@coldjoint,
Quote:And how can you not believe the evidence that voting machines can be manipulated?
Did you not see the part I posted that refered to the computer program irregularities?
Then I asked myself the questions I posted previously.
The example I saw had possible explanations of:
- poor programing (most programs are millions of lines)
- a rogue programmer
- a group of rogue programmers
Thos are in order of most likely to least likely (but none ruled out)
And the question I had of the person reporting it was:
- if they knew of that irregularity, they must have access or would soon have access to: the programming error (and the metadata that would show who made the change).
And yet I haven't yet seen this. That creates doubt in my mind as to the veracity of the claims - because having found that, a warrant and a computer analyst should quickly identify the issue and who or what caused it. So why hasn't it been presented? In the absense of metadata evidence, it is imposible to make an informed decision - so it currently for me, sits under the umbrella of 'irregularities'. This of course always comes with the qualification I haven't been closely following this. If you have that data somewhere, I would be most interested to see it.