They refused to audit, and I found this disturbing statement in the order:
For these process-based audits, it would not appear critical whether
they occur before the election results are finally certified, as the audit is intended to
gather information that could be used to perfect voting systems going forward.
Does this mean there will be an audit? Didn't they certify the election in Michigan? Does this overrule that?
Confused about the law here.
They refused to audit, and I found this disturbing statement in the order:
literally since WHEN is an audit only used to improve future "systems"? Lol what! That's literally not the purpose of ANY audit EVER
If I ever get audited in Michigan I should tell them that I look forward for their input in doing my taxes going forward.
Everyone can stop paying taxes. Apparently audits are just to help the IRS find ways to improve paying them in the future.
Great, we'll just trust the Democrats to fix an issue that favors Democrats right after we prove to them there's no real consequences to fraud.
The only way you're going to get bipartisan support to actually fix this is to start tossing election results until they do it right.
There is no next time. Either the rule of law holds or the nation goes to civil war.
Get the rope....
from what i understand they can still audit
Ya but sounds like they're saying: "audit to fix the next one... this ones already certified." Dicks.
From your lips to God's ears. I'm looking forward to getting some wins here.
Agreed. They say a whole lot about irregularities but nothing about what could happen if confirmed.