"Our vision at ES&S is simple and unwavering — we provide products and services of exceptional quality and value to maintain voter confidence and enhance the voting experience."
- but only gullible voters have "confidence" in ES&S
ES&S posted this on LinkedIn "a month ago":
"ES&S was thrilled to be part of this first-of-its-kind pilot event to further the security and transparency of elections. We know the work done by independent researchers will help raise the bar on election security. "
- Someone needs to prove they don't adhere to that transparency
“We took this step, the first of its kind, to further the security and transparency of elections through independent, multi-day testing at an event with more than a dozen researchers..” – Chris Wlaschin, ES&S SVP of Security and CISO
Not secure nor transparent before this pilot event, they imply
PLUS on their web site they tout that they support "Federal" requirements, but since when did the federal government become a voter? Do the voters get to have requirements that their implied-in-fact contracts entitle them to?
Since President Trump put the spotlight on Dr. Jan Halper-Hayes she has been interviewed a lot. One video platform that allows those interviews to remain is Rumble. Dr. Jan implies that the military is waiting for a sufficient level of public sentiment to appear on social media, especially LinkedIn she says, to intervene. This link cues up to "LinkedIn", but if you go back to the 16:34 time, she clearly says ..."the military, as you know, will eventually come into play" : https://rumble.com/v39uo80--2023-08-18-special-report-nino-w-dr.-jan-halper-us-military-calculating-th.html?start=1235
12 hours @ $107/hrs.
4 hours w/o charge.
That means if 10 people ask for 10 different windows of dates that would add up to 40 hours of searching w/o charge.
I like the way you think. Let's see how they respond to my request..
ES&S posted this on LinkedIn "a week ago":
"Our vision at ES&S is simple and unwavering — we provide products and services of exceptional quality and value to maintain voter confidence and enhance the voting experience."
- but only gullible voters have "confidence" in ES&S
ES&S posted this on LinkedIn "a month ago":
"ES&S was thrilled to be part of this first-of-its-kind pilot event to further the security and transparency of elections. We know the work done by independent researchers will help raise the bar on election security. "
- Someone needs to prove they don't adhere to that transparency
What was the pilot event?
Are the implicitly admitting that their elections haven't been secure until this pilot event?
“We took this step, the first of its kind, to further the security and transparency of elections through independent, multi-day testing at an event with more than a dozen researchers..” – Chris Wlaschin, ES&S SVP of Security and CISO
Not secure nor transparent before this pilot event, they imply
https://www.essvote.com/blog/industry-news/pilot-program-aims-to-further-the-security-and-transparency-of-elections/
PLUS on their web site they tout that they support "Federal" requirements, but since when did the federal government become a voter? Do the voters get to have requirements that their implied-in-fact contracts entitle them to?
https://www.essvote.com/blog/industry-news/ess-supports-federal-requirements-for-independent-security-and-penetration-testing/
Since President Trump put the spotlight on Dr. Jan Halper-Hayes she has been interviewed a lot. One video platform that allows those interviews to remain is Rumble. Dr. Jan implies that the military is waiting for a sufficient level of public sentiment to appear on social media, especially LinkedIn she says, to intervene. This link cues up to "LinkedIn", but if you go back to the 16:34 time, she clearly says ..."the military, as you know, will eventually come into play" : https://rumble.com/v39uo80--2023-08-18-special-report-nino-w-dr.-jan-halper-us-military-calculating-th.html?start=1235