@DisenchantedTruth China's 50 cent army now the dollar 10 army doesn't only propagandize to domestic audiences.

Very sophisticated.

I can agree with this.

Who is broadcasting moderate left? I seem to find everyone who is parroting CNN.

Smart engineering stuxnet targeted only the Siemens controllers that controlled a very specific number of centrifuges.

You assume there is a burden to prove the election non fraudulent. There is no reason to ask otherwise. You keep appealing to how the election is different but nothing specific that would matter in regards to fraud. You assume that the 3 points you brought are somehow justified. Then you appealed to hope of legislators making decisions based on these un proven fraud claims. @Corndog

The functionality of the software software is very interesting.

And the fact that it jumped the so-called air gap and was able to infect the systems moreover the Iranians didn't know what was going on for two cycles of destroyed centrifuges.

Air gap is nothing

You infect the technicians that are interacting with the air gap system.

Sorry you are mistaken and I don’t know why you say these things despite my trying very hard to understand. I wish you would do the same perhaps you are. I am just not seeing or understanding why you attribute these things to coming out of my mouth.

Another fun fact about Olympic games is that security professionals the world over were well aware of it for a number of years researching what potential Target it was to attack.

Do you think you've ever talked to anyone in the 50-cent army?

I wouldn't have a clue.

@DisenchantedTruth, you just advanced to level 9!

Aka the dollar 10 army

Ardent disinformation purveyors...

@Corndog why do you keep asking me for evidence?

How about in effect the 50 cent army.

@busillis - sorry. I've been dealing with a serious headache and this is almost like trying to decode your messages. I'm lost.

@DisenchantedTruth food for thought...

You do not owe me any evidence for anything. I was just not sure why you are saying these things and what they are based on.

@Corndog, you just advanced to level 7!

@DisenchantedTruth check your direct messaging from me

Kind of clear

Also I'm glad to hear that I'm living up to my moniker.

@Corndog which things? I was saying the starting point for this election or any election is not “prove this isn’t fraudulent” . The starting point is always it’s a valid election until proven other wise. That’s why there are challenges. There is no post election checking required. Trump took this opportunity to appeal but thus far has not provided anything significant.

This is what you kept asking for

To which you said “You assume there is a burden to prove the election non fraudulent.” and “I said no I didn’t why do you say that?” and here we are. So what do you want to do now? I don’t need evidence from you unless you want to show me something else. You have no more of a burden than the contrary point that it was a fraudulent election . My point in the middle is that we don’t know currently enough to make that call either way.

I have no burden at all not that I have more or less. I am at the neutral position of no fraud unless shown otherwise. @Corndog

You two are going 'round in circles, @Corndog and @james j - I feel like I'm watching my sons argue.

You will never agree...

I agree with that.

Time to give up the fight and each believe what you believe.

We can agree that the burden is on the Trump team to prove fraud

I will defer to my previous attempts to move on from the conversation.

Do you accept or deny this

If you deny this then you don’t understand the dynamic of the election

When has a anyone had to prove they won

It’s either accepted or denied

The neutral position is to accept things went correctly the other position is it did not