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

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Yes lets audit any place that may have had issues.

That's not even realistically logical. And who's gonna pay for it.

People take advantage. If they know they can request an audit "whenever" - - they're gonna do that.

a reply to: Xtrozero

He said a "Fool is born every minute" and "You can fool most of the people most of the time"

Thank you! I was close... a little too nice though!

The problem is mass mailings is a whole new world and it was rushed.

Yes -- and it is a big problem. Doors were opened to major abuses. There is no doubt of that, hence the suspicions and presumptions. It's probably safe to presume that some bad actors did in fact do their best to exploit the process. But to what extent is the question.

We know many states had issues and questions that could be answered. This would have all been done with many months ago if everyone just said Yes lets audit any place that may have had issues. So they get audited and nothing is found... That in itself would have secured our election process but that isn't what happened...So here we are still with 10s of millions thinking our election process was jimmied, and the left just says " We told you it was all good so you should just take our word on it" While their true motive is they do not want to really look under the hood just incase it all wasn't all that good...lol

Or they are looking under the hood with the garage door closed to see how to better tweak it for the next time! BOTH sides.

a reply to: Annee

It’s more of a constitutional democracy.

You two were both wrong, or could be right depending on how much believe in government.

But since you guys don’t believe it’s a democracy = any audit will be BS.

You can’t have a legit audit without a democracy.

BREAKING: Josh Barnett who's running for Congress in Arizona just tweeted about the Maricopa County Audit in progress: "We got what we're looking for."

gab.com...

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xtrozero
Yes lets audit any place that may have had issues.

That's not even realistically logical. And who's gonna pay for it.

People take advantage. If they know they can request an audit "whenever" - - they're gonna do that.

Requesting party should pay for it. It will not be whenever, the math people knew EXACTLY where the fraud was just based on previous elections.

Thats why we keep the ballots, you just look foolish if you audit to find nothing. You really dont think there was someone counting at Maricopa that didnt tip them off ?

a reply to: 111DPKING111

Thank you -- but rather cryptic! And rather frustrating!!!

I found his Twitter, but I'm not seeing this Tweet: Barnett for AZ

Honestly, I'm not liking this. It was agreed that no statements would be made while the audit was ongoing. That all findings would be presented in their totality in the report. Which is the most practical and intellectually honest way to do it. We don't need half-truths and semi-truths. We need the whole truth.

originally posted by: Boadicea
Hmmmm... so this audit is not reasonable? How? Why? What is unreasonable about it?

I didn't say that. I said some people who found the elections unreasonable find this audit reasonable.

Both any conclusions now is premature and unfair.

When we have the report from the auditors, we can and will read it, consider and evaluate the information, documentation and records, and we all can come to our own conclusions.

I wasn't talking about personal conclusions, I was talking about uncertainty present regardless of the results.

Faith is not reason.

Reason tells us that the only way to know if there was fraud is to examine the process and records and materials.

And most people won't actually do that, they have faith that the people doing it are going to tell them the truth.

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
BREAKING: Josh Barnett who's running for Congress in Arizona just tweeted about the Maricopa County Audit in progress: "We got what we're looking for."

gab.com...

Any idea what that means?

a reply to: Boadicea

I dont think there is anything cryptic about it, but does he really know?

As I said above, they didnt do this without some kind of tip off. What they probably dont know is the extent of it, and can they prove it.

a reply to: shooterbrody

mission accomplished, fraudulent ballots discovered.

I havent heard anyone mention this, but everyone knows Fox called Arizona before the votes were even counted based on their polling I suppose. If there was fraud and it turns out the count was way off, who all was in on it?

I believe Fox already fired someone in their polling team over this, but I think an explanation would still be in order.

a reply to: 111DPKING111

Requesting party should pay for it.

I think I might disagree, because it's too easy to price it out of reach. The people have the right to verification of election results, so accessibility has to be a feature -- not an option.

Perhaps a better condition or criteria would be to require a certain number or percentage of potentially compromised ballots/votes, or some other measure of actual potential damage.

originally posted by: Annee

That's not even realistically logical. And who's gonna pay for it.

People take advantage. If they know they can request an audit "whenever" - - they're gonna do that.

You take it maybe to some extreme and I just want what is right, maybe we could meet 1/2 way...lol

As I said this was a unprecedented election and the left winning are like "we are good".

In the end we have clearly not done enough to have people once again have faith in our elections and that is really what is important in the end... Unprecedented election with unprecedented results with each county doing their own thing. How do we ensure all the safe guards were in place or even if safe guards were even there because it was unprecedented?

a reply to: Xtrozero

Yes, if 1 team is happy with the results, tough luck verifying... I mean, if we keep the ballots on purpose, isnt it usually going to be the losing team that requests a recount? So crazy.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: 111DPKING111

Requesting party should pay for it.

I think I might disagree, because it's too easy to price it out of reach. The people have the right to verification of election results, so accessibility has to be a feature -- not an option.

Perhaps a better condition or criteria would be to require a certain number or percentage of potentially compromised ballots/votes, or some other measure of actual potential damage.

I dont think it needs to be even a full audit, they know where the numbers look way off. Requesting party is my gut reaction, but Im sure there are other avenues.

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
a reply to: Boadicea

I dont think there is anything cryptic about it, but does he really know?

Know what? Did they find dead voters voting? Unfolded and therefore unmailed mail-in ballots? Fraudulent ballots? Fractional tabulating? Internet connections? They were looking for lots of things so this tells us nothing. That's why it's cryptic!

As I said above, they didnt do this without some kind of tip off. What they probably dont know is the extent of it, and can they prove it.

Well, he thinks he knows something, and he must have heard it from someone, and must be pretty confident it can be proven as fact since he stated it as fact. But it's not his place to make it public, and it's not the time to make it public.

a reply to: shooterbrody If you want to see something enough, and you look hard enough, you will see what you want.

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
a reply to: shooterbrody

mission accomplished, fraudulent ballots discovered.

"Fraudulent" as in not official ballots printed and supplied by the state?

Or fraudulent ballots from fake voters?

Where did you see this?

a reply to: 111DPKING111

I dont think it needs to be even a full audit...

You're probably right -- at least in most circumstances.

...they know where the numbers look way off.

Good point.

Requesting party is my gut reaction, but Im sure there are other avenues.

Maybe charge the requesting party with the burden of justifying it to initiate an audit.

I'm just concerned that the people are being increasingly excluded from decision making power. We should not need anyone's arbitrary permission or approval for verification and/or justification of government actions. I just want the people to have more power, and the government critters to have less power.

originally posted by: Xtrozero


In the end we have clearly not done enough to have people once again have faith in our elections and that is really what is important in the end... Unprecedented election with unprecedented results with each county doing their own thing. How do we ensure all the safe guards were in place or even if safe guards were even there because it was unprecedented?

I think we have to wait and see where this current election audit(s) go. So, I don't think we're at the end yet.

We are definitely in a better place than from the hanging chads.