The information Sidney has provided thus far is true.
Dominion acknowledges in their operation manual how to "correct" for mistakes and configure the aystem.
They clearly were sourced from Venezuela and jumped through multiple companies.
Sidney has acknowledged having an affidavit from a credible source regarding the softwares ability and prior use in manipulating votes.
It is alleged one of the companies employees has stated he would ensure Trump isn't re-elected.
That's all great for framing a case but Sidney has got to have evidence that the software was used to manipulate the vote. It doesn't sound like she has access to the servers. She's got a lot of circumstantial evidence and her comment that she has a witness who may need witness protection is promising but she's going to need more than affidavits and math to win this case.
Honestly though how do you think she will get first-hand evidence that votes were manipulated here like they were in venezuela? If she has evidence in the form of affidavits that the system was built for this purpose in another country and then circumstantial evidence indicating that may have happened here coupled with the clearly partisan stance of said voting company, well that sure makes sense to me. At that point, you'd have a real hard time selling me on the idea that votes were NOT manipulated here.
I completely agree. This is why I continue to support her unlike many of the doomers. However, a win in the court of public approval doesn't matter. Only a win in a court of law matters. I suspect she's got some kind of hard evidence but we'll have to wait and see either on Friday or next week when she said she planned on filing her case.
The information Sidney has provided thus far is true. Dominion acknowledges in their operation manual how to "correct" for mistakes and configure the aystem. They clearly were sourced from Venezuela and jumped through multiple companies. Sidney has acknowledged having an affidavit from a credible source regarding the softwares ability and prior use in manipulating votes. It is alleged one of the companies employees has stated he would ensure Trump isn't re-elected.
That's all great for framing a case but Sidney has got to have evidence that the software was used to manipulate the vote. It doesn't sound like she has access to the servers. She's got a lot of circumstantial evidence and her comment that she has a witness who may need witness protection is promising but she's going to need more than affidavits and math to win this case.
Honestly though how do you think she will get first-hand evidence that votes were manipulated here like they were in venezuela? If she has evidence in the form of affidavits that the system was built for this purpose in another country and then circumstantial evidence indicating that may have happened here coupled with the clearly partisan stance of said voting company, well that sure makes sense to me. At that point, you'd have a real hard time selling me on the idea that votes were NOT manipulated here.
I completely agree. This is why I continue to support her unlike many of the doomers. However, a win in the court of public approval doesn't matter. Only a win in a court of law matters. I suspect she's got some kind of hard evidence but we'll have to wait and see either on Friday or next week when she said she planned on filing her case.