Rudy Giuliani Drops Bombshell, Says "Dominion" Whistleblowers Are Coming Forward

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

Hope is one thing, he's shilling delusion at this point.

But here's the thing: It's really not delusion. Not completely anyway. We already know that there's funny business with the rules and how the elections were executed -- from pre-election rule changes that weakened (or eliminated) safeguards, to dead voters to observers removed/denied -- which do allow for invalid ballots to slip through. At this point, no one is denying that, but just that it would be enough to change the outcome of the election.

The delusion appears to be that Rudy or Team Trump has any real evidence that would change the election results, and that they can or will do anything real about it.

The doubt/suspicion in people's minds is real and valid. The fraud is real. That's not the delusion.

originally posted by: Boadicea
We already know that there's funny business with the rules and how the elections were executed -- from pre-election rule changes that weakened (or eliminated) safeguards, to dead voters to observers removed/denied -- which do allow for invalid ballots to slip through.

When these go to court and are determined to have occurred you'll get my concurrence. This has not happened at all at this point.

originally posted by: Klassified
a reply to: Boadicea

It is not uncommon for a company's representatives to be present when using their software for an important task such as an election, and to check internal settings during the process.

I guess I can see that... but then I would expect that they would be there in that capacity? Rather than citizen observers?

The reps could have easily seen what was going on if they wanted to and tweaked settings accordingly.

So, they could have corrected software issues they observed?

And/or they could fix the vote for one candidate or the other?

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

When these go to court and are determined to have occurred you'll get my concurrence. This has not happened at all at this point.

Fair enough... but, for example, there is no doubt that election rules were changed by election officials contrary to the laws established by the legislature. Technically, illegal. We know that rules for verifying valid ballots have been relaxed and weakened and bypassed -- all of which allows for invalid votes to slip through.

We know it could happen, we know it almost definitely did happen, we just don't know the extent... if it was 10 votes or 10,000 votes.

So while a ruling from a court of law would be definitive, unless and until then (and thereafter!), the court of public opinion will have it's own say in the matter.

originally posted by: Boadicea
Fair enough... but, for example, there is no doubt that election rules were changed by election officials contrary to the laws established by the legislature.

Links?

a reply to: Boadicea

I guess I can see that... but then I would expect that they would be there in that capacity? Rather than citizen observers?

Officially yes.

So, they could have corrected software issues they observed?

They could adjust almost anything that didn't require a system restart. Fixing things on the fly has gotten a lot better with time, though still not perfect.

And/or they could fix the vote for one candidate or the other?

Yes. This could be done on the fly for every machine across the country using the same software, and probably from any terminal. The capability is there for firmware/software updates and fixes, but obviously it can be taken advantage of as well.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Boadicea
Fair enough... but, for example, there is no doubt that election rules were changed by election officials contrary to the laws established by the legislature.

Links?

Here's one such ruling in AZ where the Maricopa County Recorder was ordered to follow state law:

Supreme Court bars Fontes from sending mistake instructions to voters

Nonetheless, Fontes and Maricopa County “exceeded their authority” by explicitly instructing voters to cross out their mistakes if they voted for the wrong candidate, the Supreme Court concluded. State law and the state’s election procedures manual, which carries the force of law, instruct county recorders to tell voters to request a new ballot if they make such mistakes.

“While election statutes have changed, the permissible voter instructions … have not,” Chief Justice Robert Brutinel wrote in the court’s order.

And he still refused to follow the Supreme Court order:

Fontes Ignores Supreme Court Ruling, Advises Voters To Cross Out Errors

Despite being ordered to refrain from instructing voters to cross out errors on their ballots by the Arizona Supreme Court, Maricopa County Recorder Adrian Fontes is doing just that on Twitter. Showing contempt for the Court, Fontes is advising voters to ignore the “lawyers” and continue crossing out errors rather than obtaining a new ballot.

In other states, the issue has been accepting mail-in ballots past election day (with and/or without a postmark prior to/on Election Day).

a reply to: Klassified

Yes. This could be done on the fly for every machine across the country using the same software, and probably from any terminal. The capability is there for firmware/software updates and fixes, but obviously it can be taken advantage of as well.

This ^^^ is the kind of stuff I would expect Dominion whistleblowers to address. Something having to do with the software, or something about how the ballots were processed by the software.

Maybe I just don't understand the protocol well enough, or maybe Rudy misspoke when calling them "observers," but this is what I was expecting when I first saw the headline that Dominion whistleblowers were cooperating.

We'll see what happens.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Boadicea
I'm not sure yet... probably as long as it takes for him to prove himself? Or to hang himself???

He's a liability at this point, the more he talks the less credible everything he says becomes. He's become a sad and pathetic caricature.

Well, when you have 95% of media painting you in a horrible light, that'll hapen... People quickly forgot all the good he's done over the years, and just assume he's some shell of the man he used to be, and is just a corrupt Trump henchman..

a reply to: Boadicea

This was obviously caught, the person in question held in contempt but more importantly, does not appreciably effect the outcome. This is not a sign of massive fraud, this is a sign of one rogue person not following the law or the courts.

a reply to: Boadicea


Stop your messing around (ah-ah-ah)
Better think of your future (ah-ah-ah)
Time you straighten right out (ah-ah-ah)
Creating problems in town (ah-ah-ah)

Rudy
A message to you, Rudy
A message to you

Stop your fooling around (ah-ah-ah)
Time you straighten right out (ah-ah-ah)
Better think of your future (ah-ah-ah)
Else you'll wind up in jail (ah-ah-ah)

Rudy
A message to you, Rudy
A message to you

Stop your messing around (ah-ah-ah)
Better think of your future (ah-ah-ah)
Time you straighten right out (ah-ah-ah)
Creating problems in town (ah-ah-ah)

Rudy
A message to you, Rudy
A message to you, Rudy
Oh, it's a message to you, Rudy
Yeah, it's a message to you, Rudy
Yeah, it's a message to you, Rudy
Oh, it's a message to you, Rudy
Yeah, it's a message to you, Rudy
Oh, it's a message to you, Rudy

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Boadicea

This was obviously caught, the person in question held in contempt but more importantly, does not appreciably effect the outcome. This is not a sign of massive fraud, this is a sign of one rogue person not following the law or the courts.

I can’t imagine voters being disenfranchised — by doing what they’re told to do by an official recorder.

originally posted by: jhn7537
Well, when you have 95% of media painting you in a horrible light, that'll hapen...

When 100% of what you're doing lately is cringe worthy and pathetic it's not the media's fault you look like a buffoon.

a reply to: jhn7537

Well, when you have 95% of media painting you in a horrible light, that'll hapen... People quickly forgot all the good he's done over the years, and just assume he's some shell of the man he used to be, and is just a corrupt Trump henchman.

Rudy isn't completely blameless in this regard. Rudy is definitely showboating and milking every release of information for all it's worth and that usually isn't much. He did the same with Ukraine. Lots of smoke... but no fire yet.

I'm ready to believe the worst -- and have been! Since long before Trump. But Rudy isn't getting the job done. So yes, I do question his true motives and intentions.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus
a reply to: Boadicea

...does not appreciably effect the outcome.

Not affecting the outcome is not the same as not happening at all -- which is my point. And as has been pointed out ad nauseum around here, ballot counters could just as easily use the same means to "correct" ballots that did not vote for the proper candidates... and keeping observers/challengers out of the counting room would mean no one would ever know.

This is not a sign of massive fraud, this is a sign of one rogue person not following the law or the courts.

It's not proof of massive fraud. But it does expose a weakness -- a fault even -- in the process which allows for and enables fraud to take place on a massive level.

originally posted by: Boadicea
It's not proof of massive fraud. But it does expose a weakness -- a fault even -- in the process which allows for and enables fraud to take place on a massive level.

It does no such thing, this was a very isolated incident.

a reply to: Boadicea

How is the fraud real? Seriously where is your source? I have more proof that Trump impacted the election by screwing with the postal service than you have on any points. Extending deadlines for mail-in ballots.. That is fraud? How so? It is the states rights to do so. It would be like me arguing about gerrymandering. Currently that is legal right?

Allowing mail in ballots by a certain date.. How does that screw with anything? It only screws with the election because you don't want them. There is no fraud here, the only reason you think there is fraud is because your horse lost the race.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

Liberals were sharing memes of guy's holding a baby saying I'm a marine who am I. She had little to know support and what support she had she turned off with all the commercials.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

It does no such thing, this was a very isolated incident.

Of course it does! And this goes to back to the totality of circumstance as well.

First, the county recorder refuses to follow the laws as set by the legislature... "isolated incident"

Then, illegal instructions are officially given... "isolated incident"

Then, observers from one team are not allowed to observe -- "isolated incident"

Then, ballots are "corrected" with no way to verify who "corrected" the ballot... "isolated incident"

Then invalid ballots are included in the count with valid ballots -- "isolated incident"

All of these are "isolated" incidents happening in succession (and perhaps coordination) that creates a weakness in the entire process which can allow for massive fraud and which can affect the outcome of a race.

Did it happen? We don't know. Could it happen? Yes.

a reply to: Boadicea

This case was factual, the rest of the stuff you're laying out has not be proven in court.