Stop watching Fox, its propaganda trash. Does nothing but raise your blood pressure.

I wonder how many men/women who are employed would sell their soul, like I believe Baier has with that comment (from producer, or whomever), just to keep the insurance for their son's biannual heart surgeries?

Baier's son has had a heart condition since birth, and he's had, at least, three surgeries to improve/correct heart conditions. These days, thanks to Obama''s god awful health bill, each one of those surgeries has to be $1 million plus.

I don't know that Baier has done that, but it occurred to me it's likely happened a lot. It's a hell of an ethical dilemma.

BREAKING REPORT: Arizona Attorney General Asks Secretary of State to PROVIDE EVIDENCE of Potential Voter Fraud..

— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) July 20, 2021

will25u said:

---

BREAKING REPORT: Arizona Attorney General Asks Secretary of State to PROVIDE EVIDENCE of Potential Voter Fraud..

— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) July 20, 2021

---

The FBI and local law enforcement should already be investigating.

will25u said:

---

BREAKING REPORT: Arizona Attorney General Asks Secretary of State to PROVIDE EVIDENCE of Potential Voter Fraud..

— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) July 20, 2021

---

Hmm.

aggiehawg said:

---

will25u said:

---

BREAKING REPORT: Arizona Attorney General Asks Secretary of State to PROVIDE EVIDENCE of Potential Voter Fraud..

— Chuck Callesto (@ChuckCallesto) July 20, 2021

---

Hmm.

---

My answer is similar. "What"!?

To me, that should be an easy task, but since I'm sure this is political, I'm not really sure what the hell is being asked.

https://thecollege.asu.edu/node/9686
https://azsos.gov/people/sambo-bo-dul
https://twitter.com/sambodul?lang=en

aggieforester05 said:

---

captkirk said:

---

---

She needs to live in an interrogation room until she starts squealing.

---

When I worked for a municipality, 2nd jobs weren't allowed by salaried employees.

captkirk said:

---

---

I have to believe that this has been happening nationwide for some time now.

fasthorse05 said:

---

I wonder how many men/women who are employed would sell their soul, like I believe Baier has with that comment (from producer, or whomever), just to keep the insurance for their son's biannual heart surgeries?

Baier's son has had a heart condition since birth, and he's had, at least, three surgeries to improve/correct heart conditions. These days, thanks to Obama''s god awful health bill, each one of those surgeries has to be $1 million plus.

I don't know that Baier has done that, but it occurred to me it's likely happened a lot. It's a hell of an ethical dilemma.

---

That is not an ethical dilemma. It is a personal choice to solve a personal problem by knowingly doing wrong. Yes, a sad circumstance, but no dilemma. Right is always right, and wrong is always wrong

The only dilemma is which master you will choose.

Good point.

Gracias. And no, I haven't had to deal with that situation, but life throws a lot of issues at folks.

aggiehawg said:

---

Brett Baier is lying through his teeth about what has been found in Maricopa County. Just reciting what Maricopa County has says are an explanation of why the numbers don't add up on the 74,000 MIBs for which there is no record ever being mailed out.

Basically Maricopa County has said they don't keep track of who votes early in person and who votes early by dropping off a completed MIB at a voting center during early voting. I call BS on that one. Doesn't make sense that a poll worker would accept that ballot without any record of it for chain of custody.

Then again, Maricopa County heavily outsourced every aspect of their election, so how the hell would they know anyway?

---

Sadly, as I recall, it is the case.

my wife and I dropped off MiB at a local polling place. I dropped them off. Wife wasn't present, no id check, etc.. Dropped them in a box, just like returning a library book

Nothing is going to come of any of this... sure, people are asking questions. There are people who ALWAYS ask questions. There will be no real consequences. This will happen again and again in future elections. Wishful thinking is just that... wishful thinking. I will be SHOCKED if there are any meaningful consequences as a result of these "investigations."

CrockerAg98 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Brett Baier is lying through his teeth about what has been found in Maricopa County. Just reciting what Maricopa County has says are an explanation of why the numbers don't add up on the 74,000 MIBs for which there is no record ever being mailed out.

Basically Maricopa County has said they don't keep track of who votes early in person and who votes early by dropping off a completed MIB at a voting center during early voting. I call BS on that one. Doesn't make sense that a poll worker would accept that ballot without any record of it for chain of custody.

Then again, Maricopa County heavily outsourced every aspect of their election, so how the hell would they know anyway?

---

Sadly, as I recall, it is the case.

my wife and I dropped off MiB at a local polling place. I dropped them off. Wife wasn't present, no id check, etc.. Dropped them in a box, just like returning a library book

---

Really? I stand corrected then.

Helluva way to run an election.

In 2012, my elderly mother had requested and received an absentee ballot here in Texas. She was legally blind so I filled out her ballot for her, signed as such and then went to the local election office to hand it in. They wouldn't take it. Told me I had to mail it back in only.

BTHOB said:

---

Nothing is going to come of any of this... sure, people are asking questions. There are people who ALWAYS ask questions. There will be no real consequences. This will happen again and again in future elections. Wishful thinking is just that... wishful thinking. I will be SHOCKED if there are any meaningful consequences as a result of these "investigations."

---

Several states have already passed legislation, more are in the process, attempting to reduce fraud, so at minimum this is something resulting from the evidence of fraud. The federal government is reactionary in their response exposing the Democratic Party leadership agenda, we'll have to wait to see if federal courts back up the Feds or the sates.

As far as individuals accountability, I agree, I doubt any government officials are held criminally or civilly liable. At most lose, might jobs, not pensions. Hope I am wrong on this one.

Maybe not as much as honest people would like.

The states passing laws now are almost as bad.

It happened because of them, and NOW they will fix it.

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Basically Maricopa County has said they don't keep track of who votes early in person and who votes early by dropping off a completed MIB at a voting center during early voting. I call BS on that one. Doesn't make sense that a poll worker would accept that ballot without any record of it for chain of custody.

---

Oh BS, that doesn't freaking matter. If they mail out X number of ballots and the freaking total of MIB's counted is 74,000 more than what was mailed out, it doesn't matter whether they were mailed back, dropped off, or sent through a rip in the space-time continuum. X number of ballots were mailed to X number of voters as printed by Runbeck and matched to individuals on the voter roles.

Enough with all this **** already......no more "statements" run through lawyers answering questions vaguely, incomplete, and in some cases, to questions that were not asked. Drag these people in and question everyone under oath......and be sure they bring a copy of the "procedures" so they have to answer to each time one was ignored.

---

Your point would make sense but for one problem: they got to the supposed 74,000 difference by comparing apples and oranges. It's not true to say there were 74,000 more mail-in ballots received than mailed out. The "received" number he used includes all early votes, both mail-in and in-person. He was also comparing reports from two different time periods so it's no surprise they do not match.

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

MASAXET said:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Basically Maricopa County has said they don't keep track of who votes early in person and who votes early by dropping off a completed MIB at a voting center during early voting. I call BS on that one. Doesn't make sense that a poll worker would accept that ballot without any record of it for chain of custody.

---

Oh BS, that doesn't freaking matter. If they mail out X number of ballots and the freaking total of MIB's counted is 74,000 more than what was mailed out, it doesn't matter whether they were mailed back, dropped off, or sent through a rip in the space-time continuum. X number of ballots were mailed to X number of voters as printed by Runbeck and matched to individuals on the voter roles.

Enough with all this **** already......no more "statements" run through lawyers answering questions vaguely, incomplete, and in some cases, to questions that were not asked. Drag these people in and question everyone under oath......and be sure they bring a copy of the "procedures" so they have to answer to each time one was ignored.

---

Your point would make sense but for one problem: they got to the supposed 74,000 difference by comparing apples and oranges. It's not true to say there were 74,000 more mail-in ballots received than mailed out. The "received" number he used includes all early votes, both mail-in and in-person. He was also comparing reports from two different time periods so it's no surprise they do not match.

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

---

This puzzles me a bit. You would think that once the discrepancy was discovered, the auditors would look at all the scenarios of where these votes would have come from and would have a pretty good idea of their origin. I don't believe they ever claimed they were fraudulent votes.

Commenting and questioning the way they did smells more like they were trying to get a response from the county on record. Even if what the county said about mixing early votes with MIB votes is true, it exposes the fact that the county has a flaw in their system that needs to be fixed. Having them officially admit that they co-mingle the votes thereby destroying the possibility of an audit trail seems like a positive result, just not the one that the general public seems to think it suggests.

From the hearing yesterday.



Case was dismissed on the equitable doctrine of laches. (BS but it is what it is.) Also Ossoff and Warnock were not properly served. Daughtery's lawyer says he will appeal.

American Hardwood said:

---

MASAXET said:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Basically Maricopa County has said they don't keep track of who votes early in person and who votes early by dropping off a completed MIB at a voting center during early voting. I call BS on that one. Doesn't make sense that a poll worker would accept that ballot without any record of it for chain of custody.

---

Oh BS, that doesn't freaking matter. If they mail out X number of ballots and the freaking total of MIB's counted is 74,000 more than what was mailed out, it doesn't matter whether they were mailed back, dropped off, or sent through a rip in the space-time continuum. X number of ballots were mailed to X number of voters as printed by Runbeck and matched to individuals on the voter roles.

Enough with all this **** already......no more "statements" run through lawyers answering questions vaguely, incomplete, and in some cases, to questions that were not asked. Drag these people in and question everyone under oath......and be sure they bring a copy of the "procedures" so they have to answer to each time one was ignored.

---

Your point would make sense but for one problem: they got to the supposed 74,000 difference by comparing apples and oranges. It's not true to say there were 74,000 more mail-in ballots received than mailed out. The "received" number he used includes all early votes, both mail-in and in-person. He was also comparing reports from two different time periods so it's no surprise they do not match.

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

---

This puzzles me a bit. You would think that once the discrepancy was discovered, the auditors would look at all the scenarios of where these votes would have come from and would have a pretty good idea of their origin. I don't believe they ever claimed they were fraudulent votes.

Commenting and questioning the way they did smells more like they were trying to get a response from the county on record. Even if what the county said about mixing early votes with MIB votes is true, it exposes the fact that the county has a flaw in their system that needs to be fixed. Having them officially admit that they co-mingle the votes thereby destroying the possibility of an audit trail seems like a positive result, just not the one that the general public seems to think it suggests.

---

You are assuming that it cannot be determined the number of MIB sent out and number of MIB received? That's not true - it can, and has, been determined. The problem is that the info used by the auditors to "ask the question" was not the correct info to make that determination.

I agree that you would think the auditors would have looked at all of the scenarios and fully understood the implications before making any comments, but they did not. The reason they didn't fully understand what was going on, according to them, is that the county wouldn't answer questions. So they had to publicly ask the question.

MASAXET said:

---

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

---

You apparently didn't watch the video. They didn't "walk back" anything, they asked a direct question.

If you did watch the video you are making an inflammatory statement.

edit for clarity

richardag said:

---

MASAXET said:

---

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

---

You apparently didn't watch the video. They didn't "walk back" anything, they asked a direct question.

If you did watch the video you are making an inflammatory statement.

edit for clarity

---

That's why I said "somewhat" and specifically noted the "I'm just asking questions" defense.

MASAXET said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

MASAXET said:

---

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

Basically Maricopa County has said they don't keep track of who votes early in person and who votes early by dropping off a completed MIB at a voting center during early voting. I call BS on that one. Doesn't make sense that a poll worker would accept that ballot without any record of it for chain of custody.

---

Oh BS, that doesn't freaking matter. If they mail out X number of ballots and the freaking total of MIB's counted is 74,000 more than what was mailed out, it doesn't matter whether they were mailed back, dropped off, or sent through a rip in the space-time continuum. X number of ballots were mailed to X number of voters as printed by Runbeck and matched to individuals on the voter roles.

Enough with all this **** already......no more "statements" run through lawyers answering questions vaguely, incomplete, and in some cases, to questions that were not asked. Drag these people in and question everyone under oath......and be sure they bring a copy of the "procedures" so they have to answer to each time one was ignored.

---

Your point would make sense but for one problem: they got to the supposed 74,000 difference by comparing apples and oranges. It's not true to say there were 74,000 more mail-in ballots received than mailed out. The "received" number he used includes all early votes, both mail-in and in-person. He was also comparing reports from two different time periods so it's no surprise they do not match.

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

---

This puzzles me a bit. You would think that once the discrepancy was discovered, the auditors would look at all the scenarios of where these votes would have come from and would have a pretty good idea of their origin. I don't believe they ever claimed they were fraudulent votes.

Commenting and questioning the way they did smells more like they were trying to get a response from the county on record. Even if what the county said about mixing early votes with MIB votes is true, it exposes the fact that the county has a flaw in their system that needs to be fixed. Having them officially admit that they co-mingle the votes thereby destroying the possibility of an audit trail seems like a positive result, just not the one that the general public seems to think it suggests.

---

You are assuming that it cannot be determined the number of MIB sent out and number of MIB received? That's not true - it can, and has, been determined. The problem is that the info used by the auditors to "ask the question" was not the correct info to make that determination.

I agree that you would think the auditors would have looked at all of the scenarios and fully understood the implications before making any comments, but they did not. The reason they didn't fully understand what was going on, according to them, is that the county wouldn't answer questions. So they had to publicly ask the question.

---

Wasn't the number of returned ballots based on a form that is filled when returned which happens to be the same form filled out for other early votes which is where the co-mingling occurs? That is what I understood the county was saying. That the auditors looked at the forms which did not differentiate the difference in the votes making it impossible to identify the number of returned MIB's versus early votes.

MASAXET said:

---

richardag said:

---

MASAXET said:

---

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

---

You apparently didn't watch the video. They didn't "walk back" anything, they asked a direct question.

If you did watch the video you are making an inflammatory statement.

edit for clarity

---

That's why I said "somewhat" and specifically noted the "I'm just asking questions" defense.

---

I contended that this 'asking the questions' was to elicit a response from the county for the record. Which, by the way, they did. I still think it is probable the auditors DID know more than they implied.

MASAXET said:

---

richardag said:

---

MASAXET said:

---

I guess to the auditor's credit they're somewhat walked the claim back by relying on the age-old adage of "I'm not claiming anything, I'm just asking questions"

---

You apparently didn't watch the video. They didn't "walk back" anything, they asked a direct question.

If you did watch the video you are making an inflammatory statement.

edit for clarity

---

That's why I said "somewhat" and specifically noted the "I'm just asking questions" defense.

---

They didn't even somewhat walk back the claim back. They asked a direct question. Seems you are walking back your claim.