5286
Comments (114)
sorted by:
114
Logan051361 114 points ago +124 / -10

They will do what GA did. Count fraudulent ballots

145
p8riot [S] 145 points ago +145 / -0

A re-count is not the same thing as an audit. IIRC if an audit finds improprieties, then the House can vote to nullify the election, and choose the electors themselves.

51
Logan051361 51 points ago +51 / -0

I thought GA was an audit also?

120
p8riot [S] 120 points ago +120 / -0

In name only.. they're not doing it right, hence the lawsuit

99
peterstrzoked 99 points ago +99 / -0

GA was a recount, an audit, a canvas and a recanvass, all in one! The secretary of State said so!

Nevermind the fact that they didn’t look for any irregularities and just recounted all the fake ballots again. They even tried to sneak in an extra 10k in the recount.

49
Ieggo 49 points ago +49 / -0

GA is the proof that the demonrats are running their guys as republicans

33
peterstrzoked 33 points ago +33 / -0

I think Kemp cut a deal with Dominion to beat Abrams and he is now paying back his debt.

14
malak05 14 points ago +14 / -0

Powell said as much someone signed a deal to basically be guaranteed he would win a reelection bid

1
kwiztas 1 point ago +1 / -0

You mean the uniparty uniparties.

20
ImGlootchingg 20 points ago +20 / -0

They didn't even recount all the ballots. They just selected "statistically significant batches" of ballots and simply recounted those. It's a total farce.

16
airgag 16 points ago +16 / -0

Wait what? I didn't know this.

They recounted only part of the ballots, the gap between Biden and President Trump shrinked by 13% and they called it a day?

8
airgag 8 points ago +8 / -0

Looks like GA audit did a recount of all (freshly printed) ballots.

https://sos.ga.gov/admin/uploads/11.19_.20_Risk_Limiting_Audit_Report_Memo_.pdf

Audit boards from all 159 Georgia counties examined 41881 batches, hand-sorting and counting each ballot as part of the process

8
airgag 8 points ago +8 / -0

Also nevermind they printed new ballots to get the count they needed, and are shredding them now.

4
VetforTrump2 4 points ago +4 / -0

Called it that bit did not do it.

13
You_Aint_Black 13 points ago +13 / -0

What makes you think something other than that will happen in PA?

20
Dessert4TWO69 20 points ago +20 / -0

If they tried that then the legislature that just called for the audit would declare it fraudulent and select the electors.

7
bourbon_neat 7 points ago +7 / -0

AINO doesn't really have that same catchy sound does it?

Govt did mention in a press release it would be a full audit, recanvas and recount. Obviously it was barely only one of those things.

Given the allegations that world destroyer Powell has laid before the American public, and Lin woods tweets, Kemp is very much implicated here. So there's no real surprise if true he'd so blatantly lie on TV to make this a giant and expensive charade

2
Mavdick96 2 points ago +2 / -0

In name only, just like their Republicans.

23
cryogen 23 points ago +24 / -1 (edited)

A "Risk Limiting Audit" -- in other words, a small one that is supposed to prove through a sample that no fraud occurred overall. Conveniently when even this uncovered huge disparities in the small number of sampled counties, they outright ignored the very purpose and meaning of the RLA itself and jumped straight to certification. The results of the RLA would demand a full audit, but they simply declined to do that and played off the RLA as if it were a full audit by itself. Smokescreens, misdirections, and lies of omission.

13
Heck 13 points ago +13 / -0

Anyone listening to legacy media at this point will believe anything at all that they are told. They could claim the moon is gone and these tools would run around on a full moon, call us all conspiracy theorists and space fascists.

2
McSimply 2 points ago +2 / -0

Moon nazi.

10
Mooma 10 points ago +10 / -0

Especially when you know where the fraud is, so you spot check elsewhere

5
airgag 5 points ago +5 / -0

Yeah that's why it's called Risk Limiting Audit ... to limit the risk of getting caught.

2
danielh11 2 points ago +2 / -0

I think it’s an audit and then a separate risk limiting audit which doesn’t make sense to me but yeah

3
cryogen 3 points ago +3 / -0

They didn't do a full audit in two or three days. It was only the RLA.

2
BillDStrong 2 points ago +2 / -0

They were a process audit. Did the counters mistake the count. I don't know what this one is.

2
floridaboy316 2 points ago +2 / -0

same

9
K-Harbour 9 points ago +9 / -0

This resolution may have more repercussions than folks realize.

The appointment of electors is made by the current legislature. Although there are laws in place (by past legislatures) to automatically give the electors based on vote, Secretary of State or governor certification, etc — the practice is not challenged as one party usually has already conceded.

Here, we have a CURRENT legislature resolve to do an audit. This indicates the current legislature does not yet approve the electors, regardless of the actions by any other part of the state government.

5
BidenHunter 5 points ago +5 / -0

PA audit has an end date of Feb 2021

34
Mooma 34 points ago +34 / -0 (edited)

Georgia's quick audit was done by a left-wing company called Votingworks

https://voting.works/risk-limiting-audits/

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/voting-works/

20
Logan051361 20 points ago +20 / -0

This should not be allowed to stand.

13
CWAC_Patriot 13 points ago +13 / -0

Very left-wing, partly funded by Soros. Designed their audit system with the recently-fired Mr. Krebs from CISA.

Dan Bongino talked about VotingWorks a few days ago on his podcast.

18
deleted 18 points ago +19 / -1
9
Strike_Eagle784 9 points ago +9 / -0

Second this, people fall to the crystal ball fallacy a little too often on this site.

5
SpezTouchesKids 5 points ago +5 / -0

All that evil needs to succeed in the world is for good men to do nothing.

Are we not good men?

2
Marshall 2 points ago +2 / -0

Ask again in two months.

3
SpezTouchesKids 3 points ago +3 / -0

Answer won't change.

Demons run when good men go to war.

4
RahkeemTheMachine 4 points ago +4 / -0

A hand recount is the solution you ar looking for

4
airgag 4 points ago +4 / -0

With signature verification

4
VetforTrump2 4 points ago +4 / -0

Audit. Know the difference.

87
farmerPede80 87 points ago +87 / -0

This is BS... "report back by early February".

38
Paradyme 38 points ago +38 / -0

Wish I could upvote this higher because this isn't a win. The date of audit needs to be ASAP.

23
pithys 23 points ago +23 / -0

Complete farce. find out if there was corruption right after inauguration

53
Ghislaines_Ghost 53 points ago +57 / -4

FUCKING STUPID!!! Read the damn article. It calls for an audit and report back by fucking February!!!!!

Fucking virtue signaling cuck traitors.

11
deleted 11 points ago +11 / -0 (edited)
6
krog 6 points ago +6 / -0

That would effectively mean the state legislators are selecting electors, because they won't delay inauguration.

31
COnDEMnED 31 points ago +33 / -2

So we take back Pennsylvania in the end. We need Georgia and 1 other state?

28
Epy00 28 points ago +28 / -0

We need two states for a tie, 3 for a win

21
Filetsmignon 21 points ago +21 / -0

I think when the dust settles we get MI WI PA & NV for the win.

17
Tomato 17 points ago +17 / -0

GA is a high possibility too since its so close and they are filing a lawsuit.

8
K-Harbour 8 points ago +8 / -0

I think both GA & MI are 16 EV each.

If so, they are interchangeable.

But best if we get both.

Should also challenge VA.

13
peterstrzoked 13 points ago +13 / -0

And a tie = a win unless congress cucks out

8
Mooma 8 points ago +9 / -1

A tie is a loss, one republican Cuck in the electoral college will be bribed to flip.

7
RazerEdgedVengeance 7 points ago +7 / -0

my understanding is that they will be REQUIRED to vote Republican, and cannot switch over their vote. Is that is not true then someone please correct me.

3
Mooma 3 points ago +3 / -0

Probably Pelosi makes the final decision what rules they need to follow.

4
peterstrzoked 4 points ago +4 / -0

I haven’t double checked the math on the two state tie vs three state win, but I believe the only tie (not considering scenarios where a state doesn’t send electors at all) is 269 to 269.

If neither Pedo Joe nor GEOTUS hit 270 EC votes, the election goes to congress. Each state delegation gets one vote. Rs control more state delegations. So while yes, there could be a Republican congressman who cucks out, I think that’s less likely in case of a tie.

SPEZ:

Reading the article this doesn’t necessarily look helpful. The audit would deliver a report by February? That sounds like a “wow this was fucked up but oh well, let’s do better next time!”

3
Mooma 3 points ago +3 / -0

It's only 269-269 if all electors stay faithful. Not so hard to plant one rino to unfaithfully vote Biden. And there's no way to stop it.

4
peterstrzoked 4 points ago +4 / -0

True. That also depends on the faithless elector laws in the different states.

In some states faithless electors are cool. In other states a faithless vote is not counted. In others it’s counted, but the faithless elector is charged with a misdemeanor.

With that being said, I think the faithless elector angle is less likely than most other outcomes. I don’t think it has ever happened in a scenario where it made a difference, and was only for show.

3
303pede 3 points ago +3 / -0

To piggyback on this, I believe most faithless electors historically have voted 3rd party or write in candidate.

There have been approximately 165 faithless electors in history, with 63-70 of those being “faithless” on technicality, the person they were supposed to cast a vote for died before they could vote so they voted for someone else. Technically faithless but I think it’s a gray area personally.

1
Mooma 1 point ago +1 / -0

Any close electoral count, especially if there are states where the electors were appointed by the states legislature's, there will be protest and lots of pressure for the electors to "go with the popular vote"

2
RazerEdgedVengeance 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hopefully someone can come along and verify, but I am quite certain that Republican/Democrat EC electors MUST vote with their party and cannot swap sides on the vote.

1
Big-Dick-Dale 1 point ago +1 / -0

Michigan and Wisconsin get us there

1
K-Harbour 1 point ago +1 / -0

We should just call for all 50 states to have their legislatures meet and appoint their electors.

27
Shempy 27 points ago +27 / -0

That is a good first step, but if the audit will not be completed before it’s time to certified and what is the point? This seems like a big squish. Do not certify until the order is complete and you know that everything was above board. Am I missing something?

20
p8riot [S] 20 points ago +20 / -0

Doesn't have to be completed. If the audit shows any improprieties they are within their rights to NOT certify the election, and instead the legislature will choose their electors.

12
Shempy 12 points ago +12 / -0

I am just wary of squishy Republicans everywhere, especially here in Pennsylvania. This sounds like they could slow walk the audit to show everybody they are “doing something” but then still certify anyway. Kind of like the bullshit that’s going on in Georgia right now

9
p8riot [S] 9 points ago +9 / -0

Good, as you should be. Hold your local officials accountable, don't just assume they'll do the right thing.

5
Shempy 5 points ago +5 / -0

Oh I’ve been on the phone and I have a decent social media presence

8
mjw2006 8 points ago +8 / -0

Not as squishy anymore - the voting machine people didnt show up for the PA Legislature Q&A this morning and they are pissed. Had a press briefing at 9EST this morning and said things like 'what are they afraid of". I think their ego was insulted and thats not good to do to a PA legislature - they may start to believe Sidney - so chin up!

2
Marshall 2 points ago +2 / -0

Evacuating all US based Offices is bad optics at a minimum for Dominion.

4
sleepwhenimdead 4 points ago +4 / -0

The Speaker of the House and Senate Majority Leader in PA seem pretty based.

2
deleted 2 points ago +4 / -2
1
dullcare 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, February, after inauguaration is pretty useless. The only possible positive that I can think of is if Feb is for the final report but some of the audit data is released ahead of time to allow the PA Legislature more data decide if they will certify the election or if instead they will bypass election results and have the legislature vote.

14
Bystander 14 points ago +14 / -0

this is bullshit.... report due in february...

11
USAFPatriot 11 points ago +11 / -0

Keep up the pressure, pedes!

PENNSYLVANIA

Contact Bryan Cutler (R), Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives

717-284-1968

Email Bryan Cutler here: https://www.pahouseformcenter.com/.../RepBr.../SecureContact

Contact Jake Corman (R), Pennsylvania Senate Majority Leader

717-787-1377

Email Jake Corman here: https://www.senatorcorman.com/contact/

10
webthing 10 points ago +11 / -1

That's great news!

8
debacle 8 points ago +8 / -0

to conduct the audit and report back by early February.

This will not help Trump. These Republicans need to STEP UP.

3
Marshall 3 points ago +3 / -0

It works if they refuse to certify the election before the audit is completed. The legislature would probably step in so Pennsylvania wouldn't lose representation.

5
malkontent1776 5 points ago +5 / -0

This is not good news. The same people that stole the election will be doing the audit. Weve already seen that.

2
malkontent1776 2 points ago +2 / -0

Its neutral at best.

4
Mooma 4 points ago +4 / -0

Hope it won't be another fake audit by votingworks, the left wing group that did Geogia's "quick audit"

https://voting.works/risk-limiting-audits/

https://www.influencewatch.org/non-profit/voting-works/

4
AintSeenCrazyYet 4 points ago +4 / -0

Quite pleased that the article stated the State Senate does not need to approve of the resolution for it to take effect. Hopefully, we get a real audit and not the farce that's going on in Georgia.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
memtndude 3 points ago +3 / -0

This doesn't effect the current election and the results aren't due until February. Pointless smoke and mirrors by the same fucks who gave them the mail in rules that allowed so much fraud to begin with.

3
AngeredKabar 3 points ago +3 / -0

Read the article folks.

This will do nothing

3
Spacecat518 3 points ago +3 / -0

Thank God.

3
jb42 3 points ago +3 / -0

Risk Limiting Audit... As opposed to what they previously did, an actual partial recount.

https://www.worldtribune.com/soros-funded-organizations-have-assisted-with-election-security-in-pennsylvania-georgia-michigan/

They take a negligible number of votes, "randomly" chosen. Look at the article, "80% of the vote, they take 27 votes to verify". It's a sham.

2
maga_nificent 2 points ago +2 / -0

Wtf is a 'risk-limiting' audit? Is this another euphemism like the Patriot Act or the Affordable Care Act? Not at all being a doomer but skeptical that this audit will produce the evidence of fraud we need to produce in higher courts to claim victory.

2
PlateOwner 2 points ago +2 / -0

How about throwing in a class action lawsuit somewhere?

2
ChupaCobbler 2 points ago +2 / -0

‘The chamber voted 112 to 90 for a resolution that told the Legislative Budget and Finance Committee, or a contractor it will hire, to conduct the audit and report back by early February.’ ——-How is this good news? By early Feb? This sounds like another Durham report.

‘Separately, the Department of State plans another “risk limiting” audit under a pilot program to apply statistical tools that will measure the election’s accuracy and check for possible interference.’ ——-This part looks more interesting. Anyone have info on this pilot program and what statistical tools they will be using?

2
Goozmania 2 points ago +2 / -0

From my understanding, this is not relevant, as the results won't be in until a month after inauguration.

4
p8riot [S] 4 points ago +4 / -0

This is a chess move. Its success is measured not only by whether it eats another piece, but also how it sets up future moves, and forces the opponent to move.

For example with an audit underway, even with partial results or discoveries the legislature is able to reasonably doubt the veracity, and then nullify the election, leaving it up to the legislature to vote on the electors.

1
yanksali 1 point ago +1 / -0

Read they will do it in a few months. Is this true?

1
Lazarus327 1 point ago +1 / -0

Resolutions aren't binding though, right?

1
slimcoat 1 point ago +1 / -0

Democrats attacked the proposal, calling it unconstitutional, damaging to democracy and unnecessary.

Insufferable, corrupt bastards.

1
OppaiZuriZuri 1 point ago +1 / -0

WE ARE THE CHAMPIONS, MY FRIENDS!!!

Between this and Trump Gordon, is there no Queen song we can't use? XD

1
Indyjamming 1 point ago +1 / -0

Very good news!🤗

1
Strike_Eagle784 1 point ago +1 / -0

Awesome!

1
tdwinner2020 1 point ago +1 / -0

The resolution probably has no direct teeth, just indirect: do a clean audit or else we sub our electors. I like the sound of that!! It will help bring along the legislatures from other states.

1
DonttrustChina 1 point ago +1 / -0

AUDIT! Hell yes!

1
stagolee 1 point ago +1 / -0

I have no faith in the PA legislature. They voted for mail ballots. The majority leader is a cuck. Supreme Court is where this goes.

1
p8riot [S] 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wouldn't that have been the Senate though?

1
Dessert4TWO69 1 point ago +1 / -0

Full audit or risk limiting audit?

1
HotTrumpChick 1 point ago +1 / -0

Due in early February... But, on the plus side, i don't believe they will certify.

1
1PeopleCorporation 1 point ago +1 / -0

This doesn't look like a vote audit. More like a process audit since its not even going to be completed until February.

1
Trumpy 1 point ago +1 / -0

This audit concludes in February????

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
p8riot [S] 2 points ago +2 / -0

does not require approval from Wolf

1
VetforTrump2 1 point ago +1 / -0

Keep it up

1
WillyP702 1 point ago +1 / -0

winning!! 😎

1
Bernd_Lauert 1 point ago +1 / -0

Audit or recount? They called GA an audit but it was just a recount.