Why are people assuming this woman is one of the bad guys? She is testifying and not hiding this information. This is exactly what we need - testimony from the inside as to what went down. Testimony from elections staff is even more powerful than from observers, though both are good.
But you don't get it, they couldn't take over on the device that they developed the software for until I clicked the pop-up "ok" box, so they don't just have access. Back door? Administrator privilege? What's that? /s
I'm happy to have her. She clearly has no bad intent and her basic limited understanding is what we need to break it down to fellow boomers. Kiss method always works
Why are people assuming this woman is one of the bad guys? She is testifying and not hiding this information. This is exactly what we need - testimony from the inside as to what went down. Testimony from elections staff is even more powerful than from observers, though both are good.
She clearly had no idea that this was a big deal.
If you watch her whole testimony, she was there to show proof of fraud.
But you don't get it, they couldn't take over on the device that they developed the software for until I clicked the pop-up "ok" box, so they don't just have access. Back door? Administrator privilege? What's that? /s
I'm happy to have her. She clearly has no bad intent and her basic limited understanding is what we need to break it down to fellow boomers. Kiss method always works
She sounds exactly like a non-technical user, trying to explain a problem to an IT support person. I think she did a pretty good job of it!!!