other but rather a truly neutral party with no vested interest. If that isn't feasible then a group comprised equally of both parties.

In regards to the Democrats refusing to show ballots everything I can find states the opposite. Do you have something I can read backing the claim you are making?

"Pennsylvania has already conducted a so-called risk-limiting audit of the November election, andall counties also audited a sample of their votes as mandated by law. Neither effort turned up widespread fraud to put in question Trump's loss to President Joe Biden in the state by 81,000 votes."

www.reuters.com...

Do you want to tell us how many ballots they actually looked at?

It WAS NOT a forensic audit.

Because they DID NOT look at the actual ballots.
(Only a very tiny %)

Look up the MANY court cases of democrats doing exactly that.

Or read this very thread for detailed information on what they have been doing in Arizona.

a reply to: IndieA

Ballots, actually all election documents, are to be kept for a minimum of 2 years. That raises another problem if it's found that ballots were destroyed. But as we saw in Georgia, if no-one is willing to prosecute those law breakers, it doesn't matter.

Best analogy I've seen pertaining to REGULAR audits that are done by default after elections, and FORENSIC audits, which are rarely done, due to the expense and resources involved.

A Basket of Apples represent votes.

Regular audits count those apples to arrive how many votes were cast.

Forensic audits examine the apples to ascertain if any of them are not real. Plastic apples (bad votes) don't count.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA
The PA Audit is a partisan investigation which is interesting as I would think any such investigation needs to be neutral.

"- More than 9 months after Pennyslvania certified the 2020 election, Republican lawmakers in the state are launching a partisan probe into the vote by soliciting sworn testimony on "irregularities" and scheduling a hearing for next week."

www.reuters.com...

Partisan because democrats are refusing to allow anyone to look at the actual ballots.

The ONLY reason this became partisan in the first place.

And the ONLY reason it is STILL partisan today.

Show us the ballots and this issue ends.

One way or the other.

The ballots will tell us which.

It doesn't make a difference to me if its Republican or Democrat, I don't think either should audit the other but rather a truly neutral party with no vested interest. If that isn't feasible then a group comprised equally of both parties.

In regards to the Democrats refusing to show ballots everything I can find states the opposite. Do you have something I can read backing the claim you are making?

"Pennsylvania has already conducted a so-called risk-limiting audit of the November election, andall counties also audited a sample of their votes as mandated by law. Neither effort turned up widespread fraud to put in question Trump's loss to President Joe Biden in the state by 81,000 votes."

www.reuters.com...

Do you want to tell us how many ballots they actually looked at?

It WAS NOT a forensic audit.

Because they DID NOT look at the actual ballots.
(Only a very tiny %)

Look up the MANY court cases of democrats doing exactly that.

Or read this very thread for detailed information on what they have been doing in Arizona.

Why would I want to tell you how many ballots they looked at since I don't have the info to talk about that in an informed manner?

My demarcation on if its a forensic audit or not would be did they follow the laws around such matters and according to what I can read on PA they did. It doesn't sound like the relevant laws require 100% or 80% or some high number of ballots but I'm going to research what that % is and when those laws were put into place.

As I go for facts I'll gladly go back earlier in this thread and read about the Democrats withholding ballots from audits.

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA
The PA Audit is a partisan investigation which is interesting as I would think any such investigation needs to be neutral.

"- More than 9 months after Pennyslvania certified the 2020 election, Republican lawmakers in the state are launching a partisan probe into the vote by soliciting sworn testimony on "irregularities" and scheduling a hearing for next week."

www.reuters.com...

Partisan because democrats are refusing to allow anyone to look at the actual ballots.

The ONLY reason this became partisan in the first place.

And the ONLY reason it is STILL partisan today.

Show us the ballots and this issue ends.

One way or the other.

The ballots will tell us which.

It doesn't make a difference to me if its Republican or Democrat, I don't think either should audit the other but rather a truly neutral party with no vested interest. If that isn't feasible then a group comprised equally of both parties.

In regards to the Democrats refusing to show ballots everything I can find states the opposite. Do you have something I can read backing the claim you are making?

"Pennsylvania has already conducted a so-called risk-limiting audit of the November election, andall counties also audited a sample of their votes as mandated by law. Neither effort turned up widespread fraud to put in question Trump's loss to President Joe Biden in the state by 81,000 votes."

www.reuters.com...

Do you want to tell us how many ballots they actually looked at?

It WAS NOT a forensic audit.

Because they DID NOT look at the actual ballots.
(Only a very tiny %)

Look up the MANY court cases of democrats doing exactly that.

Or read this very thread for detailed information on what they have been doing in Arizona.

Why would I want to tell you how many ballots they looked at since I don't have the info to talk about that in an informed manner?

My demarcation on if its a forensic audit or not would be did they follow the laws around such matters and according to what I can read on PA they did. It doesn't sound like the relevant laws require 100% or 80% or some high number of ballots but I'm going to research what that % is and when those laws were put into place.

As I go for facts I'll gladly go back earlier in this thread and read about the Democrats withholding ballots from audits.

I already know how many ballots they looked at.

You can also find that in this very thread.

They did not perform any kind of audit as you claim.

Just 'called' their process an 'audit'.

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA
The PA Audit is a partisan investigation which is interesting as I would think any such investigation needs to be neutral.

"- More than 9 months after Pennyslvania certified the 2020 election, Republican lawmakers in the state are launching a partisan probe into the vote by soliciting sworn testimony on "irregularities" and scheduling a hearing for next week."

www.reuters.com...

Partisan because democrats are refusing to allow anyone to look at the actual ballots.

The ONLY reason this became partisan in the first place.

And the ONLY reason it is STILL partisan today.

Show us the ballots and this issue ends.

One way or the other.

The ballots will tell us which.

It doesn't make a difference to me if its Republican or Democrat, I don't think either should audit the other but rather a truly neutral party with no vested interest. If that isn't feasible then a group comprised equally of both parties.

In regards to the Democrats refusing to show ballots everything I can find states the opposite. Do you have something I can read backing the claim you are making?

"Pennsylvania has already conducted a so-called risk-limiting audit of the November election, andall counties also audited a sample of their votes as mandated by law. Neither effort turned up widespread fraud to put in question Trump's loss to President Joe Biden in the state by 81,000 votes."

www.reuters.com...

Do you want to tell us how many ballots they actually looked at?

It WAS NOT a forensic audit.

Because they DID NOT look at the actual ballots.
(Only a very tiny %)

Look up the MANY court cases of democrats doing exactly that.

Or read this very thread for detailed information on what they have been doing in Arizona.

Why would I want to tell you how many ballots they looked at since I don't have the info to talk about that in an informed manner?

My demarcation on if its a forensic audit or not would be did they follow the laws around such matters and according to what I can read on PA they did. It doesn't sound like the relevant laws require 100% or 80% or some high number of ballots but I'm going to research what that % is and when those laws were put into place.

As I go for facts I'll gladly go back earlier in this thread and read about the Democrats withholding ballots from audits.

I did not say 'withholding ballots from audits'.

I said hiding the ballots.

A 'cute' way do describe the legal and extra legal ways that democrats have prevented any audits that would actually look at the ballots.

With VERY few exceptions so far.

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA

originally posted by: Nunyabizisit

originally posted by: opethPA
The PA Audit is a partisan investigation which is interesting as I would think any such investigation needs to be neutral.

"- More than 9 months after Pennyslvania certified the 2020 election, Republican lawmakers in the state are launching a partisan probe into the vote by soliciting sworn testimony on "irregularities" and scheduling a hearing for next week."

www.reuters.com...

Partisan because democrats are refusing to allow anyone to look at the actual ballots.

The ONLY reason this became partisan in the first place.

And the ONLY reason it is STILL partisan today.

Show us the ballots and this issue ends.

One way or the other.

The ballots will tell us which.

It doesn't make a difference to me if its Republican or Democrat, I don't think either should audit the other but rather a truly neutral party with no vested interest. If that isn't feasible then a group comprised equally of both parties.

In regards to the Democrats refusing to show ballots everything I can find states the opposite. Do you have something I can read backing the claim you are making?

"Pennsylvania has already conducted a so-called risk-limiting audit of the November election, andall counties also audited a sample of their votes as mandated by law. Neither effort turned up widespread fraud to put in question Trump's loss to President Joe Biden in the state by 81,000 votes."

www.reuters.com...

Do you want to tell us how many ballots they actually looked at?

It WAS NOT a forensic audit.

Because they DID NOT look at the actual ballots.
(Only a very tiny %)

Look up the MANY court cases of democrats doing exactly that.

Or read this very thread for detailed information on what they have been doing in Arizona.

Why would I want to tell you how many ballots they looked at since I don't have the info to talk about that in an informed manner?

My demarcation on if its a forensic audit or not would be did they follow the laws around such matters and according to what I can read on PA they did. It doesn't sound like the relevant laws require 100% or 80% or some high number of ballots but I'm going to research what that % is and when those laws were put into place.

As I go for facts I'll gladly go back earlier in this thread and read about the Democrats withholding ballots from audits.

I already know how many ballots they looked at.

You can also find that in this very thread.

They did not perform any kind of audit as you claim.

Just 'called' their process an 'audit'.

I haven't claimed anything.
Too many people here think their opinions are fact and that is not something I do.
Anytime I quote an article or source I put those lines in "" and link the article which is why I did in this case.

Since you know how many ballots they looked at can you give me that number so I can try to validate it?

a reply to: opethPA

And the whining goes on and on.

How can you tell that an airplane is full of Republicans? - the whining goes on after the engines stop....

Good Grief. Forensic Audit Report delayed until "Next" Friday.

twitter.com...

"Next" means 9.24.2021 ???

Plenty of time for a major event/catastrophe to steal the show, or totally derail the report's release (again).

This week would have been PERFECT.

grrrr

originally posted by: carewemust
Good Grief. Forensic Audit Report delayed until "Next" Friday.

twitter.com...

"Next" means 9.24.2021 ???

Plenty of time for a major event/catastrophe to steal the show, or totally derail the report's release (again).

This week would have been PERFECT.

grrrr

You actually want a major catastrophe to happen?

Blimey....