Also not true. At the "real hearing", almost all of the witnesses (all of which also had affidavits) were from one single county, from a single counting location, by design. Many of their testimonies overlapped, and many of them corroborated the same things.
And you have to remember the """evidence""" is I think one of the judges described it as "hearsay of hearsay". They claim they heard someone else claim they heard someone else claim there was voter fraud. They're about as reliable and allowable in court as guys from this forum would be, because technically they've heard people say other people have heard others say there was fraud.
Who has time to watch 45 minutes of delusional gramps rambling and sniffing?
That's the craziest thing about this. He took a very similar amount of the popular vote this time. So two possible contributing factors.
And yet the court cases seem to be being dismissed or abandoned by the trump team, so those affidavits are bullshit and don't mean anything. Anyone can make an affidavit but they aren't holding up in court so they aren't worth the paper they are printed on.
Let me try to summarise for you:
Mystery to you, because you don't know what's on it and have imaged all sorts of nefarious things. Just as a notepad might look like a "mystery notepad???" to someone who assumes it's full of super-secret evil secrets.
Yes. If it's a USB that's been checked or vetted by the appropriate people before being connected. USB drives are a common tool in pretty much any environment that handles data, sensitive or not. If there's nothing else on the drive, then it's essentially just a repository; you may as well be complaining about the presence of a pen-and-paper.
Yeah, the poll workers stop the technician at the door, have him go through a metal detector, and if he's carrying any usb drives, they plug them in on their own, disposable, air-gapped machines and verify that the contents don't contain anything malicious, then they allow him through. You honestly think that's the level of security we have at our counting locations?
HAHAAHAHAH I guarantee you that nobody is doing any checking or vetting of any usb drives.
It's questions like this that make it so painfully obvious you have no idea how professional data security works.
Right, so we're just back to you making speculative assumptions, then. Nothing demonstrable actually being shown in the supposedly-damning videos.
Can you prove that? Or is that just how you think it SHOULD work?
For the latter, AZ did an audit of 100 ballots, and found 2 erroneous. One Trump vote was dropped, and another was flipped from Trump to Biden. That's a small sample size, but.. wait hold on
Pretty sure I saw an official statement that they would. And good on twitter for that, Trump has been violating the terms of service pretty constantly for the last four years.
It's common procedure for data handling for USB drives to be given by an organisation before use, and for them to then routinely be used to transfer between devices. All I'm doing is pointing out that what you saw on that video of the guy with the USB is easily explicable by purely procedural, above-board processes.
I would expect people to provide evidence in the form of: evidence of tampering of polling machines; huge discrepancy between audit and automated count (after the audit in GA, the accuracy of the automated count was reaffirmed); paper trail (for a country-wide, enormous conspiracy, involving countless state legislatures, govenors and companies, then there would be something written down ordering it that could be presented); or at the very least, testimony from somebody actually involved or knowledgeable of the process. For that last, I mean not someone clearly partisan ranting on a podium about Dem poll-watchers being mean, and giving vague or circumstantial claims. I mean somebody who was involved in the setup of the system and can give a specific, mechanic claim which can be investigated.
I think it was just a random sampling.
Oh, so this is just how it SHOULD work, not necessarily how it ACTUALLY DID work.
Too bad no courts has ordered the machines to be seized, and an audit done, so such evidence can be gathered.
That wasn't an audit that was a recount, and such recounts can't detect people voting twice, dead people voting, whether a ballot was printed or not, whether or not the signatures don't match, etc. It was just a hand count of the totals vs what the machine says.
apnews.com
Who's calling it a conspiracy?
A worker for the city is testifying right now. Her title is Head Engineer. She worked in the TCF center. She testifies that procedures weren't being followed, she was told to ignore her training, etc. Backdating ballots, being told not to spoil ballots, etc. She's the first witness. Watch
heh
