22
Comments (37)
sorted by:
2
Liberty_Prime 2 points ago +2 / -0

meh!

It's not even what's being alleged. Software seems to be the culprit.

Most in person ballots were printed on the spot. The mail in ballots were printed by third party government contractors and mailed out.

The DHS chart cited as proof of watermarks only says that SOME states require watermarks, and the contractors comply with the state requirements.

Seems like a dead end the more I look into it. The software has legs, though.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Liberty_Prime 1 point ago +1 / -0

Sure. By all means, if you have a ballot stub (my state didn't give me one when voting in person) I guess it does no harm to look at it.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
colonial113 2 points ago +2 / -0

Again. You can't watermark in complete secrecy. The FBI, CIA, etc will know. And if they know, dems know. So they would had used other means of cheating. End of story.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
colonial113 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thank you for the insight. However I maintain that dems have their back channels everywhere. So even if there's something going on, they'd know.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
TrumpSteak 1 point ago +1 / -0

If anyone has a camera with an ir filter fuction, as well. It's supposed to be in that wavelength iirc

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
NoMoreMao 1 point ago +1 / -0

Doesn’t matter anyway. The ballots are only scanned once. There is nothing to keep track of the chain transactions. You could print all the ballots you wanted and mix them in with the rest.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
queenicarius 0 points ago +1 / -1

Printers aren't capable of printing the microscopic dots - but they can be embedded by the paper manufacturer.

1
NoMoreMao 1 point ago +1 / -0

They just print them from the same manufacturer ahead of time.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
NoMoreMao 1 point ago +1 / -0

So? If they have an unlimited supply of marked stock they just use what they need.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
NoMoreMao 1 point ago +1 / -0

If you have stock from a source with all of the stock encoded and you obtain as much stock as you say you will need it won’t matter.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
NoMoreMao 1 point ago +1 / -0

Until I see any limitations on how much they can buy then it’s all speculation.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Deplora 1 point ago +1 / -0

"The ballot manufacturers"? LOL! Each state has its own authority over every aspect of ballot production. That's why there are so many fuck-ups with glaring printing errors.

STOP posting this garbage! It's about as rational as advocating "transitioning" preschoolers who "know" they're really the opposite sex from what they obviously are. Both irrational beliefs only make sense to people who have really studied and understood (read: swallowed hook, line, and sinker) all the loony "science" that the promoters of this kind of idiocy crank out.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0