CrystalO #LAVA #OYFE #CutTheCrap

What are you calling a "potential test ballot"? I am not clear on what you are suggesting

Ok, well if you marked anywhere on your ballot making any mark visual to be seen, then your ballot was adjudicated and not accepted right away. That's what stary marks on ballots cause - forced adjudication. Next, if you can get the cast vote records, in low grade image form not text form or data form, then you could search through all ballots until you can locate yours. For example, 2000 ballots cast you would have to search through them all. They wont do it for you but you and FOIA get them

Truth, I invited you on my program to share your findings and lets go through them together. Can we book you?

7 AM CST - How To Challenge Election Results and Get A Forensic Audit! rumble.com/v7hzvdc-how-to-ch…

The facts are this: (1) Eisenkot has not said the Iranians “weren’t building nuclear weapons.” His past statements (as IDF chief and later) indicate he viewed Iran as pursuing nuclear capability and that covert Israeli actions delayed it becoming a nuclear state by years. He has stressed the need to prevent Iran from acquiring a military nuclear potential. U.S. assessments at various points described Iran as not actively building a weapon (or years away from one) while accumulating highly enriched uranium and maintaining a threshold capability; Iran has long denied seeking weapons while advancing its program. (2) He has not attributed the absence of weapons specifically to a prohibition by the Supreme Leader as the reason in the way described. Iran’s official position long cited a religious ruling (often called a fatwa) by Ayatollah Ali Khamenei against nuclear weapons. Whether it was a formal, binding fatwa against production (versus use or a more limited statement) is debated by analysts; it was a central Iranian talking point. Some argue it constrained crossing the threshold; others see it as diplomatic cover while Iran hedged. (3) Eisenkot has not called the killing of Khamenei (in the February 2026 U.S./Israeli strikes, Operation Roaring Lion) “stupid.” He publicly described the elimination as “historic justice” and closing the circle against someone who embodied evil and led decades of terror. He has offered some nuance on targeting an elderly civilian leader but has justified or accepted the action. Other Israeli figures (e.g., Yair Golan or former Mossad chief Tamir Pardo) have criticized the assassination as a strategic mistake that may have backfired by strengthening hardliners, but that is not Eisenkot’s position.

UDK: The ballots DO NO have serial numbers. The ballot printing companies do not log or track by serial numbers. For example, in Arizona they do have a 6-digit code on the ballots - so the most they can do is 999,999- yet they mailed 2.5 million. In fact, one of those "codes" is on over 23,000 individual ballots. Your information is flawed and not how it works but would work IF ballots did have individualized serial by number that were tracked. In the pic I attached the CODE is the top barcode on the bottom:

For your claim on containers. 2.1 million ballots, after sort and handle and fold, fit on 45 pallets. Now lets doe the real math on your 25m ballots claim in 20 containers: (A) Pure paper stack (theoretical, no boxes/gaps): ~10 ballots covering the 48″ × 40″ footprint (orientation-dependent: e.g., 5 × 8.5″ along the 48″ side and 2 × 19″ along the 40″ side). At ~0.0061″ thickness and ~54″ usable stack height: roughly 85,000–90,000 ballots per pallet. Weight is also in the ~2,300–2,400 lb range, near typical handling limits. (B)Practical boxed packing: Cartons holding ~1,000–2,000 ballots (stack height ~6–12″ of paper + box walls) fit ~20–30+ boxes per pallet depending on exact carton size and layering. This yields a realistic ~40,000–60,000 ballots per pallet. Real examples vary widely (mail trays with air space can be ~7,000/pallet; bulk storage of returned ballots is often lower-density boxed). (C)For 25 million ballots: At ~50,000/pallet → ~500 pallets. Range of ~40,000–60,000 → ~420–625 pallets. Denser near-theoretical packing → closer to 300–350 pallets (if stable wrapping/stacking is used and weight limits allow). (D) At ~2,000–2,500 lb per pallet, 20 pallets land around 40,000–50,000 lb. That is usually under a 40-foot container’s typical payload limit (~26,500–28,000 kg / ~58,000–62,000 lb), so floor space is the main constraint, not weight, unless your actual packing is denser and heavier. (E) That would 25 standard 40-foot containers for single-stacked shipping. High-cube containers or confirmed double-stackable loads could cut that roughly in half. Exact numbers depend on final pallet height, weight, and the carrier’s loading rules. BUT HERE IS THE CRUX: Those numbers are for standard stock paper and ballot paper is not standard paper- thus it is all of these times 2x But I'll bite - your information comes where? And IF you know their FOB, then you know container number and the landing (as you claim) thus you must have the following (which I compel you to share with us all): Gather them up and come on LIVE with me and share: Tracking & Verification Documents for Containers Arriving at Ports 1. Core Shipping Documents Bill of Lading (B/L) — Master and House Sea Waybill Booking Confirmation Cargo / Freight Manifest Arrival Notice Delivery Order (D/O) Freight Release / Telex Release 2. Customs & Security Filings Importer Security Filing (ISF / “10+2”) Automated Manifest System (AMS) Entry Summary (CBP Form 7501) ACE / ABI records Customs Release / Hold records 3. Container & Cargo Details Container number (ISO format) Seal numbers Packing List Commercial Invoice Certificate of Origin Verified Gross Mass (VGM) Dangerous Goods Declaration (if applicable) 4. Port, Terminal & Carrier Systems Terminal Operating System (TOS) records Gate receipts / Interchange receipts Carrier tracking portal data Vessel AIS / port call data Port authority records 5. Supporting / Ancillary Documents Insurance certificate / policy Letter of Credit documents (if used) Inspection certificates Temperature logs (reefer containers) Photographs of seals/container condition Most useful for verification when you already know the number of containers that arrived Container numbers + Bill of Lading Manifest + AMS/ISF Terminal gate records + Delivery Orders Customs Entry Summary / ACE data Vessel AIS + port arrival records To know - meaning YOU KNOW - where these landed and their content, means you have the killer facts of all facts of all history on the horrible 2020 election. And since you know these things: Come on my program and let's get this story out and safe and then I will walk you in personally to President Trump and have you show the facts! You game?

Well, this is for Orange County and not all of California and this usually the result of Midterm Straight Ticket Voting. As may do in Midterms

All I ever ask is what the law requires: (1) show the original ballot (2) Compare that ballot to the Pre-Post and Fian CVR and EMS (3) then tabulate each changed voter, must show before and after and then (4) show who benefitted and how it made a material difference to the outcome of the election. This is what has to be shown in court. Does this individual have that info? Can he show which votes where changed and what they were and what they were changed to?

LOL, first name yourself honest,,,, rofl. Next, undeclared parties (by party) suggests what exactly? The list are almost 1/3 1/3 1/3 now and have been for years and years! You think bad voters or ballots only come from dems or republicans? How many ballots aduits have your done where you know this is how it works?

Doesn't matter - really. When Muslims can lie in order to meet their ends, and they "trust us we are not making them" and you believe that? It all matters, but to hold your beliefs you would have to totally ignore the following intel and confirmations: IAEA: Confirmed a coordinated program of activities relevant to developing a nuclear explosive device (Amad Plan and related work), mainly until the end of 2003, with some activities continuing until about 2009. Later reports (including 2025) linked undeclared sites and nuclear material to this past structured program. U.S. Intelligence Community (ODNI): Confirmed Iran had a nuclear weapons program that was halted in late 2003. Israel (government / Mossad / IDF): Has long confirmed Iran pursued (and continued efforts related to) nuclear weapons development. German BND: (and some state intelligence offices): Assessed nuclear weapons-related work continued after 2003. British intelligence: Shared assessments and helped expose secret facilities; viewed the program as having continued in reduced form. French DGSE / intelligence: Involved in monitoring and assessments of the program. Austrian intelligence: Reports have described an advanced nuclear weapons-related program Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) : Analyzed the nuclear archive and confirmed the Amad Plan and post-2003 continuation of related work. Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD): Documented the past program and related activities. Belfer Center (Harvard): Reviewed the seized nuclear archive and confirmed senior Iranian decisions to build nuclear weapons and significant technical progress. National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI): Publicly exposed secret sites and described the weapons program. Netherlands (AIVD): Monitored Iran’s nuclear procurement and program; involved in related intelligence operations (including Stuxnet support). Reports have addressed Iran’s nuclear advances. Sweden (Security Service): Annual intelligence reports have noted Iranian industrial espionage and efforts to obtain technology usable in a nuclear weapons program. Germany, France, United Kingdom, United States, Israel Already noted; these form the core of the Western assessments that accepted the past program (with some differences on whether limited work continued after 2003).

I'll bite. Can we book you and I am very interested to see what the votes were and what they were changed to and who they benefitted? Can we book you?

My take when they name themselves HONEST, its marketing and what they want the public to believe. I call bullshit! And I can prove it! @honestpollster have invited you on before and it was no go then, how about now!

All you did is reply is with gibberish, but I will bite. COME ON LIVE and show your evidence and lets discuss. You used big words, but I want you to come on and show us -since I am one of the only people on the planet who have audited these systems and knows. Can we book you?