For those without much time, watch (below) from 1 hour 36 mins where Mary Fanning goes through forensic evidence listing logs she claims shows foreign interference. The data offered allegedly shows the timestamp, the IP, the attempts, which county and the ID of the computer they broke into, how many votes were switched, the method used, and whether there was a firewall intrusion. Apparently "there are thousands of pages of documentation like this." Fully 66% of the attacks or intrusions are apparently coming from China, from Hauwei, Cloud service, Alibaba, China Unicom, U cloud, China mobile T-tong etc.

Youtube and Twitter have deleted Lindell's video and banned him. Isn't it better if these claims gets aired and discussed in detail so the voters of the US can feel assured that elections are free and fair, or that if this is real, problems with elections will be resolved.

UPDATE: See the note at the base * checking these IP's.

Unless someone went out there faking up thousands of pages of details, this would be warfare.

UPDATE: If these logs are faked it presumably would be easy for people with accurate records to point out the errors or misalignments.  These are extraordinary claims. Clearly this needs a lot of discussion and corroboration.

The New York Times claims there are three false claims in the documentary.  Though most of Kellen Browning and Tiffany Hsu's points appear to be the same generic assertions that have been made many times in the last month or two. They are not detailed discussions of the evidence. Most of the rebuttals make the claim there is "no evidence" but they don't acknowledge that proper audits could not be done, the ballots and machines were often not provided, and the recounts usually did not check signatures. It's like wearing a blindfold and saying "there is nothing to see". That doesn't make Lindell's claims correct either, but leaves us back at the start. Why is any ballot machine or ballot not easily available for examination under public scrutiny with observers from both sides? How is it that the leading democracy in the world has questions like this hanging over the outcome when in large part they could be resolved?