He's in jail bro

Hey Ralph!

That's the only thing I could hear lol.

Here's an interesting thread on this guy: https://twitter.com/RebellionBaby/status/1331902008765206528

We shouldn't necessarily believe what they are saying about him, but the fact that this was raised all the way back in November does raise some interesting questions.

Sign. Another one added to the list. It's sad all the things we have to live without to make a principled stance. No Amazon, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Apple, AT&T, Netflix, Disney, Walmart, Sony, Twitter, EA, NBA, NFL...

The list just keeps getting longer. Makes me think maybe it's better to just leave everything behind, build a cabin in the woods, and live off the land.

Those guys aren't military intelligence. Heck, they are not even military.

I listened to the whole thing, to me it sounds like POTUS and Germany are the clearest. Meadows is somewhat clear, and Raffensperger is the most muffled.

Two things you have to account for in this analysis is population growth and voter participation. Between 2012 and 2020 there would have been a modest growth in the number of eligible voters. More significantly, the voter participation rates in the 3 elections are very different. In 2012, it was 55%. In 2016, it was 59%. In 2020, it was 67%. One way you can adjust your analysis to account for these differences is to adjust down the 2016 and 2020 numbers as if the total number of votes cast were the same as in 2012.

I'd also like more clarity. Is he talking about more votes than registered voters? Eligible voters? Something else?

The voting procedure violation argument isn't working because of Laches. The courts argued that there was a time between when those procedures are put in place and when the election took place, that was the time to bring those lawsuits. Now that the election has happened it's too late to undo. You might not like this argument but it's what all the courts have said so far.

The only way to win this is to prove fraud occurred. Fraud can only be proven after the election took place, so the courts can't deny those claims based on Laches.

I believe then the House wouldn't have quorum and the whole process doesn't happen.

If this keeps happening day after day all the way to Jan 20, then the next president is never chosen, so Nancy Pelosi would then become acting president.

Ask yourself this question: do you think the United States is the kind of country where the current vice president gets to decide who the next president is going to be?

Yeah, living in a high state tax, high cost of living area, we got double whammied by the Trump tax bill. Our properties are expensive here so we pay a lot of mortgage interest. So we had our state tax deduction capped, and then also got our mortgage interest deduction capped. Our deductions are now a fraction of what it was before. The new brackets helped offset some of the deductions, but overall our taxes went up.

i feel like this sort of statistical evidence is only step 1. It should go something like the following:

1. Use statistics to identify areas where fraud occurred.
2. Arrest those who perpetuated the fraud. Make them give up their methods, their collaborators, their bosses, etc.
3. Use the criminal proceedings to overturn the election results.

We've had step 1 done for a long time. Now is not the time for more step 1 stuff. It is high time for step 2 to occur. Heck, it should really be time for step 3 already.

I pay more taxes now than before due to the SALT and mortgage interest deduction caps. I'm not mad though, fair is fair. But let's be realistic: the tax cut was situational. Some people got a tax cut, some people got a tax increase.

Very interesting, so the numbers in SURE seems to be the official numbers that PA should be using. Then the question becomes, where did the other number come from? If it's not from SURE, then who created it?

What is DoS/SURE system? Why is it different from the other number?

I think I've seen every part of this doc posted here separately before. It's nice that somebody took the time to compile it into one big doc for easy sharing. But beyond that, I don't see this adding anything new to the cases.

My guess is they won't even respond. They will run out the clock and a couple of months later they will respond, "oh this case? too late, it's moot now."

SCOTUS is clearly not where this battle will be won.

But this fails to achieve the end-to-end airgapping of all computers involved in the vote tabulation chain. Now you have two Internet-connected computers involved in the tabulation chain: the computer that talks to the state, and the state computer that receives the various results from across the state and aggregates them.

This design isn't the worst, as there are various secondary safety measures that can be used to ensure these Internet-connected computers haven't been compromised. For example once the votes are aggregated at the central computer, the numbers it shows can simply be compared to the numbers stored on the airgapped devices. However, this is a manual process.

I guess I'm not totally opposed to this design, I just thought they would have something better, like an end-to-end airgapped system.

Well Trump appointed her Transportation Secretary so we assume she's been vetted by Trump himself.

There was a video recorded by some election observers showing someone doing that. They take a USB flash drive and plug it into the tabulating computer to download the data, then plug that flash drive into a laptop that's connected to the Internet to upload that information.

That's a really good question. We need some answers about just how their network topology works. The least suspicious setup is perhaps they have a few devices in the same building, a server of some sort and a bunch of tabulators or something like that. Then they just wire them all up into a switch so all the machines all talk to each other. No Internet needed.

But maybe they need each precinct to talk to the county? How do they do that? The right way is to run a dedicated line between the county and each precinct, separate from the Internet. That is very expensive. So maybe they cheaped out and connected them to the Internet instead. Very bad!

This clip doesn't really explain much about how all that works. More things need to come forward.