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

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CraftyArrow

originally posted by: network dude

that's why I feel this audit is essential to our future. One of this magnitude will prove any fraud found, and if non exists, that will only help solidify the previous statement that this has been the most secure election in history. If fraud is found, that guy will be laughed at and new laws should be put in place to make damn sure that never happens again.
www.nytimes.com...

We all saw the fraud, it’s well documented with election interference and harassment, illegal ballot harvesting, destruction of ballots and materials, resubmitting ballots, timeline spike data, mishandling usb drives etc... way far from the most secure election in history.

OK

Show me your actual documented proof by legal decree/court, etc.

Yet you stated just a couple comments above that line that nobody lied in Arizona. You failed to submit your "actual documented proof by legal decree/court." Don't you see that your bias is showing? You don't want truth, you want your feelings justified.

What!?!?

Please post what you’re referring to.

Are you really that dense or is it typical deflection that the Left uses so much to not have to answer for your opinion? In this case it can only be one or the other. Which is it?

You know what I was referring to because it was right there in my comment, the one you quoted from. How could you not know what I was referring to? You're just being intentionally oblique.

edit on 3-5-2021 by TrulyColorBlind because: Clarification.

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CraftyArrow

originally posted by: network dude

that's why I feel this audit is essential to our future. One of this magnitude will prove any fraud found, and if non exists, that will only help solidify the previous statement that this has been the most secure election in history. If fraud is found, that guy will be laughed at and new laws should be put in place to make damn sure that never happens again.
www.nytimes.com...

We all saw the fraud, it’s well documented with election interference and harassment, illegal ballot harvesting, destruction of ballots and materials, resubmitting ballots, timeline spike data, mishandling usb drives etc... way far from the most secure election in history.

OK

Show me your actual documented proof by legal decree/court, etc.

Yet you stated just a couple comments above that line that nobody lied in Arizona. You failed to submit your "actual documented proof by legal decree/court." Don't you see that your bias is showing? You don't want truth, you want your feelings justified.

What!?!?

Please post what you’re referring to.

Are you really that dense or is it typical deflection that the Left uses so much to not have to answer for your opinion? In this case it can only be one or the other. Which is it?

You know what I was referring to because it was right there in my comment, the one you quoted from. How could you not know what I was referring to? You're just being intentionally oblique.

Post what you’re referring to — or let it go.

I’m not interested in playing your game.

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
a reply to: shooterbrody

mission accomplished, fraudulent ballots discovered.

Thanks!

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

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?

Follow Scott Adams on Twitter

Scott Adams
@ScottAdamsSays
If the Arizona audit is finding any indications of voting irregularities, wouldn't we have heard about it by now?

How
Is this audit completed?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CraftyArrow

originally posted by: network dude

that's why I feel this audit is essential to our future. One of this magnitude will prove any fraud found, and if non exists, that will only help solidify the previous statement that this has been the most secure election in history. If fraud is found, that guy will be laughed at and new laws should be put in place to make damn sure that never happens again.
www.nytimes.com...

We all saw the fraud, it’s well documented with election interference and harassment, illegal ballot harvesting, destruction of ballots and materials, resubmitting ballots, timeline spike data, mishandling usb drives etc... way far from the most secure election in history.

OK

Show me your actual documented proof by legal decree/court, etc.

Yet you stated just a couple comments above that line that nobody lied in Arizona. You failed to submit your "actual documented proof by legal decree/court." Don't you see that your bias is showing? You don't want truth, you want your feelings justified.

What!?!?

Please post what you’re referring to.

Are you really that dense or is it typical deflection that the Left uses so much to not have to answer for your opinion? In this case it can only be one or the other. Which is it?

You know what I was referring to because it was right there in my comment, the one you quoted from. How could you not know what I was referring to? You're just being intentionally oblique.

Post what you’re referring to — or let it go.

I’m not interested in playing your game.

I'm not playing games. You are. The deflection game. List everything that was in the comment of mine that you quoted from and you'll see that I quoted a comment of yours. It is obvious to everybody but you what I was referring to - it was right there in my comment. You do this kind of thing all the time. You admitted you're 74. Could that be part of the reason you couldn't understand what I was referring to?

It boils down to this: Somebody made a claim about all the known election fraud then you asked for court-validated proof of their claim. Then you made the claim that nobody in Arizona lied in referrence to the certification of their election. I asked you for the very same court-validated proof to back up your claim that you had asked somebody else to back their claim up with. You don't see the double standards you employ? That's what I was referring to. Now, find another way to deflect from that. Which you will, or else you'll just not even acknowledge this. The Left has this game of yours down pat.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: shooterbrody

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?

Follow Scott Adams on Twitter

Scott Adams
@ScottAdamsSays
If the Arizona audit is finding any indications of voting irregularities, wouldn't we have heard about it by now?

How
Is this audit completed?

I don’t know. But, they were discussing the comment “mission completed . . .”

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: TrulyColorBlind

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: CraftyArrow

originally posted by: network dude

that's why I feel this audit is essential to our future. One of this magnitude will prove any fraud found, and if non exists, that will only help solidify the previous statement that this has been the most secure election in history. If fraud is found, that guy will be laughed at and new laws should be put in place to make damn sure that never happens again.
www.nytimes.com...

We all saw the fraud, it’s well documented with election interference and harassment, illegal ballot harvesting, destruction of ballots and materials, resubmitting ballots, timeline spike data, mishandling usb drives etc... way far from the most secure election in history.

OK

Show me your actual documented proof by legal decree/court, etc.

Yet you stated just a couple comments above that line that nobody lied in Arizona. You failed to submit your "actual documented proof by legal decree/court." Don't you see that your bias is showing? You don't want truth, you want your feelings justified.

What!?!?

Please post what you’re referring to.

Are you really that dense or is it typical deflection that the Left uses so much to not have to answer for your opinion? In this case it can only be one or the other. Which is it?

You know what I was referring to because it was right there in my comment, the one you quoted from. How could you not know what I was referring to? You're just being intentionally oblique.

Post what you’re referring to — or let it go.

I’m not interested in playing your game.

I'm not playing games. You are. The deflection game. List everything that was in the comment of mine that you quoted from and you'll see that I quoted a comment of yours. It is obvious to everybody but you what I was referring to - it was right there in my comment. You do this kind of thing all the time. You admitted you're 74. Could that be part of the reason you couldn't understand what I was referring to?

It boils down to this: Somebody made a claim about all the known election fraud then you asked for court-validated proof of their claim. Then you made the claim that nobody in Arizona lied in referrence to the certification of their election. I asked you for the very same court-validated proof to back up your claim that you had asked somebody else to back their claim up with. You don't see the double standards you employ? That's what I was referring to. Now, find another way to deflect from that. Which you will, or else you'll just not even acknowledge this. The Left has this game of yours down pat.

Until you post exactly what I said — word for word — of what you are referring to — I am moving on.

edit on 3-5-2021 by Annee because: (no reason given)

a reply to: Annee

what about those ballots that got switched in transport from the polling places to the counting places ?

🤣🤣🤣🤣

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind

It is obvious to everybody but you what I was referring to...

Color me embarrassed, but I wasn't sure what you were referring to, altho after you explained I do remember this:

It boils down to this: Somebody made a claim about all the known election fraud then you asked for court-validated proof of their claim. Then you made the claim that nobody in Arizona lied in referrence to the certification of their election.

And again, not to speak for anyone but myself, I took that statement to mean that no one person -- including the SoS -- "lied" in certifying the election because the results are basically according to others promising this, that and the other thing happened, and -- voila! -- this is the combined result of all those things. So the SoS isn't certifying the vote count itself, but only that these authorized people said this is the result after these things happened.

I don't like it. I think this creates issues rather than prevents issues, because the SoS -- the person with ultimate responsibility for saying "This is a true and accurate count" -- really has no idea. She is just taking the word of others, and therefore has plausible deniability. And it effectively leaves no one responsible or accountable for the end result.

Again, I'm not speaking for anyone but myself, but that could be the disconnect here.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Annee

what about those ballots that got switched in transport from the polling places to the counting places ?

There you go again...

Switched from what to what?

Anything is possible, but I'm hopeful that any such shenanigans would be discovered and exposed somehow, so even if it wouldn't be possible to know all the specifics that changed, we would at least be aware that a switcheroo took place...

The auditors don't need to prove who won. They only need to show how the system could be and if it was indeed compromised and rigged. Depending on what exactly is found, the logical and natural implications and inferences might actually be worse in some ways...

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Annee

what about those ballots that got switched in transport from the polling places to the counting places ?

🤣🤣🤣🤣

I haven’t followed that.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the nation:

HAPPENING NOW: HUNDREDS Turn Out to Windham New Hampshire City Meeting on Forensic Audit – Selectmen Move Meeting Back to Smaller Venue — LIVESTREAM VIDEO

The city leaders or “selectmen” moved the meeting back to the smaller venue at the city hall sometime today.

That way HUNDREDS of concerned citizens were left standing outside!

The Windham residents ARE NOT HAPPY after city leaders announced they were using a corrupt deep state organization to hold the audit!

--------------------------------------------------------

ETA: BREAKING! Windham, NH Board WALKS OUT of Town Meeting After Outraged Residents Shouts Them Down! — VIDEO

a reply to: TrulyColorBlind
No, it is faith that what you are being shown is legit.

There has to be a level of trust placed in events like this.

I'm not even saying it is a bad thing, just that it is still there and my point is that those placing trust in this are just at a different level, of trust, as those trusting the election results.

Update/Correction to Windham NH meeting:

Meeting Moved to High School

UPDATE — The town meeting was moved over the Windham High School.

No further info on how the meeting is progressing at the high school. There is some additional video posted of the initial meeting.

media.gab.com...

a reply to: 111DPKING111
Well
Guess we will see if he is really in the know...

The OFFICIAL Arizona Audit Update Feed: twitter.com...

Updated 3 to 4 times @ day, it looks like. There will be no interim results, but the status reports confirm the audit is going well, and picking up speed.

originally posted by: 111DPKING111
media.gab.com...

Josh Barnett is running for Congress, so he's probably telling the truth, to the best of his knowledge.

a reply to: carewemust

Josh Barnett is running for Congress, so he's probably telling the truth, to the best of his knowledge.

Yeah, I'm sure he thinks he knows something. I'm not so sure it's not mis-info or dis-info. He seems to be a serial candidate... last year he was running in District 07... now it's District 06.

Truth or not, he should be keeping his mouth shut. He is compromising the audit and auditors with this crap. Like he said, "Loose lips sink ships." And he isn't doing any of the heavy lifting. It's not his place to say anything.

I’ve been reading various sources.

It’s confusing because they’re talking about the integrity and process of the audit — and if you don’t read it carefully, it sounds like they’re talking about finding errors.

Other than Barnett’s tweet — I’ve not found anything that comes close to indicating they found anything.