@no1marauder saidYou are still lying.
LMAO! That "audit" was shredded a year and a half ago as a shoddy propaganda piece done by people with no expertise in voting systems. That you absurdly dug it up doesn't warrant beating its poor dead carcass again.
You need to prove it to avoid losing this debate. Prove it was more than the opinions of disgruntled democrats. Keep in mind that these were the same democrats that falsely claimed releasing the report would compromise the elections only for us to find out it was really because they hated the result of the forensic analysis and didn't want anyone to know.
@metal-brain saidI showed in the other thread that the Judge who allowed the report to be released as part of an election fraud case later dismissed the case because there had been a real audit done which showed no major irregularities.
You are still lying.
You need to prove it to avoid losing this debate. Prove it was more than the opinions of disgruntled democrats. Keep in mind that these were the same democrats that falsely claimed releasing the report would compromise the elections only for us to find out it was really because they hated the result of the forensic analysis and didn't want anyone to know.
You lose, clown. Now admit it.
@no1marauder saidFrom the other thread:
I showed in the other thread that the Judge who allowed the report to be released as part of an election fraud case later dismissed the case because there had been a real audit done which showed no major irregularities.
You lose, clown. Now admit it.
""Determining that Bailey’s claims were moot, the judge noted the audit had already been conducted.
“I am saying that, as pled, the plaintiff’s request for an audit is not available,” Elsenheimer said. “[An audit] did occur and it appears to have been done so pursuant to authority.”
“Granting judgment to the plaintiff on its claims would have no practical legal effect as the audit available under article 2 section 4 1H has already been done,” the judge added. “There is no reason to do it twice as the plaintiff has no additional relief available there is no need to review the remaining counts it has brought.”
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/[WORD TOO LONG]/
Judge Elsenheimer is the one who allowed the public release of the report pursuant to the case he dismissed above. https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2020/12/14/michigan-judge-allows-release-report-antrim-county-voting/6537394002/
@no1marauder saidAll you have proven is that the judge did not allow another forensic analysis.
From the other thread:
""Determining that Bailey’s claims were moot, the judge noted the audit had already been conducted.
“I am saying that, as pled, the plaintiff’s request for an audit is not available,” Elsenheimer said. “[An audit] did occur and it appears to have been done so pursuant to authority.”
“Granting judgment to the plaintiff on its claims would ha ...[text shortened]... story/news/politics/2020/12/14/michigan-judge-allows-release-report-antrim-county-voting/6537394002/
That is all. Just what is it that you think you are proving?
@metal-brain saidWhat I said; that the report was laughed out of court, that a hand audit was done that showed no major irregularities (thus refuting the report) and that the judge therefore dismissed the case the plaintiff had sought to use the report in.
All you have proven is that the judge did not allow another forensic analysis.
That is all. Just what is it that you think you are proving?
@no1marauder saidYou are still lying. It was never laughed out of court.
What I said; that the report was laughed out of court, that a hand audit was done that showed no major irregularities (thus refuting the report) and that the judge therefore dismissed the case the plaintiff had sought to use the report in.
A hand audit is how they found out votes were flipped in Antrim County Michigan.
You keep forgetting I am from Michigan. You cannot lie and get away with it with me. STOP LYING!
1 edit
@metal-brain saidNo votes were "flipped" as you well know and the erroneous preliminary count was corrected long before any hand count was done.
You are still lying. It was never laughed out of court.
A hand audit is how they found out votes were flipped in Antrim County Michigan.
You keep forgetting I am from Michigan. You cannot lie and get away with it with me. STOP LYING!
You know this but keep insisting on lying about the facts. Why?
"Laughed our of court" is a colloquial term; it's quite obvious the judge found the report you keep relying on to have no evidentiary value.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidStop lying. Votes were flipped and you explained "why" they were flipped countless times. Human error is why the votes allegedly were flipped. Human error does not prove votes were not flipped, it explains "why" votes were flipped.
No votes were "flipped" as you well know and the erroneous preliminary count was corrected long before any hand count was done.
You know this but keep insisting on lying about the facts. Why?
"Laughed our of court" is a colloquial term; it's quite obvious the judge found the report you keep relying on to have no evidentiary value.
Thank you for acknowledging that you are aware of "why" votes were flipped in Antrim County MI. You are obviously trying to fool yourself because you are not fooling me.
" it's quite obvious the judge found the report you keep relying on to have no evidentiary value."
What is your source of information? It is not obvious until you prove it which you never did.
@metal-brain saidI'm not going to keep wasting time with your false claims about Antrim County. You know as well as I do that no votes were "flipped"; as the Michigan Department of State explained:
Stop lying. Votes were flipped and you explained "why" they were flipped countless times. Human error is why the votes allegedly were flipped. Human error does not prove votes were not flipped, it explains "why" votes were flipped.
Thank you for acknowledging that you are aware of "why" votes were flipped in Antrim County MI. You are obviously trying to fool yourself b ...[text shortened]... e."
What is your source of information? It is not obvious until you prove it which you never did.
"However, because the county did not update the media drives for the tabulators that did not have changes to races, those tabulators did not communicate properly with the County’s central election management system software when the county combined and reported unofficial results. Every tabulator recorded ballots correctly but the unofficial reports were erroneous.
These errors can always be identified and corrected because every tabulator prints a paper totals tape showing how the ballots for each race were counted. After discovering the error in reporting the unofficial results, the clerk worked diligently to report correct unofficial results by reviewing the printed totals tape on each tabulator and hand-entering the results for each race, for each precinct in the county.
Again, all ballots were properly tabulated. The user error affected only how the results from the tabulators communicated with the election management system for unofficial reporting."
https://www.michigan.gov/-/media/Project/Websites/sos/30lawens/Antrim_Fact_Check.pdf?rev=7a929e4d262e4532bbe574a3b82ddbcf
Your ignorant stubbornness aside, the report submitted by the plaintiff, which you soooooooooooooooooooooo heavily rely on, was disregarded by the Judge in the case it was submitted in because it was worthless. That is why he dismissed the case once Michigan showed a proper hand count was done. IF the report was correct, the hand count would have shown major errors in the official results, but no such irregularities occurred. Thus, no matter how many times you post about the report, it was "laughed out of court".
The real story here is how the extreme-right and people like MB get stuck on these false narratives.
Ignoring common sense, good reporting and experts on a subject.
What causes them to believe extremist media sources and obnoxiously pathetic conspiracy theories over anything else?
There has to be an underlying cause (other than me calling them paranoid incels, the whole time).
We’ve got them in the Netherlands too. Generally youny white males. Blind to the sexism and racism they spout, which comes from the same source or problem.
Something is seriously wrong.
@no1marauder saidDude, you just proved yourself wrong.
I'm not going to keep wasting time with your false claims about Antrim County. You know as well as I do that no votes were "flipped"; as the Michigan Department of State explained:
"However, because the county did not update the media drives for the tabulators that did not have changes to races, those tabulators did not communicate properly with the County’s central el ...[text shortened]... s occurred. Thus, no matter how many times you post about the report, it was "laughed out of court".
The Michigan Department of State did not deny votes were flipped. Heck, even dominion did not deny any votes were flipped. They just shifted the blame for their machines counting votes wrong on a person that failed to update software. You can blame that person all you want for the vote flipping, but all you are doing is acknowledging vote flipping by explaining why the votes were flipped.
The dominion voting machine counted the votes wrong in Antrim County MI. You can blame human error all you want, but all that does is explain why votes were flipped. You seem to want to believe that any wrong counts are not wrong unless they are not corrected. As I recall, you once argued that if votes are flipped and then flipped back to correct the mistake that is no flipping. 2 flips = 0 flips. So stupid!
Are you trying to change the definition of vote flipping? If a voting machine counts votes wrong that is vote flipping. Hand counting ballots does not eliminate vote flipping, it corrects vote flipping. Fortunately Michigan law requires a paper trail so vote flipping can be corrected, but only if the vote flipping is noticed. If it is not noticed it is not corrected. Not every state requires a paper trail, so vote flipping is unlikely to be caught in those states even if someone notices the count is not right like someone did in Michigan.
You are clearly self delusional because of political bias. You already admitted there was vote flipping and do not realize it. You think voting machines that count votes wrong is not vote flipping. By your twisted definition vote flipping does not exist. Even your democrat peers on here will not defend you because you are so obviously wrong. Usually sonhouse and suzi will hurl some insults and call me a liar, but even they see how deep you are in your own dung. You are denying the very existence of vote flipping, even when the flipping is caught. If it is not caught it the wrong count is accepted and never corrected.
You are making yourself look really stupid. Explain to us all again how the voting machines got the count wrong. I enjoy you explaining why votes got flipped and then explaining how they didn't get flipped. You are a superb example of cognitive dissonance. Everyone on here thinks you are crazy but you because you are contradicting yourself so badly.
1 edit
@shavixmir saidDefine vote flipping.
The real story here is how the extreme-right and people like MB get stuck on these false narratives.
Ignoring common sense, good reporting and experts on a subject.
What causes them to believe extremist media sources and obnoxiously pathetic conspiracy theories over anything else?
There has to be an underlying cause (other than me calling them paranoid incels, the wh ...[text shortened]... and racism they spout, which comes from the same source or problem.
Something is seriously wrong.
A wrong vote count is vote flipping. no1 wants to redefine the definition so vote flipping is impossible unless it is not caught. Do you want to do that as well?
Do you care to explain why most of Europe refuses to use voting machines?
2 edits
@metal-brain saidAs the article explained, the machines didn't "get the votes wrong". One more time:
Dude, you just proved yourself wrong.
The Michigan Department of State did not deny votes were flipped. Heck, even dominion did not deny any votes were flipped. They just shifted the blame for their machines counting votes wrong on a person that failed to update software. You can blame that person all you want for the vote flipping, but all you are doing is acknowledgi ...[text shortened]... ance. Everyone on here thinks you are crazy but you because you are contradicting yourself so badly.
"Again, all ballots were properly tabulated. The user error affected only how the results from the tabulators communicated with the election management system for unofficial reporting.""
Nor was a hand count of individual ballots required because:
" Every tabulator recorded ballots correctly but the unofficial reports were erroneous.
These errors can always be identified and corrected because every tabulator prints a paper totals tape showing how the ballots for each race were counted.
That you are too stupid and/or stubborn to admit this, doesn't change that fact.
@no1marauder saidYou didn't specify who or what got the votes wrong. You simply said there was no flipping. It does not matter who or what caused it for you to be wrong.
As the article explained, the machines didn't "get the votes wrong". One more time:
"Again, all ballots were properly tabulated. The user error affected only how the results from the tabulators communicated with the election management system for unofficial reporting.""
That you are too stupid and/or stubborn to admit this, doesn't change that fact.
Now you are admitting the votes were counted wrong by communication. Wrong vote counts are flipping. But feel free to explain why votes were flipped by whatever means you want. You still proved yourself wrong.
@no1marauder saidNo votes were flipped? Flipped by anyone or anything then.
No votes were "flipped" as you well know and the erroneous preliminary count was corrected long before any hand count was done.
You know this but keep insisting on lying about the facts. Why?
"Laughed our of court" is a colloquial term; it's quite obvious the judge found the report you keep relying on to have no evidentiary value.
Is a wrong vote count vote flipping? Yes or no?