Wi-Fi sniffers strapped to drones—Mike Lindell’s odd plan to stop election fraud

So let's just make the assumption for a moment that this would even work (hard, I know).

What do the drones bring to this? Why not just install them in a static location in or near the voting area? Ideally with an AC power adapter so dead batteries aren't a concern.
Congratulations on trying to rationalize the irrational.

Why not hire a psychic to scan everyone who walks in or out of a polling place, to determine who has malice in their soul and is planning to fraudificate the election? :rolleyes:
 
Upvote
39 (39 / 0)

DarthSlack

Ars Legatus Legionis
23,540
Subscriptor++
Why aren't elections 3rd party verifiable and monitorable? Obscurity is not real security.

What obscurity? Elections are run out in the open using pre-defined rules and validated using known and publicized methodologies. The only people who thing this is obscure, or in need of a 3rd party to oversee, are the ones not paying any attention at all. Or those bent on overthrowing the US.

The overall goal isn't crazy. Now, how they plan to get there... I can't speak to (haven't RTFA).

Yes, the goal is crazy. And you may want to go RTFA because the implementation is beyond stupid. And ineffective.

But my guess is they want a way to do Cambridge Analytics (or whoever they were with Facebook) again... where they sneak or steal information somehow. Even manipulate it (lie about finding cheating) if expecting to fail.

Prove the information you're extracting can't be used to know how people voted, and we'll talk about it. Find another person or 3 to also view the information... and we'll talk about it. Try to help everyone instead of just yourself... and we'll talk about it.

Go talk to your local election officials. You'll be pleasantly surprised at how secure and open US elections are. Lindell is a fucking moron doing fucking moronic things in service of utter imbeciles. None of it is based in any sort of reality.
 
Upvote
75 (76 / -1)

thekaj

Ars Legatus Legionis
48,270
Subscriptor++
Bankrupted or not, he and Alex Jones will still end up sipping aged scotch together on the stern of a megayacht on their days off thanks to being maliciously useful idiots for moneyed interests.
Eh. Lindell doesn’t seem to be useful to anyone. Every indication is that he’s mostly self-funding all this election fraud stuff, that his “seminars” are extremely poorly attended, and that even the True Believer attendees come away disappointed with how shitty his claims and “evidence“ is. This sniffing drone thing isn’t close to being his first doesn’t survive first contact with a brain cell idea. And when the people who believe the ghost of a dead Venezuelan ruler interfered with the election think your ideas are nuts, you know you’re on a different level.

I actually believe he's a true believer. He's blown through too much of his own money (including future lawsuit payouts) and torpedoed his company (even WalMart stopped selling his stuff) for this to be any kind of act for future financial consideration.
 
Upvote
32 (32 / 0)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…
Who knew selling pillows can fund this amount of crazy? Is it some niche lucrative industry I had no idea about like Persian rugs. (Fun story in college there was a pretty run down looking rug store near my apartment, went in figuring I could buy a cheap rug for my living room and discovered that pre conflict Iranian rugs and Persian rugs are basically like an investment vehicle prices started around $30,000+).
 
Upvote
18 (18 / 0)

ColdWetDog

Ars Legatus Legionis
14,402
So, a switch and Cat6 Ethernet cabling, connected to the router, which is connected on coax or fiber makes his drones useless.

DOH!
Not at all. He'll find some AP in the building - hard to find a public building without a Wifi point these days, even if it belongs to somebody's printer or toaster oven. Once he's found said AP, he's 'proven' that the voting machines are connected to Illuminati servers. Because of course he has.

Reality has nothing at all to do with his world.
 
Upvote
40 (40 / 0)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…

thekaj

Ars Legatus Legionis
48,270
Subscriptor++
Why aren't elections 3rd party verifiable and monitorable? Obscurity is not real security.
Here's the link to my county's page asking people to observe. It's different for each county/state across the country, as to whether any rando can request directly to be a monitor, or whether they have to be a representative of a political party, but pretty much every election in this country is run with 3rd party observers watching the counts.

This is why 99.9% of all the election fraud claims from 2020 are complete bullshit. They rely on the assumption that members of their own political party failed to notice what would have been obvious manipulation. And when those observers speak out about how there wasn't any manipulation, they're attacked.
The overall goal isn't crazy. Now, how they plan to get there... I can't speak to (haven't RTFA).
Why is someone who named themselves "EternalStudent07" apparently so dedicated to NOT actually learning things before speaking? Yeah, RTFA! Also, RTFA about just how verifiable and monitorable elections actually are before assuming they're not.
 
Upvote
53 (53 / 0)

ColdWetDog

Ars Legatus Legionis
14,402
So let's just make the assumption for a moment that this would even work (hard, I know).

What do the drones bring to this? Why not just install them in a static location in or near the voting area? Ideally with an AC power adapter so dead batteries aren't a concern.
Because drones are cool and hi tech and something something. And they're made in China and hook into the Chinese Iluminati servers (but he overlooked that little detail). You're just over thinking this. Certainly Lindell isn't.
 
Upvote
14 (14 / 0)
Post content hidden for low score. Show…

jhollinger

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
144
Subscriptor
Because if we allowed the UN to come in and monitor our elections like they do everywhere else what do you think would happen? Especially if they actually found irregularities? I suspect that the term "ZOG" would come back into fashion as people decided that the UN had taken over our government.
Wait, does the UN actually do that in other "developed" democracies? I thought it was the exception, not the rule. Damn, we think we're so much better than everyone else...
 
Upvote
4 (4 / 0)
Without going into the why a sniffer is useless in what he wants to prove.

Why a drone? Polling places in the US don't have observers from the political parties already in site? Can't you just put the fucking sniffer in the backpack of that observer? ...
You could. In fact, since the task at hand is "searching for wi-fi addresses" you probably already have the necessary hardware in your hand or pocket at this very instant. You could run this as an app on a phone.
 
Upvote
21 (21 / 0)

MrMcLargeHuge

Ars Scholae Palatinae
1,476
Subscriptor
Poll worker here (Ohio). The tablets where voters check in are connected to each other through an access point. No internet or cell connectivity, just a local wireless LAN. This is because Ohio mandates that, when a polling location contains multiple precincts, people must be allowed to check in at any given tablet, regardless of which precinct that that voter belongs to. So the LAN is needed in order for the tablets to talk to each other, otherwise it's theoretically possible that one person could check in at each tablet separately and get a ballot from each. So, ironically, the WiFi is preventing fraud, not supporting it.

Guarantee these goons would flag such a network, because nuance does not exist in their world, they'll just see a WiFi network and freak. Also, the building I worked in last time was city hall for a small suburb, and it has public WiFi, as does much of the surrounding area.
 
Last edited:
Upvote
88 (88 / 0)

The Dark

Ars Tribunus Angusticlavius
12,206
Here's the link to my county's page asking people to observe. It's different for each county/state across the country, as to whether any rando can request directly to be a monitor, or whether they have to be a representative of a political party, but pretty much every election in this country is run with 3rd party observers watching the counts.

This is why 99.9% of all the election fraud claims from 2020 are complete bullshit. They rely on the assumption that members of their own political party failed to notice what would have been obvious manipulation. And when those observers speak out about how there wasn't any manipulation, they're attacked.

Why is someone who named themselves "EternalStudent07" apparently so dedicated to NOT actually learning things before speaking? Yeah, RTFA! Also, RTFA about just how verifiable and monitorable elections actually are before assuming they're not.

There's also one parish that's monitored by the Civil Rights Division of the DOJ by court order. St. Landry Parish was ordered to have its elections monitored for violations of the Civil Rights Act in December 1979 with a duration of "until further order of this Court." No further orders have been forthcoming in the past 44 years. There were also three Census Areas in Alaska that were under similar orders, but they expired at the end of 2022.
 
Upvote
14 (14 / 0)
I think the whole registered D or registered R thing is weird. In other countries, your party membership is a private matter, and is certainly not public information.

But on your main point, in (most?) countries only party members get a say / vote on who their party's candidate for election is going to be. I think I'm misunderstanding your point - you seem to be saying you should have a say in the candidate selection process of multiple parties?
In most countries for most jobs it's active local party members only — people who dedicate time routinely to actively supporting their party, whether by attending meetings or through stronger contributions.

In the US it's whomever has most-strongly built being a party supporter into their personality; it's purely about your declared labelling.

I don't see the need to agree on what the ideal system would be just to be able to say that's clearly flawed. Not just logically, but empirically if you compare the relative extremities of American politics to those elsewhere.
 
Upvote
-6 (3 / -9)

s73v3r

Ars Legatus Legionis
25,793
Upvote
38 (38 / 0)
It is not unrelated to this discussion that people who say they are independent of a political party, and who also say they do not lean toward either party, who claim the pure "moderate" category, are actually the least-intelligent adults in America, by a large margin.

There is really nothing wrong with political parties. They are a convenient mechanism through which to exercise your individual beliefs. Every advanced nation has political parties, and George Washington has been dead for centuries and there is no particular reason to revere him. View attachment 61283
Your graph fails to back up your point. It only tries to link IQ to political ideology, not party affiliation.

Political parties may be inevitable, as like-minded people get together to further their shared goals. This clearly becomes problematic if party members place loyalty to the party above the good of the populace as a whole. I am not a member of any political party, but I definitely "lean" solid Democratic these days; because it's obvious that the Republican Party has gone @#$%@$% insane.
 
Upvote
31 (31 / 0)
Poll worker here (Ohio). The tablets where voters check in are connected to each other through an access point. No internet or cell connectivity, just a local wireless LAN. This is because Ohio mandates that, when a polling location contains multiple precincts, people must be allowed to check in at any given tablet, regardless of which precinct that that voter belongs to. So the LAN is needed in order for the tablets to talk to each other, otherwise it's theoretically possible that one person could check in at each tablet separately and get a ballot from each. So, ironically, the WiFi is preventing fraud, not supporting it.

Guarantee these goons would flag such a network, because nuance does not exist in their world, they'll just see a WiFi network and freak. Also, the building I worked in last time was city hall for a small suburb, and it has public WiFi, as does much of the surrounding area.
Interesting. I fail to see how a person could get multiple ballots that way. Doesn't checking in on the one tablet eliminate the possibility of checking in again, on any device?

In my county you check in on paper. You sign your name next to your registration and they give you a ballot. Clearly, you cannot collect multiple ballots that way. We're quite lenient about same-day registration or allowing people to vote who claim to be registered, or who say they are registered in a different precinct, but their ballots go in a different box and have to be judged by central election officials, by hand, starting the following day. They are "provisional" until judged.
 
Upvote
-13 (5 / -18)

Rris

Wise, Aged Ars Veteran
109
Subscriptor
Oh please. It will go like this:
Lindell: "I have 5000 drones ready to go!..." (which he does not, but...)

-election day-

Lindell: "All the drones fell out of the sky after 20 minutes! PROOF they were targeted and jammed by <insert perceived enemy in each area here> to cover up them stealing the election!"...
 
Upvote
20 (20 / 0)

s73v3r

Ars Legatus Legionis
25,793
I agree that there needs to be a solution for many things wrong with US politics. But the one thing the country was born on was checks and balances. If we remove political parties, how do we honestly evolve to a better future without weighing both sides of anything?
Political parties don't provide any kind of checks and balances. If they did, then Trump would have been impeached.

Further, not every topic has two sides to everything. Some things have one side to them. Some things have 5.



There's greasy stuff going on for both sides.
Only an idiot would boil it down to just "both sides".


So getting rid of parties would let the greasy get away with more without any opposition or oversight.
HOW

If anything, there needs to be better balance within parties.
Fuck that noise. There does not need to be any balance with the Republican party. They are straight up fucking fascists.


Establishing balanced parties by establishing better checks in the system might be our answer.
Again, fucking how?

For example lobbyists, they have caused huge momentum swings for both parties and have turned them into wrecking balls. We need to ban lobbyists.
And how do you do that when the right to lobby elected officials is literally right there in the first amendment?

Second, who is electing our candidates? Maybe it's time for democrats to pick the republican candidates and republicans to elect the democratic candidates.
That's the dumbest fucking thing you've said on the topic, and that's saying something.
 
Upvote
62 (62 / 0)