Election 2020 Election Fraud: Let's face it, this year will be a shitshow

What's the sitch?

Well-known member
This is getting kinda derail now, but this is one of those things like with many other things and "facts" that exist in life that I do not have experience with and can only hope that "experts" in the field are telling me the truth.

As of late though I have come to learn that I cannot really trust people as things within my scope that I can actually easily verify as being true or false are contested by "experts" and checkmarks.

This is not your fault, but like with many other things I will "take it with a grain of salt". I always hear about data being pulled from computers that people thought they had deleted, thrown away or damaged enough.

---

For example even as a non expert and my very light knowledge and experience I knew that BIOS data did not need the hard drive, as I had actually run into this scenario in my computer dealings. Yet you had claimed in a prior post that nothing is saved anywhere besides the hard drive.

Knowing this, that you attempted to decieve me, even if unintentionally, by not mentioning minor scenarios, I am unwilling to believe that data(no matter how minor) cannot be saved somewhere that is accessible by someone with enough determination and know-how.
 

Terthna

Professional Lurker
This is getting kinda derail now, but this is one of those things like with many other things and "facts" that exist in life that I do not have experience with and can only hope that "experts" in the field are telling me the truth.

As of late though I have come to learn that I cannot really trust people as things within my scope that I can actually easily verify as being true or false are contested by "experts" and checkmarks.

This is not your fault, but like with many other things I will "take it with a grain of salt". I always hear about data being pulled from computers that people thought they had deleted, thrown away or damaged enough.

---

For example even as a non expert and my very light knowledge and experience I knew that BIOS data did not need the hard drive, as I had actually run into this scenario in my computer dealings. Yet you had claimed in a prior post that nothing is saved anywhere besides the hard drive.

Knowing this, that you attempted to decieve me, even if unintentionally, by not mentioning minor scenarios, I am unwilling to believe that data(no matter how minor) cannot be saved somewhere that is accessible by someone with enough determination and know-how.
Do you even know what the BIOS is? It's settings information for your computer hardware; utterly useless in the context you established, and not even what I would consider "data", beyond stuff like what kind of processor your computer has. It's not going to tell anyone what your bank account numbers are, or what you downloaded from the internet last night, or even where you hid your teeth so the government can't find them.

You know what; fine. Don't believe me; you have fun smashing things with a crowbar for no logical reason. Me? I've got better things to do than try to deal with someone else's paranoid delusions; as if I didn't have enough of my own already.
 
This is getting kinda derail now, but this is one of those things like with many other things and "facts" that exist in life that I do not have experience with and can only hope that "experts" in the field are telling me the truth.

As of late though I have come to learn that I cannot really trust people as things within my scope that I can actually easily verify as being true or false are contested by "experts" and checkmarks.

This is not your fault, but like with many other things I will "take it with a grain of salt". I always hear about data being pulled from computers that people thought they had deleted, thrown away or damaged enough.

---

For example even as a non expert and my very light knowledge and experience I knew that BIOS data did not need the hard drive, as I had actually run into this scenario in my computer dealings. Yet you had claimed in a prior post that nothing is saved anywhere besides the hard drive.

Knowing this, that you attempted to deceive me, even if unintentionally, by not mentioning minor scenarios, I am unwilling to believe that data(no matter how minor) cannot be saved somewhere that is accessible by someone with enough determination and know-how.

honey at some point there is a thing called TOO paranoid and I think you have reached that. If you are really that paranoid go amish, live on a desert island and never interact with anybody ever again. At some point you have to accept that there are at least some things beyond your control.
 

What's the sitch?

Well-known member
But Terthna was the one getting worked up for me taking extra steps in getting rid of a computer? Does it really bother you that much if I spend 30 minutes or less doing this once every several years?


"Honey", the whole point is that it is not beyond my control to take those few extra steps.

Maybe if I was doing this on a weekly basis I would look more into it to streamline the process, but if I was burning through computers that fast I think I would have other problems.
 

strunkenwhite

Well-known member
I have a friend who literally burns his correspondence etc. He does not do this because he thinks the FBI is dumpster diving but because he gets a sense of catharsis out of watching the shit that he doesn't need any more go up in flames.

By all means, take a crowbar to your old PC. Reenact that scene from Office Space. Just don't delude yourself about the practical effect of doing so.
 
But Terthna was the one getting worked up for me taking extra steps in getting rid of a computer? Does it really bother you that much if I spend 30 minutes or less doing this once every several years?


"Honey", the whole point is that it is not beyond my control to take those few extra steps.

Maybe if I was doing this on a weekly basis I would look more into it to streamline the process, but if I was burning through computers that fast I think I would have other problems.

it's more of an optics thing. You're smashing things like a druggie who thinks black helicopters chasing after him, and when someone calls you out and says your being and redundant you go onto this big spill about how you can't trust him.

By all means, take a crowbar to your old PC. Reenact that scene from Office Space. Just don't delude yourself about the practical effect of doing so.

this.
 
Last edited:

strunkenwhite

Well-known member

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
This is getting kinda derail now, but this is one of those things like with many other things and "facts" that exist in life that I do not have experience with and can only hope that "experts" in the field are telling me the truth.

As of late though I have come to learn that I cannot really trust people as things within my scope that I can actually easily verify as being true or false are contested by "experts" and checkmarks.

This is not your fault, but like with many other things I will "take it with a grain of salt". I always hear about data being pulled from computers that people thought they had deleted, thrown away or damaged enough.

---

For example even as a non expert and my very light knowledge and experience I knew that BIOS data did not need the hard drive, as I had actually run into this scenario in my computer dealings. Yet you had claimed in a prior post that nothing is saved anywhere besides the hard drive.

Knowing this, that you attempted to decieve me, even if unintentionally, by not mentioning minor scenarios, I am unwilling to believe that data(no matter how minor) cannot be saved somewhere that is accessible by someone with enough determination and know-how.
Without pushing the derail too far, I am going to post this for the benefit of anyone who wants to protect their data when getting rid of their computer.

All you need to do is write zeros to the drives.

There are programs that will do this for you. Some you can even load into a live boot USB drive so that you don't have to remove the drive and connect to a new computer.

Just boot into the USB drive and write zeros to your Hard drive a few times.

Explanation: when you delete something from a drive, all it really does is removed some stuff in your OS that points to it. (This is why you hear about recovery of deleted data. They didn't overwrite it) That data remains there until you overwrite it with something else. Writing zeroes is a reference to the binary zero. It fills up your entire drive, with zeroes. It overwrites EVERYTHING.

This technique is good enough for the DoD. It works.

As for BIOS: it doesn't contain any personal data. It only holds a few settings, like time, date, what order to boot your drives, basic stuff like that. It doesn't hold programs or personal data. Computer settings only.
 
Last edited:

Lord Sovereign

Well-known member
I guess the clowns that deleted the data didn't realize that doesn't get rid of it completely .

Oof, that's bad news for them, especially if anything incriminating is gleaned from this.

Granted, we know nothing will happen immediately or directly (because elements of law enforcement that aren't converged are too cowardly), but I do believe it would be important. If this is what people hope it to be, then the lower house (Trump friendly) Republicans and American Nationalists have their smoking gun. The former now have the drive to cut the Democrats off at the pass in 2022, and the latter have casus belli for seizing full control of the Republican party from the Neocons who let this happen under their noses.

Win, win, in many respects.
 

Captain X

Well-known member
Osaul
Their actions show that they also think the election was fraudulent. That is literally the only reason to fight an audit at this point, because it's not like it's delaying anything, because Biden has already been sworn in. If they truly believed this election was entirely on the level, they would welcome an audit, as it would then only serve to embarrass Orange Man and his supporters. So the fact they resist it not only says they think it was fraudulent, but that there is actually some evidence which can be found to support this.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
Their actions show that they also think the election was fraudulent. That is literally the only reason to fight an audit at this point, because it's not like it's delaying anything, because Biden has already been sworn in. If they truly believed this election was entirely on the level, they would welcome an audit, as it would then only serve to embarrass Orange Man and his supporters. So the fact they resist it not only says they think it was fraudulent, but that there is actually some evidence which can be found to support this.
Exactly what I've been saying. If there was no fraud, what are you afraid of?

You'd think they'd WANT an audit just to prove what a liar Trump was supposed to have been.

Clearly, they're afraid it was fraudulent themselves.
 
Last edited:

Cherico

Well-known member
Exactly what I've been saying. If there was no fraud, what are you afraid of?

You'd think they'd WANT an audit just to prove what a liar Trump supposed has been.

Clearly, they're afraid it was fraudulent themselves.


Once a house of cards starts falling you cant get it to stop falling.
 

Megadeath

Well-known member
Their actions show that they also think the election was fraudulent. That is literally the only reason to fight an audit at this point, because it's not like it's delaying anything, because Biden has already been sworn in. If they truly believed this election was entirely on the level, they would welcome an audit, as it would then only serve to embarrass Orange Man and his supporters. So the fact they resist it not only says they think it was fraudulent, but that there is actually some evidence which can be found to support this.
trump's actions show that he also believed there was collusion with Russia, and that his finances both personal and business involved illegal dealings. That is litterally the only reason he'd fight the investigations taking place. If he truly was on the level, he'd have welcomed such investigations as they would only serve to embarrass his opponents who initiated them. So, the fact that he resisted them shows that not only did the alleged crimes occur but he was worried they'd find the proof.

Exactly what I've been saying. If there was no fraud, what are you afraid of?

You'd think they'd WANT an audit just to prove what a liar Trump was supposed to have been.

Clearly, they're afraid it was fraudulent themselves.
If there was no Russian collusion, and no illicit financial dealings, what is trump afraid of? You'd think he'd WANT the investigation and audits, just to prove it was all made up.

Clearly he's afraid they'll find the proof of his crimes.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
trump's actions show that he also believed there was collusion with Russia, and that his finances both personal and business involved illegal dealings. That is litterally the only reason he'd fight the investigations taking place. If he truly was on the level, he'd have welcomed such investigations as they would only serve to embarrass his opponents who initiated them. So, the fact that he resisted them shows that not only did the alleged crimes occur but he was worried they'd find the proof.


If there was no Russian collusion, and no illicit financial dealings, what is trump afraid of? You'd think he'd WANT the investigation and audits, just to prove it was all made up.

Clearly he's afraid they'll find the proof of his crimes.
You think you made a good point against me, but I've held this opinion for years. :rolleyes:

It was downright foolish to interfere with that sham of an investigation.

Especially considering how it was revealed to all be fake and funded by the Clintons. All he did was give the left ammo to use against him.
 
Last edited:

Megadeath

Well-known member
You think you made a good point against me, but I've held this opinion for years. :rolleyes:

It was downright foolish to interfere with that sham of an investigation.
The point isn't against you, it's against the argument. The fact that other reasons exist for such interference and obstinacy, even if those other reasons are stupidity or childishness, would be the point I'm trying to make. I do think other reasons exist for such opposition, in both cases, but even if we only accept that it still invalidates your point that the only reason they could oppose the audit was guilt.
 

Rocinante

Russian Bot
Founder
The point isn't against you, it's against the argument. The fact that other reasons exist for such interference and obstinacy, even if those other reasons are stupidity or childishness, would be the point I'm trying to make. I do think other reasons exist for such opposition, in both cases, but even if we only accept that it still invalidates your point that the only reason they could oppose the audit was guilt.
It was an indication of guilt on Trump's part.

And massively foolish, because he wasn't actually guilty.

It is still an indication of guilt for the democrats to do the same.

This is consistent. Trump wasn't guilty but he sure have people a reason to believe he was. Which was either massively foolish, or a good way to keep them focused on a wild goose chase instead of other shit. Which is not impossible for these democrats to be doing, either.

Yes, a logical conclusion to come to when people interfere with these investigations is "well maybe that indicates that they might be guilty." It isn't a guilty sentence but it definitely leads you in that direction.
 

Megadeath

Well-known member
It was an indication of guilt on Trump's part.

And massively foolish because he wasn't actually guilty.

It is still an indication of guilt for the democrats to do the same.
I think you're using the wrong word. It might have been suggestive of guilt where there was none, but I don't believe it can be indicative if there wasn't.
 

Megadeath

Well-known member
If you want to argue semantics, that's on you. You know what I mean.
Well, it seems to me there's a fairly big difference between "This thing could suggest there was fraud." and "Clearly, they're afraid it was fraudulent themselves." That's not just semantics, the difference between something being suggestive and something being clear is fairly meaningful.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top