The "What's on the server" tin foil thread

rtB

rtB

Major Hide Member
Full Member
Minuteman
Supporter
Apr 29, 2019
2,218
6,305
Phoenix, AZ
#1
We all know that they did or did not maybe take a server from a three letter or four letter location that may or may not have been co located in a foreign country.

I'm kinda wondering what might be found on this potentially existing server.

I have a few ideas of what might be found, so I'll start with a couple ideas. All in fun...

1. Pictures of Goebbels and Hunter partying like it's 1939.

2. The missing minute from the Zapruder film.

Your insight appreciated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: camocorvette and rustyinbend
#10
a lot of porn I mean a lot ..... maybe porn and all the names of corrupt politicians and the people they took bribes from , the location of jimmy Hoffa ( na no one cares anymore he is dead one way or the other , maybe the location of the lost city of eldorado , pick of Angela Merkel smiling
1605931968761.png

she would kill to keep her secrets private .
pics of bill Clinton in drag with prince Albert and a harem of under aged kids , others have died to keep what they know that quiet ...
Jeffrey Epstein did not kill himself . maybe he had proof of aliens I mean not such a big deal in the us we have 30 million + or - a few illegal ones here . or What i think it was he had the only known recording of kim (little rocket man ) singing in the bath tub .
 
  • Like
Reactions: camocorvette
#21
Verified footage of the birth of the unholy union between Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster ... both of whom then voted for Trump in Pennsylvania on Dominion voting machines ... after which their votes miraculously changed to "Biden" ... and then get delivered at 3:30am on a fake food truck containing 4,000,000 "Biden" votes ... to Philadelphia vote counters paid by George Soros to double every Biden vote ... certified by Election Canvassers that are members of a secret cabal presided over by Venezuelan President Maduro ... all seen first on OAN and Newmax. But all of that pales in comparison to the TRUE origins of the "ooze" coming from Rudy's temples.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BytorJr
#24
theLBC said:
it is supposed to be annoying.
Click to expand...

Oh. I literally watched the whole thing and thought:

I don’t get it. Weird clothes. I bet no one got a BJ in the 1900’s

Maybe they played that on the radio when there was just one channel and they played it too much?

Oh maybe when the internet was SOOOOOOO slow and you waited for that to load. I could see how that could be frustrating. Nowadays it’s just confusing and I thought you didn’t know how to post a link. 😂🤣😂
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: OldSalty2, Bourbon_and_Bullets and theLBC
#25
DevilDocAZ said:
Oh. I literally watched the whole thing and thought:

I don’t get it. Weird clothes. I bet no one got a BJ in the 1900’s

Maybe they played that on the radio when there was just one channel and they played it too much?

Oh maybe when the internet was SOOOOOOO slow and you waited for that to load. I could see how that could be frustrating. Nowadays it’s just confusing and I thought you didn’t know how to post a link. 😂🤣😂
Click to expand...
lol, yeah and imagine if every other link to hot chick pics went to a rickroll.
it got so bad, people uploaded the song over and over because people memorized the original url address for the original music video.
 
#31
rustyinbend said:
I love how we've gone from "Does it exist?" ... to "What's on it?" ... in record time, and with zero physical evidence.
Oh well, If it's on the Internet, it must be true ... right?
Click to expand...
pretty much as i described yesterday or the day before.

richardsonpost.com

United States European Command (USEUCOM) did Take Control of ‘Vote Switching' Servers in Germany

SCYTL server seizure referenced in our article November 16th is no longer speculation by Texas Congressman, Louie Gomert. They were CIA servers.
richardsonpost.com

notice they say "took control" not seized.
there is some evidence the servers were only down for a short period.
very possible the took down the VMs, took snapshots of them, and backups of the DBs and transactions logs, and then brought them back online.
if these servers were a routing point for the election tallies, how could they take it all down without affecting the tallying that is still going (or is it)?
 
#32
theLBC said:
pretty much as i described yesterday or the day before.

notice they say "took control" not seized.
there is some evidence the servers were only down for a short period.
very possible the took down the VMs, took snapshots of them, and backups of the DBs and transactions logs, and then brought them back online.
if these servers were a routing point for the election tallies, how could they take it all down without affecting the tallying that is still going (or is it)?
Click to expand...
I guess I'll wait for "real evidence" ... but thanks for that.
Thus far, this whole "German Server" thing only exists as non-evidential hard-right fever-swamp editorial.
Time will tell if it's real or not.
My estimation (just a "gut" feeling) is that this whole thing will dissipate very quickly as it turns out to be non-existent.
Where's the lawsuit in which "real" lawyers have to present "proof" and testify "under oath" with their "Law Licenses" on the line?
When I see that happen, I'll start to believe. Until then, it's fantasy ... a great story nonetheless ... but still just fantasy.
 
#33
Existence of infrastructure devices to aggregate and tally votes is a given. To say that such devices do not exist is silly. Of course they do. How else are the votes tallied? By some supernatual power?

The question is really, did the raid take place? It might have. Let me play the game. What proof is there that the raid didnt take place? Credible sources? I need a video that the servers are still sitting in the rack, undisturbed. I would like a log with the chain of custody (with signatures) that show the server has remained in the rack. While we are at it, i also need proof that the data was not taken from the server, since physical possession isnt needed to have the data anyways.

This was how it worked for the trump dossier. So hey, whats good for the goose...ammirite?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Forgetful Coyote
#34
OldSalty2 said:
Existence of infrastructure devices to aggregate and tally votes is a given. To say that such devices do not exist is silly. Of course they do. How else are the votes tallied? By some supernatual power?

The question is really, did the raid take place? It might have. Let me play the game. What proof is there that the raid didnt take place? Credible sources? I need a video that the aervers are still sitting in the rack, undisturbed. I would like a log with the chain of custody (with signatures) that show the server has remained in the rack. While we are at it, i also need proof that the data was not taken feom the server, since physical possession isnt needed to have the data anyways.
Click to expand...
Three quick points ... and then I'll shut up and go clean my garage and get my wife off my back.
1. Great observations.
2. Proving something "didn't happen" is frequently a paradoxical impossibility ... when making accusations of election fraud, you actually have to prove it "did happen".
3. The assertion isn't the use of technology for vote aggregation. It is that aggregation took place (a) off shore, and (b) with intent to defraud.
 
#35
They could tabulate the votes on the software my company makes and control permissions security, trace and record every single change in the system (which cannot be deleted), and allow you to vote from home. And the vote would be tabulated and done in real time.

But no...
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forgetful Coyote
#38
rustyinbend said:
Three quick points ... and then I'll shut up and go clean my garage and get my wife off my back.
1. Great observations.
2. Proving something "didn't happen" is frequently a paradoxical impossibility ... when making accusations of election fraud, you actually have to prove it "did happen".
3. The assertion isn't the use of technology for vote aggregation. It is that aggregation took place (a) off shore, and (b) with intent to defraud.
Click to expand...

1. Thanks

2. Agree, but the burden of proof is a one way street with lefties. My comments were made tounge-in-cheek to point out the hipocrisy. Lets give it time and see where the chips fall.

Hopefully (but i have my doubts), you used the same level of scrutiny with the (pee dossier, two scoops, troops are morons, good people on both sides, russia gate, etc).

3.
a) where are the infrastructure devices? If you know please share.

b) intent is subjective, at least to an extent. would having the ability to add weight to votes, change votes etc, just coded in the software itself show intent? Why else would these features be needed in a simple tallying device?

Remember, comey said hills had no intent...therefore it wasnt so. I bet you agree.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forgetful Coyote
#39
OldSalty2 said:
1. Thanks

2. Agree, but the burden of proof is a one way street with lefties. My comments were made tounge-in-cheek to point out the hipocrisy. Lets give it time and see where the chips fall.

Hopefully (but i have my doubts), you used the same level of scrutiny with the (pee dossier, two scoops, troops are morons, good people on both sides, russia gate, etc).

3.
a) where are the infrastructure devices? If you know please share.

b) intent is subjective, at least to an extent. would having the ability to add weight to votes, change votes etc, just coded in the software itself show intent? Why else would these features be needed in a simple tallying device?

Remember, comey said hills had no intent...therefore it wasnt so. I bet you agree.
Click to expand...
1. You're welcome.
2. Sort of agree ... time will tell. "Scrutiny" is my middle name. That said, the burden of proof isn't "right" or "left" ... it belongs to the person making the allegations of fraud.
3a. I have no idea, as each election agency/locale stores their data in their own pre-determined location, where the only standardized element is the data format shared "up" to the state recording database.
3b. "Intent" is subjective, but "proof" is not. It's either demonstrable, or it's not.
3c. Comey made MANY errors and omissions ... I believe he was a "moron", but probably not a "criminal".
 
#41
oneshot86 said:
Comey is not a criminal...
now... i have heard everything...
you need to get your head out of the sand.
Click to expand...
I'm saying "probably" and "I don't know".
That said, if he committed a crime, why hasn't Barr's Justice Department charged him?
Republicans should "love" Comey ... had he not done what he did at the end of the 2016 campaign, it's very likely Hillary would have won.
 
#42
rustyinbend said:
I'm saying "probably" and "I don't know".
That said, if he committed a crime, why hasn't Barr's Justice Department charged him?
Republicans should "love" Comey ... had he not done what he did at the end of the 2016 campaign, it's very likely Hillary would have won.
Click to expand...

oh geeze...
could they have avoided prosecution because the whole upper echelons of DOJ were crooked and supporting each other???
 
#43
rustyinbend said:
1. You're welcome.
2. Sort of agree ... time will tell. "Scrutiny" is my middle name. That said, the burden of proof isn't "right" or "left" ... it belongs to the person making the allegations of fraud.
3a. I have no idea, as each election agency/locale stores their data in their own pre-determined location, where the only standardized element is the data format shared "up" to the state recording database.
3b. "Intent" is subjective, but "proof" is not. It's either demonstrable, or it's not.
3c. Comey made MANY errors and omissions ... I believe he was a "moron", but probably not a "criminal".
Click to expand...

2. I agree it isnt right or left, or at least shouldnt be. But shouldnt be isnt reality. Again, i point to (pee dossier, two scoops, troops are morons, good people on both sides, russia gate, etc). If you believe that the burden of proof doesnt have differing levels between people on the right and left, id argue you arent looking objectively.

3a) Not knowing where they are, opens the possibility that they are overseas, does it not? This could be quickly debunked by the software makers. Hey, that isnt correct, the servers are locted in omaha nebraska. But, here we are and neither of us know. That should alarm us both.

3b) again, i agree. But over and over again this standard is used as convenience instead of the quest for truth. But, then again...fuck the truth, we will provide you with facts.

3c) i do not believe comey is a moron. In fact, i believe hes probably highly intelligent, and especially so in the ways of the swamp. It is in my opinion he knew exactly what he was doing. Criminal? meh...again, subjective. To the left hes a hero (after being the devil himself), to the right hes at minimum a hipocrit, and possibly worse.
 
#44
oneshot86 said:
oh geeze...
could they have avoided prosecution because the whole upper echelons of DOJ were crooked and supporting each other???
Click to expand...
Now where did I put that tin-foil hat ... ???
OldSalty2 said:
2. I agree it isnt right or left, or at least shouldnt be. But shouldnt be isnt reality. Again, i point to (pee dossier, two scoops, troops are morons, good people on both sides, russia gate, etc). If you believe that the burden of proof doesnt have differing levels between people on the right and left, id argue you arent looking objectively.

3a) Not knowing where they are, opens the possibility that they are overseas, does it not? This could be quickly debunked by the software makers. Hey, that isnt correct, the servers are locted in omaha nebraska. But, here we are and neither of us know. That should alarm us both.

3b) again, i agree. But over and over again this standard is used as convenience instead of the quest for truth. But, then again...fuck the truth, we will provide you with facts.

3c) i do not believe comey is a moron. In fact, i believe hes probably highly intelligent, and especially so in the ways of the swamp. It is in my opinion he knew exactly what he was doing. Criminal? meh...again, subjective. To the left hes a hero (after being the devil himself), to the right hes at minimum a hipocrit, and possibly worse.
Click to expand...
Only minor disagreements in there. We're in the same book, and same chapter, but not quite on the same page. LOL
 
#45
Time to go clean the garage ... before she REALLY gets mad. It's been fun. We'll see what happens. It'll either break into a huge story with facts and witnesses, or recede back into the fever-swamp. Time will tell.
 
#47
rustyinbend said:
1. You're welcome.
2. Sort of agree ... time will tell. "Scrutiny" is my middle name. That said, the burden of proof isn't "right" or "left" ... it belongs to the person making the allegations of fraud.
3a. I have no idea, as each election agency/locale stores their data in their own pre-determined location, where the only standardized element is the data format shared "up" to the state recording database.
3b. "Intent" is subjective, but "proof" is not. It's either demonstrable, or it's not.
3c. Comey made MANY errors and omissions ... I believe he was a "moron", but probably not a "criminal".
Click to expand...
comey is indeed a criminal.
how does something like brennan briefing everyone that hillary clinton has a working plan to frame trump for collusion with russia stay hidden for over 3 years?
sedition dude.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Forgetful Coyote and Blutroop
#48
theLBC said:
comey is indeed a criminal.
how does something like brennan briefing everyone that hillary clinton has a working plan to frame trump for collusion with russia stay hidden for over 3 years?
sedition dude.
Click to expand...
That story is highly suspect ... here's a pretty thorough fact-check from the Associated Press ..

apnews.com

Intel in letter is unverified, doesn’t show Clinton planned ‘Russia hoax’

CLAIM: A declassified letter from the United States Director of National Intelligence proves that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton planned the “Russia hoax” against Trump in 2016. AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The letter contains unverified Russian intelligence information and some lawmakers...
apnews.com apnews.com
 
#50
rustyinbend said:
That story is highly suspect ... here's a pretty thorough fact-check from the Associated Press ..

apnews.com

Intel in letter is unverified, doesn’t show Clinton planned ‘Russia hoax’

CLAIM: A declassified letter from the United States Director of National Intelligence proves that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton planned the “Russia hoax” against Trump in 2016. AP’S ASSESSMENT: False. The letter contains unverified Russian intelligence information and some lawmakers...
apnews.com apnews.com
Click to expand...
dude, you are so....
brennan admitted to the briefing after the document was made public. i watched it myself on television.
when he was interviewed, he claimed he was just using it as an example of the kind of intelligence they had.
he said everyone was there as it was a typical intelligence briefing, meaning the entire top on the obama administration knew it.
 
  • Love
Reactions: Forgetful Coyote
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Glassaholic
2025 SHOT Show Optics
Replies
81
Views
8K
JamesHLde
J
Glassaholic
Rifle Scopes Alpha Class High Magnification 6-36/7-35 FFP Scope Review
Replies
126
Views
8K
Charcoal Victorious Alp
C
beetroot
T1x ACE in Hand - Review - Pictures - Info - Thoughts
Replies
24
Views
2K
Emerson0311
Emerson0311
fpgt72
What its like living with ADHD and Dyslexia at 57....
Replies
30
Views
2K
Pharmseller
Pharmseller
lonegunman762x51
Taking a cruise with a$$holes.........................
Replies
129
Views
8K
Big Phish
Big Phish
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Merch
Alerts