Forensic Audit in Maricopa County, AZ

Horn6721 said:
Garm
We see it here on WM
Click to expand...

Most here may not believe but are at least willing to listen. There are many republican voters (mostly RINOs or sometimes DeSantis voters) that are zealots to the purity of our elections and believe the court cases against Trump are real.
 
Last edited:
Mr. Deez said:
Have either of you guys read the court's opinion and the applicable law?
Click to expand...

I read the one page opinion above in my post.

Basically says that having unlimited access might lead to substantial harm.

Goes with the confidential and privacy ******** when on election night every Tom, Dick, and Harry at the place they're counting and checking sigs have already seen the voters' info. A few more people (3-5, maybe few more) to inspect the signatures wouldn't hurt anyone.

An excuse to keep transparency away from the voter.
 
Last edited:
Garmel said:
I read the one page opinion above in my post.

Basically says that having unlimited access might lead to substantial harm.

Goes with the confidential and privacy ******** when on election night every Tom, Dick, and Harry at the place they're counting and checking sigs have already seen the voters' info. A few more people (3-5, maybe few more) to inspect the signatures wouldn't hurt anyone.

An excuse to keep transparency away from the voter.
Click to expand...

Hard to dismiss the privacy concerns. If they turned them over, essentially the signatures would become public record. What they need is a remedy that balances both interests - perhaps some sort of court-appointed master to review the signatures at issue.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Hard to dismiss the privacy concerns. If they turned them over, essentially the signatures would become public record. What they need is a remedy that balances both interests - perhaps some sort of court-appointed master to review the signatures at issue.
Click to expand...

I agree that would help. However, with dozens of people who have already seen these ballots I'm not sure what privacy is really left. Would the amount of people to check the sigs really make that much difference? :idk:
 
Garmel said:
I agree that would help. However, with dozens of people who have already seen these ballots I'm not sure what privacy is really left. Would the amount of people to check the sigs really make that much difference? :idk:
Click to expand...

If it becomes public record, anybody can see them. It's why I never let my clients give their Social Security numbers during depositions. Most likely, nobody would look and commit identity theft, but anyone could look. The probability of identity theft was pretty low, but the potential for it was very high and impossible to cure. Again, I'd suggest a remedy that respects both the privacy interest of voters and allows for a reasonable examination since there has been reason to question them.
 
Mr. Deez said:
If it becomes public record, anybody can see them. It's why I never let my clients give their Social Security numbers during depositions. Most likely, nobody would look and commit identity theft, but anyone could look. The probability of identity theft was pretty low, but the potential for it was very high and impossible to cure. Again, I'd suggest a remedy that respects both the privacy interest of voters and allows for a reasonable examination since there has been reason to question them.
Click to expand...

Look at the judge's ruling. He says it's a public record that we aren't allowed to see.
 
Garmel said:
Look at the judge's ruling. He says it's a public record that we aren't allowed to see.
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that "public" doesn't always mean that something that is available to the public to broadly see. It also means a record that is held by the government. For example, your tax return is a public record in the sense that a public agency (the IRS) holds it, but can everybody see it? No.
 
Mr. Deez said:
Keep in mind that "public" doesn't always mean that something that is available to the public to broadly see. It also means a record that is held by the government. For example, your tax return is a public record in the sense that a public agency (the IRS) holds it, but can everybody see it? No.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know. However, this would only be opened to a small group of people checking signatures, not the whole general public. As I said there are a lot of people who have already seen these sigs.
 
Garmel said:
Deez, Abe explains this better than I am. You can't convince me that some corrupt BS isn't happening.

Click to expand...

They use the voting rights act to prevent oversight, citing potential voter intimidation due to racism. Patently absurd.
 
Gee, another election thrown into the trash can. It makes you mad when you look at what Kari Lake has had to go through when her case is a slam dunk.

 
To this day Pennsylvania still shows it had 90,000 more votes than voters in the 2020 presidential election. If it's some kind of mistake it still hasn't been fixed in 3 years. Here's an American Thinker article from a professional auditor who looked at info gathered from a data analysis group who examined PA's voter rolls.

 
Last edited:
Horn6721 said:
Garm
This election in Caddo Parish Louisiana mirrors so many faux election results.
Of course it was the Demx
What I don't get is how many Demx in how many elections think they can steal elections.This wasn't even good fraud
Judge makes ruling in Caddo Parish sheriff recount lawsuit; Whitehorn appeals decision
Click to expand...

That's also just what's been caught. I'm willing to bet there's a lot more fraud if they checked the signatures in that election. Ballot harvesting is out of control.

It's not just the dems. The McCainite republicans in Arizona are fixing elections and the McCainite judges are protecting them.
 
Yep. The Georgia 2020 election fraud is about to be exposed. Big hearings on Dec 19th which will show it all.
 
Last edited:
Garmel said:
Yep. The Georgia 2020 election fraud is about to be exposed. Big hearings on Dec 19th which will show it all.
Click to expand...

Exposed is one thing. It's a good thing. But it won't matter if those who are guilty aren't thrown in jail for a very long time. Not just one guy either. Dozens or even hundreds going up to high levels of government must go to jail. Otherwise Dems will shrug their shoulders and keep tearing down America.
 
Monahorns said:
Exposed is one thing. It's a good thing. But it won't matter if those who are guilty aren't thrown in jail for a very long time. Not just one guy either. Dozens or even hundreds going up to high levels of government must go to jail. Otherwise Dems will shrug their shoulders and keep tearing down America.
Click to expand...

No matter the proof the courts aren't going to touch it in certain states. I wish it wasn't the case but that's the way it is.

Hell, you can see Ruby Freeman in the back of that one video feeding the same ballots into the voting machine over and over and she won part of a 150M dollar settlement against Rudy today. The system is effed up.
 
This might have scared Georgia more than the 17,000. How could these cowards defend this? They can't talk and bS their way out of it so they cancelled it. Let's hide the truth from the public is theri motto.

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top