This is my working theory for the fraud in CO:

• ERIC is used to maximize voter rolls in SCORE (helps create a larger pool of "voters," for which votes may be generated- see below)
• ERIC/SCORE are shared w/Runbeck, Dominion, and BallotTrax; SCORE gives all three access to not only name/DOB/address/party affiliation, but signature files
• Runbeck prints the universal mailed ballots for CO, using CO voter data from SCORE, prints the envelopes w/voter info and barcodes on them, and either ships them to CO to mail (through USPS) or ships them to USPS, themselves, on behalf of CO SOS
• BallotTrax tracks which ballots are delivered/not delivered/not deliverable, and which are mailed back (including receiving captured images of security envelopes from USPS and comparing/adding sig files from the security envelopes to their databases)
• Since the SCORE rolls (largest % of state's counties in U.S. with registration exceeding 100% of county's eligible VAP) include lots of residents (including many non-citizens/ineligible/moved/dead), and since a large number of them aren't active voters, the moment CO is past the deadline for mailing ballots back in, the ballots for anyone in SCORE not shown by USPS and thus BallotTrax are a pool of votes which the cartel can commit however they please, by
• Using Runbeck's Sentio/Simulo/Agilis systems in-state to print ballots on-demand that are machine marked (capability is nominally to be able to print a hand-marked ballot equivalent from the e-ballot sent by an absentee voter), and put it into an envelop which has the voter info and signature machine-printed on it; they're delivered to the county/precinct that needs them, signature-verified (e.g., "look, there's a signature;" but it will ostensibly match because it's printed FROM the signature file that BallotTrax and Runbeck both have access to), opened, and run through the Dominion scanners (so the #s coming out of the precincts will match the conclusions already drawn/predetermined for each race/issue. THIS is how CO is able to "call" the Presidential race w/only 60% of returns - because, no matter what, that's how the final tally will go, without being able to call the wolf issue yet, because those weren't the fraudulent ballots they'd pre-printed)
• Dominion's Democracy Suite is used to adjust the totals of any contest/issue and, at the same time, the ballot-on-demand are being printed to match - if you're BallotTrax or CO SecState (or Scytl, which is getting the data from Dominion's system), and if you inconveniently receive actual ballots from actual voters that don't vote they way you'd like/need, you can dump them and the CVR image of them out of Dominion's DVS (remotely, probably) and just print replacements for them that read as you like- the voters themselves will never know they voted for Biden/Harris/Hickenlooper/national popular vote compact/wolves
• RLA is now adopted, using Voting Works' Arlo; it's "open source" software, but reads a settings file from the state (which makes it a black box); the RLA only compares those paper ballots to the tabulation - it doesn't audit the ballots themselves for fraud. Nobody ever goes back to verify that the votes were legitimate, and no Colorado voter is able to verify that their vote was counted as cast. It's also structured so that the larger the contest/issue margin, the fewer cast vote records are examined. I.e., the more you cheat, the lower the chance of getting caught.

A few fascinating facts:

• Coomer of Dominion "helped" w/the Voting Works' (Soros-funded through Democracy Works/Democracy Alliance) Arlo RLA software
• BallotTrax was started as i3Ballot at i3Logix by Moreno, from Dominion's Colorado UVS team; BallotTrax agreement w/CO SOS does not allow their software/hardware/network to be examined by anyone - i.e., CO SOS turned CO voter info (SCORE) over to BallotTrax w/no security verification whatsoever, for either privacy or election security
• Voting Works' Arlo RLA software security review (not certification, since EAC doesn't specify any guidelines or standards or "require" certification for RLA software) was conducted by Security Compass, of Canada, which employs a number of (presumably now Canadian citizens) Iranians who all attended/graduated Sherif University, Tehran together
• The DVS DemocracySuite in CO uses the same system architecture/components that Texas' election examiners reported on and recommended against certifying for use in TX; their reports are telling. It also uses components that were exploited in DEFCON Voting Villages 25-28. Furthermore, you don't have to have any of that info to know that hundreds of very nice people in the county offices, as well as myriad election observers, are not going to have the first fucking clue that it's not possible to "secure" a Windows-based machine, or a scanner w/changeable firmware, or any device or network w/active USB ports, and/or internet/network connections, including wi-fi, without secure, encrypted, auditable logs, etc. And we haven't even gotten to whether the supply chain for components has been corrupted, or whether they would know if internal components were replaced
• Pro V&V, which provides the security certifications for DVS in CO (and many other states) is a Potempkin village; their "security section" in their reports is two paragraphs - they don't red team. They don't do persistent or advanced persistent. It's not even clear they run standard security suite tools against anything they "test;" same with SLI Compliance (which is owned by a gaming machine company)
• PS: acceptable forms of ID for same-day voting in CO include a copy of a current (w/in last 60 days) utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, etc, showing name and address of the elector, or a copy or certificate of indian blood (which you can make yourself in about 2 minutes). These could also be bulk-loaded into SCORE from BallotTrax