You’d think a hegemony with a 100-years tradition of upkeeping democracy against major non-democratic players, would have some mechanism that would prevent itself from throwing down it’s key ideology.
Is it really that the president is all that decides about the future of democracy itself? Is 53 out of 100 senate seats really enough to make country fall into authoritarian regime? Is the army really not constitutionally obliged to step in and save the day?
I’d never think that, of all places, American democracy would be the most volatile.
That’s not what that letter says. It says that operatives may have gained access to the software used to count votes, and if that happened they may have been able to probe that software for weaknesses.
What it doesn’t say is that there was a subsequent, second breach of the voting machines in which doctored software was then installed.
It’s like someone gaining access to blueprints for a bank vault. Yes, that theoretically lowers the security of the vault, but it doesn’t prove that a bank heist has taken place, just that a heist is more likely to be possible now.
Okay so what do you do when the mob gets the blueprints for the bank vault, and then a few weeks later the Don brags about all the money he stole?
The Don who lies constantly about everything? Who didn’t even say “we stole the money” but more, “Elmo is good with bank stuff, and we have lots of money”? The same guy who wouldn’t know how to read a blueprint, and would probably just post a picture of the blueprint on social media to generate controversy and traffic? The Don who, if he actually had broken into the bank, wouldn’t be able to shut up about it, and would be bragging about it non-stop, probably by doing live-streams from within the bank vault?
You don’t assume that he hit the bank. You follow your normal security procedures, and check that what you expect to see in the vault is what you actually see in the vault. Then you just ignore the blowhard.
But the people in charge didn’t check. Harris was told to ask for a recount, and she didn’t.
If the people responsible for security won’t do their due diligence, drag is going to play it safe and assume they fucked up.
How do you know that the people in charge didn’t check? Just because there wasn’t a big announcement doesn’t mean that there weren’t sanity checks done on the process. It’s likely that was done and that the results seemed to be legit, so there was no need to do more.
Because the letter we both read says so:
There’s a difference between an “audit” and a basic sanity check. You wouldn’t do an audit unless there was strong evidence there is something worth auditing.