✮✮✮ !Trump Dump! ✮✮✮

ZylonBane on 10/1/2021 at 23:47

Quote Posted by nbohr1more

Ah, I see. So all those people who wrote articles for years after the 2000 election about how Al Gore was the real winner are "seditious traitors".

You must really be pro 1984-dystopian.

This is my complete lack of surprise that someone whose entire personality revolves around getting suckered in by trolls, got suckered in by a troll.

lowenz on 11/1/2021 at 01:01

Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula

You're being far too kind.

After the attempted coup that happened, trump should be considered a traitor. Anyone who still supports him is a traitor and should be considered a terrorist enemy combatant.

And you know what we do with traitors right? Something about "hanging by the neck until dead". they should all suffer the fate of Benedict Arnold.

Possessed by Bannon "Fauci is a traitor, put his head on a pike" spirit? :p

Tocky on 11/1/2021 at 01:28

Stephen is really nailing it lately-

[video=youtube_share;WAMMiCe35-Y]https://youtu.be/WAMMiCe35-Y[/video]

Tocky on 11/1/2021 at 01:42

Of course Seth is always spot on.

[video=youtube_share;ScYghG0QZXc]https://youtu.be/ScYghG0QZXc[/video]

faetal on 11/1/2021 at 02:05

See, this is why it is best to ignore nbohr. Same loop every time.
Wild, scattered accusations about the deep state conspiracy against...pretty much everything, accuses everyone of parroting the MSM, then when asked to post ANY kind of evidence, drops some ridiculously tenuous obscure document which says something vague which barely manages to back up 0.01% of the claims he has been making (and always dropped with "WAIT UNTIL THE CIA DELETE THIS FROM GOOGLE" flourish), then usually a spell of silence after it is torn to fucking bits by anyone with the time / patience to read it (I am glad I didn't take the time).

Tony's bit is starting to sound a bit less restrained, calling for hanging. Still adorable though.

(https://postimages.org/)

Inline Image:

https://i.postimg.cc/rw57KmYp/4tc7m5.jpg

demagogue on 11/1/2021 at 03:12

Quote Posted by Tony_Tarantula

Haha, careful or you're gonna crack Vae's marbles.

Let me interject to say, trolling aside, that of course it's important that Trump be treated as fairly and neutrally as possible.

For example he probably shouldn't be found guilty for inciting insurrection because that requires specific intent (he said things with the specific intention his audience would interpret them as instructions to storm the capitol), and his statements to the riotous mob at the time, on their face, didn't actually cross that line... I think they did pretty clearly cross the line into reckless intent (a reasonable person could have predicted the violence would happen with those words and he said them anyway), but reckless intent isn't enough for that crime.

I think it's enough for an impeachment, but not for a conviction. I mean it's up to a jury to decide; they might think his intention was that specific in the context, but it's not immediately clear from the words themselves, and there's arguably reasonable doubt about it.

And I think it's an important message that needs to be communicated in the coming weeks as Trump is subjected to who knows how many scores of prosecutions. You can't just lock people up because you don't like them. The sufficiency of demonstrable evidence matters, and not in the handwaving sense of "it's evidence because some guy on the internet posted it and said it came from somebody official".

Plenty of other things Trump did have sufficient evidence anyway, like the obstruction charges that Mueller walked through in Volume II of his report.

------

Edit: Well this isn't reassuring.

Quote Posted by USA Today

(https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/01/10/25-troops-under-investigation-terrorism-related-riot-capitol/6618295002/) At least 25 people under investigation for terrorism in connection with Capitol riot

Rep. Jason Crow, a Democrat of Colorado and a former Army Ranger, said he spoke with Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy on Sunday and was told that "at least 25 domestic terrorism cases have been opened as a result of the assault on the Capitol."

A Defense official who was informed about the call initially confirmed that the cases involved troops but later corrected that statement. The official said some troops - active and reserve duty - may have been involved in the riot, and the military will investigate them as necessary.

"There is concern that military members may have been involved in the riot," the official said. [...]

"The Pentagon also has been asked to review all members who will be a part of the security detail for the Jan. 20 inauguration to ensure the are not sympathetic to domestic terrorists."

Starker on 11/1/2021 at 03:24

Quote Posted by Cipheron

Reading the entire PDF makes me believe in the voting fraud LESS, not more, because if there was anything to it, complete amateur shit like this isn't what would have made it in front of my eyeballs.

I went through a few of those cases and they are all like that. This kind of stuff is literally they best evidence they had to offer and what they actually used to demand the disenfranchisement of millions of voters. Hell, Rudy's farts had more substance than that. Some of the judges got really angry at this bullshit too.

nbohr1more on 11/1/2021 at 04:44

Quote Posted by Cipheron

For a start, there are several easily checked things here.

They focus on the website dominionvotingsystems.com, pointing out that it's registered in China.

You can "who is" easily for dominionvoting.com, and you can see that they registered their actual page 15 years ago, and they do it through a third-party IT provider.
(https://who.is/whois/dominionvoting.com)

Whereas the one mentioned in the paper was only registered a few months ago, was registered anonymously instead of through Dominion's normal provider, and there's no page at that location
(https://who.is/whois/dominionvotingsystems.com)

So, it's clearly just a fake.

Also, the guy is citing LinkedIn and shit as his "sources".

Yeah the guy is just dribbling shit at this point. There is no such software as scorecard in the first place, and the idea that a spin-off of community services NGO ACORN is involved in high-tech shenanigans? You'd have to really be drinking the koolaid to believe this stuff.

(https://scorecard.indivisible.org/)

Ok so there's a subdomain on a pro-Obama website that says "scorecard". What this page contains is a list of policy areas and it's scoring Biden vs Trump on each of those areas. Wow, such proof of the "scorecard" software.

---

He then goes on (about sections 13-16) to show a "similar domain" report. But all "similar domain" means is that it two sites are similarly spelled, they don't indicate that the owner of one domain has anything to do with the owner of the different domains. The "similar" domains are just similarly-spelled sub-domains, they're completely unconnected.

His "proof" is that Dominion's old website was dvscorp.com and there's a misspelling of dvscorp that they picked up as well, just to be safe, dvscopr.com. And there are several other websites that have a sub-domain which includes "dvscopr". What is Dominion hiding? The plot thickens /sarcasm

For example he notes that "dvscopr.hasura-app.io" is "similar" to "dvscopr.com" so therefore infers there's some nefarious link between these two entities, because they happen to have an (actual) subdomain of dvscopr, which is spelt the same as the (non-existent btw) website dvscopr.com, which is a misspelling of dvscorp.com. Following this yet? And he notes that some of the companies with these "dvscopr" subdomains exist in China, Iran etc. Therefore they're secret links between Dominion and those other nations /sarcasm

The point here is that dvscopr is a typo. Web providers will sometimes register a range of misspellings for the client in order to pick up common typos. But why then would an actual company in China working with DVS use the typo'd version? The very fact that this "proof" needed to go via a misspelling of Dominion's old website should indicate how bullshit this claim is. If there was any more direct (i.e not misspelled) connection then he would have used it. You don't have to be any sort of network expert to realize these claims are outright bullshit. The question of course is what's actually *at* those other "similar" websites would of course be the smoking gun, but apparently the high-level hacker behind this PDF wasn't interested to go *that* far down the rabbit hole, the same as he just mentions "scorecard.indivisible.org" without actually telling you what's there. He's relying on his readers being too dumb to do their own research.

---

As a programmer I know this one. The idea that a "decorator" "smooths the data" is bullshit. There's a whole wikipedia page about this:

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decorator_pattern)

Looking at the "evidence" all that really says is that it's a thing for determining how you want the final results to be displayed, as in formatting.

This guy is supposedly some kind of expert. No actual "computer expert" of any type would say "ahah, they said decorator! that means they're rigging the data!" without further evidence that something is going on.

What you have here is the classic Gish Gallop with 100 stupid claims and hoping that the sheer amount of dumb things adds up to one good thing.

---

Reading the entire PDF makes me believe in the voting fraud LESS, not more, because if there was anything to it, complete amateur shit like this isn't what would have made it in front of my eyeballs.

How much do they pay you to gaslight this much?

The author of the paper used automated tools to track network activity.

It is common for "botnets" to use typo-squat hosts and there are even references to the type of "Advanced Persistent Threats" (ATP) used in this operation.

Is it you who assumes that nobody here understands how a botnet works?

Jason Moyer on 11/1/2021 at 05:32

Good lord, I just read that .pdf about Dominion. What a waste of fucking time, and nothing about any sort of network traffic between voting machines and anywhere else. No wonder this shit was thrown out immediately.

Of course, it wouldn't fucking matter because the only state that was close (Georgia) recounted the paper ballots 3 times and the final total had nothing to do with electronic voting machines.

Pyrian on 11/1/2021 at 06:59

So... Is anybody else concerned about the apparent fact that a simple majority in both houses of Congress could just throw out as many electoral votes as they wanted and easily put any candidate with at least one electoral vote into office? Is there any teeth to the statute that states the objection must have a, y'know, basis? Most Republican representatives voted to throw out at least some electoral votes. They can't be counted on to follow norms or principles, and it is most likely that they will once again control Congress at some point in the future. ...Possibly next election, as midterms are notoriously hard on the president's party.

(https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32717.pdf)