FEMA Hurricane Relief Funds are a Prime Example. If you don't use them because there were no Hurricanes in that Year. It means you need a New Authorization in the New Year.

Sorry for the delay in responding... I started to look into this last night and was pulled away. I think I have a better idea on what is happening. Detroit has issues, but they appear to be more on the ineptitude side than the nefarious side. MI has an unnecessarily complex process for absent voter (AV) procedures (https://www.michigan.gov/documents/sos/VIII_Absent_Voter_County_Boards_265998_7.pdf). In a city as big as Detroit, all absentee votes are not counted at their local precincts, but are sent to a central location where they are sorted into bi-partisan AV Counting Boards (AVCB). These are usually 1 for 1 (in-person to AVCB), but jurisdictions with more than 250 precincts (Detroit has 503) are allowed to have AVCBs that count multiple precincts AV's. Detroit has 134 AVCBs and I have been unable to find a mapping between precinct and AVCB's.

The SoS tried to explain here (https://www.michigan.gov/sos/0,4670,7-127-1633_100423_102534_102535---,00.html in the first section) - Apparently, Precinct 1 maps to AVCB 132 - but doesn't explain how anyone is supposed to know that (hence my search for a mapping). So, AV's are centrally received and sorted by hand into AVCB's. AVCB's that count for multiple precincts are responsible for keeping individual AV's for individual precincts segregated - which would be problematic once envelopes are separated from ballots. According to the AV procedures, Election results are supposed to be presented in Precinct totals, ACVB totals, and combined precinct/AVCB totals. Detroit does not appear to provide the combined totals, which could be illegal (but the doc uses words that might provide wiggle room) and definitely confuses matters. They need to fix this going forward.

Given this convoluted process... it is kind of amazing that they were out of balance by only 441 votes total in Wayne County, MI - especially when factoring in the reliance on human accuracy in the AVCB's.

Looking at the length. I understand the Delay.

Lol it was Russia but who knows it could have been China. Always deflect to China and blame them for anything

It shows, though, that shows like Crowder's aren't really about in-depth investigation. They are about getting eyeballs/ears. His "analysis" assumed nefarious intent and claimed to have tried to call a couple of AVCB board members, but didn't bother reading the Absent Voter manual published in Oct 2020, which explains why jurisdictions over 250 precincts do not have a separate AVCB for each Precinct and explains why the numbers are separate. He, then, could have been asking why the City of Detroit jurisdiction was not publishing combined Precinct and AVCB (segregated precinct) results.

I believe if someone had the ability to pull this off. They may also have the ability to leave false Breadcrumbs?

https://twitter.com/filipinanswers/status/1340067983922630658?s=21

Nice signature “audit”.

Russia is not really relevant in the world stage.

They are relevant in terms of hacking solarwinds

@William Dinan or that’s what they want you to think 🤔

I'm not stating its a Reality. I'm only open to the Possibility absent of Facts and Data.

Basically, I'm not jumping to conclusions!

@james j. And I am sure you are aware that an affirmative statement from our Government doesn't always equate to the Truth or Factual?

Yes but it could be China why not lol

This is why I was asking Rob to stop the fear-mongering during yesterday’s show. People who work in and around the institutions affected know better the reality.

? Im referring to Trump blaming China even though all known evidence points to Russia.

Trump's "hyperbole" that his supporters find so endearing is like fingernails on a chalkboard to those that don't. The left will shake their heads at the irony of his closing point about "making it an even more corrupted embarrassment for the USA." The right will be cheering his audacity.

@TaLoN132, you just advanced to level 32!

Russia, Russia, Russia

@TaLoN132 yes fingernails on a chalkboard. The effect would be reduced if the outrage was consistent

Known by whom? You? CNN? Let the subject matter experts figure out what is going on.

I didn't know you are privy to the Evidence?

@kennyb the people involved in investigating

@William Dinan if you hold to that do you also hold to trumps analysis of “it could be China”

That’s what I am pointing out the baseless accusation

Could and is are two very different things.

One is possible the other is definitive.

blaming anything on china is financial suicide

You are assuming the basis is an assumption. Do you have knowledge of the material he is making the Basis upon?

@William Dinan right it’s blaming China with no evidence when your own appointed SOS affirms it’s Russia. So to not lend any credence to the “Russia narrative” just blame china baselessly for political points.

That tweet is misleading... The person who is there to count is talking about signatures on the ballots. Ballots - by law in 50 states - are secret. If there is a signature on the ballot, it was likely done by an election worker. I believe that some jurisdictions require the people who do adjudication or other functions to sign to indicate they were involved. I am not certain, but it seems possible that this may be what was happening here. The election official that is trying to get the volunteers to complete the task that they were supposed to be doing is obviously not wanting to antagonize them or get into why they are wrong about their assertion. She is displaying an inordinate amount of patience.

He said he got a briefing , using your logic politicians lie. But sure let’s see trumps word that he has some basis for his China accusation. Let’s forget he has a political incentive (to his supporters and himself) to scapegoat China and give no credence to russia being a bad actor. In other words blame China with very little base but not blame Russia even thought there is more to go on.

Just like his assertions that Hunter was under investigation for Dealings with China. It was called baseless and 50 Former Intelligence Officials said so? Who was Correct?

They accusation of malfeasance (so far) would be baseless not the fact an investigation it self was occurring

Also how would former intelligence officials known anything about current investigations

Please take the Blinders Off. I am willing to do so.

You are being inconsistent in your analysis and completely missing the point

The point is when all else fails scapegoat China to distance yourself from any Russian malfeasance (from trumps point of view)

His main goal is to overplay China and underplay Russia

We as Human Beings probably all have Basis. The first step to coming to an informed decision is accepting it is so and recognizing it could cloud your Judgement or Reasoning.

Still missing the point