- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:48 pm to Jimbeaux
Exactly. This is probably about all the evidence that the judges more concerned with jurisdiction and legal minucia refused to hear.
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:50 pm to xGeauxLSUx
He’s running a PR campaign and putting big numbers out for headlines because he knows he won’t lose the money.
He’s going to present his packets regardless.
But no one who actually knows what packets do will show up because they know it’s a farce… by his “disprove for $5 million”, PT Barnum silliness
He’s going to present his packets regardless.
But no one who actually knows what packets do will show up because they know it’s a farce… by his “disprove for $5 million”, PT Barnum silliness
This post was edited on 8/5/21 at 11:51 pm
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:51 pm to boosiebadazz
Ok. Why don't you just explain it right now.
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:51 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
And the answer is yes, yes there is a way for Mike to wiggle out. And that wiggle is why no one serious will take him up on his offer.
Mike literally just has to say “but what about …” and he wins.
Whether or not Mike keeps his word is not what we're talking about.
If Mike shows the evidence of his claim and then someone has evidence to the contrary, then Mike's claim is disproven.
This post was edited on 8/5/21 at 11:53 pm
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:53 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
But no one who actually knows what packets do will show up because they know it’s a farce… by his “disprove for $5 million”, PT Barnum silliness
Sounds like you have a quick line to the $5M. Are you going to tells us cavemen what packets do or just flail around like a man on fire?
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:55 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
And the answer is yes, yes there is a way for Mike to wiggle out. And that wiggle is why no one serious will take him up on his offer.
Mike literally just has to say “but what about …” and he wins.
He can squelch, of course, but if someone can show that the data is a) fraudulent, b) doesn’t show what he thinks it does, or c) is not definitive in what it shows, then he should pay up.
What you seem to be saying is that some form of option c will take place, and there will be a continued argument over whether or not it does show what Lindell thinks it shows.
But let’s play this the other way. Suppose the evidence shows definitively that fraud took place, but it can’t show definitively that enough votes were changed.
Aren’t the Dems playing the same game with evidence? Moving the goal posts?
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:57 pm to Texas Yarddog
quote:
Sounds like you have a quick line to the $5M. Are you going to tells us cavemen what packets do or just flail around like a man on fire?
That's their way of killing a discussion.
Posted on 8/5/21 at 11:58 pm to RiverCityTider
The regular judicial system extremely unlikely to see any prosecution related to the 2020 election fraud
This post was edited on 8/6/21 at 12:34 am
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:08 am to boosiebadazz
"A packet sniffer — also known as a packet analyzer, protocol analyzer or network analyzer — is a piece of hardware or software used to monitor network traffic. Sniffers work by examining streams of data packets that flow between computers on a network as well as between networked computers and the larger Internet."
So it can be done
This post was edited on 8/6/21 at 12:10 am
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:00 am to RiverCityTider
quote:Well yeah, packet capturing is a thing. Something else that's a thing is faking packet captures. You can just type it out or have a computer generate some.
"A packet sniffer — also known as a packet analyzer, protocol analyzer or network analyzer — is a piece of hardware or software used to monitor network traffic. Sniffers work by examining streams of data packets that flow between computers on a network as well as between networked computers and the larger Internet."
So it can be done
Another thing that's a thing is encryption, which means the vast majority of packets captured over the internet are useless.
Lindell claims to have the entire election captured. That in itself is laughable.
The prize money is only up for grabs to attendees of the symposium - which is invite-only. ell oh ell
It is supposedly 37 terabytes of information, which no one can analyze ahead of time, and they only have a couple of days to look at it.
So the most straightforward way to disprove that the data is legit is if it shows something that doesn't match the actual results. Of course this will be the case, and of course would not be accepted as a disproof.
So what would be accepted as disproof? The only way I can think of would be if I also broke countless wiretap laws to capture an entire election and show that his data doesn't match mine. But then he could just say that I missed something.
This is a marketing stunt, obviously.
This post was edited on 8/6/21 at 1:13 am
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:06 am to RiverCityTider
I've got one question about this that nobody has answered for me yet and if he doesn't answer it in the first thirty minutes, I'm out.
Where did they get the packet capture data from?
It's that simple. And it's the most obvious question. And if nobody is going to bother answering it, then this is a fairy tale. And I'm 100% convinced that they stole the fricking election.
But answer that one first so I can take it seriously. Please. I was involved in cyber security for the 2016 election and I can assure you there was no central place where that data existed in order to be captured. We were doing it on our state. Others were doing it on theirs. But some weren't even doing it and NOBODY had it all.
Where did they get the packet capture data from?
It's that simple. And it's the most obvious question. And if nobody is going to bother answering it, then this is a fairy tale. And I'm 100% convinced that they stole the fricking election.
But answer that one first so I can take it seriously. Please. I was involved in cyber security for the 2016 election and I can assure you there was no central place where that data existed in order to be captured. We were doing it on our state. Others were doing it on theirs. But some weren't even doing it and NOBODY had it all.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:19 am to Captain Rumbeard
quote:If we assume that it's even possible, how many laws would have to be broken to do it?
Where did they get the packet capture data from?
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:45 am to RiverCityTider
Who in the civilized world does not know the election was stolen? Not counting the mindless robots who watch and listen to the media.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 5:11 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
You can’t disprove something.
No one can disprove that smoking is healthy?
Posted on 8/6/21 at 5:23 am to boosiebadazz
quote:
You literally cannot do that by the nature of science, philosophy, law, and the judicial system as it’s been passed down for hundreds of years. There is a reason the plaintiff and the state (in criminal matters) start with the burden of proof rather than the defendant starting with a burden of “disproof”.
Man, that is dumb. You can absolutely disprove something. In fact, I can disprove the notion that you can breathe water and survive .. You go ahead and try to breathe water and get back to me.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 5:38 am to RiverCityTider
I want to believe, I'll be honest I still don't even understand what a packet capture is, but I do think Lindell has the goods.
I went to an election integrity event put on by a few pretty smart IT guys. They explained that there is a guy nicknamed "Spider", I can't remember his real name. Former military intel guy who is an elite world renowned hacker. Apparently he is one of a few who were able to hack in and view in real time what was happening, and some how create a verified data log of what happened.
I assume that him or someone like him was who provided him this information.
I went to an election integrity event put on by a few pretty smart IT guys. They explained that there is a guy nicknamed "Spider", I can't remember his real name. Former military intel guy who is an elite world renowned hacker. Apparently he is one of a few who were able to hack in and view in real time what was happening, and some how create a verified data log of what happened.
I assume that him or someone like him was who provided him this information.
This post was edited on 8/6/21 at 5:39 am
Posted on 8/6/21 at 6:48 am to boosiebadazz
As of now the “state” as you mentioned has been having no problems having the the defendants disprove their guilt . Trump , Trumps circle of government employees and advisors , January 6th participants , McClusky’s are a few examples
Posted on 8/6/21 at 7:18 am to RiverCityTider
Either is he is absolutely insane or he's scamming the frick out of people probably a bit of both. If the dude actually had evidence he'd just drop it not make a big show out of it. Also a guy doing infomercials for pillows isn't going to have access to information that nobody had been able to find 
Posted on 8/6/21 at 7:29 am to boosiebadazz
Good grief Boosie, you chose two absolutes to say you can't disprove them. You can't disprove something that is a known fact, like gravity and time/space. You can't disprove that the sun comes up in the east, either.
So, I assume you put the stolen election in the same category as gravity? Me too.
So, I assume you put the stolen election in the same category as gravity? Me too.
Page 2 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News