American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

torrid said:

---

This audit is going to answer everyone's questions and will be the gold standard for all future elections.

---

No, it won't. When your audit is led by a firm that hasn't ever done this before and headed by a CEO who has penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and pledged that this election was fraudulent prior to the audit, you have ceded objectivity and credibility in favor of partisanship. Imagine the shoe was on the other foot and Daily Kos was leading the audit, y'all would rightfully snicker.

I have no objections to an election audit in principle run by neutral third parties. This audit isn't that.

---

Nothing in your statement would prove that the audit is invalid. The CEO stuff might create questions of motive, but motivation alone doesn't disqualify the process. Disregarding the audit before you see the results or studying the methods used means that YOU have ceded objectivity in favor of partisanship. So by your own standard, everything you say on the subject should not be considered valid.

---

Of course they can do everything above board correctly and the process may be unimpeachable. For all I know it is. But motive doesn't give me a bit of confidence that they're searching for truth, it gives me confidence that they're searching for a fact pattern to fit a preordained conclusion. We will now have to audit the auditors, ad nauseum. This was a preventable error. We live in a huge country filled with qualified people to do this. Arizona picked the Q Anon election fraud guy which doesn't bode well for this process.

---

As Hawg can attest, having all of these other 'audits' and recounts performed by the very people who would be culpable doesn't bode well either.

How about the motive of the people running the elections in these precincts? What if they weren't looking for the truth either? What if they wanted an election result that fit a preordained conclusion? Your concern seems to be particularly one-sided.

---

I'm not against audits. I'm against audits run by conspiracy theorists with an obvious agenda. If Cyber Ninjas finds something, surely you're not against Daily Kos auditing their process, correct?

Just stop. Hitler could have counted a box of papers and if he counted it correctly then the result is what it is.

Malibu2 said:

---

stetson said:

---

Quote:

---

by neutral third parties.

---

And where do you find this? Everything is political. Everything.

---

Seriously? If we must have audits surely there's a Republican former Big4 partner that hasn't penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and shouted stop the steal.

---

Look at the lib crying for more influence from their corporate overlords.

This is our audit. Not yours. We can argue about the evidence, if any, after it's disclosed.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

titan said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

Deep down you know there was cheating, but you don't care so you are throwing up the same flak that your Marxist leaders tell you to throw up. Counting is not hard. That's all they are doing.

---

Malibu's 11:49 is not that kind of talking point. He is right that the composition of how began is going to cause it to have less impact among so many already reasonably set in their positions.

---

I would say this is accurate and inaccurate at the same time.

It is not the facts of how it began, but the way the narrative was written before it ever started and the coverage of it before it started and as it was done by the MSM that will cause it to have less impact amongst otherwise reasonable people even if the methodology and results are airtight in that fraud occurred and tipped the scales.

The MSM and establishment was prepared for and took preventative counter measures to prevent any sort of audit from taking place.

Their strategy was to muddy the waters to the point that there was no way to audit things other than a full hand recount. And that every step until that point would be so murky that things could be spun to the effect that no fraud could be verifiably found, which by default allowed them to create the narrative that the election was legit and claims otherwise were wild conspiracy theories.

---

Agree with that. Rocky the Dog posted a meme some months back that captured it well -- the caption was saying "we aren't saying there was no cheating -- we are saying you can't prove it".

FriscoKid said:

---

Just stop. Hitler could have counted a box of papers and if he counted it correctly then the result is what it is.

---

So, why put Hitler in charge of counting then, to use your analogy?

Malibu2 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

torrid said:

---

This audit is going to answer everyone's questions and will be the gold standard for all future elections.

---

No, it won't. When your audit is led by a firm that hasn't ever done this before and headed by a CEO who has penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and pledged that this election was fraudulent prior to the audit, you have ceded objectivity and credibility in favor of partisanship. Imagine the shoe was on the other foot and Daily Kos was leading the audit, y'all would rightfully snicker.

I have no objections to an election audit in principle run by neutral third parties. This audit isn't that.

---

Nothing in your statement would prove that the audit is invalid. The CEO stuff might create questions of motive, but motivation alone doesn't disqualify the process. Disregarding the audit before you see the results or studying the methods used means that YOU have ceded objectivity in favor of partisanship. So by your own standard, everything you say on the subject should not be considered valid.

---

Of course they can do everything above board correctly and the process may be unimpeachable. For all I know it is. But motive doesn't give me a bit of confidence that they're searching for truth, it gives me confidence that they're searching for a fact pattern to fit a preordained conclusion. We will now have to audit the auditors, ad nauseum. This was a preventable error. We live in a huge country filled with qualified people to do this. Arizona picked the Q Anon election fraud guy which doesn't bode well for this process.

---

As Hawg can attest, having all of these other 'audits' and recounts performed by the very people who would be culpable doesn't bode well either.

How about the motive of the people running the elections in these precincts? What if they weren't looking for the truth either? What if they wanted an election result that fit a preordained conclusion? Your concern seems to be particularly one-sided.

---

I'm not against audits. I'm against audits run by conspiracy theorists with an obvious agenda. If Cyber Ninjas finds something, surely you're not against Daily Kos auditing their process, correct?

---

You are against audits by republicans. Keep crying about conspiracy theories. Your side has them too.

Malibu2 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

torrid said:

---

This audit is going to answer everyone's questions and will be the gold standard for all future elections.

---

No, it won't. When your audit is led by a firm that hasn't ever done this before and headed by a CEO who has penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and pledged that this election was fraudulent prior to the audit, you have ceded objectivity and credibility in favor of partisanship. Imagine the shoe was on the other foot and Daily Kos was leading the audit, y'all would rightfully snicker.

I have no objections to an election audit in principle run by neutral third parties. This audit isn't that.

---

Nothing in your statement would prove that the audit is invalid. The CEO stuff might create questions of motive, but motivation alone doesn't disqualify the process. Disregarding the audit before you see the results or studying the methods used means that YOU have ceded objectivity in favor of partisanship. So by your own standard, everything you say on the subject should not be considered valid.

---

Of course they can do everything above board correctly and the process may be unimpeachable. For all I know it is. But motive doesn't give me a bit of confidence that they're searching for truth, it gives me confidence that they're searching for a fact pattern to fit a preordained conclusion. We will now have to audit the auditors, ad nauseum. This was a preventable error. We live in a huge country filled with qualified people to do this. Arizona picked the Q Anon election fraud guy which doesn't bode well for this process.

---

As Hawg can attest, having all of these other 'audits' and recounts performed by the very people who would be culpable doesn't bode well either.

How about the motive of the people running the elections in these precincts? What if they weren't looking for the truth either? What if they wanted an election result that fit a preordained conclusion? Your concern seems to be particularly one-sided.

---

I'm not against audits. I'm against audits run by conspiracy theorists with an obvious agenda. If Cyber Ninjas finds something, surely you're not against Daily Kos auditing their process, correct?

---

Nope, I fully expect the opposition to take their shots at the process. It will be interesting to see if there are any demonstrable flaws in the process or the results. I think the Daily KOS is going to have a tough row to hoe.

aggiehawg said:

---

Have about 30,500 viewers on the youtube feed I'm watching.

---

The scrolling chat feature to the right is making my eyes bleed.

Malibu2 said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

Just stop. Hitler could have counted a box of papers and if he counted it correctly then the result is what it is.

---

So, why put Hitler in charge of counting then, to use your analogy?

---

Maybe he was the only one that was interested in counting them because the big guys were afraid of being canceled by the cancel mob.

FriscoKid said:

---

---

She is making me nervous here.

Quote:

---

I'm not against audits. I'm against audits run by conspiracy theorists with an obvious agenda. If Cyber Ninjas finds something, surely you're not against Daily Kos auditing their process, correct?

---

Do you really think that Cyber Ninjas are the only companies involved with this? Because they are only one part of the overall audit.

Malibu2 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

torrid said:

---

This audit is going to answer everyone's questions and will be the gold standard for all future elections.

---

No, it won't. When your audit is led by a firm that hasn't ever done this before and headed by a CEO who has penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and pledged that this election was fraudulent prior to the audit, you have ceded objectivity and credibility in favor of partisanship. Imagine the shoe was on the other foot and Daily Kos was leading the audit, y'all would rightfully snicker.

I have no objections to an election audit in principle run by neutral third parties. This audit isn't that.

---

Nothing in your statement would prove that the audit is invalid. The CEO stuff might create questions of motive, but motivation alone doesn't disqualify the process. Disregarding the audit before you see the results or studying the methods used means that YOU have ceded objectivity in favor of partisanship. So by your own standard, everything you say on the subject should not be considered valid.

---

Of course they can do everything above board correctly and the process may be unimpeachable. For all I know it is. But motive doesn't give me a bit of confidence that they're searching for truth, it gives me confidence that they're searching for a fact pattern to fit a preordained conclusion. We will now have to audit the auditors, ad nauseum. This was a preventable error. We live in a huge country filled with qualified people to do this. Arizona picked the Q Anon election fraud guy which doesn't bode well for this process.

---

As Hawg can attest, having all of these other 'audits' and recounts performed by the very people who would be culpable doesn't bode well either.

How about the motive of the people running the elections in these precincts? What if they weren't looking for the truth either? What if they wanted an election result that fit a preordained conclusion? Your concern seems to be particularly one-sided.

---

I'm not against audits. I'm against audits run by conspiracy theorists with an obvious agenda. If Cyber Ninjas finds something, surely you're not against Daily Kos auditing their process, correct?

---

If there is bias in the audit, it will become apparent when a liberal audits the audits auditors.

An audit is based on verifiable data and factual representation. If someone is trying to pull a fast one, it will become apparent very quickly. You berating the process before the results are released screams you are trying to provide political cover.

Seriously. What world do you live in? People or humans in as humans we all have biases. As theduce stated above, our election process and system should be so airtight that even the most rabid opponents of a victorious candidate should be able to perform an audit validating the veracity of an election. I used to do system conversions in system testing and always went in with the mindset of trying to break it and find faults. This process should be no different. .

hbtheduce said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

stetson said:

---

Quote:

---

by neutral third parties.

---

And where do you find this? Everything is political. Everything.

---

Seriously? If we must have audits surely there's a Republican former Big4 partner that hasn't penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and shouted stop the steal.

---

Look at the lib crying for more influence from their corporate overlords.

This is our audit. Not yours. We can argue about the evidence, if any, after it's disclosed.

---

With due respect, this is not your audit. It's OUR audit. The American public has the right to know if their elections are fair, not just the Trump voting America. I for one would like to put the issue to rest. This firm isn't going to do that, and that was true the second they were hired.

I used to post in the q thread. Does that make me professionally inept Malibu?

Quote:

---

The American public has the right to know if their elections are fair

---

Are you serious? That's what this whole thing is about.

Troutslime said:

---

Just look at his posting history.

---

I know it

Which is why I asked

N796WW, a Cessna 172S, is circling over Maricopa County at 3000 feet, speed 81 MPH, squawking 0233, 0.58 miles from Speedword Raceway Park Offroad Course #N796WW https://t.co/kMXg9OzwQA pic.twitter.com/GAO5usw1QH

— Advisory Circular Phoenix (@SkyCirclesPHX) July 15, 2021

Circling over the target now.

hbtheduce said:

---

I used to post in the q thread. Does that make me professionally inept Malibu?

---

I've worked with Scientologists that were competent at their job. BSC beliefs, but competent. Q Anon is no different in that regard. I wouldn't hire a Scientologist to do spiritual counseling and I wouldn't hire a Q Anon believer to be a fair arbiter of an election audit.

What channel is this on? Link?

Malibu2 said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

stetson said:

---

Quote:

---

by neutral third parties.

---

And where do you find this? Everything is political. Everything.

---

Seriously? If we must have audits surely there's a Republican former Big4 partner that hasn't penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and shouted stop the steal.

---

Look at the lib crying for more influence from their corporate overlords.

This is our audit. Not yours. We can argue about the evidence, if any, after it's disclosed.

---

With due respect, this is not your audit. It's OUR audit. The American public has the right to know if their elections are fair, not just the Trump voting America. I for one would like to put the issue to rest. This firm isn't going to do that, and that was true the second they were hired.

---

Its Arizona's audit, to satisfy republicans, not dems. Dems think 2020 was the gold standard. If you want a functioning democracy, Rs need to be convinced not Ds.

Proof the firm isn't going to do that? They are going to dig up whatever they can, it could come back meager.

Malibu2 said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

stetson said:

---

Quote:

---

by neutral third parties.

---

And where do you find this? Everything is political. Everything.

---

Seriously? If we must have audits surely there's a Republican former Big4 partner that hasn't penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and shouted stop the steal.

---

Look at the lib crying for more influence from their corporate overlords.

This is our audit. Not yours. We can argue about the evidence, if any, after it's disclosed.

---

With due respect, this is not your audit. It's OUR audit. The American public has the right to know if their elections are fair, not just the Trump voting America. I for one would like to put the issue to rest. This firm isn't going to do that, and that was true the second they were hired.

---

It looks like we will get forensic audits in other states. If Cyber Ninjas aren't involved with those, I will be looking for your posts of approval.

Robin Hood Was A Thief said:

---

What channel is this on? Link?

---

Quote:

---

With due respect, this is not your audit. It's OUR audit.

---

Then why is the left in such opposition to OUR audit, throwing up roadblocks, filing legal motions denying access to documents? This isn't our audit. If it were our audit it would be bipartisan,, but it is not, is it? Why isn't it? Because there is something incriminating to hide.

Malibu2 said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

I used to post in the q thread. Does that make me professionally inept Malibu?

---

I've worked with Scientologists that were competent at their job. BSC beliefs, but competent. Q Anon is no different in that regard. I wouldn't hire a Scientologist to do spiritual counseling and I wouldn't hire a Q Anon believer to be a fair arbiter of an election audit.

---

Proof he is a believer and wasn't just interacting with Qanon for entertainment?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm not against audits. I'm against audits run by conspiracy theorists with an obvious agenda. If Cyber Ninjas finds something, surely you're not against Daily Kos auditing their process, correct?

---

Do you really think that Cyber Ninjas are the only companies involved with this? Because they are only one part of the overall audit.

---

He's showing how the audit team did a better job with the chain of custody than the original election officials.

stetson said:

---

Quote:

---

by neutral third parties.

---

And where do you find this? Everything is political. Everything.

---

As the left has willed it to be.

Malibu2 said:

---

hbtheduce said:

---

Malibu2 said:

---

stetson said:

---

Quote:

---

by neutral third parties.

---

And where do you find this? Everything is political. Everything.

---

Seriously? If we must have audits surely there's a Republican former Big4 partner that hasn't penned Q Anon conspiracy theories and shouted stop the steal.

---

Look at the lib crying for more influence from their corporate overlords.

This is our audit. Not yours. We can argue about the evidence, if any, after it's disclosed.

---

With due respect, this is not your audit. It's OUR audit. The American public has the right to know if their elections are fair, not just the Trump voting America. I for one would like to put the issue to rest. This firm isn't going to do that, and that was true the second they were hired.

---

What proof do you have that they won't be fair?

Bennett has once again stated that Maricopa County has not provided the chain of custody from election materials between the election and prior to delivery to the audit site. He has asked repeatedly for that information and Maricopa County replied they had given him all they were ever going to give him.

Subpoena be damned, I guess.

Former SoS Bennett says he requested the chain of custody for blank ballot stock from Maricopa County. Sen. Fann says it was in the subpoena. Bennett said Maricopa will no longer interact with him regarding subpoenaed material.https://t.co/gdbRmSzXeI

— Election Wizard (@ElectionWiz) July 15, 2021

But hawg, I got told on another thread that this person called "the county" had everything the whole time! No need for concern.

hbtheduce said:

---

But hawg, I got told on another thread that this person called "the county" had everything the whole time! No need for concern.

---

Yeah well jmiller doesn't know what he's talking about most days.