(UPDATE 9:40 - 11/18: follow up here)
We saw a correction in Georgia, where votes were “found” on a missing memory stick that magically fell out of the sky. How did they know the votes were missing? In Nevada, they tossed 153k ballots for a local race.
Powell said they were going to overturn election results in multiple states. I’m beginning to think she was speaking literally. I'm also reading into this quote:
“They can stick a thumb drive in the machine or upload software to it, even from the internet. They can do it from Germany or Venezuala, even. They can remote access anything, they can watch votes in real-time, they can shift votes in real-time. We’ve identified mathematically the exact algorithm they’ve used and planned to use from the beginning, in this case, to modify the vote to make sure Biden won.” Powell blasted Biden, who in his “demented state,” spoke the truth when he said he had the “largest voter fraud organization ever. Well, it’s massive voter fraud and it’s going to undo the entire election.”
That's quite a statement, and to my interpretation, she's telling us they watched it the entire time.
I’m not sure of specifics, of course, as this is all conjecture on my part, but there's zero doubt that the good guys know what was changed, and have “the evidence”.
This was a massive sting (read Rex's post in the link above). If the feds watched an illegal banking transfer take place, could they not reverse the transaction if they were monitoring and caught it? Why couldn’t they do that for votes where they have control of the system?
The ultimate evidence isn’t missing ballots in dumpsters, etc., but the electronic monitoring on election night. I think the bad guys thought they were initiating permanent transactions, and they were fooled into believing the changes were being committed.
Not to get too technical, but in a database, when you add, delete, and change database entries, the changed records remain in an “uncommitted” state until they’re committed, which is to set them in stone. However, while they’re uncommitted, the transactions can be rolled back to their original state, like an "undo".
You can configure a database to expire and automatically roll back changes that were left uncommitted after a period of time. In my mind, conceptually, that’s what’s happening now. The criminals thought they were committing transactions (taking votes from here and putting them over there, etc), but were fooled by the good guys. I bet their changes were never permanent.
Maybe the real-time reporting by the media organizations were looking at uncommitted transactions, and if they were to go back and look now, those transactions have already rolled back to the correct tallies?
Again, I’m thinking metaphorically and conceptually, but I can see the bad guys being tricked into thinking their changes were committed (whatever form that would take). If it were something like this, the beauty would be the good guys probably wouldn’t even need to go back in and manually change them; it would just happen automatically, which would be hilarious.
It’s like in the movies, where at the end of the movie, the good guys stole money out of the bad guy’s bank account. When the bad guy goes to check his balance after he thought be made a deal, and the good guys are already gone, he sees a zero balance.
There's been plenty of time for the bad guys to say our elections are secure, and there's no wrong-doing. Once they figure out their fraudulent votes are rolling back, what are they going to say? I thought our voting systems were secure?
What are they, conspiracy theorists?
Listen to THIS 👇 pic.twitter.com/lfNVODXHae— ĐɆ₱ⱠØⱤ₳฿ⱠɆ ₣ØⱤ ₮ⱤɄ₥₱ (Parler @IowaTrump)⭐️⭐️⭐️ (@iowa_trump) November 16, 2020