Sunday, May 02, 2021 8:58:38 PM
WHY DO WE NEED FORENSIC AUDITS AND HOW DO THEY DIFFER FROM STATE REQUIRED “CERTIFICATION AUDITS?”
Currently, an understaffed tiny federal agency (EAC) and 2 private testing companies (Pro V&V and SLI Compliance) are responsible for certification of our nation’s voting systems and elections.
One of the chief employees at the EAC is a former 10-year executive of Dominion Voting Systems.
Pro V&V and SLI Compliance like Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic are all members of CISA’s Sector Coordinating Council.
Yes, you read that correctly, these companies are in charge of investigating and approving themselves. The EAC is the same council that issued the “most secure election in American history” statement shortly after the election on Nov. 12th.
The testing from Pro V&V and SLI Compliance had been characterized as “superficial” and “cursory testing” by election security experts.
Forensic audits are far more thorough and test everything from the voter rolls to the physical paper ballots to the physical machines themselves.
This includes the election management system, ballot images, adjudication machine logs, compact flash drives, USB drives, audit logs, election database servers, chain of custody documents, and much more.
With forensic audits, everything is audited under one all-encompassing audit by individuals not associated with the government or voting machine companies.
Instead of a “superficial” testing of the machines or hand recounts that just run the same printed ballot images through scanners, independent forensic audits are the only way to determine if an election was truly fair or not.
WHAT IS THE 2020 ELECTION EVIDENCE PROJECT?
The 2020 Election Evidence Project was started in response to the media refusing to report on factual pieces of evidence regarding the 2020 election. Our goal isn’t to convince you of some grandiose conspiracy theory, but instead, to present you with information the traditional media isn’t reporting and allow you to form your own opinions. Because the media generally isn’t reporting on what we’ll be presenting, inevitably a lot of our sources will come from independent and right leaning news sources, tech experts, politicians, lawyers, whistleblower, witnesses, and judges themselves.
I highly encourage you to question everything you see in each piece of presented material. With that said, it’s important to be careful of dismissing information due to the source rather than the claim.
Example: If you see a Youtube video that claims something which makes you uncomfortable, don’t throw out the claim because it’s from a source you’re not familiar with. Research the claim instead. It’s easy to fall into the trap of dismissing evidence from a source (instead of verifying the claim) because as humans, we have an inherent need to be “right.” This is dangerous as our human minds are conditioned to believe pretty much anything that will make us feel “right” even when the truth is contrary to the feeling. (This is a term known as cognitive dissonance.)
Throughout your research if you see something that doesn’t sit well with you, match it up with available sources and evidence to fact check it. When doing so, watch out for misleading “fact checkers” whose headlines will claim to dismiss a “fact” when in reality they only dismiss a portion of a fact or outright masquerade as false evidence being real to prove a point, agenda, or simply get clicks (Reuters, AP, USA Today, Politifact, and others are notorious for this). Remember to question everything and come to your own conclusions.
Finally, please understand, we’re not saying that anything posted on this site is right or wrong, we’re simply pointing out the things that traditional media isn’t reporting. Our goal is to share the information and allow you to decide.
To understand more about how cognitive dissonance works click here:
https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/human-nature/behavior/how-cognitive-dissonance-affects-us-crazy-political-times.htm
How Cognitive Dissonance Affects Us in Crazy Political Times
The recent U.S. presidential election and transition has created lots of conflict between people with different beliefs and internal conflict due to our own beliefs.
Let's say you exercise regularly and eat balanced meals in appropriate portions. It's snack time after a particularly strenuous workout, and you're in the mood for something delicious.
Instead of chowing down on something nutritious like you normally would, you devour a whole bag of chocolate-chip cookies, only to regret your indulgence later. Those feelings of guilt and shame? That's cognitive dissonance at play.
Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we feel when we hold conflicting beliefs, or our actions don't match our values. Because we're bad at dealing with these inconsistencies, our instinct is to resolve them.
We can minimize the dissonance by justifying, downplaying or changing an inconsistent belief or behavior. "I'll just call it a cheat day," you might say, sugar high from those guzzled cookies.
Or you might point to all the evidence that chocolate is good for your health, and conclude that you actually did your body a favor.
According to psychologist Leon Festinger's seminal cognitive dissonance theory, we have a drive that motivates us to reduce psychological discomfort and create consistency among our beliefs.
Let's say you exercise regularly and eat balanced meals in appropriate portions. It's snack time after a particularly strenuous workout, and you're in the mood for something delicious. Instead of chowing down on something nutritious like you normally would, you devour a whole bag of chocolate-chip cookies, only to regret your indulgence later. Those feelings of guilt and shame? That's cognitive dissonance at play.
Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we feel when we hold conflicting beliefs, or our actions don't match our values. Because we're bad at dealing with these inconsistencies, our instinct is to resolve them.
We can minimize the dissonance by justifying, downplaying or changing an inconsistent belief or behavior. "I'll just call it a cheat day," you might say, sugar high from those guzzled cookies.
Or you might point to all the evidence that chocolate is good for your health, and conclude that you actually did your body a favor.
According to psychologist Leon Festinger's seminal cognitive dissonance theory, we have a drive that motivates us to reduce psychological discomfort and create consistency among our beliefs.
Even though the effects of cognitive dissonance are ever-present in the political realm, the election of an unconventional, highly unfavorable (according to polls) candidate have made them even more apparent.
Take the administration's banning of immigrants from seven majority-Muslim countries.
Data suggests that citizens of these countries pose little terroristic threat to Americans, considering they committed no fatal terrorist attacks in the U.S. from 1975-2015.
So, the risk these immigrants pose statistically is not great enough to threaten national security and warrant such a drastic measure.
In this way, the ban indicates cognitive dissonance among its enactors and supporters: They are justifying a ban that aims to increase Americans' safety, though there's strong evidence it will not do so.
"When events make us experience existential threats that are in contradiction to expectations of happiness and well-being, we are driven to make changes in order to restore consistency to our world," Cooper says. "Finding scapegoats to explain the precarious state of the world during hard times helps people's mental equation."
And then there's the proliferation of fake news and presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway's accusation of alternative facts.
This kind of confirmation bias, or the tendency to only accept information that conforms with pre-existing attitudes, is tied to our drive to resolve psychological discrepancies.
We search for information that is consistent with our beliefs and follow like-minded news sources to avoid cognitive dissonance.
There are plenty of other signs of cognitive dissonance's presence in the current U.S. sociopolitical climate — like workers' desire to bring back coal jobs, despite the industry's decline, or the denial of well-evidenced climate change.
It's obvious that people — conservative, liberal and in between — are struggling to maintain their values in a time of political upheaval.
"We need to feel that our beliefs have a logical and psychological coherence," says Cooper. And considering how polarized the United States has been in recent years, this need has caused a ton of friction among Americans.
So, what can we do to make sure we're all communicating effectively when dissonance is so prevalent?
The aforementioned study posits that close, empathetic relationships can change partisanship and policy positions.
And Cooper emphasizes the value of understanding, cooperative conversation.
"The key is to afford people the opportunity to entertain different points of view without seeing it as a discrepancy," he says.
"The point is that the more a political discourse resembles a frontal attack on a person's attitudes or values, the more it will be dismissed and avoided. Showing consistency with other values that a person supports allows for greater acceptance and compromise."
https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/human-nature/behavior/how-cognitive-dissonance-affects-us-crazy-political-times.htm
Currently, an understaffed tiny federal agency (EAC) and 2 private testing companies (Pro V&V and SLI Compliance) are responsible for certification of our nation’s voting systems and elections.
One of the chief employees at the EAC is a former 10-year executive of Dominion Voting Systems.
Pro V&V and SLI Compliance like Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic are all members of CISA’s Sector Coordinating Council.
Yes, you read that correctly, these companies are in charge of investigating and approving themselves. The EAC is the same council that issued the “most secure election in American history” statement shortly after the election on Nov. 12th.
The testing from Pro V&V and SLI Compliance had been characterized as “superficial” and “cursory testing” by election security experts.
Forensic audits are far more thorough and test everything from the voter rolls to the physical paper ballots to the physical machines themselves.
This includes the election management system, ballot images, adjudication machine logs, compact flash drives, USB drives, audit logs, election database servers, chain of custody documents, and much more.
With forensic audits, everything is audited under one all-encompassing audit by individuals not associated with the government or voting machine companies.
Instead of a “superficial” testing of the machines or hand recounts that just run the same printed ballot images through scanners, independent forensic audits are the only way to determine if an election was truly fair or not.
WHAT IS THE 2020 ELECTION EVIDENCE PROJECT?
The 2020 Election Evidence Project was started in response to the media refusing to report on factual pieces of evidence regarding the 2020 election. Our goal isn’t to convince you of some grandiose conspiracy theory, but instead, to present you with information the traditional media isn’t reporting and allow you to form your own opinions. Because the media generally isn’t reporting on what we’ll be presenting, inevitably a lot of our sources will come from independent and right leaning news sources, tech experts, politicians, lawyers, whistleblower, witnesses, and judges themselves.
I highly encourage you to question everything you see in each piece of presented material. With that said, it’s important to be careful of dismissing information due to the source rather than the claim.
Example: If you see a Youtube video that claims something which makes you uncomfortable, don’t throw out the claim because it’s from a source you’re not familiar with. Research the claim instead. It’s easy to fall into the trap of dismissing evidence from a source (instead of verifying the claim) because as humans, we have an inherent need to be “right.” This is dangerous as our human minds are conditioned to believe pretty much anything that will make us feel “right” even when the truth is contrary to the feeling. (This is a term known as cognitive dissonance.)
Throughout your research if you see something that doesn’t sit well with you, match it up with available sources and evidence to fact check it. When doing so, watch out for misleading “fact checkers” whose headlines will claim to dismiss a “fact” when in reality they only dismiss a portion of a fact or outright masquerade as false evidence being real to prove a point, agenda, or simply get clicks (Reuters, AP, USA Today, Politifact, and others are notorious for this). Remember to question everything and come to your own conclusions.
Finally, please understand, we’re not saying that anything posted on this site is right or wrong, we’re simply pointing out the things that traditional media isn’t reporting. Our goal is to share the information and allow you to decide.
To understand more about how cognitive dissonance works click here:
https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/human-nature/behavior/how-cognitive-dissonance-affects-us-crazy-political-times.htm
How Cognitive Dissonance Affects Us in Crazy Political Times
The recent U.S. presidential election and transition has created lots of conflict between people with different beliefs and internal conflict due to our own beliefs.
Let's say you exercise regularly and eat balanced meals in appropriate portions. It's snack time after a particularly strenuous workout, and you're in the mood for something delicious.
Instead of chowing down on something nutritious like you normally would, you devour a whole bag of chocolate-chip cookies, only to regret your indulgence later. Those feelings of guilt and shame? That's cognitive dissonance at play.
Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we feel when we hold conflicting beliefs, or our actions don't match our values. Because we're bad at dealing with these inconsistencies, our instinct is to resolve them.
We can minimize the dissonance by justifying, downplaying or changing an inconsistent belief or behavior. "I'll just call it a cheat day," you might say, sugar high from those guzzled cookies.
Or you might point to all the evidence that chocolate is good for your health, and conclude that you actually did your body a favor.
According to psychologist Leon Festinger's seminal cognitive dissonance theory, we have a drive that motivates us to reduce psychological discomfort and create consistency among our beliefs.
Let's say you exercise regularly and eat balanced meals in appropriate portions. It's snack time after a particularly strenuous workout, and you're in the mood for something delicious. Instead of chowing down on something nutritious like you normally would, you devour a whole bag of chocolate-chip cookies, only to regret your indulgence later. Those feelings of guilt and shame? That's cognitive dissonance at play.
Cognitive dissonance is the discomfort we feel when we hold conflicting beliefs, or our actions don't match our values. Because we're bad at dealing with these inconsistencies, our instinct is to resolve them.
We can minimize the dissonance by justifying, downplaying or changing an inconsistent belief or behavior. "I'll just call it a cheat day," you might say, sugar high from those guzzled cookies.
Or you might point to all the evidence that chocolate is good for your health, and conclude that you actually did your body a favor.
According to psychologist Leon Festinger's seminal cognitive dissonance theory, we have a drive that motivates us to reduce psychological discomfort and create consistency among our beliefs.
Even though the effects of cognitive dissonance are ever-present in the political realm, the election of an unconventional, highly unfavorable (according to polls) candidate have made them even more apparent.
Take the administration's banning of immigrants from seven majority-Muslim countries.
Data suggests that citizens of these countries pose little terroristic threat to Americans, considering they committed no fatal terrorist attacks in the U.S. from 1975-2015.
So, the risk these immigrants pose statistically is not great enough to threaten national security and warrant such a drastic measure.
In this way, the ban indicates cognitive dissonance among its enactors and supporters: They are justifying a ban that aims to increase Americans' safety, though there's strong evidence it will not do so.
"When events make us experience existential threats that are in contradiction to expectations of happiness and well-being, we are driven to make changes in order to restore consistency to our world," Cooper says. "Finding scapegoats to explain the precarious state of the world during hard times helps people's mental equation."
And then there's the proliferation of fake news and presidential counselor Kellyanne Conway's accusation of alternative facts.
This kind of confirmation bias, or the tendency to only accept information that conforms with pre-existing attitudes, is tied to our drive to resolve psychological discrepancies.
We search for information that is consistent with our beliefs and follow like-minded news sources to avoid cognitive dissonance.
There are plenty of other signs of cognitive dissonance's presence in the current U.S. sociopolitical climate — like workers' desire to bring back coal jobs, despite the industry's decline, or the denial of well-evidenced climate change.
It's obvious that people — conservative, liberal and in between — are struggling to maintain their values in a time of political upheaval.
"We need to feel that our beliefs have a logical and psychological coherence," says Cooper. And considering how polarized the United States has been in recent years, this need has caused a ton of friction among Americans.
So, what can we do to make sure we're all communicating effectively when dissonance is so prevalent?
The aforementioned study posits that close, empathetic relationships can change partisanship and policy positions.
And Cooper emphasizes the value of understanding, cooperative conversation.
"The key is to afford people the opportunity to entertain different points of view without seeing it as a discrepancy," he says.
"The point is that the more a political discourse resembles a frontal attack on a person's attitudes or values, the more it will be dismissed and avoided. Showing consistency with other values that a person supports allows for greater acceptance and compromise."
https://health.howstuffworks.com/mental-health/human-nature/behavior/how-cognitive-dissonance-affects-us-crazy-political-times.htm
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
