Read my post though. I say that I don't trust wikipedia implicitly. I agree and have thought that lack of prison time for Montgomery is definitely a check in the "could be true" direction. However there also isn't any "win" from those incidents. One of the things that convinced me he's probably a fraud is that Sherrif Joe Arpaio said the evidence - that he paid Mr. Montgomery for in 2015 - was "probably junk". The implication in that article, written in 2015, is that Montgomery pretended to be connected with CIA sources and produced -for money- questionable "evidence" that was dismissed by the person who gathered it- Sherriff Joe (who was a vocal anti-illegal-immigration pro-Trump supporter then). Granted, that's a NYT article, so who the heck knows if it's true or not.
So I am not saying that I know for certain that Montgomery is a fraud. But, if you take the past allegations of fraud - including from pro-Trump Sherriff Joe, and add the fact that this site looks like a con, and that it offers zero evidence besides video of a map and video of a spreadsheet, and that it offers zero explanation of how the data was obtained, etc., and that the donations go to him personally. Well, the most likely explanation is that Montgomery is a fraud. If he's NOT a fraud, he needs a better web designer, and needs to release much more than a video of a spreadsheet and video of lines going between china and US as evidence.
Compare Snowden and Assange. They had similarly explosive evidence, and released it credibly in a way that nobody seriously doubts the content is authentic. Their stories are just so much more believable than Montgomery's IMO.
Well, NSA or other nations could in theory monitor this traffic. Or Dominion/scytl/etc. I just don’t think Dennis is that guy, or that it would leak in such a crappy site. I have thought about the idea that this is an intentional psyop. If I were to organize ballot stuffing, mail in fraud etc., “leaking” a few crazy theories to some key players would be a good way to cover my tracks. I could lump claims of ballot stuffing with my leaked conspiracies etc. to hide the truth. Still the simplest explanation is just that Dennis is running a scam
I’m no lawyer so I don’t know about liability. Look, I hope I’m wrong. I hope Dennis Montgomery really is some NSA operative that stole packet capture data from Nov 3 and is taking donations to summarize it into a rock solid criminal case against Biden. That would be awesome. But there is nothing in theAmericanreport.org, Blxware.org, or electionreports.com, or what info I can find on Dennis Montgomery that gives me a shred of confidence in that outcome.
I think it’s just as likely that Dennis Montgomery is a scammer and Mike - and maybe even Mary - is falling for it.
One way to know for sure is to interview Dennis and ask him for more information about how he got his data, and why we should believe him. I hope someone does that soon.
No. Patriots.win is providing a legit service and lots of content that people can evaluate and discuss themselves. Look at electionrecords.com and patriots.win and tell me which site you think is more deserving of donations. Which has more sources and detailed explanations of their claims? Which allows you to interact with the site owner directly and publicly? Which looks like a modern site vs something the 90s threw up?
So no it’s not kinda like that at all. Also, I think your caps lock is stuck.
I like this as an example of the sort of analysis we need to publicize:
https://github.com/douglasroth3/PA2020Analyzer
It shows data from an official source, and analyzes the results in a way anyone with a little know how can replicate. Matt Braynard has done similar. I think the Navarro Report has some valid examples. The Antrim report we can’t replicate, but seems more detailed and valid- they at least go through their methods and sources. The Edison data is a legitimate source (that’s where we get the “spike” charts from.).
I mean, in theory a packet capture could have been saved by some patriot and is sitting on drives somewhere. But just to do that at a national - really international- scale is a NSA type task. If you look at Dennis Montgomery, Mary Fanning, and the Blixseths, they do at claim to have some intelligence community ties. Dennis’s previous scams involve intelligence services. So it really comes down to “do you believe Dennis Montgomery has access to NSA packet captures and has published truthful claims based on that data on electionrecords.com?”
fixed the link. thanks.
So you're telling me you go to https://www.electionrecords.com/scorecard/index.html and click on the donate button and your first thought is "this is completely legitimate"
I did not say apis are executed from a web address. I said that the voting machines aren't going to be connecting to http://www.scytl.com. They are likely connecting to some other subdomain or domain. For example, they may have something like https://api.scytl.com (or more likely dozens or hundreds of different domains and subdomains. You definitely can move a small to medium website overnight. I've done it plenty. Also, just because DNS changes doesn't mean the site moved. Could be a proxy. Or you may have two hot copies in two regions and switch DNS between them.
I also said I agreed scytl was shady. Just because scytl is shady, it does not follow that every claim about fraud is true. Just look at the blxware site and tell me that is an honest looking site.
Also "Not an IT guy if you think apis are executed from a web address" doesn't even make any sense. Almost every website, including this one, uses AJAX calls to backend apis.
No. Dominion is shady, the videos of adjudication, the Antrim report and plenty of other things show real evidence of fraud.
Mary showed a video of a spreadsheet and a map. Mary runs AmericanReport.org, who did show the source of this data as blxware and electionrecords. Those have the same map video (which is meaningless) and a link to a donation page for someone who may be a scammer. Just because the election fraud was real doesn't mean there can't be people taking advantage of the reports of fraud to peddle fake theories and/or earn a quick buck. Dude has raised 67k just from a dinky website with zero actual evidence on it.
See my post history dude. I just genuinely don't believe this one case from Denis Montgomery and don't want pedes to get swindled.
My take on that is 1) Sure, Dominion, Scytl, etc. are shady and very well may have been hacked or intentionally manipulated the vote. I have seen evidence of that (the spikes in vote tallies and statistical anomalies indicating fraud) 2) Just because the website www.scytl.com was in Germany, doesn't mean anything else was. For example votes probably go through something like api.scytl.com. The actual servers are in AWS cloud services, and can move anywhere in the world with a few keypresses. 3) Just because Dominion, etc. are shady it does not mean that Dennis Montgomery is not running a scam.
I wouldn't say I know for a fact they- or somebody- did not hack machines. That definitely could have happened, and the Antrim report is good evidence. I'm just saying this Mary Fanning report is not good evidence, and I have reason to believe it is a scam that could hurt our credibility (or pocket books!).
No. Not what this spreadsheet is claiming. I've been on here since reddit. I've seen lots of theories, data, etc. The "true" data we have that shows fraud is: mail in ballot data from PA, voter records compared to death records, video and affidavits of shipped in fake ballots, the antrim report showing deleted logs, and statistical evidence based on election tallies (ie "the spike"). There is plenty of reason to doubt the election. But I have not seen real packet captures of the actual fraud traffic, which is what this video-of-a-spreadsheet claims to summarize.
I have checked the IP addresses. They are IP addresses associated with the names they say in the spreadsheet. However, ANYBODY could take those IP addresses and put them in a spreadsheet. I could literally make the same spreadsheet and replace the name Trump with Biden to show the opposite.
For the spreadsheet to mean anything, we need more information about the data used to create it. Add to that that the guy showing it to us (Dennis Montgomery) has several scams under his belt, the correct thing to do is be skeptical of the Mary Fanning claim. The other claims seem more legit both technically and in who is producing them.
Read the posts from a couple days ago. I say the same thing. I think Mike is being fooled by blxware.org. Now I'm saying either Mary is fooled as well or is doing the fooling, and providing additional info.
Same here. This would have to be wireshark or similar packet capture at either end of the traffic, OR packet capture at ISPs in between by nation-state level monitoring. Regardless, I need some more info about this data before I believe it.
Without more explanation, I have to think that particular claim is a larp meant to discredit the other more credible claims he brings up.
That’s funny and all, but next time use Hunter Crack photos
We need a public database of these arrests, FBI reports, etc. So far, they seem to fall into a few categories: Agent Provoceurs (James Sullivan) Antifa or Dem (these two) Maybe-MAGA-but-a-little-crazy attention-seekers (Viking dude) Mostly harmless MAGA (little old lady, stay between the rope people)
It will be hyuge!
The is beautiful. More of this please. Then build your own presidential library before Obama gets his.
I've read this a couple times, and am not sure what it's trying to say. Is there some specific action we're supposed to be taking? ELI5?
I really like this idea and I've been thinking the same thing. Memes, shitposts, etc have their place, but I also think there is a market for a low-key, facts-only site. www.hereistheevidence.com and c19study.com are sort of what I have in mind, but they let a little shouting creep in. We need something to hand normies on any given topic and say "look, there are a lot of opinions on X issue, but at least step back and see the main-stream media narrative for what it is: one very skewed narrative from the far left.
I'm a web dev and really may build something like this.
I still worry this guy is well meaning, but being fooled by some fraudsters. Blxware referenced on his site is just shady as hell. I’ll watch the doc, but it shouldnt take 3 hours- it’s plain as day. Go over the low-hanging fruit of dead voters, mail in fraud, and rule changes without legislators. Then, show the spikes, the GA hidden box video that correlates with a spike, and affidavits of people saying they saw boxes of fake ballots being brought in. Make clear this is all proven beyond what most courts would require, but most courts only rejected on standing. Show cases. That’s enough to show the steal.
THEN if you really feel the need, mention hacking of election machines, Dominion manipulation, and present any evidence you may have of that. But it had better be really good evidence. Wireshark captures or screen grabs of the machines running the fraud or a Dominion employee spilling the beans. A sketchy website with a donate now button is not evidence.
I previously posted why I think Mary Fanning may have been conned by Dennis Montgomery. I stick to my assessment that they will need to show or tell more about their sources for me to believe that part of the show.
For the record though, I don’t think the video should be banned. People should watch it and make up their mind about each claim separately. Personally I think the Navarro Report, Antrim Report, Matt Braynard, and statistical analysis like Dr Shivas have way more credibility than Dennis Montgomery’s.