Why so many people believe the election was rigged

[SheepDog4Life]

My name is Michelle Klann, and I’m here today to put you on public notice and to inform you that you are not our elected officials. None of you have never signed an oath to the Republic of Arizona. Instead, you have signed an oath of office to a foreign corporation which means this is an act insurrection. You do not have a proper bond carrying surety for your actions to we the people. Due to all the voter fraud, you have never been formally voted in. Acting as if you have any authority over the people is a direct act of treason. Today we, the body sovereign are presenting you each a notice of liability and opportunity to cure. The fine is $1.75 million per claim and there are 12 signatures which means you are each personally liable for $21 million. If you do not resign in 3 days you will be presented with a writ quo warrento , an a waiver of tort. If you do not rebut these truths and you remain in office, We will be notifying the military, and your act of treason will be grounds for an immediate military tribunal. I don’t need to tell you the penalties for treason. We the body sovereign, hereby command you to resign within three days or else face the consequence.

Sovereign citizen shadow government fruit-basket stuff here folks... "We will be notifying the military".

Giving Permission to Political Violence

Undermining the legitimacy of institutions—as the left and the right have both done—is just the first step.

www.yahoo.com

 

[BugI02]

And all of the automated vulnerability, library dependency, etc scan tools are available and should be standard practice/gates to proprietary software as well.

Having said that, open source is no panacea... some OS has broad and lasting community support, other projects, that support lapses and those frameworks/libraries/etc increasingly become proprietary to keep relevant or must be re-factored out.

Not all OS has a retains rebust community support.


I must be dense... how can it not without being immediately apparent?

Each of these voting terminals prints a paper man/machine readable ballot which is then scanned at the drop box ('member the issue in Maricopa AZ where the ballots wouldn't scan for a couple hours?) There is literally a 'paper trail' as well as the equivalent of 'double entry accounting'... triple actually for in person voting... signed in voters, voters/votes at each terminal, the paper ballots. To 'stuff' the in person voting, you've got three checkpoints to cover.

And yes, i review my printed paper ballot... don't you?

And you think the machines couldn't be programmed to display a faithful copy of your voting choices for printout but change the count apportionment so the number of votes matched the number of voters but the distribution of the votes was shaded towards the desired outcome

Something as simple as counting every 166th vote for president as a Biden vote, regardless of what it actually was, would shift the totals by between 0.9 points and 1.2 points, easily enough to swing a close election - and if you do a recount using the same tabulation equipment the results would be the same. It would only become apparent in a hand recount of all the votes

We have no idea how easy that might be to do or what internal safeguards are in place because we are not allowed to see the code, and there should be NOTHING going on in that code complicated enough to be proprietary or a trade secret

 

[jamil]

Ditto.



And I would suggest that voting system software falls into this... more on my search of OS voting s/w below.


Yup and the presumption is that voting is a common task and has (or should have) a well-supported OS community behind it. My limited search yielded the Open Voting Consortium. Their support site is not whatchumitecall trust-inspiring.

OVC website

Perhaps there is a widely supported alternative? My limited Google/Wiki searching indicates that the only time it's been used in practice, as opposed to pilot, was Choctaw County, Mississippi.

Does not sound ready-for-primetime to me.

If this is a debate about what should be versus options that exist, then yeah.

Nor would I, hence the reason I offered it, lol!


Ignoring rank order voting - IMO it's a solution in search of a problem, and the wrong solution at that - I'd say you need better QA's and better SMEs/Product Owners to define the acceptance criteria!

The premise presumed that it's a company wide sort of thing, where customer acceptance testing would probably be easy enough to pull off, especially of the customer is a willing Democrat SoS.

So something like what Trumpers believe about Dominion. I think they believe about Dominion IS possible. But, there isn't the evidence needed to start indicting people. And then there's the whole lawsuit thing where reasonable people should expect that if there were anything to the Dominion allegations, surely those who were sued would have presented evidence to save them the $800M or whatever.

Whether willful or negligent (bug), the MVP for voting systems (like many other processing systems) is 100%. Add in whitebox testing and code reviews - yes we still do them - and you should be fired promptly on your first attempt.

I would never do it. I'd quit first. Like I said, the presumption was that it's intentional on the part of a dishonest company.

I think you're making light work here...

Hacking voting systems from afar if connected to the internet (they weren't) absolutely could happen as could happen with ANY connected system. The only 100% sure way to avoid it is to disconnect (and screen, scan, etc for trojans, malware, etc).

BUT, doing so without being detected (non-technically detected, not network/firewall/pen-alerts, etc) is not possible as far as I can see. Where did all of those electronic votes come from in excess of voters signed in? Where are the paper ballots with judges initials on the sleeve? Or is someone picking them up off the floor, lol?

Mail-in ballots... whole different story.


Perhaps I should have specifically phrased it with the indefinite "you" as in "doesn't everybody?" Which we know the answer to that is no.

 

[jamil]

WTF did I just read?

 

[SheepDog4Life]

The premise presumed that it's a company wide sort of thing, where customer acceptance testing would probably be easy enough to pull off, especially of the customer is a willing Democrat SoS.

So something like what Trumpers believe about Dominion. I think they believe about Dominion IS possible. But, there isn't the evidence needed to start indicting people. And then there's the whole lawsuit thing where reasonable people should expect that if there were anything to the Dominion allegations, surely those who were sued would have presented evidence to save them the $800M or whatever.



I would never do it. I'd quit first. Like I said, the presumption was that it's intentional on the part of a dishonest company.

Ok, could a totally dishonest company, to bottom, pull it off software wise. Yeah. They could even make the tabulating servers match the individual voting machines…

But, the sign-in books and the paper ballots walking themselves into the ballot box?

The more people in on a secret, the less secret it becomes.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

View attachment 343206

WTF did I just read?

Michelle Klann… address to the Maricopa Board of Supervisors, though they adjurned rather than recognizing her so she read it from the podium to an empty diaz.

Full on shaved head koolaid drinker.

Basically, she’s telling what time it is…

 

[BugI02]

The more people in on a secret, the less secret it becomes.

Yes. I've always heard it said that the only way two people can keep a secret is if one of them is dead (or 58 of them if you're Hillary)

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[Leadeye]

View attachment 343206

WTF did I just read?

I'm guessing the manifesto of somebody on a one way trip to prison.

 

[phylodog]

 

[jamil]

It sounds to me like Zapata genuinely was trying to expose a high potential for voter fraud. An election official sending ballots to one influential person is obviously not trying to change the election. It looks more like she was fired by democrats and prosecuted by democrats because they'd rather put her in jail than fix the problem they'd like to exploit.

Perhaps she'd have been more effective if she had brought the problem to Brandtjen personally, and worked with her instead of committing a crime to expose the exploit. But, now that everyone knows the exploit...

 

[Magyars]

 

[SheepDog4Life]

It sounds to me like Zapata genuinely was trying to expose a high potential for voter fraud. An election official sending ballots to one influential person is obviously not trying to change the election. It looks more like she was fired by democrats and prosecuted by democrats because they'd rather put her in jail than fix the problem they'd like to exploit.

Maybe she was, but I'm still skeptical that she was genuiniely whistleblowing. I'd imagine if I was Brandtjen, I'd smell a setup. And, since she, Zapata, didn't "raise her hand" until after law enforcement was involved... not convinced she was pure of heart.

Perhaps she'd have been more effective if she had brought the problem to Brandtjen personally, and worked with her instead of committing a crime to expose the exploit. But, now that everyone knows the exploit...

In the alternate, if she was genuinely concerned and her boss, the Director of Elections kept poo-poo'ing it... have the ballots mailed to the Director's home. THAT smells more like real whistleblowing... along with a paper-trail of trying to convince the director in just the theoretical sense.

 

[SheepDog4Life]

Wisconsin Voters Pass Amendments to Bar Private Election Funding in Response to ‘Zuckerbucks’ Controversy | National Review

Zuckerberg donated $420 million to a nonprofit that dispersed the funds to state and local election officials in 2020.

www.nationalreview.com

 

[indyblue]

Wisconsin Voters Pass Amendments to Bar Private Election Funding in Response to ‘Zuckerbucks’ Controversy | National Review

Zuckerberg donated $420 million to a nonprofit that dispersed the funds to state and local election officials in 2020.

www.nationalreview.com

Now if only the rest of the states would enact this.

 

[Ingomike]

Wisconsin Voters Pass Amendments to Bar Private Election Funding in Response to ‘Zuckerbucks’ Controversy | National Review

Zuckerberg donated $420 million to a nonprofit that dispersed the funds to state and local election officials in 2020.

www.nationalreview.com

Dems are already on to next. Lawsuits on their way to SCOTUS, but doubt they stop the EO ordering the government to register voters through the government offices, like an SBA loan requiring the business owners to register all their employees.

 

[jamil]

Maybe she was, but I'm still skeptical that she was genuiniely whistleblowing. I'd imagine if I was Brandtjen, I'd smell a setup. And, since she, Zapata, didn't "raise her hand" until after law enforcement was involved... not convinced she was pure of heart.


In the alternate, if she was genuinely concerned and her boss, the Director of Elections kept poo-poo'ing it... have the ballots mailed to the Director's home. THAT smells more like real whistleblowing... along with a paper-trail of trying to convince the director in just the theoretical sense.

What did she have to gain? She sent the fake ballots to a Republican. I think it’s probably closer to the truth to just say she’s stupid than to say she was trying to scam someone.

I thought she was caught with actual nefarious fraud at first. Until I heard the rest of the story. It was only 3 ballots and all sent to the same person, a Republican, the opposite party. If she’s trying to steal an election from republicans, she’s really bad at it.