The Fight for Election Integrity Continues -- Audits, Criminal Investigations, Legislative Reform

I have some interesting information that I learned about a week ago. I plan to do more research on it, but perhaps someone with more of a computer background can help explain something to me.

I'll ask the the question first then explain.

If electronic election tally devices are not connected to the internet, but do however transmit their results at the end of election day on a secure network, what is that network and is it possible to reached it with an internet connection and the right credentials?

Disclaimer: I'm not a hacker and have absolutely no interest in hacking anything, I am merely attempting to better understand the election system in hopes of regaining confidence in the election process.

The only secret networks I know of are for law enforcement, military, and the shadow net. I believe that all of these can be accessed by the internet with credentials, but I could be wrong.

My state uses these cute ES&S tally devices that look like modified trash bins. A scanner takes digital images, a computer records the votes, and the bins collect the paper ballots. My state retains the paper ballots, but it's their digital images that are actually tallied. We have learned that these images can be altered by software in ways that can flip votes. I recently learned that at the end of election day, rather than print out tally results, these machines transmit the tally results through a secure network. Since polling places are so spread out, I assume that this couldn't be a LAN network, so I'm left to wonder if it connects to the internet in some way.

If these machines can be accessed by the internet, or even by the DHS, ERIC, or private 3rd parties for that matter, then theoretically, real-time election results could be available to anyone who has access, or has gained access, to this secure network. Real-time election results would be much needed information for those wanting to rig an election without getting caught. A sophisticated rigging operation would make use of this data to determine how many votes need to be added, and or changed, and would help them to cover-up their actions in cases of an audit by showing them the election results by precinct, which could be used when inflating voter rolls to allow for counterfeit ballot stuffing. Any electronic manipulation could be recorded so that paper ballot replacement could take place in case of a full forensic audit, which is almost always not an issue.

I can't help but think that if it's a computer, it can be hacked, and if a computer is connected to the internet, access can be gained to it. Satellites increase security, but even those can be venerable, at least that's my understanding.

Just as counterfeit money can be detected, and often even by common folk upon physical examination or simple testing, so to can counterfeit ballots be detected.

It's even easier to detect counterfeit ballots when they come from overseas printing companies.

I wonder how Sonny Borrelli knew that the shredded ballots that Staci Burke had were, "plutonium", without having seen or investigating them.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
a reply to: carewemust

What's that got to do with anything? Presumed innocence has nothing to do with being open to the possibility that someone could be guilty.

Do you really need this logic gate explained to you?

I think people were open to that possibility the first 10 or 20 times Trump was investigated. But in each case, the opening accusation just got repeated 20 different ways, rephrased, recast, spun around a bit. And then the investigation never turned up anything more concrete.

You can only cry "wolf" so many times.

originally posted by: alphabetaone
What does indict mean?

In Election Fraud Land that means any day now the Arizona AG is gonna tick-tock a bunch of those out since the CyberBozos were able to locate so much fraud. So much. The most fraud ever. So Corrupt.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

If the AG does nothing, it's highly likely that he's involved in some way with either the corruption or the cover-up.

I'm hearing from people in Arizona, that Arizona has been a hotbed for ballot trafficking for at least 20 years, and that it has developed and grown over the years.

Let's see what happens after Monday's hearing with Jovan Pulitzer.

originally posted by: IndieA
If the AG does nothing, it's highly likely that he's involved in some way with either the corruption or cover-up.

That's the lame excuse every time it doesn't go your way, "They must be in on it!!!!".

Weak.

originally posted by: IndieA
If electronic election tally devices are not connected to the internet, but do however transmit their results at the end of election day on a secure network, what is that network and is it possible to reached it with an internet connection and the right credentials?

If it is connected, it is possible to breach it.

That said, it could be protected to the point that you would need to hack into it before even being able to attempt providing credentials, and the most secure networks require multi-auth (much more than just simple 2FA), usually some form of bio-ID.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: IndieA
If the AG does nothing, it's highly likely that he's involved in some way with either the corruption or cover-up.

That's the lame excuse every time it doesn't go your way, "They must be in on it!!!!".

Weak.

Except in this case we all can see enough evidence to warrant a massive investigation generating multiple high profile arrests.

So... no, not weak at all.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
Except in this case we all can see enough evidence to warrant a massive investigation generating multiple high profile arrests.

WOW! I hope so! Any day now, aannnnnnnnnny day. When does all the arrests happen, 2000 and never?

LOL.

WINNING!

‘If the Truth Hurts, Then Just Shut the Hell Up!’ Republican Arizona AG Lashes Out at MAGA Hecklers During Debate.

When it was Brnovich’s turn to speak, he was met with jeers and heckles from the MAGA faithful in the audience. HE MUST BE IN ON THE FRAUD!!!!!!!

This guy hooked you all like a bunch of largemouth bass. It must have been the type of bait.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: IndieA
If the AG does nothing, it's highly likely that he's involved in some way with either the corruption or cover-up.

That's the lame excuse every time it doesn't go your way, "They must be in on it!!!!".

Weak.

No matter how you look at it, the AG is a politician. Politicians lie.

Going after it doesn't prove it's true. Not going after it doesn't prove its false.

It just means the AG did or didn't see a political benefit for them self in pursuing it.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: IndieA
If electronic election tally devices are not connected to the internet, but do however transmit their results at the end of election day on a secure network, what is that network and is it possible to reached it with an internet connection and the right credentials?

If it is connected, it is possible to breach it.

That said, it could be protected to the point that you would need to hack into it before even being able to attempt providing credentials, and the most secure networks require multi-auth (much more than just simple 2FA), usually some form of bio-ID.

A network is only as secure as the people who have access to it. Most big hacks are inside jobs.

In this case, maybe they don't even need to hack it. Just have an insider with access keep checking the tallies and texting what they see on their screen to the ballot stuffers.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
When it was Brnovich’s turn to speak, he was met with jeers and heckles from the MAGA faithful in the audience. HE MUST BE IN ON THE FRAUD!!!!!!!

This guy hooked you all like a bunch of largemouth bass. It must have been the type of bait.

I'm not sure what is funnier, that you continue to intentionally misconstrue what people are saying, or that you actually believe what you are saying.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
No matter how you look at it, the AG is a politician. Politicians lie.

No kidding, I said as much about this guy last year that he was just stringing all of you along.

a reply to: tanstaafl

‘If the Truth Hurts, Then Just Shut the Hell Up!’

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: tanstaafl

‘If the Truth Hurts, Then Just Shut the Hell Up!’

Well, we at least agree on that...

Too bad you're incapable of following your own good advice.

Hmmm... maybe because it's so rarely good that can't tell the good from the bad...

a reply to: tanstaafl

My advice was spot on, this guy played everyone like a Stradivarius. Any indictments coming from the AZ AG? No?

‘If the Truth Hurts, Then Just Shut the Hell Up!’

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: IndieA
If the AG does nothing, it's highly likely that he's involved in some way with either the corruption or cover-up.

That's the lame excuse every time it doesn't go your way, "They must be in on it!!!!".

Weak.

No matter how you look at it, the AG is a politician. Politicians lie.

Going after it doesn't prove it's true. Not going after it doesn't prove its false.

It just means the AG did or didn't see a political benefit for them self in pursuing it.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

originally posted by: IndieA
If electronic election tally devices are not connected to the internet, but do however transmit their results at the end of election day on a secure network, what is that network and is it possible to reached it with an internet connection and the right credentials?

If it is connected, it is possible to breach it.

That said, it could be protected to the point that you would need to hack into it before even being able to attempt providing credentials, and the most secure networks require multi-auth (much more than just simple 2FA), usually some form of bio-ID.

A network is only as secure as the people who have access to it. Most big hacks are inside jobs.

In this case, maybe they don't even need to hack it. Just have an insider with access keep checking the tallies and texting what they see on their screen to the ballot stuffers.

So Politicians lie, BUT not the politicians that are pandering to their base and so many seeking donations to support them and their quest with unproven fraud? That's really funny. Heck the former President himself grifted over 250 million that you were told was to fight fraud and did not go to it at all.

These politicians want to stay in office, and if they can make some easy money from their supporters, all the better.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: tanstaafl

My advice was spot on, this guy played everyone like a Stradivarius. Any indictments coming from the AZ AG? No?

He only played people who actually believed he would do the right thing. Many of us hoped he would. I don't think anyone truly believed that he would.

So, nope, your advice was not spot on, but your incessant crowing about your glorious amazingness is really tiring...

originally posted by: tanstaafl
He only played people who actually believed he would do the right thing. Many of us hoped he would.

You hoped wrong as I said last year.

Do I have a crystal ball or am I in on the fraud? I think both.

‘If the Truth Hurts, Then Just Shut the Hell Up!’

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I definitely had my concerns when the nunchucks came out, but I held on to hope that we would see some justice.

What a f-ing joke of an AG.

Just a reminder, Jovan Pulitzer's Arizona presentation on his Maricopa county kinematic artifact detection report is between 6pm and 9pm PST tonight.

RSBN will be streaming it live!

www.reddit.com...



twitter.com...

a reply to: IndieA

I expect that to do **** all as well.