Win uses cookies necessary for site functionality, as well as for personalization. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
I believe it has. I really respect the gateway pundit for reporting every possible lead but I am getting a bit frustrated with them not chasing the lead either. We're going to have leads that go nowhere as well.
I don't think this stuff should be buried but it's just picking up the scent. I wish they would do a little more to chase things up to rule in or out the leads or make clear what's the next step for us to track down.
I think it's also a problem if everyone treats every lead as a smoking gun. When I'm playing hide and seek I put down false trails all the time. Sometimes even by accident.
It's good that everyone is given a chance and heard but it's only a chance. There are many chances. We don't need them all to turn out.
I don't care if someone is inventor of email or inventor of the QR code. I caught out the inventor of the email on a few mistakes that could hurt the case. Even if he means well he's doing more harm than good if submitting something to court that's wrong and can be provable before hand. He's blocking, stuffing the quota, denial of service, strangling the pipe. We can't have people presenting evidence of fraud which itself is fraudulent. These people sabotage us. The GWP has an open door policy and we need to keep it in mind.
Only one true title steals me. Discover of election fraud. Except anything but the title seduces me. Only the deed.
If some hobo addicted to meth, a criminal record as long as your arm which comprises of all that he's ever accomplished in life susses it then I don't care who he is or what else he's done if he's worked it out that stands for itself.
Anyway I'm an expert to. I make automated machines like voting machines and I use QR codes as well funnily enough. Once in the office I invented a game of barcode tag. Printed out barcodes that you would stick to your body. Each one had a score for the body part. Laptop in backpack or phone attachment to hand scanner then little app to count the score. I invented it. Fucking hilarious. You thought COD was fun.
Anyway this guy is generally right for the most part though it's a little hard to explain the full implications. Primarily, a lot of the stuff going to court is actually stuff that shouldn't need to if things were done right. If they were then they would have real defence in court up front and this would all be over instead of trying to just obstruct.
It's not a direct smoking gun but regardless of what's behind the curtain the fact that there even is one is damning enough. He's also absolutely right. There are procedures that should either make it very easy to detect fraud or at least significantly reduce the search space. I'm an expert and scientist. I beat up journalists for fun. I'm the real deal. They're just a pathetic weak representation. A sketch based on hearsay based on a letter about a photo of a statue of the original form. That's why we call them sketchy. The beatings on the other hand are just for fun. No other reason.
I so what to see this happen to see what's what. I still feel we need to also fix those requesting ballots who isn't that person. Voter ID and some kind of crypto protecting the paper ballot.
More proof than gateway pundit is a big pile of sack... guys just wants to make money on our back by feeding us BS that we, unfortunately, are way too happy to fall for
This is good. Maybe Trump's legal team has been asking for the wrong thing. There are a number of ways to forensically identify a group of fake ballots, including signatures in the same handwriting and the same few fingerprints rather than an individual set per ballot.
Absolutely agree.
So much fucking THIS!
I believe it has. I really respect the gateway pundit for reporting every possible lead but I am getting a bit frustrated with them not chasing the lead either. We're going to have leads that go nowhere as well.
I don't think this stuff should be buried but it's just picking up the scent. I wish they would do a little more to chase things up to rule in or out the leads or make clear what's the next step for us to track down.
I think it's also a problem if everyone treats every lead as a smoking gun. When I'm playing hide and seek I put down false trails all the time. Sometimes even by accident.
It's good that everyone is given a chance and heard but it's only a chance. There are many chances. We don't need them all to turn out.
I don't care if someone is inventor of email or inventor of the QR code. I caught out the inventor of the email on a few mistakes that could hurt the case. Even if he means well he's doing more harm than good if submitting something to court that's wrong and can be provable before hand. He's blocking, stuffing the quota, denial of service, strangling the pipe. We can't have people presenting evidence of fraud which itself is fraudulent. These people sabotage us. The GWP has an open door policy and we need to keep it in mind.
Only one true title steals me. Discover of election fraud. Except anything but the title seduces me. Only the deed.
If some hobo addicted to meth, a criminal record as long as your arm which comprises of all that he's ever accomplished in life susses it then I don't care who he is or what else he's done if he's worked it out that stands for itself.
Anyway I'm an expert to. I make automated machines like voting machines and I use QR codes as well funnily enough. Once in the office I invented a game of barcode tag. Printed out barcodes that you would stick to your body. Each one had a score for the body part. Laptop in backpack or phone attachment to hand scanner then little app to count the score. I invented it. Fucking hilarious. You thought COD was fun.
Anyway this guy is generally right for the most part though it's a little hard to explain the full implications. Primarily, a lot of the stuff going to court is actually stuff that shouldn't need to if things were done right. If they were then they would have real defence in court up front and this would all be over instead of trying to just obstruct.
It's not a direct smoking gun but regardless of what's behind the curtain the fact that there even is one is damning enough. He's also absolutely right. There are procedures that should either make it very easy to detect fraud or at least significantly reduce the search space. I'm an expert and scientist. I beat up journalists for fun. I'm the real deal. They're just a pathetic weak representation. A sketch based on hearsay based on a letter about a photo of a statue of the original form. That's why we call them sketchy. The beatings on the other hand are just for fun. No other reason.
It’s the smoking gun.
this is not "huge" this is bullshit. And also, more bullshit, he's not the inventor of QR code by any means.
yeah isn't this pulitzer guy a conspiracist
I so what to see this happen to see what's what. I still feel we need to also fix those requesting ballots who isn't that person. Voter ID and some kind of crypto protecting the paper ballot.
More proof than gateway pundit is a big pile of sack... guys just wants to make money on our back by feeding us BS that we, unfortunately, are way too happy to fall for
This is good. Maybe Trump's legal team has been asking for the wrong thing. There are a number of ways to forensically identify a group of fake ballots, including signatures in the same handwriting and the same few fingerprints rather than an individual set per ballot.