Braineack

iTrader: (62)

When you WANT your case to go to SCOTUS to get the precedent ruling the judge was unwilling to rule on [or actually view the evidence she claimed didn't exist] this is actually a good thing...

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

That time being an election fraud denier wasn't cool.






https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/21/m...g-machine.html


https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/30/u...-machines.html


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...r-registration


https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-r...ng-documentary


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...s-2020-hacking

New Yorker

“How Voting-Machine Lobbyists Undermine the Democratic Process”
https://www.newyorker.com/tech/annal...cratic-process

Politico

Election commission orders top voting machine vendor to correct misleading claims
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...-claims-394891

The scramble to secure America’s voting machines
https://www.politico.com/interactive...ting-machines/

Reuters

June 2020, Reuters, “Exclusive: Philadelphia’s new voting machines under scrutiny in Tuesday’s elections”
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN23828J

NBC News

Online and vulnerable’: Experts find nearly three dozen U.S. voting systems connected to internet”
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...oting-n1112436

Washington Post

The Cybersecurity 202: Lawsuit seeks to force Pennsylvania to scrap these electronic voting machines over hacking fears
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ff125ce5b2fec/

The Hill,

Voting machines pose a greater threat to our elections than foreign agents
https://thehill.com/opinion/technolo...foreign-agents

Vice

Exclusive: Critical U.S. Election Systems Have Been Left Exposed Online Despite Official Denials
https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/3...ficial-denials





Tell me again, why exactly are you so certain the election couldn't have been rigged? Because governments have a stellar record of being without fraud/abuse?

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

This is a pretty simple concept being argued here.

Create a weighed system to give Biden say 1.1 votes and Trump .99. (remember, the only places in question are the Dominion Systems places)

Paper ballots must match electronic totals.

Trump has bigger turnout than expected, so wait till middle of night, create the exact extra ballots needed (no time to waste giving them to other races). dump.

The pauses were suspicious. The last minute flips were as well. Unusually unrealistic viewer turnout (>100%) was suspicious. Statistically unrealistic vote percentage in only biden's favor was suspicious.

Counties not using Dominion did not have these sort of anomalies.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Heh. Good read.

I always chuckle a bit when the court, in dismissing a claim, pretty much openly mocks one party or the other (sometimes both) in the process. Even when the court is not a party to a multi-state conspiracy to steal a US Presidential election.


One of my personal favorites is the Order to Remand of Judge James C. Paine in Noble v. Bradford Marine. It was peppered with Wayne's World references, with the headings of each part of the order being titled "Hurling Chunks", "Like a Winged Monkey Flying Out of the Ashes". "NOT!", and "A Schwing and a Miss."

Judge Paine then knocked it out of the park at the very end, by closing with: "In short, Prime Time’s most bogus attempt at removal is ‘not worthy‘ and the Defendants must ‘party on’ in state court."



Actually, there's another good one that I remembered. I'm just gonna copy-paste the Lexis notes directly:

This morning, a tweet from OnTheDocket clued me in to a gem of an opinion that I'd never had the pleasure of reading previously. Bradshaw v. Unity Marine Corp., 147 F. Supp. 2d 668 (S.D. Tex. 2001), involved a claim for personal injuries filed by a seaman pursuant to the Jones Act. I'll let the Court's words speak for themselves:

Skamba

As a neutral outsider (I really have no stake in your elections), my reasoning is as follows:

1. Trump was doing pretty bad in the polls before the elections. There was, like last time, a sizable polling error, but let's not pretend like he was the favorite to win these elections.
2. Trump has a track record of making false claims - so I'll take anything he says with a (large) grain of salt. The amount of verifiable bullshit Trump and Giuliani are spewing now seriously make me doubt some of the claims that could have some merit.
3. The claims that could have some merit, could as well be mistakes or statistical blips
   1. Mistakes: Hanlons razor states "never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity". Were mistakes made? Probably - I'd be very surprised if such a massive undertaking as processing 160 million votes would go without any mistakes. Are these indication of fraud? Probably not.
      1. For example, the "sudden influx of 138k votes for Biden in Michigan", was a result of a clerical error of one of the data providers
      2. Another example, the over-votes in Michigan were a result of common mistakes being made - there were actually significantly more tabulation errors in 2016, when Trump won. Source.
   2. Statistical blips: Within any sufficiently large data sets, you can find patterns on a small scale that look out of place.
4. On voter turnout: To assume the high voter turnout is a result of people loving Biden so much seems like a mistake to me. Trump might be the the most divisive president the US has ever seen - so most of the votes for Biden are actually votes against Trump.
5. Paperless voting machines are relatively high risk. However, none of the important states used paperless voting machines. Funnily enough, 7 out of 8 states that use paperless voting went to Trump. Andrew Appel, probably the most quoted source behind the whole "Voting machines are vulnerable" debate, actually came out against fraud allegations for this election.
6. Large scale conspiracy is hard. Pulling off a coordinated fraud across multiple states would require hundreds if not thousands of people to be in the know. At that scale, it's impossible to have a conspiracy that does not also leave a significant paper trail. Furthermore, because there are almost always physical ballots, the risks of getting caught are significant. Why would hundreds to thousands of people risk their life/freedom to defraud the presidential election? The only reason I could think of is a fat paycheck - but that requires even more of a paper trail. So far, there has been no evidence of large-scale coordinated effort.
7. There might be some small scale uncoordinated efforts, but between Hanlon's razor and Trump's significant loss I doubt it, and I doubt it would matter.
8. Even if one or two states would flip, Trump still loses.

Tl;dr: Elections perhaps could be rigged. However, there doesn't seem to be that much here.

Skamba

These make me wonder if perhaps I chose the wrong profession

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

But... that would mean that there's no conspiracy. And there has to be a conspiracy! Otherwise, Orange Man didn't win. And of course Orange Man won. Ergo: a conspiracy must exist.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

You didn't.

I went down that path. Fortunately, life-events provided me with a convenient escape before I'd gotten in too deep.

The legal profession really is quite unpleasant and unrewarding for most of those who enter it.

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

A common trait among conspiracy theorists is their need to derogate critics. Criticism must be devalued because it threatens the comfort provided by the conspiracy. This is done in one of two ways. Either the critic is too dumb to see the intricacies of the conspiracy, and is thus contributing to it by ignoring it; or they're actively helping the conspirators to cover up the truth. The unconsidered third option: that the critic is just not convinced by the evidence, is undesirable because it would create a reason to doubt the comforting belief.

The two ways of derogating critics have distinct, self-serving functions. In believing that some critics are too dumb to see their special knowledge, theorists establish their superiority. In believing that other critics are part of the conspiracy, theorists are manufacturing evidence to support their special knowledge.

Gee Emm

Having been away from this thread for far too long(?), I came back recently in the certain knowledge that much entertainment was to be had, given a recent event in a strange land over the water.

Thanks Brain et al, much appreciated!

Having said that, I do regret that my entertainment is coming at a cost to your society and governance, but that is your choice not mine.

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Timeline of events:
2017: Russia Meddled in our election.
2018: Russia Meddled in our election.
2019: Russia Meddled in our election.
2020: "In believing that some critics are too dumb to see their special knowledge, theorists establish their superiority. In believing that other critics are part of the conspiracy, theorists are manufacturing evidence to support their special knowledge."

poormxdad

You make a good argument--the hardest part about being a republican/conservative and not just a Trump supporter--is knowing in your heart there are groups of people conspiring against us.

I am absolutely sure the MSM is part of the conspiracy. No matter how much you hate Trump, he has accomplished some good things we never hear about. For example, getting the remains of those 55 servicemen lost during the Korean conflict returned is a big deal. CNN only gave it 30 seconds of coverage, and that was not live. MSNBC didn't cover it at all. Also, that picture of the "kids in cages" was from 2014. Apparently, it was okay when the O'Bomber was president. You can see from the questions Sleepy Joe is getting that they're in on it, whatever that "it" is.

I'm retired military and still work as a contractor for the DoD. I have to take "Information Assurance" training every year to maintain my classified computer access. I know absolutely without question that Hillary and her staff mishandled classified information. The statute is clear. Dozens of people had to know about it and participate in it. In fact, Hillary probably didn't do the actual transfer of data to the unclassified side, so there could have been a "fall guy" or guys. The fact that the intelligence and justice communities did nothing proves there is a conspiracy.

We now know the Steele Dossier, the FISA warrants, and the whole Russiagate scandal was a hoax perpetrated to derail the president. $34M spent on lies. Definitely a conspiracy.

The Ukraine phone call and following impeachment was a conspiracy. Did anyone ever hear of what statute/law was supposedly broken by Trump by asking the Ukrainian president to investigate Creepy Joe? I never did. It was certainly interesting to find out that the MSM would break away from the hearings when republicans were making their arguments.

Why did the voting irregularities only happen in dimocrat run swing states? Why was the counting stopped in just those states? Conspiracy.

I saw the Trump rallies and the Biden pressers. No way Biden won, IMHO. His voters are the people that drive around alone in their cars with the windows up and a/c on, wearing masks...

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

Braineack

iTrader: (62)

https://www.vice.com/amp/en/article/...0w-JmJjSohU31U

xturner

Reminds me of my youth -

“Keep it up and I’ll give you something to cry about!”

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

poormxdad

The real question is whether or not these occurrences are part of one conspiracy.

You could throw the climate change hoax in there, too. While I'm absolutely sure the climate is changing--the word "climate" by its very definition is an attempt at describing the average weather of a region over an extended period of time. Therefore, the description of the climate of North America over the past 30 years would be different of that for the last 100 years, which would be different than that for the last 1000. What I don't believe is that politicians who can't do anything right--like count votes or make AmTrac profitable or Social Security solvent--can actually change the temperature of the planet if we just paid more taxes and endured a little more hardship. It's ridiculous. While I respect those folks who have a deep, emotional need to protect the planet, the idea that some politican like Maxine Waters or Mazie Hirono might be the "Temperature Czar" is laughable.

It's a hoax, a conspiracy, because it's brilliant. Simply stopping the climate from changing requires no plan or goals. There are no milestones to measure the government's progress towards success. Since the climate changes slowly, they can come out each year and say "Hey, John Q., the climate today is basically the same as it was this time last year, so what we're doing must be working. Give us more taxes". Conspiracy.

The problem is the "one conspiracy" theory means there are people in charge, directing the actors. Who?

Take the MSM talking points. Remember "gravitas"? Or when they all described the Republican Convention as having a "dark message"? Who picked those words and how did they get to each network? Why do all the talking heads agree to say the same things, over and over? No one ever steps out of line. You'd think that if one of these liberal clowns with his or her own show started reporting the news they'd get a bigger audience and then could make more money. However, they all appear to be fine with the status quo. Why?

Then you have "big tech" censoring everything they don't agree with, like discussion of hydroxychloroquine or voter fraud. Why are dimocrats pushing for more censorship? It's absolutely against the First Amendment.

Why do the dims want to take our guns away now, after 234 years? More people die from medical malpractice and car accidents than by gun violence.

New World Order? Great Reset? One Conspiracy? What would be the reward?

Joe Perez

iTrader: (8)

Well, to be fair, there is a logical answer to that: More and bigger government.

If you're asking from the point of view of a member of the two-party political system, then that's a significant reward.

Bajingo

Power and control is all these people want.

poormxdad

Sure, but what does Brian Stelter or Anderson Cooper get out of it that makes them such strong adherents to the cause? It seems to me the dims are pushing the idea that the world would be a better place if we were all equally miserable.

But remember, some animals are more equal than others.