1
HairSniffer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Cover other topics first. Maybe, if time allows, we will discuss your topic.

10
HairSniffer 10 points ago +10 / -0

Not a lawyer, but I'm reading "enacted" to mean "became law". This is not new 2021 law, but long-established law. Laws are pretty much "in effect" until they're repealed, though some fall from favor and just get ignored.

This doesn't mean that real POTUS implemented/utilized the Insurrection Act, though Lord knows he should have. I don't know that he did or didn't.

1
HairSniffer 1 point ago +1 / -0

This is a bit challenging to follow. The parties in the conversation are not introduced. The interviewee seems to have a lot of details. Discussion of Epstein and John Roberts as well as Mike Pence.

1
HairSniffer 1 point ago +1 / -0

You have to draw the line somewhere, right?

2
HairSniffer 2 points ago +2 / -0

This reminds me of all those Trump voters who were told that they could vote in person. They went to the polls, waited for hours, voted, and then had their votes switched to Biden. Those Election Supervisors that told people they could vote in person should be charged.

1
HairSniffer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Be sure to post a photo of it here! Unless its on your face, then maybe not.

4
HairSniffer 4 points ago +5 / -1

Or AR just means just ARmalite. They called their shotguns the AR-9 and AR-17. They had an AR-24 pistol.

36
HairSniffer 36 points ago +36 / -0

Epoch TImes is not a Democrat outlet. It might be the best print & online news source in the US today.

1
HairSniffer 1 point ago +1 / -0

I found some discussion at a site associated with The Daily Caller. I presume this would be generally conservative friendly and not your typical BS "fact checker". https://checkyourfact.com/2020/12/29/fact-check-att-contract-audit-dominion-voting-systems-machines-nashville-bombing/

2
HairSniffer 2 points ago +2 / -0

They may be squatting -- or the opposite. If you expect squatters, you can grab a domain to keep it safe for the rightful user.

2
HairSniffer 2 points ago +2 / -0

So much symbolism. Politicians and media are saints to these atheist commies.

11
HairSniffer 11 points ago +11 / -0

I hope someone is working on a bill of materials. It would suck to not be ready when the CIA offers.

1
HairSniffer 1 point ago +1 / -0

Mailed or not, I agree that ballots must have unique codes. As I recall, one of the governors explicitly instructed his legislature that a requirement for unique codes would result in an automatic veto. Somehow they agreed and eliminated that requirement.

I would suggest further that they should have some random secret data as well rather than just sequential numbers that anyone could duplicate or extend. If someone knew codes 1,2,3,4,5 where used, they could make there own ballot with a #3 code to conflict with a legit 3 code thereby sowing confusion. They could also make a ballot with #6 code when there was none. By adding some secret confirmation data, e.g. combining 3 with confirmation code WLCPZ stored confidentially, permanently, and verifiably in an audit log, it would be possible to later confirm which #3 code ballot is legit and which is forged. The confirmation code could be entirely random or result from a cryptographic function.

1
HairSniffer 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'd like to have some means of confirming that the ballot images are legit, one per registered voter, and not Chinese-manufactured. It would be neat to issue certs to registered voters with in-person ID verification and photography.

My brain isn't yet wired for blockchain. I get the distributed ledger concept at the basic level. What specific problem do you see blockchain solving? Maybe loss or addition of records?

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›