You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–] 26556496? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Forgetting that code could have been modified the night before the election and then directly after back to original. Machines were connected to the internet and connections worldwide were noted.

[–] 26556916? 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

The actual voting machines are air gapped and not networked to the internet. The companies that run them have servers and connections but those are different.

[–] 26557708? ago 

It is easy to stuff a secondary wifi connector in there. Hence the demand for a declaratory judgement on seizure of equipment.

[–] 26557610? 1 point -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Except when they aren’t. Video and network prof of connected machines on voting day are going around.

They *should * be air gaoped from date of certification to months after election, but that would be logical and legal and reasonable and stuff.

[–] 26556507? [S] 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Yes true.

[–] 26556554? 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Also, documents scanned multiple times, usb files of fraudulent votes, illegal votes of dead, harvested votes, votes transferred by drag and drop from folder to folder, votes that were blank and modified by the machine, votes bought in bulk from China are all not covered by this. I think the forensics must be done, but also that not finding something can be pronounced as truth no fraud took place and the opposite is true.