OK, this has got to be a quick one. It's an elbows thing. Explain later.
For starters, see this post.
https://gettr.com/post/p1yjryk1a1a
The 223 Maricopa machines were running perfectly 7 Nov.
Starting at 0600 8 Nov Kari got panicky calls that the machines weren't working.
Technicians arrived ten hours later to REBOOT the machines. Since then they've worked PERFECTLY.
What does that tell you?
Yes, what does that tell you?
The data comes from one MICHELE SWINICK who is an elections 'judge' working in Scottsdale Arizona.
Michele was interviewed numerous times a few days ago and then her story was covered again last night.
Michele has a lot to talk about, but the three things cited above stick out the most. And they really stick out. So let's reiterate them.
All 223 Maricopa machines were inspected on the eve of the elections and all were working perfectly.
KARI LAKE started getting panicky phone calls early in the morning of 8 November, election day. Friends and colleagues were telling her about irregularities. The machines weren't working. They were spitting the ballots back out.
At 15:30 - 16:00 the same day, or ten hours later, technicians arrived at Michele's locale to 'reboot the machines'. After that, and presumably throughout the obscenely arduous counting process, the machines performed perfectly. Perfectly.
So again: What does that tell you?
Phones Ringing
We've been on the horn all day, trying to reach people. Good luck with that. Everyone's still running around like chickens looking for their heads. The Donald declared last night, the sky is falling again. And who is Kari Lake? It's almost as if the media forgot about her and the travesty in Maricopa. And nobody but nobody is picking up or replying to mail.
But the three facts - and they seem fairly certain - are potentially a game changer. Except no one notices.
Let's talk computer science. We reached one dude who couldn't connect us to the person we wanted to speak with, so we just asked him, point blank, 'what does *reboot* mean to you?' At first he was fuddled, so we added 'no, just your perception of what it means'. That made it easier for him, and he went on to say: 'well, reboot means a sort of *refresh*'.
Which is basically what we suspected. Being in this business so long, it's hard to imagine what Joe Blogs and the unwashed think about things like this or how they perceive them.
The Von Neumann architecture of computers means they have an arithmetic and logic unit (ALU) along with primary memory and secondary memory (and register flags and so forth, instruction pointer, stack pointer). Old mainframes used ferrite cores for primary memory. Today we use 'chips', thanks to William Shockley and the transmitter-resistor.
Programs are run from primary memory because it's faster. The code and data for these programs is loaded from secondary memory. Secondary memory used to mean 'hard drives' but today more and more means solid-state drives. No matter.
CPUs (central processing units) built with ferrite cores retained their values even on a power-down. Modern CPUs can't do that.
A reboot means the equivalent of a power-down. It means all memory is flushed. As the machine comes back up again, built-in routines will see that the code needed is read in from secondary memory, and, at long last, the machine is fit for use again.
Anything previously found in primary memory is gone. That's been flushed away. All of it.
So what does that tell us about Maricopa? Are you getting it? Are you starting to get it?
Some people, identity not yet known, were in polling places after hours on 7 November. Someone with a map of the area could probably sketch out a likely route.
Those people would necessarily have needed access to not only the locales themselves, for which there might be data available, but also to the machines as well (and there might be data available for that too).
(An alternate theory is that the machines were somehow remote-controlled, but that's an even more nefarious ballgame.)
Whoever accessed those 70 (seventy) machines on the night between 7 and 8 November had to have done so without rebooting the machines. That can mean that they somehow changed parameters in the machines as the machines were up and running (although inactive). The default parameters would be on disk, but those values were changed in seventy (70) running machines.
A job well done, the crooks will be thinking.
Of course - and this is the 'fun' part - as soon as you reboot those machines, all traces of the intrusion are wiped away. The machine’s memory is cleaned. Wiping the tracks.
Again:
The machines were working perfectly the day before.
70 of the 223 machines were not working the morning after.
Ten hours into election day, the machines were finally rebooted, and since then they've been working perfectly.
So we know that the machines were not tampered with on disk (unless of course it's a Lindellesque-type remote control operation, much more nefarious and oh so complex).
And, knowing the machines were not tampered with on disk, we know someone came in and, for example, changed their running parameters under the cover of night. To perhaps heighten criteria for accepting ballots - in the extreme, it would seem.
There are holes/gaps in this theory of course. Lots of blanks to fill in. But the main premise must hold. For there are three incontrovertible facts as things stand now.
The machines worked perfectly the day before.
The machines did not work the following day.
The machines worked again after a reboot.
The software in the machines was OK. It was OK on 7 November and again on 8 November after 16:00 and it has continued to be OK ever since. We can therefore discount things such as memory leaks and sundry bugs gradually corrupting data or code, wild pointers running amok past sentinel addresses or bad-pointer zones. The machines reportedly run a Google Unix, so stability should be good.
Elbow time.