and within 12 hours of that conversation, the US Consulate in Frankfurt was raided “by men in US Army uniforms” but Byrne says, “It’s not clear at all who did the seizing. No one’s really taking responsibility, at the moment.” This would explain Sidney Powell’s comments
Continues thread
1/
- DID THE BAD GUYS GET THE SCYTL SERVERS? -
A colleague of Byrne’s informed a friendly congressman about the Frankfurt data transfer. This congressman, unfortunately informed the President about this on an open line
and within 12 hours of that conversation, the US Consulate in Frankfurt was raided “by men in US Army uniforms” but Byrne says, “It’s not clear at all who did the seizing. No one’s really taking responsibility, at the moment.” This would explain Sidney Powell’s comments
during last week’s press conference that she was unsure if the Scytl servers seized in this raid had fallen into the hands of the Bad Guys.
- CHINA ‘ABSOLUTELY’ SWITCHED VOTES -
Byrne says there are three different buckets to understand.
Bucket #1, The technical functionality of these Dominion election systems, “Because they were built by Hugo Chavez in order to make himself El Presidente for Life, they were built with functionality that you would not imagine any legitimate voting system would have.
“They can drag and drop votes to the candidate of their choice. And this isn’t a theory, it’s in their instruction manual…they can allocate votes, they can generate blank ballots, they can do all these admin overrides that really destroy election integrity.
“What’s even worse than that, that you do want to understand, if you want to understand the foreign involvement, here is this – and nobody in the press has picked up on this, yet:
these Dominion servers are widely-infected with a malware called QSnatch. And what QSnatch is is a credential-stealer…75,000 Dominion servers [in the US] are infected with it
“That means if an admin or a poll worker in any precinct logs on to any machine that’s infected, their credentials get zapped & sent out on the Dark Web, where they’re for sale or there’s somebody in Xi’an, China, at the military hacking base has them. So they can login.
“So, it’s bad enough that in Maricopa County, Arizona, there’s some precinct worker, there’s an administrator who has the ability to do a bunch of mischief and slide votes around.
It’s especially bad that some guy who steals his credentials from China can login to Maricopa County and that guy in China can move the votes around. That’s horrendous.
“And there’s absolute Chinese involvement in what’s going on here. I’m gonna stop there but there’s absolutely that kind of Chinese involvement.
- HOW TO PROVE THE CASE -
Within 24 hours of the Election, Byrne’s team had put everything together. “We saw the traffic that night…The traffic going to Frankfurt. So that’s one set of things to understand, things like that hack.
“Let me give you another aspect of that: If you go up to the voting booth, with your ballot all filled-out and you turn it in and they feed it into the machine, if the machine says, ‘Oh, I find this hard to read,’ it gives you a warning sign.
The precinct worker will tell you, ‘Honey, you can fill it out again and stand in line for an hour or you just hit this green button.
Hit the green button and your vote will be adjudicated later,’ meaning humans will look at it and they’ll decide, they’ll choose what you were trying to mark. It’ll be OK, it’ll all go in.
“And 95% of people, if not more are going to hit the green button. What that really does with your vote is that it adds it to a pool and a pool accumulates of these adjudicable votes…but the admin can come by and grab – at the end of the day, there’s 931 of those votes…
he can just drag and drop them to Joe Biden, which is why you might see this sudden spike of 983 Biden votes – or, in some cases, 25,000 or 130,000. That’s the functionality. Now, no legitimate machine would have the functionality but let’s set that aside.
Now, we get to Bucket #2.
“Bucket #2 is the lived experiences of the people who voted and who worked in the precincts, who volunteered. And we have hundreds of affadavits from such people.”
Affadavits regarding “Sharpiegate” are an example of the sworn testimonies of irregularities and/or foul play that Byrne’s team has collected, independent of those collected by Trump’s legal team.
Those ballots that became invalidated in Maricopa County because the Sharpie ink bled through, instead of ending up in an “Adjudication Pool”, as referenced in Bucket #1 above, they ended up in a “Drag ‘n Drop” pool, for Joe Biden.
Bucket #3 refers to the statistical outcomes, in some cases, on the order of “Quadrillions-to-one against that certain things could happen,” Byrne says.
“And again, I am not a Republican, I did not vote for Mr Trump, I’m a Libertarian and I love the Constitution and that’s my religion…I’m not coming at this from a pro-Trump thing, I’m just about the truth.
“If the outcomes that occur – if you were theoretcially in an intensely Biden district, with 96% support, & you had 100 people come in & vote, the chances that 100 people in a row would vote for Biden would be .96 raised to the hundredth power. So that’s 60-1 against.
More from For later read
the whole point of Dunks was you could go cop them at VIM whenever you wanted for $65. this shit is like having to enter a raffle to buy milk.
like seriously why not make a ton more of them if they're gonna be so sought-after? they land at outlets? so? nike still makes money off that.
the only reason to keep making them so limited is that they KNOW all that matters is the profit on the flip and if they were readily available FEWER people would want them, not more
the whole system is super broken, but it's just gonna go the way it goes, because at this point it all caters to the secondary market. the only reason Nike can sell Jordan 1s for $200 is because the people buying them can flip them for $500
adjusted for inflation, a $65 AJ1 in 1985 is like $160—and modern-day AJ1s are made from cheaper materials in factories staffed by cheaper workers. they don't HAVE to be $200 retail. but the secondary market nuked the whole concept of what sneakers are "worth"
\U0001f91e ONLINE RAFFLE is available from @bodega for the upcoming "UNLV" Nike Dunk Low Retro. Open until 5 PM ET on 2/16.
— Kicks Deals (@KicksDeals) February 15, 2021
\u27a1\ufe0f\u27a1\ufe0f https://t.co/JxJlyPuJVo pic.twitter.com/zenWOCDg4L
like seriously why not make a ton more of them if they're gonna be so sought-after? they land at outlets? so? nike still makes money off that.
the only reason to keep making them so limited is that they KNOW all that matters is the profit on the flip and if they were readily available FEWER people would want them, not more
the whole system is super broken, but it's just gonna go the way it goes, because at this point it all caters to the secondary market. the only reason Nike can sell Jordan 1s for $200 is because the people buying them can flip them for $500
adjusted for inflation, a $65 AJ1 in 1985 is like $160—and modern-day AJ1s are made from cheaper materials in factories staffed by cheaper workers. they don't HAVE to be $200 retail. but the secondary market nuked the whole concept of what sneakers are "worth"
You May Also Like
A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.
6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices
https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x
PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.
735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices
https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ
The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.
The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.
