Forensic Audit in Maricopa County, AZ

[CTex]

Thanks C Tex I am over the target!
But by doing so I become the target.

Sadly it has been that way for a while. Have the courage to speak up outside of the mainstream narrative and you will be cancelled.

 

[Garmel]

Sadly it has been that way for a while. Have the courage to speak up outside of the mainstream narrative and you will be cancelled.

Yep. You're Q Anon if you don't follow the MSM narrative.

 

[AC]

 

[Garmel]

"The Arizona Senate’s report that was released on Friday raises some serious questions regarding the 2020 election,” said Attorney General Mark Brnovich. “Arizonans can be assured our office will conduct a thorough review of the information we receive."

Litigation hold in effect.

 

[Mr. Deez]

"She's got big balls!"

Hard to believe that Bon Scott was trans-woke in the '70s.

 

[CTex]

"The Arizona Senate’s report that was released on Friday raises some serious questions regarding the 2020 election,” said Attorney General Mark Brnovich. “Arizonans can be assured our office will conduct a thorough review of the information we receive."

Litigation hold in effect.

The litigation hold letter being dated September 27th is interesting. The duty to preserve evidence begins when Litigation should be reasonably anticipated. Arguments could be made that a “reasonable” person could anticipate possible litigation going back to the beginning of the audit or possibly before. This becomes very important if Maricopa county makes claims that relevant personnel do not have emails or other communications going back to the timeframe of the election because their email server only maintains the last 30 or 60 days of email and auto-deletes at that point (Common in many organizations). It will be interesting to see how that plays out given the counties history of withholding evidence. Establishing exactly when a duty to preserve evidence began gets argued all the time in litigation. Any thoughts from you @Mr. Deez

 

[bystander]

Arizona Audit Backers Turn on Each Other After Recount Flop

The right-wingers who refuse to accept this audit are the same as The Crew and other Liberal fanatics. Republicans would do themselves a HUGE SERVICE to repudiate these zealots who continue to create discord with "facts" that have no evidence.

 

[Garmel]

Arizona Audit Backers Turn on Each Other After Recount Flop

The right-wingers who refuse to accept this audit are the same as The Crew and other Liberal fanatics. Republicans would do themselves a HUGE SERVICE to repudiate these zealots who continue to create discord with "facts" that have no evidence.

That article is 100% ********. The recount was not the center of this investigation, it was the illegal votes. MSM disinformation at its best.

 

[Seattle Husker]

That article is 100% ********. The recount was not the center of this investigation, it was the illegal votes. MSM disinformation at its best.

It's all MSM disinformation. You need to follow sites like Gateway Pundit for real information, right?. That site that as of yesterday was referencing a fake copy of the audit report in their coverage.

 

[Seattle Husker]

"The Arizona Senate’s report that was released on Friday raises some serious questions regarding the 2020 election,” said Attorney General Mark Brnovich. “Arizonans can be assured our office will conduct a thorough review of the information we receive."

Litigation hold in effect.

Agreed. Hold as of 9/27? My guess is that this goes nowhere and is primarily political posturing. Karen Fann couldn't find anything but "irregularities" that may or may not be fraud so they threw the hot potato over to the AG's office.

 

[Garmel]

It's all MSM disinformation. You need to follow sites like Gateway Pundit for real information, right?. That site that as of yesterday was referencing a fake copy of the audit report in their coverage.

Because I know what the auditors have said and what their goals are. A recount doesn't prove anything one way or another. If you understood what a forensic audit is (which you obviously don't) you would know this. That's how I know the article is BS.

 

[bystander]

Because I know what the auditors have said and what their goals are. A recount doesn't prove anything one way or another. If you understood what a forensic audit is (which you obviously don't) you would know this. That's how I know the article is BS.

The article was posted on Yahoo. Not that it gives it more or less credibility.

 

[Garmel]

The article was posted on Yahoo. Not that it gives it more or less credibility.

I'm sorry if I sounded too harsh toward you but the article is trash. Recounts don't prove anything because possible illegal votes are counted as well.

 

[Seattle Husker]

LOL! In the "formal

Because I know what the auditors have said and what their goals are. A recount doesn't prove anything one way or another. If you understood what a forensic audit is (which you obviously don't) you would know this. That's how I know the article is BS.

Let's talk about what the "auditors" have said for a moment. On Friday, Karen Fann said in the faux hearing that the goal was not to decertify the election. If you watched the video you'd see that Wendy Rogers was one of 6 people in the frame sitting against the wall. Both Fann and Rogers participated in a rally that evening in which the theme was "continue the audit" and "decertify" the election. Yes, Fann shared the stage with leaders and a crowd whose stated goal is to decertify the election. No different than what Fann stated on those secret calls during Maricopa's counting, what she states in those faux hearings is NOT what she's stating privately or in rallies.

 

[bystander]

I'm sorry if I sounded too harsh toward you but the article is trash. Recounts don't prove anything because possible illegal votes are counted as well.

It's cool. I should stay out of this anyway. I'm not as versed on it as you guys are.

 

[Garmel]

LOL! In the "formal



Let's talk about what the "auditors" have said for a moment. On Friday, Karen Fann said in the faux hearing that the goal was not to decertify the election. If you watched the video you'd see that Wendy Rogers was one of 6 people in the frame sitting against the wall. Both Fann and Rogers participated in a rally that evening in which the theme was "continue the audit" and "decertify" the election. Yes, Fann shared the stage with leaders and a crowd whose stated goal is to decertify the election. No different than what Fann stated on those secret calls during Maricopa's counting, what she states in those faux hearings is NOT what she's stating privately or in rallies.

Wait, when did Fann become an auditor? Nice goalpost move because this has zero to do with what we were talking about.

You don't even know what an auditor is and you don't know what a forensic audit is . Please, do me a favor and don't respond to me anymore. Your BS is testing my patience.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Wait, when did Fann become an auditor?

Is your position that the goals of the sponsor of the audit have nothing to do with the actual audit/results? Is so, this is more of a **** show than Hollywood could ever dream up.

 

[Seattle Husker]

MSM disinformation at its best.

This needs to be put in context. @Garmel appears to be an avid consumer of blog sites like Gateway Pundit and Epoch Times. He's cited articles from these cites to justify his positions. Here are a few posts where he shows he'd getting his information.

In fact, the lowly Gateway Pundit (and a few other sites) said that the team recovered the files in this article here. Look at the date. This article is BEFORE Maricopa supposedly pointed it out to the auditors. On here 6721 and I discuss this on posts 329 and 330, before Maricopa's report. The team has confirmed it.

Data Files Reportedly Deleted in Arizona Before Providing Machines to Senate Auditors May Have Been Recovered by the Audit Team

There was an older gentleman that worked with Bennett that had election experience. I don't remember his name but he did a few interviews along with Bennett on Gateway Pundit. Logan did say that he did work in GA and PA elections before CN, but I can't back that statement up with documentation. There were people who were volunteer observers during the audit who had past election experience from what I read. Cotton had auditing experience but no election, that's true. Like I said, even without the fraud you conveniently ignore the **** show Maricopa ran, while the worst you can find with these auditors is that they almost used the wrong pens one time. The Board had 168,000 bleed throughs because they used the wrong paper stock. The Board can't even produce chain of custody documents and you want to call the auditors amateurs?

Now, when Gateway Pundit is shown to be a relay point for misinformation he continues projecting that on others. Others are misinformed because they consume reputable, albeit not mistake proof, media sources. It's always pointing the finger rather than the thumb. OTHER media is "fake", even in the face of the documented proof of the sources he consumes using a fake audit report.

If that seems like a frontal assault it's because it documented proof that the sources feeding @Garmel's views are exactly what he's claiming of "MSM".

 

[Garmel]

This needs to be put in context. @Garmel appears to be an avid consumer of blog sites like Gateway Pundit and Epoch Times. He's cited articles from these cites to justify his positions. Here are a few posts where he shows he'd getting his information.





Now, when Gateway Pundit is shown to be a relay point for misinformation he continues projecting that on others. Others are misinformed because they consume reputable, albeit not mistake proof, media sources. It's always pointing the finger rather than the thumb. OTHER media is "fake", even in the face of the documented proof of the sources he consumes using a fake audit report.

If that seems like a frontal assault it's because it documented proof that the sources feeding @Garmel's views are exactly what he's claiming of "MSM".

Actually, I rarely use The Epoch Times or Gateway Pundit as my sources unless it's been linked from somewhere else. If a story that I know is true I'll use it no mater where it comes from, even the MSM. Over the past 5 years you've made a complete *** of yourself more than any other poster on here due to being wrong. I've been wrong but nowhere as much as you have. What does that say about your sources? I realize you're trying now to rip me a new one because I practically destroyed you because I showed everyone here just how uninformed you are but please keep making a fool of yourself. It's entertaining. Summer of Love, Part Zillion is in your future.

 

[Seattle Husker]

Actually, I rarely use The Epoch Times or Gateway Pundit as my sources unless it's been linked from somewhere else.

That's fair because you rarely post your sources. Claims are your specialty void of evidence. You scream "MSM is fake" while rarely citing your own so I can only go off the limited posts where you point to the sites without any linkage.

Your first claim of getting info from Epoch Times was last Friday so I can only confirm you've been there once.

If a story that I know is true I'll use it no mater where it comes from, even the MSM. Over the past 5 years you've made a complete *** of yourself more than any other poster on here due to being wrong. I've been wrong but nowhere as much as you have. What does that say about your sources? I realize you're trying now to rip me a new one because I practically destroyed you because I showed everyone here just how uninformed you are but please keep making a fool of yourself. It's entertaining. Summer of Love, Part Zillion is in your future.

How do you "know it's true"? Because you want to believe it? Are Gateway Pundit's view of the audit report true, the ones referencing a fake report?

On my posting history, I have >10k posts on West Mall. Clearly you have ample evidence to show that I'm "wrong" so often. To date, like most of what you post, you have never shown any evidence. It's like you want to comment and claim you know that truth without every being called to put up or shut up. Time to show you have a semblance of research skills rather than simply another **** talker commenting on things you are ignorant of.

 

[Sangre Naranjada]

A recount doesn't prove anything one way or another. If you understood what a forensic audit is (which you obviously don't) you would know this.

Here is a simple analogy, not that I expect our mind numbed robots on the left to care.
If you did a job for me and I paid you $2500 in cash (our agreed amount), mixed small bills, and you counted it and confirmed the bills added up to $2500, would you be happy?

What if, after counting, I then told you some of those bills were counterfeits, should you still be happy? You could recount them all day long, and it would still add up to $2500. But until you ferreted out which of those bills was counterfeited you would never know how much money you were actually paid.

The forensic audit is ferreting out the counterfeit bills.

 

[Garmel]

Here is a simple analogy, not that I expect our mind numbed robots on the left to care.
If you did a job for me and I paid you $2500 in cash (our agreed amount), mixed small bills, and you counted it and confirmed the bills added up to $2500, would you be happy?

What if, after counting, I then told you some of those bills were counterfeits, should you still be happy? You could recount them all day long, and it would still add up to $2500. But until you ferreted out which of those bills was counterfeited you would never know how much money you were actually paid.

The forensic audit is ferreting out the counterfeit bills.

Exactly

 

[Seattle Husker]

Here is a simple analogy, not that I expect our mind numbed robots on the left to care.
If you did a job for me and I paid you $2500 in cash (our agreed amount), mixed small bills, and you counted it and confirmed the bills added up to $2500, would you be happy?

What if, after counting, I then told you some of those bills were counterfeits, should you still be happy? You could recount them all day long, and it would still add up to $2500. But until you ferreted out which of those bills was counterfeited you would never know how much money you were actually paid.

The forensic audit is ferreting out the counterfeit bills.

Have any bills been definitively shown to be counterfeit? So far, they simply said [paraphrasing] we've spent $6M and we can say XXX of bills might or might not be counterfeit. From that some are saying see...there are counterfeit bills!

 

[CTex]

Here is a simple analogy, not that I expect our mind numbed robots on the left to care.
If you did a job for me and I paid you $2500 in cash (our agreed amount), mixed small bills, and you counted it and confirmed the bills added up to $2500, would you be happy?

What if, after counting, I then told you some of those bills were counterfeits, should you still be happy? You could recount them all day long, and it would still add up to $2500. But until you ferreted out which of those bills was counterfeited you would never know how much money you were actually paid.

The forensic audit is ferreting out the counterfeit bills.

Bingo! Perfect analogy!

 

[OUBubba]

Have any bills been definitively shown to be counterfeit? So far, they simply said [paraphrasing] we've spent $6M and we can say XXX of bills might or might not be counterfeit. From that some are saying see...there are counterfeit bills!

They may as well be using magic 8 ball phraseology. Magic 8-Ball - Wikipedia

 

[Seattle Husker]

They may as well be using magic 8 ball phraseology. Magic 8-Ball - Wikipedia

Imagine the receiver of the $2500 Bills assuming some were counterfeit and demanding you proved they were not counterfeit. Let's say the receiver decided to test the bills with black lights, paper samples worrying they were "Chinese made" or other assorted tests. Even when the receiver couldn't prove they were counterfeit they still stress the potential they were counterfeit. Most would say the receiver of the $2500 was "crazy" and never do business with them again. Just carrying that "simple analogy" to it's fitting conclusion.

 

[OUBubba]

We’re any of the counterfeit bills made of bamboo? What happened to the hunt for bamboo? What about the Italian votes from the Vatican. LOL

 

[Garmel]

We’re any of the counterfeit bills made of bamboo? What happened to the hunt for bamboo? What about the Italian votes from the Vatican. LOL

Kinematic report is next. Probably no bamboo but if the witnesses are correct many of the ballots will be on copy paper.

 

[Garmel]

We’re any of the counterfeit bills made of bamboo? What happened to the hunt for bamboo? What about the Italian votes from the Vatican. LOL

What about the three Maricopa workers who were caught deleting election files? You election fraud deniers are finished and you guys don't even realize it. LOL!

 

[OUBubba]

What about the three Maricopa workers who were caught deleting election files? You election fraud deniers are finished and you guys don't even realize it. LOL!

You said I was finished last Friday. Then a mea culpa after it turned out Biden won more votes.