The Current Election Fraud Investigation

lindelltv.com So it seems mike's site is live and they're doing their stream. What does everyone think? Personally i think that the hiding of evidence ((refusing to turn over the routers for one)) are rather damming, and although i find it hard to see the scope one would need to hack an entire election, as a tech worker i know enough to tell there's some serious bull going on Right now Mike is displaying packet captures and other data, but i'm more of a webdev then a real sec dev, so i can't read it in full intelligence, but everything i've heard so far gels. Furthermore, the idea that 50 separate state governments can create protocol that would be cyber-secure is entirely retarded, most government security i've seen is theater first and function as a far, far following point. The idea that we have the "most secure election in history" and we've got boxes of votes completely unsupervised randomly scattered around the country , that most of our "election workers" are basically random people one step removed from off the street with next to 0 accountability - the amount of political lies being passed around as fact would make anyone suspicious, even without any of this other evidence. Mike also has his 5 million dollar challenge to prove his data is not valid, so that seems like a juicy bug bounty. I'm curious to see what comes of that as well.(OH GOLLY WOW LOOK AT THIS SECURITY TOPIC SO RELEVANT PRESENT DAY, PRESENT TIME! AHAHAHAHAHA!)

>>17079 Also i'm watching the livestream right now, he's also displaying data that shows where trump lost states, not just the ones he won. To me, this gives him some credibility, because he's demonstrating states trump lost and not just ones where he won, and he's also accounting for non technical election shenanigans which he refers to as "organic fraud", ie pedro going up to vote saying his name is John Smith. I'm from chicago, so i know for a fact that there is election fraud, there's a saying "vote early, vote often", because if you don't, you'll find you've been voting anyway. Really, i think american anonymous voting is rather insecure as a concept because of how easy it would be to manipulate, esp without the ability to pull back the curtain to check. As i said though, i'd like some more technically proficient thoughts on the matter.

who the fuarrrk is mike and why would I care about things he claims to be packet captures? >as a tech worker i know enough to tell there's some serious bull going on I know some tech workers who are basically retarded so this is not a strong pedigree. >the amount of political lies being passed around as fact would make anyone suspicious, even without any of this other evidence. Of course there's political lies being passed around as fact. There always is. That is how politics works: whoever can fool the most dipshits wins. You got fooled by the guy who lost. Tough beans.

>>17082 Well, Mike is the pillow guy with 5 million dollars saying his data is legit. But you would know that if you had actually read my post.

>>17082 Also right now it seems he's been able to send in his white hats to each election following this one So right now you're saying we should sit down and accept a completely rigged election because "lel it allready happened"

>>17084 I'm saying that American "democracy" is a sham in the first place.

>>17079 >What does everyone think? Anyone who actually believes him and sees this audit bullshit as anything other than a joke at this point is retarded. >Mike also has his 5 million dollar challenge to prove his data is not valid, so that seems like a juicy bug bounty. I'm curious to see what comes of that as well. What's going to happen is someone will waste their time to prove him wrong and he will either try to move the goal posts, make claims about how they didn't actually prove him wrong that will only be believed by retards, or will just straight up refuse to pay for whatever reason.