I think the most interesting part is where she described how they likely deleted Trump votes by setting the tolerance for acceptable oval marking to manipulate the amount of votes to be sent to the “not cast” folder where anyone on a connected workstation could choose to cast or delete each vote. She doesn’t say for sure but she wants to get possession of the machines to try and prove it. She also hints at the destruction of the signature envelopes and the possibility of incriminating video tapes by requesting the defendants produce them. She doesn’t even have to make any direct accusations there, the defendants will either have to admit they destroyed the evidence, or present it and expose the fraud.
She has a lot of evidence showing how poorly the recount was performed that could address this concern. While the ballot handling during the recount was highly inappropriate and seemingly half-hazard, I’m struggling to imagine that chaos machine an electronic fraud total exactly enough to pass suspicion.
The recount and electronic fraud is starting to approach copper field slight of hand levels.
The traditional fraud was out of control and definitely needs to get checked,
I know the counter argument is that court is the place evidence would be presented but no one has floated a plausible theory on how it would survive an audit. (a recount is more plausible)
I can’t imagine anyone spending that kind of money putting an electronic fraud organization together that could be exposed with a single audit.
I could see a Eric Coomee doing it just to resist trump.
I think the most interesting part is where she described how they likely deleted Trump votes by setting the tolerance for acceptable oval marking to manipulate the amount of votes to be sent to the “not cast” folder where anyone on a connected workstation could choose to cast or delete each vote. She doesn’t say for sure but she wants to get possession of the machines to try and prove it. She also hints at the destruction of the signature envelopes and the possibility of incriminating video tapes by requesting the defendants produce them. She doesn’t even have to make any direct accusations there, the defendants will either have to admit they destroyed the evidence, or present it and expose the fraud.
This has been on my mind since day one.
She has a lot of evidence showing how poorly the recount was performed that could address this concern. While the ballot handling during the recount was highly inappropriate and seemingly half-hazard, I’m struggling to imagine that chaos machine an electronic fraud total exactly enough to pass suspicion.
The recount and electronic fraud is starting to approach copper field slight of hand levels.
The traditional fraud was out of control and definitely needs to get checked,
Did they use the same machines to recount? Same programming?
I know the counter argument is that court is the place evidence would be presented but no one has floated a plausible theory on how it would survive an audit. (a recount is more plausible)
I can’t imagine anyone spending that kind of money putting an electronic fraud organization together that could be exposed with a single audit.
I could see a Eric Coomee doing it just to resist trump.
Other countries too I believe.