Why Are Democrats So Afraid of Election Audits? By Charlie Kirk

[Cyber Liberty]

Of course the name does not matter.  However auditing is a distinct competence, with particular right ways to do things.  These audits ideally would be conducted by people who understand both elections and data, but even with that competence knowing how to audit is another piece of it.

I'm not saying the chosen auditors lack this understanding.

Leftists mock us daily for the choice of our shoes, so it's not surprising they would make fun of the Cyber Ninjas.  What is disappointing is people who should know better ape the liberal line on it.

[BassWrangler]

Leftists mock us daily for the choice of our shoes, so it's not surprising they would make fun of the Cyber Ninjas.  What is disappointing is people who should know better ape the liberal line on it.

Politics is as much PR and media relations as anything else. The name is a dumb choice, and doesn't speak highly for the intelligence of the founder of that firm.

[Hoodat]

Is CyberNinjas an independent, dis-interested party that is an accredited accounting firm?  If not, their findings cannot be taken at face value. 

The same can be said of Maricopa County.

[Smokin Joe]

Politics is as much PR and media relations as anything else. The name is a dumb choice, and doesn't speak highly for the intelligence of the founder of that firm.

Us old farts might look at it that way, but the marketing is likely aimed at a younger client group.
Name recognition is a huge part of that, and Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe might not have the same sticking power with a younger target market.

[BassWrangler]

Us old farts might look at it that way, but the marketing is likely aimed at a younger client group.
Name recognition is a huge part of that, and Dewey, Cheatham, and Howe might not have the same sticking power with a younger target market.

Last I checked, it wasn't the younger crowd writing the checks at Fortune 500 companies. Plus who wants to tell a customer "yeah, we have our security routinely audited by 'Cyber Ninjas'". I mean it sounds like something some 18 year old web dude would come up with.

[roamer_1]

It was in your reply #22 on this thread :

That is more in how you took it... My intent was to flip the accusation thrown at @goatprairie ... That his holding out was somehow improper or inane... To turn it around, the only way the whole stolen election thing works is if Republicans never get elected again... Because obviously, if the Dems did indeed commit fraud and figure out how to get away with it, That would be the likely way it would go. So Republicans winning in the midterm and the next general would speak against massive undetectable fraud today. Were that to reasonably occur, the goat would be the GOAT, calling that right from the start.

And that the right leaning press has been caught lying through their teeth requires no bellwether. A liar is a liar. How do you trust anything else he has said? That is a call to verify everything, not take anything reported as fact... That merely enforces my previous position, which has always been toward verity, and the proof thereof...

But as you say:

We don't need to get into a semantic spiral my friend, we both distrust media with an axe to grind, we both want the truth, and we both support audits to get the truth.

 

[DefiantMassRINO]

It would be improper for Maricopa County audit their own ballots.  Ideally, that would be done by an outside, independent, dis-interested, accredited auditing firm without conflicts of interests.

There are a couple of issues:

- auditing the ballot counts
- auditing the legalities and potential illegalities of election rule changes made outside the states' legislative processes and/or states' constitutional processes.

Unfortunately both issues would subject to a drawn-out resolution of findings, appeals, and eventual state or Federal supreme court adjudications by accountants and lawyers who bill by the hour.

Pursuing state election reforms in a manner consistent with state constitutions and state and Federal civil rights protections is a valid way to proceed in the leap up to the 2022 and 2024 elections.

These state law modifications could include a state requirement for a post-election audits to validate that all applicable state laws, policies, and procedures were followed and while preserving the state and Federal civil rights protections applicable at the time ballots were distributed and collected.

At no point should any ballot be in the possession of any party other than those authorized by state elections laws, presumably the voter and an agent of the government (local, county, state, US Postal service.)  3rd party ballot harvesting is rife with opportunities for impropriety.  All ballot distribution, collection, and counting processes should maintain paper records to act as backup to any automated processes.  State election laws should also cover contingincies that may interfere with a voter's access to a ballot - acts of nature, God, and government that necessitate the legal declaration of state of emergency by state government officials.

[Hoodat]

It would be improper for Maricopa County audit their own ballots.

Knowing what we now know about Maricopa County, it was improper for them to count them in the first place.

[Cyber Liberty]

Pursuing state election reforms in a manner consistent with state constitutions and state and Federal civil rights protections is a valid way to proceed in the leap up to the 2022 and 2024 elections.

These state law modifications could include a state requirement for a post-election audits to validate that all applicable state laws, policies, and procedures were followed and while preserving the state and Federal civil rights protections applicable at the time ballots were distributed and collected.

At no point should any ballot be in the possession of any party other than those authorized by state elections laws, presumably the voter and an agent of the government (local, county, state, US Postal service.)  3rd party ballot harvesting is rife with opportunities for impropriety.  All ballot distribution, collection, and counting processes should maintain paper records to act as backup to any automated processes.  State election laws should also cover contingincies that may interfere with a voter's access to a ballot - acts of nature, God, and government that necessitate the legal declaration of state of emergency by state government officials.

That part I highlighted is precisely the reason the balloting in Maricopa County is getting a full Audit.  It's definitely NOT to reverse the election, there is no Constitutional provision for that, yet the Leftists keep screaming "It's all about Tumpy!!!"

No, for me it's about my vote only counting as 75% of a vote, while votes for Sloe Joe counted for 125%.  I am the injured party here, not Donald Trump.  As you can imagine, the "All about Tumpy!" cry really pisses me off.

[Hoodat]

No, for me it's about my vote only counting as 75% of a vote, while votes for Sloe Joe counted for 125%.  I am the injured party here, not Donald Trump.  As you can imagine, the "All about Tumpy!" cry really pisses me off.

Word.  Same with me here in Georgia.  My vote was effectively cancelled out with a ballot cast in violation of Georgia election law - one that should have been disqualified from the election process.

[Sled Dog]

Sure, the rats cheat if possible. But there's zero proof that enough cheating went on to lose Trump the election.

Then you have no valid reason to whine about the audit that's going to show otherwise.

WE, the Americans, SAW the cheat right there on TV in real time.

There's no doubt that it happened.

Which is why the Rodents want to interfere with the audit, just like they interfered with the election.

[Sled Dog]

Yep, we saw all that. Unfortunately, none of it is to be found in a court record yet.

Doesn't have to be in "court record" to be conclusive evidence of the most massive vote fraud operation in history.

The courts aren't the final arbiter of what is and what is not fact.

The American people are, and the American people have determined that Trump won the election of 2020.

[Sled Dog]

And until all which exists is entered into a court of law, it isn't evidence of record.
That is the magic transition which has not been accomplished.
What we have has no more force of law than the results of a congressional investigation that are not followed up on by an enforcement authority.

And that is frustrating, but it is so.

No, it is not so.

What purpose does taking this to court serve the people of the United States?   

Will a court suddenly proclaim that Alzheimer Joe is not "the president"?

No.

If a court did make such a proclamation...so the eff what?   

None of the mechanisms for securing an honest election laid out in the Constitution allow any action AFTER the usurper is installed.

So...NONE of the evidence regarding the theft of the Electoral College in 2020 will ever see the inside of a courtroom.  Not now, not in the future.

That does not change the fact that the Rodents stole the election and that you're assisting the Rodents by pretending only the courts can adjudicate the matter...when the courts cannot do anything now that the coup has been effected.

Why do you seek to assist the Rodents?

[Sled Dog]

Indeed. But when you have lost journalism, you won't ever know until it is way too late. And when law is substituted by conviction on twitter... well...

You support the side of twitter that acclaimed the usurpation by Senile Joe.

...well....

[Sled Dog]

Ideally, audits are conducted by independent, dis-interested, accredited accounting firms without conflicts of interest.

Is CyberNinjas an independent, dis-interested party that is an accredited accounting firm?  If not, their findings cannot be taken at face value.  They would need to be verified by another audit by another independent, dis-interested, accredited auditor with no conflicts of interest.

If the audit determines that the vote in Maricopa county was dishonest, it was an honest audit.

Life is so easy as a real American.

Just like when the Rodents tried to steal Floriduh! in 2000.   The Rodents wanted to audit any audit that disagreed with their effort to steal the election.

Why would ANYONE believe ANYTHING a Rodent has to say about the outcome of a disputed election?   

Real Americans used their EYES on election night and SAW the steal live and real.

[HoustonSam]

What purpose does taking this to court serve the people of the United States?   

Will a court suddenly proclaim that Alzheimer Joe is not "the president"?

No.

If a court did make such a proclamation...so the eff what?   

None of the mechanisms for securing an honest election laid out in the Constitution allow any action AFTER the usurper is installed.

So...NONE of the evidence regarding the theft of the Electoral College in 2020 will ever see the inside of a courtroom.  Not now, not in the future.

That's a good call @Sled Dog; the judiciary doesn't have any tool in its toolbox to change anything about the election of 2020, so they're not going to spend time thinking about it.  And that means a legal standard of evidence is no longer relevant.  What's relevant now is a persuasive standard.

And "relief" will not come from courts, but from state legislatures.

[Sled Dog]

It would be improper for Maricopa County audit their own ballots.  Ideally, that would be done by an outside, independent, dis-interested, accredited auditing firm without conflicts of interests.

There are a couple of issues:

- auditing the ballot counts
- auditing the legalities and potential illegalities of election rule changes made outside the states' legislative processes and/or states' constitutional processes.

Unfortunately both issues would subject to a drawn-out resolution of findings, appeals, and eventual state or Federal supreme court adjudications by accountants and lawyers who bill by the hour.

Pursuing state election reforms in a manner consistent with state constitutions and state and Federal civil rights protections is a valid way to proceed in the leap up to the 2022 and 2024 elections.

These state law modifications could include a state requirement for a post-election audits to validate that all applicable state laws, policies, and procedures were followed and while preserving the state and Federal civil rights protections applicable at the time ballots were distributed and collected.

At no point should any ballot be in the possession of any party other than those authorized by state elections laws, presumably the voter and an agent of the government (local, county, state, US Postal service.)  3rd party ballot harvesting is rife with opportunities for impropriety.  All ballot distribution, collection, and counting processes should maintain paper records to act as backup to any automated processes.  State election laws should also cover contingincies that may interfere with a voter's access to a ballot - acts of nature, God, and government that necessitate the legal declaration of state of emergency by state government officials.

The Constitution grants to the state legislatures the sole authority to define how presidential electors are chosen.

Subsequent Amendments prevented states from discriminating on the basis of race or sex and reduced the voting age to 18.

That's it.

If a state wants to stop accepting ballots at 7:42:15 PM on election day, and refuse to accept any further ballots from any source, that was a decision by the legislature and signed into law by the governor, and the courts and the governor have nothing further to say on the matter.

If a state wants to decide to require a voter to present a valid ID when voting, that's the state's perogative, and HR-1 is not a valid counter to that.

State laws were violated all over the country by the most massive vote fraud operation in history, with the deliberate intent to steal the election and defraud all Trump voters.

And the sheep are complacent about this.

[Sled Dog]

That's a good call @Sled Dog; the judiciary doesn't have any tool in its toolbox to change anything about the election of 2020, so they're not going to spend time thinking about it.  And that means a legal standard of evidence is no longer relevant.  What's relevant now is a persuasive standard.

And "relief" will not come from courts, but from state legislatures.

And the pissed off public. 

The Rodents and their stooges in the media are doing everything they can to defuse the Stolen Election issue and make it seem like the fact that the election was stolen was the "Big Lie", instead of the Big Lie being Biden.

And the media are REALLY good at getting the sheep in the public to chase squirrels.

[roamer_1]

You support the side of twitter that acclaimed the usurpation by Senile Joe.

...well....

No, I most certainly do not. I support getting actual evidence before going off half-cocked.

[roamer_1]

That's a good call @Sled Dog; the judiciary doesn't have any tool in its toolbox to change anything about the election of 2020, so they're not going to spend time thinking about it.  And that means a legal standard of evidence is no longer relevant.  What's relevant now is a persuasive standard.

That is not altogether true. Criminal charges could abound. And the more the merrier, so election workers and officials might think twice before colluding and cheating.

And "relief" will not come from courts, but from state legislatures.

As it should

[HoustonSam]

That is not altogether true. Criminal charges could abound. And the more the merrier, so election workers and officials might think twice before colluding and cheating.

I would be happy to see criminal charges if justified, and yes of course they would require a legal standard of evidence.  in fact I would like to see legislatures passing extremely severe penalties for election workers, election judges, etc, who violate procedures regarding observers or take any action that renders votes, envelopes, ballots, etc non-auditable.  Make an example of a few and the rest will get the message.

But criminal charges are not really what we've been talking about for the last few months; rather we've been focused on understanding whether actual vote tallies were accurate.  And I think The Dog is right, a legal standard for that question isn't germane because no court can take any action relevant to the election outcome.

[Sled Dog]

No, I most certainly do not. I support getting actual evidence before going off half-cocked.

Yeah, that's what I said.   You support the Big Lie.  You want to deny you've seen the evidence.

[Sled Dog]

That is not altogether true. Criminal charges could abound. And the more the merrier, so election workers and officials might think twice before colluding and cheating.

As it should

Yeah.   We all know Hillary is serving 150 life sentences in federal prison for her Espionage Act violations.

You don't get it.  You don't want to get it.

Rodents don't go to prison .

[roamer_1]

I would be happy to see criminal charges if justified, and yes of course they would require a legal standard of evidence.  in fact I would like to see legislatures passing extremely severe penalties for election workers, election judges, etc, who violate procedures regarding observers or take any action that renders votes, envelopes, ballots, etc non-auditable.  Make an example of a few and the rest will get the message.

Oh yeah. That's all we got, because that's all that's left. Let the heads roll. BUT, in reality, all that's going to be is tiny little worker-bee heads. What it would take to get any higher up than the precincts would be absolute evidence of conspiracy and collusion all the way up to the state elections board - And that's what worker-bee heads are for. They get the BOHICA.

And the same thing, even more so to tear anything down that is truly structural above the state level... It would take interstate conspiracy to put it into the federal domain, and the jurisdiction of the SCOTUS. And it would have to be so very blatant - something like the Dominion thing - that it would be wholly inescapable before it would begin to touch the national figures in the Dem party... Just more worker-bees with slightly bigger heads.

But I will take it. If they can prove Arizona, start mowing em down. Throw the book at em. Maybe you get lucky and get one of them to roll over on someone who matters. But either way, make it so painful that the precincts and the counties would be horrified to do anything like it again... That can only help the process.

But criminal charges are not really what we've been talking about for the last few months; rather we've been focused on understanding whether actual vote tallies were accurate.  And I think The Dog is right, a legal standard for that question isn't germane because no court can take any action relevant to the election outcome.

Right. It is the state legislature's (s) bailiwick, as you and I already agree.

[roamer_1]

Yeah, that's what I said.   You support the Big Lie.  You want to deny you've seen the evidence.

No. The evidence is worthless unless it can be proven in a court of law or some other certifiable jurisdiction - Like a proper audit would be.

You can whine and moan and throw dirt in the air all you want, it means exactly nothing until you can make a charge. And make it stick.