Thread by @ErrataRob

I'm watching Phil Waldron testimony in Arizona. I'm a couple hours into it and, as I an expert, it looks like complete garbage.

A good example is this point: the "SpiderFoot" graph doesn't show what he claims, it's wildly misrepresented.

He cites the SharpieGate conspiracy theory. Um, the new ballots for 2020 are no longer affected by bleedthrough. They generate fewer error ballots, not more.

As far as I can tell, at no point does he claim that Maricopa Dominion machines were connected to the Internet talking to Germany. Instead, that's the conclusion people reached from disconnected pieces of testimony.

I see the disconnected pieces that don't mean what people assume they mean, and can see how people would construct from these misunderstandings that conclusion.

On the other hand, maybe I missed some separate clear statement of this.

So why does Phil Waldron make these errors? My guess is that he's either incompetent or not committed to the truth.

I didn't want to insult Waldon. I started this thread trying to assume that there's a reason for these errors, things get lost in translation when dumbing down technical content.

But no, he went there first :).

This question is vaguely worded and means nothing.
This response is even more vague and means nothing.

It appears as if he's testifying that he's seen Dominion voting machines talking to Germany. That's not actually what was said at all.

Question: "Can you discuss this web traffic increase?"
Him: no

It's a lot of words in which he explains he has no idea what he was talking about, and gives us no more information, but a lot of terabytes were involved.

It's important to note what's going on here. He's not providing hard details. He's providing vague, confusing statements, from which the listeners derive their own conclusions. As the panel obviously misunderstands what he says, he goes with it, rather than correcting them.

Panel: "But is there a secure system?"
Waldron: "Voatz, which uses the blockchain"



FYI: Voatz and blockchain for voting are widely discredited ideas. If you were looking for something for experts to laugh at, this would be it.

Panel: "If you got a text message from Ukraine, would that not be a red flag your phone/information was being attacked/infiltrated?"
Waldron: "correct, it would be"

Um, no. It wouldn't be, not even close.

Giuliani: "that chart [SpiderFoot graph] that I can't understand with all those arrows -- that's the traffic that was going on from your voting and calculating machines to the rest of the world".

This is a malicious lie. Lie, lie, lie.

That SpiderFoot picture shows information that might be available, such as BGP membership or open TCP ports. It's not a pew pew graph showing traffic between machines on the Internet, but when there is a relationship between two pieces of information.

Anybody can generate a SpiderFoot graph for "DominionVoting.com". It takes a while to scan everything, but here's my current scan running. As you can see IT'S NOT A PEW PEW GRAPH SHOWING TRAFFIC AS RUDY GULIANI CLAIMS!!! He's a liar.

Voting machines, and our entire voting system, have problems.
The pandemic fueled changes to our voting systems also have problems.
I'm willing to believe, if you give me evidence.

But what we see here in this 11 hour testimony is Giuliani and Waldron trying to deceive.