Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 8.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

blah blah blah

 

Arizonas Secretary of State, who I suppose is not a republican and is part of the vast conspiracy to deny the correct person won the 2020 election, has the gall to put in writing that the partisan auditors were not transparent in what they were actually doing to “audit” the election results, and that the “auditors” denied access to outsiders who might question their methods!  See a screenshot from the SOS’s report below.  Still looking for a link to the actual report from the “auditors”.

 

Also, anybody have advice on how to properly paste questionable material so that it looks conspiratorial.  I’m thinking it would need to be brought up on a computer and the take a screenshot at an angle with my phone?  I’m looking for something akin to shots from the Batman show in the 60’s, where when things were askew and off, the screen was not square and straight.  It was a clue that things were not as they seemed.

image.thumb.png.fc93888eeeb7d6225058d32cae3ff75c.png
 

image.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
18 minutes ago, thisismatt said:

How about simply pointing out where and how the report is wrong? No need for all the smoke & mirrors.

Which report?  Unable to locate the one by Cyber Ninja's, those were the guys hired to poke holes in the audit results.  All the first pics are about that report.  So many problems with that report that it would be difficult to summarize, so I didn't - hence the "smoke and mirrors."

 

The report by the SOS's office is the second post - to summarize that and to get rid of the "smoke and mirrors," the SOS said cyber auditors were full of shit and keeping secrets so nobody could follow what they did.  Cyber auditors were promoting conspiracies by doing that.

Edited by Dav
spelling pole for poke
Link to comment
33 minutes ago, thisismatt said:

How about simply pointing out where and how the report is wrong? No need for all the smoke & mirrors.

 

Do you see the inherent lie? The MSM goes: the COUNT shows Biden won... but it wasn't a recount it was an audit to check if the ballots themselves were valid in the first place. Which we can now see 17,000 of them were duplicates and therefore invalid and the signature verification of those after election night had 95% that were ineligible compared to 5% before election night.

 

Let's try an example:

 

A kid asks his Father for $15.

The Father gives the kid a $10, two $1s and a $3 dollar novelty bill.

Kid: "Why did you only give me $12?"

Father:" Count it again, it is $15"

Kid: "yeah, but it is $12 dollars and a fake $3 bill"

Father: "that's not counting that is auditing"

 

 

 

Edited by Dguy210
  • Like 2
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, Dguy210 said:

 

Do you see the inherent lie? The MSM goes: the COUNT shows Biden won... but it wasn't a recount it was an audit to check if the ballots themselves were valid in the first place. Which we can now see 17,000 of them were duplicates and therefore invalid and the signature verification of those after election night had 95% that were ineligible compared to 5% before election night.

 

Let's try an example:

 

A kid asks his Father for $15.

The Father gives the kid a $10, two $1s and a $3 dollar novelty bill.

Kid: "Why did you only give me $12?"

Father:" Count it again, it is $15"

Kid: "yeah, but it is $12 dollars and a fake $3 bill"

Father: "that's not counting that is auditing"

 

 

 

One would think that if it was an audit, that they would have described in their report that 17,00 ballots were duplicates or whatever else might have been wrong with the ballots, but they described nothing like that in their report.  Their conclusion was that nothing was wrong with the election or the ballots.  Cyber Ninjas were hired by the republican legislature and the report shows the former presidents loss was greater (meaning he got fewer votes) than the County determined.  Go figure.

 

Not sure where you learned there were that many duplicates.  What was your source for that statement?  Auditors have a saying - if it isn’t documented, it didn’t happen.  So, did it happen?  Show some support that isn’t a screenshot of a computer screen that can’t be read or relied on, or isn’t a quote of a radio show host that is talking out of his ass (and isn’t COVID dead).

 

Luciano Pacioli described what auditing was in about 1473, which was to listen (auditory) to merchants (ships) describe goods when they left port and when they returned to determine if they made a profit for the ship’s owner.  They recorded the results in writing.  He also described double entry accounting.

 

Cyber Ninjas consulted and wrote a report.  Doubt there was a CPA auditor among them.

 

I suppose this is more smoke and mirrors?

Link to comment
12 minutes ago, Dav said:

One would think that if it was an audit, that they would have described in their report that 17,00 ballots were duplicates or whatever else might have been wrong with the ballots, but they described nothing like that in their report.  Their conclusion was that nothing was wrong with the election or the ballots.  Cyber Ninjas were hired by the republican legislature and the report shows the former presidents loss was greater (meaning he got fewer votes) than the County determined.  Go figure.

 

 

 

 I thought you said you couldn't find the report?

Yet you repeat the propaganda there was nothing wrong with the ballots.

Where is your link to the report?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, Ooph! said:

 

 I thought you said you couldn't find the report?

Yet you repeat the propaganda there was nothing wrong with the ballots.

Where is your link to the report?

Still looking.  Yep - googled it - read thirty or forty news reports - none of them being CNN NBC ABC or other major or minor left wing sources.  I pic’d one of them for what I posted.  I suppose that’s research.  Do you have something better - to the actual report?

 

It’s kinda funny the way wild ass conspiracy stuff gets posted here that seems way off one end of the pool, and most posters eat that shit up.  Nobody questions or says “what was your source?”  Post what seems to be factual information, meaning it was from neither a left or right wing source, and everybody lines up asking that question, and they ask other leading questions, like, “how stupid are you to believe something I don’t believe?”

 

Relax, the subtitle for destruction of America indicates fake news might be present.  What makes your fake news any better than my fake news?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, thisismatt said:

Yeah - so it looks like there are two links but both take you to same report.  If that is the full report, then it is not a full report that can be verified in any way, so it is understandable why the Arizona SOS’s office questioned the validity of that report.  Normal audit reports allow the auditee (the voting system in this case) adequate data to understand what was done, how it was done, etc.  this “audit” report is so thin with “data” that the auditee has no way to verify anything.  They would be left to prove a negative, which is near impossible.  So, if the purpose was to amplify conspiracy theories, then this “audit” report would do that.  All those who enjoy amplifying questionable ideas should run with this one…

Link to comment
6 hours ago, Dav said:

 

 

It’s kinda funny the way wild ass conspiracy stuff gets posted here that seems way off one end of the pool, and most posters eat that shit up.  Nobody questions or says “what was your source?”  Post what seems to be factual information, meaning it was from neither a left or right wing source, and everybody lines up asking that question, and they ask other leading questions, like, “how stupid are you to believe something I don’t believe?”

 

Relax, the subtitle for destruction of America indicates fake news might be present.  What makes your fake news any better than my fake news?

 

I don't believe any of the shit posted in here. There aren't enough hours in the day to follow back even one link and even then you find more and more questionable sources like branches on a massive shit tree. Destruction is like the alphabet news stations that I stopped watching a year ago and for good reason. Truth, unlike kernels of corn, is indistinguishable from all the shit around it being pushed through the media bowel. At the end of the day all that's left is to cry or laugh about it all.   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
13 minutes ago, datzenmike said:

 

I don't believe any of the shit posted in here. There aren't enough hours in the day to follow back even one link and even then you find more and more questionable sources like branches on a massive shit tree. Destruction is like the alphabet news stations that I stopped watching a year ago and for good reason. Truth, unlike kernels of corn, is indistinguishable from all the shit around it being pushed through the media bowel. At the end of the day all that's left is to cry or laugh about it all.   

I like your analogy using corn n shite, nothing could be more true.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.