[–] Fateswebb ago 

what does he mean, "there is no reason to talk about hacking into voting machines, because that is covered?"

whats covered?

[–] Jonny_Ninja [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

You'd have to ask him to be sure.

But I think he's implying that end is covered via CISA.

That doesn't mean they weren't allowed to do it, either. I think he is asserting that if they were in fact allowed to do it, it's because CISA allowed for them to just to catch them in the act.

He believes that all or most of the steal came in the form of physical ballots. Maybe he's wrong.

[–] Fateswebb ago 

well sure, I mean... hopefully, the problem is the only legal person I have seen discussing the computer glitches is sydney powell, rudy doesn't even bring it up.. I would feel a lot more confident if rudy mentioned it..

[–] Art_Vandalay ago 

Can someone chime in on why this guy's opinion is often posted and appears well regarded? Is he connected in any sort of way, have great experience/credentials, or are people just entertained by his theories?

[–] Jonny_Ninja [S] ago  (edited ago)

He's generally regarded as a logical person and he does seem to do A LOT of research.

If credentials are what matter to you, then go listen to Dan Bongino I guess.

[–] Blacksmith21 ago 

Summary for the time challenged?

[–] Kzintrooper2016 ago 

See my reply above.

[–] lightindarkness ago 

Only I disagree that the software counting issue is already taken care of.

[–] Jonny_Ninja [S] ago  (edited ago)

It is already taken care of if you know how they do it beforehand.

Just because they were allowed to do it doesn't mean it's not taken care of.

Too many of you guys aren't thinking like a cop.

Cops LET PEOPLE COMMIT CRIMES in sting ops. It's the whole fucking point of sting ops.

[–] Kzintrooper2016 ago 

A though, was a similar operation done on the electronic counting....

[–] corrbrick 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

At 18:50 Wictor mentions some outcomes of this scheme in passing: destroying the opposition party, destroying the media, destroying punditry. These are things Q tells us Q+ wants to accomplish.

[–] cabalstone 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Hypothetically, of course. LQL! Thanks for posting.

[–] KurtAlbert 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

too long

[–] Kzintrooper2016 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

He is challenging to listen to, but he is getting a little better with each video.

So ok, what he is saying in this video is that Team Bidem's plan was to cheat just enough to get over the line and win by a whisker, all carefully calibrated.

But Trump agents infiltrated the ballot delivery process and delivered/substituted not carefully prepared plausible ballots, but flawed obviously screwy ballots all marked for Biden that will not pass any inspection.

The people counting would have been told by Biden agents "count everything" so that is what they did.

(Numbers below are just examples to show scale.)

Instead of a camouflaged win by 500 votes in a few counties, we have a "win" of 800,000 obviously fraudulent votes.

How is Team Biden going to dispute this? "We only asked for an extra 500 votes but we got 500,000" - we are honest cheaters....

Downstream at SCOTUS instead of presenting a loss by 500 plausible ballots, its 500,000 obviously fraudulent ballots.

Basically, Trump cheated the cheaters.

Points to consider:

  • there were those screwy results where Biden won but down ticket Republicans won. Why is that?

  • Election night there was a lot of military flights - who loves Trump is loyal and can keep secrets? Special Forces?

  • Remember the pause on election night in counting votes in 2016? Similar?

  • all the coordinated messages by the media before the election?

  • Q told us Biden was being hidden away and cheating was in play.

[–] corrbrick ago 

Love it! Lessons learned in 2016 and 2018, and applied with a vengeance in 2020. This handily explains just why the ballot fixers simply didn't fill in the straight Dem bubble.

[–] Blacksmith21 ago 

Awesome. Thanks!

load more comments ▼ (1 remaining)