re: New Details on Tonight's Speech

quote:

---

ostensibly to manufacture mail-in ballots for Biden.

---

Is this his spin or will the speech have actual evidence of this? This seems like spin

Legit, American ballots have a water mark on them. These Chinese ballots that were dumped in by the thousands, did not have the water mark.

I would like some announcements of who is being perp-walked for taking these from the ricers to dump into the pile of real ballots.

quote:

---

Legit, American ballots have a water mark on them. These Chinese ballots that were dumped in by the thousands, did not have the water mark.

---

That doesn't appear to be what will be discussed tonight

quote:

---

Intelligence agencies also found China did not "interfere with election infrastructure," including vote-counting

---

quote:

---

The report found "no indications" that any foreign actors attempted to alter voter registrations, the casting of ballots, vote-counting or any other "technical aspect" of the 2020 election process.

---

quote:

---

"We assess that it would be difficult for a foreign actor to manipulate election processes at scale without detection by intelligence collection on the actors themselves, through physical and cyber security monitoring around voting systems across the country, or in post-election audits," the report read.

---

The news and media won't care about evidence, they will use this to say Seeeeeeeeeee he still denies it and he will cheat again or some shite like that. The white liberal women will eat it up and the cycle will continue.

quote:

---

China Did Not Attempt to Influence
Presidential Election Outcome

We assess that China did not deploy interference efforts and considered but did not deploy influence efforts intended to change the outcome of the US presidential election. We have high confidence in this judgment. China sought stability in its relationship with the United States and did not view either election outcome as being advantageous enough for China to risk blowback if caught. Beijing probably believed that its traditional influence tools, primarily targeted economic measures and lobbying key individuals and interest groups, would be sufficient to achieve its goal of shaping

US policy regardless of who won the election. We did not identify China attempting to interfere with election infrastructure or provide funding to any candidates or parties.

---

quote:

---

Beijing probably continued to collect intelligence on election-related targets and topics some—and later increased—its election influence efforts, especially over the summer of 2020. The NIO assesses these indications are more persuasive than other information indicating that China decided not to intervene. The NIO further assesses
China probably also continued longstanding efforts to gather information on US voters and public opinion; political parties, candidates and their staffs; and senior
government officials. We assess Beijing probably sought to use this information to predict electoral outcomes and to inform its efforts to influence US policy toward China
under either election outcome, as it has during all election cycles since at least 2008 and considers an acceptable tool of statecraft.

We assess Beijing did not interfere with election infrastructure, including vote tabulation or the transmission of election results..

---

quote:

---

Minority View

The National Intelligence Officer for Cyber assesses that China took at least some steps to undermine former President Trump’s reelection chances, primarily through social media and official public statements and media. The NIO agrees with the IC's view that Beijing was primarily focused on countering anti-China policies, but assesses that some of Beijing's influence efforts were intended to at least indirectly affect US candidates, political processes, and voter preferences, meeting the definition for election influence used in this report.
The NIO agrees that we have no information
suggesting China tried to interfere with election processes. The NIO has moderate confidence in these judgments.

This view differs from the IC assessment because it gives more weight to indications that Beijing preferred former President Trump’s defeat and the election of a more predictable member of the establishment instead, and that Beijing implemented

---

LINK

Weak sauce to predicate passage of the Save Act.

quote:

---

This seems like spin

---

Oh, it seems like spin, does it?

I told you explicitly only yesterday that this would be about China. "Almost certainly". And some of us have been telling you folks exactly what they did since the time it frickin happened. And now you have a reporter telling you that's what is coming. But in your stupid world it "seems like spin."

What it seems to me like is you spent all day yesterday being flat wrong. Will you own up to it, like you are constantly trying to demand from others, when you ask them to make predictions and then eat crow if those predictions don't pan out?

quote:

---

I believe this is new information gathered from "lost" or "destroyed" files.

---

You sure about that?

quote:

---

I told you explicitly only yesterday that this would be about China

---

Sure. Cool.

That really isn't important to my point yesterday.

We can revisit this from yesterday, though:

quote:

---

And if all the report does is reference foreign interference and it has no impact on the domestic investigations, you'll admit how wrong you were?

---

quote:

---

quote:

---

Legit, American ballots have a water mark on them. These Chinese ballots that were dumped in by the thousands, did not have the water mark.

---

That doesn't appear to be what will be discussed tonight

---

You're desperately wish casting at this point.