Well crap, the excitement of 40+ unread replies was quickly dashed. It is late, and I know this is just feeding the socks/trolls, but I will play along.
Frankly, it doesn't matter what is driving people to attack this process. I don't care if it is TDS, 'my guy won', orange man bad, mean tweets, or even if you truly believe this is fraudulent audit. Having done research on the previous audit and trying to find anything outside of the MSM talking points, it does not surprise me to see so many people convinced this is all a fraud. If you had to guess about the care/sincerity behind the poster who wrote:
With that said. How hard is it to allow this process to finish, findings to be published, and then pick those apart. Actually put them under the microscope and challenge them. If they find nothing, then there is your answer. If they find something, make it survive or die based on merit and fact.
If you were following the "router" thread, you would have already had an opportunity to see the research done on the previous audit. The one performed by Pro V&V and SLI Compliance which has been reported by the MSM and election officials say proved everything was above board and no issues found.
It less than an hour of reading it is clear you are reading a report generated around a predetermined narrative.
Many more gaps, questions, items which should be challenged, but yet were not. To make it worse, none of this process was recorded nor done with impartial/external observers present. You are just expected to take their word for the process and their findings.
If all of this isn't enough to prove it was a massive CYA, we then find out the same two companies Pro V&V and SLI Compliance were the two companies who were hired to certify the configuration and setup prior to the election. That is right, two private companies hired to sign off on all of this called back after all of the anomalies to audit themselves. No reason a private company would have any motivation to deliver a report exonerating them of incompetence or fraud, or negligence, etc. etc. No reason at all to doubt that they would report on things which would put them at risk of fines and damage to their reputation.
All of this noise before the formal findings have been released is simply disingenuous and propaganda. Let the report come out, challenge the findings, and let the facts and data survive or fail on their on merits.
Frankly, it doesn't matter what is driving people to attack this process. I don't care if it is TDS, 'my guy won', orange man bad, mean tweets, or even if you truly believe this is fraudulent audit. Having done research on the previous audit and trying to find anything outside of the MSM talking points, it does not surprise me to see so many people convinced this is all a fraud. If you had to guess about the care/sincerity behind the poster who wrote:
I don't think it needs much analysis to come to an accurate conclusion.Quote:
I'll excuse myself having soiled the vibe of the thread, which is my want from time to time.
Carry on.
With that said. How hard is it to allow this process to finish, findings to be published, and then pick those apart. Actually put them under the microscope and challenge them. If they find nothing, then there is your answer. If they find something, make it survive or die based on merit and fact.
If you were following the "router" thread, you would have already had an opportunity to see the research done on the previous audit. The one performed by Pro V&V and SLI Compliance which has been reported by the MSM and election officials say proved everything was above board and no issues found.
It less than an hour of reading it is clear you are reading a report generated around a predetermined narrative.
- The Pro V&V report is painfully embarrassing. Calling it sophomoric is too kind. It is barely over 9 pages with at least 3 of those pages being filled with tables showing Software and Serial numbers
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66844/Post-Audit-Report - Of the 700+ polling places, the audit only looked at (5), count them (5) machines and nowhere does it explain where they came from, how many votes they counted, who/how those were selected. Even better 1 of the 5 didn't have a seal and they didn't even specifically identify WHY. Only a few sentences about how that COULD happen.
- And in the end, their conclusion. TWO SENTENCES. Two.
- The SLI Compliance document was at least closer to what you should expect as an output of a professional audit
https://www.maricopa.gov/DocumentCenter/View/66843/SLI-Compliance-Forensic-Audit-Report?bidId= - As you read the SLI report, two things become very clear. (1) It is a document written by lawyers in carefully crafted legalese, and (2) just as important as what is in the report is what isn't in the report
- Examples of language "not connected to Internet between X and Y dates" Why the significance of those dates? Even better, why "Internet" by Dominion's own best practices devices aren't supposed to connect to any other private or public networks. So why did you only look at the Internet? What is the "checklist" you used?
- Example of missing info: The word "routers" doesn't appear anywhere in this document and only twice is the word "routed" in it, used in the context of "Internet routed network". Dominion provided (2) options for install. Express and Standard. Both were complete, out of the box solutions containing everything you needed to setup a polling station. No routers provided, and more importantly no routers were needed. Even better, Dominion warned against them specifically saying traffic in transit was not encrypted and the security/integrity could not be guaranteed if not airgapped. So why were they there and who put them there?
Many more gaps, questions, items which should be challenged, but yet were not. To make it worse, none of this process was recorded nor done with impartial/external observers present. You are just expected to take their word for the process and their findings.
If all of this isn't enough to prove it was a massive CYA, we then find out the same two companies Pro V&V and SLI Compliance were the two companies who were hired to certify the configuration and setup prior to the election. That is right, two private companies hired to sign off on all of this called back after all of the anomalies to audit themselves. No reason a private company would have any motivation to deliver a report exonerating them of incompetence or fraud, or negligence, etc. etc. No reason at all to doubt that they would report on things which would put them at risk of fines and damage to their reputation.
All of this noise before the formal findings have been released is simply disingenuous and propaganda. Let the report come out, challenge the findings, and let the facts and data survive or fail on their on merits.
