1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Or a major shift in public opinion, that allows state legislatures wiggleroom. Trump to Biden... I will concede, and I will welcome you into the WH on inauguration day as soon as you provide proof that you won, on the very day of, I will concede.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Are they actually accepting people, or being overly paranoid like a lot of the other militias?

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

And we will not prove this for a very long time if ever. Especially if DOJ is not involved as they are required for the most part. So I conclude, we have our bets on the wrong horse. We need to get a firm decision on whether or not a candidate must prove they won an election. Is it preponderance of evidence, or beyond reasonable doubt.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

Perhaps, but if that is the path to disqualifying Biden, its the way the Constitution was written. I would look on that more favorably than Biden being President.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Trump should have replaced him, or told us why he could not. That is part of the deal. As of today, Barr is part of the deal as a whole. He is included with Trump.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

The problem is, if they sing, when they track them down. Why is that our job?

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

We keep them for 22 months because they are used to prove a candidate won, you do not have to prove anything if you lose.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why can we not just request that Biden prove he won? They can show us the logs, ballots, signature. Afterall that is why we have such.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

There is no way to verify (certify) that Biden won. Thats why we keep those logs.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

It means there is no evidence Biden won, and we require evidence that a candidate who is to enter the position of President, wins an election. The requirements in state law implicitly state that a winner must be able to prove it, by the requirements of data to show that the case. If this was not the case, there would be no such requirement in state law for keeping logs or ballots for a substantial amount of time after an election.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Majority of people think it was. I dont think so. I am not in the majority.

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

And if it has been destroyed, then...

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

We dont even need to go there or scratch that surface. We need to only do won thing, we need to request Biden proves he won, which is east to do if everything is legit. Thats it. Prove you won, we will demand Trump concede if he does not (he would).

2
handpeople 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yup. And why do we have those records? Why should they not be deleted?

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Not even that complicated, they would see how easy it is for end users to adjudicate results without required oversight. I think that is what it is showing. There is apparently a redacted system setting in the report. I am not sure what that would show.

0
handpeople 0 points ago +1 / -1

Doesn't prove fraud though. Proves the machine was error prone, not that errors were intentional.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

People believe the election was close, Trump also relieved a huge amount of votes, hence if the election is close, then Biden as well received a huge amount of votes.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, proves election laws were violated (logs were deleted in addition to other things). There is precedent that this is not enough to apply a remedy to an election however. Those logs are used to verify that a candidate won, now show us you won. We will wait.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, extremely big news. And this is the problem, high errors = you need to verify you won. Now go prove you won. We will wait... Oh, you deleted the logs, To bad, that is how we prove you won.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

Apparently description of system settings, and an image of a menu option on the UI.

1
handpeople 1 point ago +1 / -0

What they found, shows an insecure system, an error prone system, a system not in compliance with state laws. It does not prove fraud.

view more: ‹ Prev Next ›