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

I just realized an interesting thing to check for:

See if postage was paid for a number of outbound ballots equal to the number that was flagged in the database as having been sent.

It's not impossible that the Post Office might forget to collect some postage that is owed to it. But it's probably worth a look, if the records exist. (I'm sure the financial ones exist.)


If ballots were being smuggled in from an outside printer, then no outbound postage would be getting paid for them. However they wouldn't read as real ballots if there wasn't a matching entry in the voter registry. So if entries in the voter registry flagged as mailed outnumber outbound postage payments, that proves something. (At a minimum it proves USPS clerks were screwing up and not collecting postage.)

If the numbers are available and add up, that also proves something. Or at least casts a lot of doubt on the 2000 mules theory.

a reply to: IndieA

I've read this comment three times now, and every time it brings up more doubts and questions and suspicions. Most unanswerable.

But one thing keeps popping up in my head: Would we even need this level of security and Fed oversight/involvement if the machines and internet were taken out of the equation? If we went back to only hand-counted paper ballots?

It seems that it's the machines and internet that allows for possible coordinated multi-state fraud and cheating....

ETA: As well as foreign interference and tampering of course. I'm just focusing on our domestic corrupt criminal critters for now.

originally posted by: IndieA
a reply to: Boadicea
There's much less riding on the mid-terms in the grand scheme of things.

Disagree completely.

In fact, I'd submit that the outcome of the mid-terms will decide whether our country survives as the nation it was intended to be.

If there is no massive red wave - and I would actually use a different term - MAGA wave, not just a bunch of TINOs getting re-elected - then it is over.

But of we can prevent massive election fraud ala 2020, and there is a massive MAGA wave, then we can reverse a whole lot of the insanity. Then you have the virtually impossible to consider - Trump is elected Speaker of the House, we impeach both O'Biden and Harris, and Trump would get to finish out the next two years and could still run for re-election.

And yes, I actually prefer Trump for this part of the process. We need the wrecking ball, and I honestly think that, after his first experience, he would be vastly more effective, wouldn't hesitate to fire ALL of the US Attorneys and heads and all Inspector Generals of all of the alphabet agencies and everyone else that needs to go and do it immediately (first day in office). Have only trusted advisors inside, and fire anyone immediately who refuses to act when action is needed, temp appointments ready to go, etc etc...

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: IndieA

But one thing keeps popping up in my head: Would we even need this level of security and Fed oversight/involvement if the machines and internet were taken out of the equation? If we went back to only hand-counted paper ballots?

It seems that it's the machines and internet that allows for possible coordinated multi-state fraud and cheating....

ETA: As well as foreign interference and tampering of course. I'm just focusing on our domestic corrupt criminal critters for now.

Exactly. This is absolutely what needs to happen, and Congress could do it. They have the authority, they just need the balls.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: IndieA

I've read this comment three times now, and every time it brings up more doubts and questions and suspicions. Most unanswerable.

But one thing keeps popping up in my head: Would we even need this level of security and Fed oversight/involvement if the machines and internet were taken out of the equation? If we went back to only hand-counted paper ballots?

It seems that it's the machines and internet that allows for possible coordinated multi-state fraud and cheating....

ETA: As well as foreign interference and tampering of course. I'm just focusing on our domestic corrupt criminal critters for now.

I don't know of a system that doesn't have venerabilities. I envision a secure paper ballot system that includes a blockchain that would allow for people to check their votes.

The machines could ultimately make massive election manipulation much easier by integrating election information, sophisticated computers, special software, and intelligence analysis in a intelligence center setting(s). Imagine having voter rolls, being able to add or subtract from them, knowing who has voted and who hasn't, having assess to election severs, knowing the results at various times, having the power to remotely "adjudicate" ballot images and change votes by using the election ballot image modifying software, then having the full force of the government and media having your back on any needed cover-ups. Now imagine also having access to the most state of the art technology and say being able to connect all that information and power to AI systems that do most of the work for you. Sounds a bit like what Hammer and Scorecard was said to do.

I still have a bit more I want to share from my classes, I just haven't gotten to it yet.

a reply to: tanstaafl

Exactly. This is absolutely what needs to happen, and Congress could do it. They have the authority, they just need the balls.

So it's not just me -- thank you! I kept thinking I was missing something or presuming too much.

The older I get and the more I see, the more I appreciate the wisdom of the founding fathers in doing their best to limit and restrict the power of the Feds. And the more sure I am that if the Feds are involved, it's their fault... every time!

a reply to: IndieA

I don't know of a system that doesn't have venerabilities.

This is true of course. There are no perfect answers and any system can be compromised and corrupted.

I envision a secure paper ballot system that includes a blockchain that would allow for people to check their votes.

I don't understand blockchain technology completely, but I definitely like the open and transparent nature of it. I do think maximizing transparency is a huge part of any solution. So I'm happy to consider it.

originally posted by: tanstaafl


And yes, I actually prefer Trump for this part of the process. We need the wrecking ball, and I honestly think that, after his first experience, he would be vastly more effective, wouldn't hesitate to fire ALL of the US Attorneys and heads and all Inspector Generals of all of the alphabet agencies and everyone else that needs to go and do it immediately (first day in office). Have only trusted advisors inside, and fire anyone immediately who refuses to act when action is needed, temp appointments ready to go, etc etc...

When I think about this plan, and the wrecking ball approach, I have to wonder, does Trump have the knowledge to know who to trust? Who not to trust seems like an easy target, but for all the good things he might bring, his track record on "hiring the best people" isn't looking like the slam dunk some think it is.

If you blow up the chicken pen, be sure you have new chickens at the ready, and be sure they are ready to poop out eggs on day 1. Of his choices, Pompeo was super, many others "Barr" was less than stellar.

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: tanstaafl
When I think about this plan, and the wrecking ball approach, I have to wonder, does Trump have the knowledge to know who to trust? Who not to trust seems like an easy target, but for all the good things he might bring, his track record on "hiring the best people" isn't looking like the slam dunk some think it is.

Oh, don't get me wrong, I agree 100%, but like I said, with the resources he has at his disposal, and now combined with his experience during his 1st stint, I think he is smart enough to figure it out well enough to get the job done.

That, or he really is in on it, which I don't believe, but any sane person has to be able to admit is entirely possible.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: IndieA

I don't understand blockchain technology completely, but I definitely like the open and transparent nature of it. I do think maximizing transparency is a huge part of any solution. So I'm happy to consider it.

Like the monetary system, blockchain tech could revolutionize and corruption-proof elections, even to the point that the voter - and only the voter - could even verify that their vote was counted as cast.

originally posted by: tanstaafl


But of we can prevent massive election fraud ala 2020, and there is a massive MAGA wave, then we can reverse a whole lot of the insanity. Then you have the virtually impossible to consider - Trump is elected Speaker of the House, we impeach both O'Biden and Harris, and Trump would get to finish out the next two years and could still run for re-election.

Biden *might* be impeachable depending on what comes out of Hunter's laptop/cell.

But Harris, to my knowledge, has not committed any "high crimes or misdemeanors".

You can't impeach for incompetence (or she would definitely be an easy target...)

And yes, I actually prefer Trump for this part of the process. We need the wrecking ball, and I honestly think that, after his first experience, he would be vastly more effective, wouldn't hesitate to fire ALL of the US Attorneys and heads and all Inspector Generals of all of the alphabet agencies and everyone else that needs to go and do it immediately (first day in office). Have only trusted advisors inside, and fire anyone immediately who refuses to act when action is needed, temp appointments ready to go, etc etc...

Talk like this is why moderate libs are so afraid of conservatives that they are willing to follow a radical fringe.

Purging the judicial department would look like at attempt to make the new leader "above the law"

Instead of firing them, competing agencies should be started, with overlapping jurisdictions. That keeps people honest, because then when one agency refuses to prosecute something, its competitor can embarrass it by prosecuting it successfully, and pointing out the corruption.

The two can police each other, and whichever ends up being found guilty of more stuff gets less funding.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
a reply to: tanstaafl
Biden *might* be impeachable

Rotflmao!!!!!!

Biden has been fully impeachable since before he took office simply by virtue of his obvious mental incapacitation.

In fact, if, after the insanity of the last election and the last 1.5 years, a new Congress does not propose a Constitutional Amendment requiring some form of testing for mental competence as a prerequisite to even run for P, then I submit that they are incompetent as well.

I'd also be fully in favor of a much more rigid (escalating as the age progresses) set of tests for those starting at a certain age, but, (just as I am opposed to term limits - there are other much better ways of dealing with the problems that term limits are intended to solve), I am absolutely opposed to imposing a hard age limit, because there are a lot of people who are sharp as a tack well into their nineties, so I don't think they, and their advanced years of experience, should be excluded based solely on their age.

Lastly, I submit to you that the very same Amendment should not be limited to only the President, it should be made applicable to the V.P. and all Members of Congress as well.

depending on what comes out of Hunter's laptop/cell.

The stuff on the laptop almost certainly contains enough information for him to end up being required to spend the rest of hi miserable life in jail, along with most of his family and the vast majority of his cabinet and cohorts as well.

But Harris, to my knowledge, has not committed any "high crimes or misdemeanors".

You're forgetting the other one: mental incapacitation. I submit to you that that is also a slam dunk.

That said, she absolutely is guilty of 'high crimes and misdemeanors' simply by virtue of her complicity in allowing, even encouraging our invasion at the southern border. Her guilt in this area was sealed when she was made the 'border czar'.

You can't impeach for incompetence (or she would definitely be an easy target...)

Well, since the impeachment process is not reviewable by any court, Congress can actually impeach for any reason they might so choose and just call it a 'misdemeanor'. Just like what is getting ready to be announced by the Supreme Court with regard to the power of State Legislatures to make the laws and rules regarding the Elections processes in their respective States that is not reviewable by any Court (State or Federal), there is no court of appeals for the Congressional impeachment process, including to the Supreme Court.

I guarantee you any reasonably competent investigative body of integrity could easily find plenty of other 'high crimes and misdemeanors' if they actually went looking.

"And yes, I actually prefer Trump for this part of the process. We need the wrecking ball, and I honestly think that, after his first experience, he would be vastly more effective, wouldn't hesitate to fire ALL of the US Attorneys and heads and all Inspector Generals of all of the alphabet agencies and everyone else that needs to go and do it immediately (first day in office). Have only trusted advisors inside, and fire anyone immediately who refuses to act when action is needed, temp appointments ready to go, etc etc..."

Talk like this is why moderate libs are so afraid of conservatives that they are willing to follow a radical fringe.

That irrational fear is precisely why we need Trump again.

Purging the judicial department would look like at attempt to make the new leader "above the law"

Who said anything about purging the Judicial Department??? The President has no authority to fire anyone in the Judicial branch of government.

Instead of firing them,

Oh, you meant Executive (DOJ specifically)... you do know that U.S. Attorneys are all part of the Executive Branch, right? And that all Presidents have historically always fired a bunch of U.S. Attorneys as part of their process of molding the Executive Department so as to achieve their goals.

competing agencies should be started, with overlapping jurisdictions.

Rotflmao!!! Your solution is to create even more beurocracy and complexity?

No, what we need is simplification and cleaning of the entire house. Wholesale cleaning, just as I described.

That keeps people honest, because then when one agency refuses to prosecute something, its competitor can embarrass it by prosecuting it successfully, and pointing out the corruption.

The two can police each other, and whichever ends up being found guilty of more stuff gets less funding.

Ok, I'll just say it...

Dumbest ... idea ... ever.

originally posted by: tanstaafl

You can't impeach for incompetence (or she would definitely be an easy target...)

Well, since the impeachment process is not reviewable by any court, Congress can actually impeach for any reason they might so choose and just call it a 'misdemeanor'. Just like what is getting ready to be announced by the Supreme Court with regard to the power of State Legislatures to make the laws and rules regarding the Elections processes in their respective States that is not reviewable by any Court (State or Federal), there is no court of appeals for the Congressional impeachment process, including to the Supreme Court.

You don't want to set that precedent. Biden is a temporary problem, lasting 8 years at the longest, 4 years more likely, and we're already through the first one and a half of them.

Permitting creative reasons for impeachment would be a permanent change to a temporary problem.

Trump was threatened with impeachment at least twice for the crime of "other side doesn't like you!!!" Which, if we start expanding the allowed reasons, will probably get in there eventually.

Let's not expand.

Instead of firing them,

Oh, you meant Executive (DOJ specifically)... you do know that U.S. Attorneys are all part of the Executive Branch, right? And that all Presidents have historically always fired a bunch of U.S. Attorneys as part of their process of molding the Executive Department so as to achieve their goals.

competing agencies should be started, with overlapping jurisdictions.

Rotflmao!!! Your solution is to create even more beurocracy and complexity?

No, what we need is simplification and cleaning of the entire house. Wholesale cleaning, just as I described.

That keeps people honest, because then when one agency refuses to prosecute something, its competitor can embarrass it by prosecuting it successfully, and pointing out the corruption.

The two can police each other, and whichever ends up being found guilty of more stuff gets less funding.

Ok, I'll just say it...

Dumbest ... idea ... ever.

Ironic that you disagree so whole heartedly with the reasoning of the founders.

The surest way to prevent abuse of power is for other power to check it. For local law enforcement, we already have that in the USA., The County Sheriff can arrest the same people as the City police. The state police can arrest the same people as the County Sheriff. So you've got three overlapping law enforcement agencies, each with their own independent leadership.

That works amazingly well at minimizing corruption in our nation's police departments.

Where it breaks down, is a the Federal level. There is simply not enough overlap. No second agency looking over the FBI's shoulder. That's exactly why they can get away with the bullox they get away with lately.

It's why, when they choose not seriously look into the question of election fraud, nobody looks.

But if they had to compete with someone, then they run into what is known as the "prisoner's dilema".

www.investopedia.com...#:~:text=A%20prisoner's%20dilemma%20is%20a,many%20aspects%20of%20the%20economy.

If both agencies agree to stand down, both get away with it, but if one looks and the other doesn't, then the one that didn't look gets seriously embarrassed.

a reply to: tanstaafl

TWO sets of articles to impeach President Biden have been filed in Congress over the past 18 months, and await action by the Republican-led U.S. House.

Here is the set 2 of 2: greene.house.gov...

Note: Kevin McCarthy says if he is the Speaker of the House next year, the impeachment articles will NOT be brought up.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous
a reply to: tanstaafl
You don't want to set that precedent.

Irrelevant to the point. She can most definitely be impeached, for any reason whatsoever.

Biden is a temporary problem, lasting 8 years at the longest, 4 years more likely, and we're already through the first one and a half of them.

As I said, there are fully adequate reasons to impeach O'Biden, we were talking about Harris.

Ironic that you disagree so whole heartedly with the reasoning of the founders.

By all means, provide me with a link to any Founding Father who thought it would be a good idea to do anything even remotely like what you described.

Their reasoning with regard to separation of powers was via the three separate branches - not creating multiple Executive Departments purporting to serve the same purpose and create utter chaos an confusion.

Again, your ideas was the dumbest one I've ever heard, and I've heard some doosies.

Own it.

The surest way to prevent abuse of power is for other power to check it.

Yep. And firing traitors and incompetents at the top/upper management level is the fastest and most efficient way to check it in a single department/agency.

Yippie HiYo ... software adjustable ...


How Automated Signature Verification Supports Efficient, Reliable Vote-by-Mail

a reply to: tanstaafl

Like the monetary system, blockchain tech could revolutionize and corruption-proof elections, even to the point that the voter - and only the voter - could even verify that their vote was counted as cast.

That would be ideal. AZ Rep Mark Finchem prosed something similar for AZ. He's currently running for Secretary of State.

There is sound reason for secret voting, but it's also an big obstacle in proving votes were flipped, for example, if the vote can be verified and still remain secret, it's a twofer. Only good!

a reply to: xuenchen

The signature verification system you linked-to would stop illegal aliens from voting.

Can't have that!

From Georgia:

Fulton County’s election director emailed the recount’s vote totals as 511,543 on December 3rd — but Fulton County reported the official results as 527,925 a few hours later.

Where did Fulton County officials find the extra 16,382 votes in a few hours?

Nobody knows.

Fulton County does not have any ballot images for these votes. In a pending lawsuit in a federal court, Fulton County has even confirmed in writing that it does not have the ballot images for those votes.

EXCLUSIVE: Fulton County Still Can't Explain Its 2020 Election Results

And --

Fulton County also counted 10 tabulators with more than 20,000 votes on Election Day 2020 that do not exist.

I don't know if there is any way to identify these votes and to uncount them, especially with no ballot images.

With a measly 12,000 vote margin, 17,000 and/or 20,000 could be a game changer. But we cannot know...

a reply to: Boadicea

Thanks Boadicea.

We already knew that the integrity of the 2020 election in Georgia is abysmal. This further proves it.

Thank God they can't cover-up the whole truth.