auraithx

Took me a while but I found what I was thinking of.

It was the Fired FEC head

But it wasn't because she was fired they didn't go forward, it's because the board is 3/3 dem/rep so a republican would need to 'flip'

Asked by Alicia Menendez, "What is most alarming to you?" she replied, "Well, I can't talk about anything that would be currently before the commission by law, complaints that are filed and any investigatory action remains confidential until the cases are closed."

She then continued. "But I can tell you that in the past we have had 63 separate complaints filed against the president or his political committees –– and not all complaints are well-founded not all complaints are worth the agency's time to pursue. But our nonpartisan professional staff has advocated that we pursue 31 of those cases and, in not a single one, did we get four votes to move forward."

This is one of the things they talked about in the election interference hearings in December too

“Almost every matter that the FEC has not pursued is associated with the former president [Trump]” (Rep Torres, about 57minutes in)

Link to thread discussing: https://www.reddit.com/r/somethingiswrong2024/s/JUGCXE7Gab

Link to full hearing on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/live/mIDJ5whpSHQ

Storage medium? What are you on about? You can prune blockchains and do things like demurrage to reduce bloat.

But either way it’s a weird critique. Bitcoin getting bigger makes it harder to sync clients but it’s not gonna consume all the worlds storage that doesn’t make sense.

They were rigging it via voter suppression and fighting it in court so they must think it relevant enough to involve themselves in anyway

https://youtu.be/E7aH2_F8v5Q

They did do a variety of things.

• limited the dems to 45% on the tabulators after 500 votes
• suppressed enough votes that they would’ve lost if it weren’t for the massive voter purges and other legislation they shoved through
• algorithmically induced psychosis in 20% the population

If any one of these had failed they would’ve lost.

It’s not really denialism when there’s evidence. Verify the evidence.

It’s only denialism when it’s irrational and not based on coherent arguments. (Ie. Trump in 2020)

💯

Verifying the vote isn’t denialism. The evidence is compelling and coherent. Too many whiners not enough debunkers!

Of course it’d be both sides. They use projection to shield themselves. So if they were going to steal an election, they’d accuse the dems of doing it first.

This isn’t conscious but they think everyone thinks like them so if they’re trying to steal the election obviously the dems are too.

I don’t think that’s the right bit. He said something like ‘and Elon knows those computers so well, those tabulators, and then we won PA’

There was a ton of irregularities reported btw. I forget the exact number but like 20-40 with enough evidence that they were bringing the cases forward. But when Trump came in he appointed someone to a role who dismissed them all.

While it might seem simple to attribute the drop-off phenomenon to personal preferences for Trump or against Harris, the SMART Elections analysis shows that this pattern is far more complex and inconsistent with such an explanation. For instance, if Harris were uniquely unpopular, you’d expect her drop-off to be uniformly large across all states, but it isn’t. In Michigan, her drop-off is negligible (0.87%), while in Montana, it’s a staggering -19%, even though Montana has little connection to the pro-Gaza movement that critics say might have influenced her support. Similarly, the Republican drop-off (votes for Trump but not for down-ballot candidates) is just as significant, sometimes exceeding the margins of victory in key swing states. Down-ballot candidates refer to those running for lower-profile positions, such as governors, state legislators, or other local offices, as opposed to high-profile ones like the president. This suggests the issue isn’t simply about liking Trump or disliking Harris but instead points to a mix of unusual voter behaviors or even potential systemic issues in how votes were cast or counted. The consistent pattern of drop-off across vastly different demographics and states demands more scrutiny, not simple assumptions.

I’m not getting any red flags I think they’re just a bit disorganised. Here’s the name of someone involved

https://bsky.app/profile/electiontruth.bsky.social/post/3lhpbvqswak2d

Seems if it were a scam they wouldn’t register as a non profit in the us they’d be anon and taking crypto donations.

I know Spoonamore said he was working with a new team to verify the claims. I’m not sure which one that is though.

They did, the early versions of the first ones anyway. They’re adjusted afterwards and weighted to match the alleged vote counts as they come out.

Exit Polls were spot on for all down ballot races, but were wildly off base with Trump.

State Edison Exit Polls (EEP) (MoE 3%) vs. Reported Results. In Swing States. EEPs show Harris wins 4 beyond MoE, Trump 0. 3 within MoE. Returns Trump wins all 7. 6 of 7 beyond MoE. But DownBallot EEPs are right and falloff counts are hard to believe.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2024/11/05/politics/how-exit-polls-work-election