laxtonto

The bitcoin account is anonymous. The app you use to check it can and probably will not be.

Get the app provider to be willing to share the user info and coordinates of anyone who accesses and approves the transaction and you have a “person of interest”.

From there you work backwards and the rest of the crew.

So they have the raw paper ballots, what now? What do you do to see if the DNI should be involved?

Step 1, test all ballots to see if they were printed on official paper. If not, collect them, test and try to ID point of origin and are they potentially from out of the country.

Step 2, test all ballots to see if they were filled out by hand or via a printer. If not, match to where they entered the system (mail
In, in person, or absentee) and trace backwards to see if tied it out of the country. If so, how did that happen?

If either of those happen, then the question of where did they come from is asked, and enter the DNI. Then move on to the hard audit.

Step 3, manually hand count all ballots and make sure that votes cast match votes recorded.

Step 4, manually check each box of ballots to the assigned tabulator machine tape. If it doesn’t why? If the tape doesn’t exist, why?

Step 5, confirm all ballots actually match the submission signature on file. If not, why were the included in the count? Where is the documentation of those that had signature adjudication? Who is on record for approving each signature in question?

Step 6, do a manual count and tabulation of all races after the fraud was excluded and move forward with the criminal cases.

What I find so interesting is that they state this is a warrant based off of a crime stating in October 2020 and not November. So the fraud may be tied to not only ballots but registrations as well.

So while they do a forensic ballot analysis, you do the exact same thing with the voter registration logs and signatures for the county as well. Each voter will have a paper trail and some type of approval system. Identify all non-eligible voters that were approved and who approved them and ask why?

At the end of the day the fake ballots came from somewhere, the fake registered voters paperwork came from somewhere, and of that was tied to outside of the US, then Gabbard should be there, as it will be a potential massive event.

This is an area people mention all the time, but really have no clue how operationalize it. Blockchain has been the "next" big thing a decade ago, and yet adoption severely lags behind the supposedly "future". I have had several doc students research blockchain and its failure to launch and people can't wrap their heads around the problems.

People forget that blockchain is expensive to implement for non-digital goods, as it requires people to be put into the loop and goods to be moved from an off-grid to an on-grid state and then be input into the distributed ledger. That means you either have the non-digital good be tied to the digital dispersed ledger at all times (which, how does that work in things like shipping or a person's physical presence to vote?), or lose the security aspect you are trying to have by having to have an intermediary for the physical interaction with the non-digital good to be categorized in the chain.

Lets try this from a voting standpoint. The dispersed ledger would require you, the state, and the agency providing oversight all to digitally connected. The state and the agency would essentially be observers and as such, only you are providing a change (or adding a new block) to the system. So how do we verify who you are at the time of the vote? That is the hole in the system, which is also the current limitation of what we do now. To make more "secure" now you need to tie you ID into another chain that is somewhat absolutely sure you are actually you. In truth, this is may actually make voting fraud easier once you develop the "person" then the chain assumes that they are always legal and not other future scrutiny would exist on the identity (outside of random checks).

Blockchain might make tallying look fancy and auditable, but it doesn't solve the core hard problem of remote voting: proving identity securely, secretly, and inclusively over an insecure internet without creating new coercion/bribery vectors or single points of failure.

So Cam Coleman, Brown, Biles, and Smothers as headliners...

If they had an OL, they would be scary.

I would be doubtful about the Michigan talk as they pulled two of their IOL back in from the portal. While it is possible, my guess is that he is more likely to start at say Texas (where the two Michigan OL were looking to go) than Michigan

If you can't see that this is directly tied to the continued drop in deaths in the US due to illegal drug overdoses and a huge boost in the US GDP through American firms rebuilding the oil infrastructure of SA, I dont know what to tell you...

If this isnt America first, what is? America First isn't isolationism post WW1, it is making moves that benefit the US first and duck everybody else's view on it.

Venezuela falls, then so does Cuba. No free oil from Venezuela, no backdoor of production equipment, no vacation spot for the party elite.

Having Cuba fall would remove the last communist blot in North America. Removing Communist Cuba will revitalize the rest of the US interests in the Caribbean and lead to a secondary economic boom in the Gulf states.

Make no bones about it, you will start hearing about claims repatriating the property rights of the US companies lost to Castro.

He is a tall burner with excellent straight line speed but "OK" hands and agility. If you watched the Texas/Michigan game he had at least 2 drops including a deep bomb off his outstretched hands and another down the sideline.

He gets a lot of love for his touchdown totals early in the year, but he tailed off as the season went on. It became pretty obvious that when Mosely came back from injury midseason, Lingstone was only viewed as a deep guy.

He has 2 things you can't teach, speed and size, but if you want to use him for anything other than a guy to take the top off the D, you are doing a lot of projection on a redshirt FR.

quote:

---

Mestemaker will be in Red and black

---

Already announced he is going with his coach to Ok State

If Texas has a real OL next year, Manning is going to put up numbers. I saw him do too much crazy stuff the last 1/3 of the season to not expect him to progress some as a 2nd year starter this offseason.

The question is going to be, does he have time, and does he have anyone that can consistently catch the ball...

Texas needs one real wide out and spend all the rest of their offensive cash on 3 new IOL...


If Arch plays like this, WR is probably less of an issue if they can keep him clean and get push in the running game...