Try this one

So the law is that the voter rolls can't be cleaned up 90 days before the election. Raffensperger is just using this as cover for the fact that he didn't do anything to clean them up. There are 275 other days in just the one year alone that this could have been done. Raffensperger seems to just be trying to shift the blame. Why states don't have a regular maintenance program to keep clean rolls is beyond me, unless of course you want to have a flaw in the system.

I don't think the 90 day moratorium isn't necessarily a bad thing either. It does seem like messing with the voter rolls close to an election is an opportunity to invalidate legitimate voters 'by mistake' from districts you may not want voting and not give enough time to 'fix the mistake' in time for voting.

Thanks for the link/

How disingenuous is this?

Quote:

---

Raffensperger made the claim in an interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast. The state official said that Congress "definitely" needs to reexamine the 1993 Voter Registration Act, specifically the provision prohibiting states from performing routine voter roll maintenance in the 90 days prior to a federal primary or general election.

Federal primary elections in Georgia were rescheduled several times throughout last year, continuously pushing the 90-day window forward through the election year.

The original March 24 presidential primary date precluded any voter roll maintenance at the start of the year. That primary was eventually rescheduled for May and then June.

---

Remember, the entire state of Georgia's voter database was stolen in August/September of 2019. Voter rolls can be updated on a schedule that avoids the 90 day prohibition quite easily.

Rats***perger is a liar.

American Hardwood said:

---

So the law is that the voter rolls can't be cleaned up 90 days before the election. Raffensperger is just using this as cover for the fact that he didn't do anything to clean them up. There are 275 other days in just the one year alone that this could have been done. Raffensperger seems to just be trying to shift the blame. Why states don't have a regular maintenance program to keep clean rolls is beyond me, unless of course you want to have a flaw in the system.

I don't think the 90 day moratorium is necessarily a bad thing either. It does seem like messing with the voter rolls close to an election is an opportunity to invalidate legitimate voters 'by mistake' from districts you may not want voting and not give enough time to 'fix the mistake' in time for voting.

---

"Raffensperger seems to just be trying to shift the blame."
Agree completely.

Quote:

---

On September 17, 1787, delegates left the Constitutional Convention in Independence Hall in Philadelphia. As they exited, Benjamin Franklin was asked what kind of government do we have? "A Republic," he replied, "if you can keep it."

---

Amazing how our founders knew we would be our own, worst enemy.

#AZAudit They broke down a lot of tables and equipment overnight and were here early this morning. Contrast this to just a few weeks ago: pic.twitter.com/TISsJ7UGkL

— Jellenne 🇺🇸🌵🌞 (@jellen805) July 1, 2021

aggiehawg said:

---

Thanks for the link/

How disingenuous is this?

Quote:

---

Raffensperger made the claim in an interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast. The state official said that Congress "definitely" needs to reexamine the 1993 Voter Registration Act, specifically the provision prohibiting states from performing routine voter roll maintenance in the 90 days prior to a federal primary or general election.

Federal primary elections in Georgia were rescheduled several times throughout last year, continuously pushing the 90-day window forward through the election year.

The original March 24 presidential primary date precluded any voter roll maintenance at the start of the year. That primary was eventually rescheduled for May and then June.

---

Remember, the entire state of Georgia's voter database was stolen in August/September of 2019. Voter rolls can be updated on a schedule that avoids the 90 day prohibition quite easily.

Rats***perger is a liar.

---

Seems like several states would have told the federal government to pound sand since elections and how it is run is entirely up to the state.

Who was President in '93 again? If only the Dems weren't so sure of themselves in 2016. What is truly amazing is that if they would have done this in 2016, there is a good chance that no one would have been the wiser due to the constant push by the MSM.

Line Ate Member said:

---

Who was President in '93 again?

---

Just for fun
https://whowaspresident.com/1993

Not to mention an open border allowing more sickness into the country.

Here's the interview posted on Telegram. I'm looking for another source for it, but you can see it here now. Wow. https://t.co/XIpAPp6FtW

— Jellenne 🇺🇸🌵🌞 (@jellen805) July 1, 2021

will25u said:

---

Here's the interview posted on Telegram. I'm looking for another source for it, but you can see it here now. Wow. https://t.co/XIpAPp6FtW

— Jellenne 🇺🇸🌵🌞 (@jellen805) July 1, 2021

---

I don't do that. Any summary?

Damn, that's the definition of "own goal"!

That's what I was thinking. The driver has to know the total weight of his cargo.

Troutslime said:

---

That's what I was thinking. The driver has to know the total weight of his cargo.

---

Standard operating procedure.

Quote:

---

Liz Harris is apparently a volunteer for the Maricopa County audit having previously been a candidate herself. In this interview Ms. Harris, while qualifying her statements with the non-disclosure agreement, gives an overview of what the audit team has likely uncovered so far. Additionally, as CTH has previously highlighted, the canvas is the important aspect to the physical ballot review.

Ms. Harris discusses -in broad terms- how the canvassing is being done and how commercials are being deployed throughout the region by "Protect Democracy" the leftist activist group. It appears the DNC affiliate is running ads in an effort to get canvassed voters to provide them "voter intimidation" ammunition for the DOJ to use against the audit workers. But wait, it gets worse AND very familiar for those who walk the deep weeds.

Ms. Harris describes a very familiar tactic previously used by the SEIU operatives (purple orcs we called them), where they impersonate audit canvassers (and/or election workers) and actually do intentionally intimidate the voter (very aggressive). The canvassed voter then thinks they have been intimidated by an audit worker and reports that conduct to the DOJ who in turn use that evidence against the audit team to file lawsuits.

We saw this exact type of operation carried out by the SEIU in Pennsylvania circa 2007 as the DNC wanted to keep the RNC under a consent decree (long story). This is also how Bob Creamer operated when he was planting fake protestors in Trump rallies on behalf of Hillary Clinton.

---

Now tie this info into my thread on the former attorney at DOJ's Civil Rights Division abusing their powers and lying.

Video of her interview is at the Link

Quote:

---

https://t.me/ArizonaAuditLiveFeeds/947

---

That is the short part of the interview where Bennett speaks to the "packet captures."

So, in context, these are the packet captures from the Dominion Machines. This could yield some interesting information if not tampered with. You can, at least, see "who" the voting machines were communicating with and what type of traffic was being sent. I fully expect the cheaters to lose there minds over this piece as we already know the dominion network does not have any native encryption so payloads would be human readable.

118 terebytes of packet captures is a lot to go through. Before digging, they need to first look at the capture parameters to see if it is even worth the effort. Example:

- If the capture parameters were setup to capture all inbound/outbound traffic from the dominion machine to any external IP (worth looking at)
- if the capture parameters were setup to capture all inbound/outbound traffic from the dominion machine to any devices on the election LAN. It won't show any traffic to other public networks or the Internet. (Might have some value, if it shows manipulation or bad actions from someone connected to the LAN)

We fixed the keg said:

---

Quote:

---

https://t.me/ArizonaAuditLiveFeeds/947

---

That is the short part of the interview where Bennett speaks to the "packet captures."

So, in context, these are the packet captures from the Dominion Machines. This could yield some interesting information if not tampered with. You can, at least, see "who" the voting machines were communicating with and what type of traffic was being sent. I fully expect the cheaters to lose there minds over this piece as we already know the dominion network does not have any native encryption so payloads would be human readable.

118 terebytes of packet captures is a lot to go through. Before digging, they need to first look at the capture parameters to see if it is even worth the effort. Example:

- If the capture parameters were setup to capture all inbound/outbound traffic from the dominion machine to any external IP (worth looking at)
- if the capture parameters were setup to capture all inbound/outbound traffic from the dominion machine to any devices on the election LAN. It won't show any traffic to other public networks or the Internet. (Might have some value, if it shows manipulation or bad actions from someone connected to the LAN)

---

I'm amazed they captured the traffic at all! Kinda like the Nixon tapes, pretty incriminating if you know you have something to hide. Bet they won't do that again!

By the way, if the voting machines are not supposed to be connected to the internet, then how in the world did they generate ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTEEN TERABYTES of traffic??? That is an Enormous amount!

It is a lot of data to go through. However, I imagine that the audit team will be able to utilize AI and greatly reduce the time of scanning a lot of info. They should be able to program the AI to search for key pieces they would expect to find and therefore get through the information faster than any of us imagine.

Fulton County's absentee ballots are now available for download. I put all 148K of them online so anyone can see them, without having to pay a $240 records fee. Links to download them are embedded in AJC articles here. https://t.co/q5iS6GFArI and https://t.co/DVAofVdofD

— Mark Niesse (@markniesse) July 1, 2021

Just spitballing here but could it be possible that Maricopa County submitted a ton of duplicates in those packets? To make the needle in the haystack harder to find? That was a common litigation technique, bury the incriminating stuff with a ton of information that was not exactly relevant nor responsive to a discovery request.

Would the duplicates be very easily identified? By date and time stamps? Or otherwise?

https://t.co/EQZnNLQ4hP

— JovanHuttonPulitzer™ #JovanHuttonPulitzer (@JovanHPulitzer) July 2, 2021

To further explain:

Quote:

---

In a press release from Dr. Kandiss Taylor yesterday, Taylor, a candidate for governor, claims that there is sufficient evidence of process violations and malfeasance that would be adequate to place in doubt the results of the presidential election. Taylor writes:

Quote:

---

The proper process of closing a precinct for advanced early voting or election day voting includes the printing of tabulation tapes from each ballot scanner where votes are cast. This provides the starting counter number (called the Protective Counter), unit serial number, number of votes scanned, date, time, and other vital information.

Most precincts attach a printed hardcopy of these tapes, at the end of the day, to the door of precincts to show voters, in an act of transparency, how many votes were cast in each precinct. This is proper procedure for all voting precincts. The Protective Counter is comparable to an odometer by keeping track of how many ballots were scanned since the machine went into action. It cannot be reset nor rolled back for auditing purposes.

When the auditing team was examining the tabulator tapes for advanced voting, they noticed that some tapes were produced by the same machines with the same serial number, and the protective counter numbers stayed the same. Tapes, in some cases, were printed minutes apart.

Each scanner should have produced its own tape, with its own counter number, with its own serial number on it, and with unique date and time stamps.

When questioned about these data anomalies, the Election Director told the auditing team leader that she decided to make the decision to remove original memory cards that held vote ballots and totals from the scanners. She had these cards brought back to her location, and the cards inserted in different machines she had at the county office.

The cards would be officially closed. She effectively cast the voters' ballots in a different machine and in a different location than where the voter originally cast their vote. Then, her staff proceeded to break the seals on the machine, remove the memory cards, and bring the cards back to her station. In doing this, the vote was flawed and did not protect the chain of custody of the ballots. The cards, which contained the ballot information and your vote totals, were haphazardly and, without chain of custody, mishandled with no proof of security or time-stamp.


Cobb County had 174,979 Early Advance votes. Only 6,057 early advanced votes were processed correctly. The result of this action is that 168,922 early advanced votes have no chain of custody, violated the vote security of the citizens of Cobb County, and therefore put into question the validity of the Cobb County votes."

---

---

That may sound like a technicality but it really isn't. Failure to follow the correct procedures, to the point of breaking seals that are there for security purposes is fraud. There is no legitimate reason for utilizing that approach other than manipulation of the totals..

Quote:

---

By the way, if the voting machines are not supposed to be connected to the internet, then how in the world did they generate ONE HUNDRED AND EIGHTEEN TERABYTES of traffic??? That is an Enormous amount!

---

I thought the same thing, but it really depends on the number of devices and type of traffic. Surely they are parsing the forms and sending database inserts and not ballot images. That would make a huge difference, but to be completely honest, I haven't spent any time looking into "what" the machines communicate, only the "how."

To your first point, Dominion's own documentation states, these devices are not to be connected to any public network. They even provide switches and servers as a self-sufficient LAN setup. So, if any of the packet captures have an IP address outside of the LAN, then people have some 'splaining to do.

- Pro V&V and SLI for how the sites got certified and why there own "audit" didn't catch/mention any of this.
- Dominion for how they didn't know their own devices/switches had a router attached. They had the admin credentials to the devices
- Maricopa IT for how any network, let alone election networks, could be connected to their infrastructure and not know, or do anything about it.

Quote:

---

When questioned about these data anomalies, the Election Director told the auditing team leader that she decided to make the decision to remove original memory cards that held vote ballots and totals from the scanners. She had these cards brought back to her location, and the cards inserted in different machines she had at the county office.

---

Why? What is her excuse for this "decision"? Why did she think it was okay to break seals and remove cards, etc.? I assume she has no good reasons.