This hearing is lawyerly but brutal. The congressman gets them to admit that they deleted the data ("but we archived it") and did not turn over subpoenaed data to the audit ("because they did not subpoena our archives, only our servers"). It turns out, though, that the data was deleted after the subpoenas arrived.
Then he gets them to intimate that this 'archiving' of data is just standard practice due to the needs of clearing out space on servers for the next election. "Can you explain, then," he asks only after giving them all this rope, "why the records from earlier elections are still present?"
Oh.
3 comments:
I don't know if the Democrats won several elections by fraud but they certainly seem determined to give everyone the impression they did.
"I've been playing evasive games with you, but you can totally believe what I say from now on, and I'll bristle with indignation if you don't, you conspiracy theorist."
On a more serious note, many of these revelations have made me reconsider the primacy of pushing for voter id. While it obviously has some utility, it appears that the real wholesale fraud occurs long after ballots are actually cast by injecting pre-prepared ballots into the system at mass counting locations, other forms of vote duplication such as repeated counts of ballot batches, and the obvious problems with distributing ballots by mail. It appears that what is really needed is strict auditing and balancing of the number of ballots distributed, cast, collected, and counted since identifying a fake ballot once it has been separated from the originating location is so unlikely as to be impossible.
Stalin was right that it's not the votes but who counts them that really matters.
Post a Comment