Let’s see what you posted previously. That you have no actual interest in politics And that you only hope Trump wins because it’ll wind up people on here. how would you describe that? I call it trolling (at best) Others might call you a WUM
Im not sure what you would accept as evidence so here's a bit for starters... The following images are extras from an affidavit by Dr. Keshavarz-Nia, a 35-year highly qualified cyber-security expert for DIA, CIA, NSA, & DOD, which concludes that a man-in-the-middle cyber attack via operatives using USB memory cards was perpetrated with results being forwarded to servers in Frankfurt, Germany.
Funny how this seems not to have impressed 50 courts out of 51 up to and including SCOTUS. Anyway, electoral college day tomorrow. Then it will be time for the batshit-crazy conspiracy theorists to move on to their next challenge! Vaccine denial, anyone?
As someone who works in IT with an emphasis on IT security, let me just tell you how stupid this affidavit sounds. All the right words, just not necessarily in the right order.
https://leadstories.com/hoax-alert/...erences-several-debunked-election-hoaxes.html Just a fact check for you ....he also claims to have proof of fraud in county that doesn't exist https://www.businessinsider.com/sid...vote-problems-edison-county-2020-12?r=US&IR=T
So a star witness from a Lawyer so bats that Trump dropped her whilst still employing Guiliani. The ‘evidence’ has been laughed out of 50 courts, but there’s still people prepared to see it as credible. I just wish I had some magic beans for sale. Special MAGA beans; guaranteed to save from Covid and Brexit.
Chortle. That doesn't appear to make a great deal of sense, and doesn't refer to any evidence - it's just more baseless accusation. Putting something in the form of an affidavit doesn't mean it's true.
Im not sure having a BTec in Computer Studies and being allowed to load Norton antivirus software on your computer at work really qualifies you to appraise a testimony from a PhD qualified cybersecurity professional who has worked for the NSA and DOD.
If a sworn testimonial by a suitably qualified professional under threat of perjury doesn't qualify as 'evidence' what form of evidence would you consider acceptable?
Whoops....and there goes another one..... https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...n-georgia-election-fraud-hearings/ar-BB1bC0bh
OK @casual tyke Lets assume that the affidavit is absolutely bang on the money as an explanation of how the votes were miscounted. How do you explain that a manual recount of the same votes comes out with the same numbers? Did someone download Chinese software into the brains of the counters too?
I have a BSc and MSc in compsci and have worked in software engineering for 20 years with the last 5 as lead engineer overseeing the development with emphasis on the security considerations of software with over 7 million users worldwide. The affidavit makes no sense.
That would be laughed out of court (and probably was). First sentence - hearsay. Second sentence - speculation based on hearsay. Rest of it - assertion of items as fact without any evidence or explanation as to how the person acquired knowledge of/observed the issues. It's not worth the paper it's written on, whether it's signed as an affidavit or signed in crayon. They put any old nonsense in these affidavits because the threat of anyone ever being prosecuted for perjury is basically nil.
It was....2 weeks ago. I'm afraid Mr Casual Tyke doesn't seem to want to check his own ground breaking research....Google could be his friend if only he tried harder
It's the Norton antivirus comment that got me. What a joker. Cant believe this has been going on for 86 friggin pages. And cant believe I've just contributed to it. Pretty sure old casual by his own admission said on page two or so that he hadn't the foggiest clue what he was talking about. Now he's really getting into it and people are biting. This thread should be archived. Weve enough going on with UK politics after all.
Jesus after a hard day trying to locate unicorns I see this is still rumbling on. Trump lost, he got lost of votes. But he f*cking lost by quite a lot. Charlatans are just milking the educationally challenged to pay the bill and support Trump's other legal bills.