That’s a good point, thanks for the info. I didn’t see them halt either but I’ll watch it again more closely.
Side thought- what if the LAST ballot scanned was the only “faulty” one (intentionally, ofc). I did see some videos of Dominion exploits that said if any errors occurred the entire batch can be adjudicated. What I’m getting at is what if it’s a known exploit to do it that way and they took advantage if it (the top ballot would be the last ballot scanned if not flipped over). In a separate comment I noted how the woman with the braids keeps fiddling with just the top ballot of the stack each time she walks by.
From what I remember, they said that the workers had to manually discard a batch of ballots or else it would just keep adding onto the previous count. So even if it counted the full 50, as long as they didn't reset the count to zero, I assume it would keep adding on. Either way, if you look at Desk 2, the girl is toying with her cell phone half the time and is not worried about making sure the system is being exploited. However they exactly did it was obviously of no concern and probably easy as fuck to do.
I see what you're saying. But I'm assuming that all of them had admin rights just like this lady did in the video you sent. I remember there was one witness who said all of the USB drives and logins/passwords were just left around on the desks unsecured.
If they all had admin rights, they wouldn't need a faulty ballot as they clearly have the options to just put in and accept whatever they want with an admin login. The Batch Number and Batch Size appear to be editable fields in that video as well.
Yeah you’re right, I’m probably overthinking this. It’s likely as simple as them scanning a batch they know is almost entirely Biden multiple times.
What I don’t get though is why they would scan these ballots multiple times, when Edward Solomon already showed mathematically how the vote count totals seemed to be manipulated up at the reporting level. If that’s the case (aka they’re already manipulating the digital vote count later in the aggregation process), why would rescanning ballots be necessary? Maybe so that there are “more” digital images of ballots in the system to account for the fake numbers? But then wouldn’t an audit of the digital images show duplicates (if they have unique ids)? On a physical paper ballot recount however both the rescan technique and database/server reporting manipulation doesn’t help them because there would be a shortage of physical ballots, unless they’re added after the fact. Some things aren’t making sense to me.
That’s a good point, thanks for the info. I didn’t see them halt either but I’ll watch it again more closely.
Side thought- what if the LAST ballot scanned was the only “faulty” one (intentionally, ofc). I did see some videos of Dominion exploits that said if any errors occurred the entire batch can be adjudicated. What I’m getting at is what if it’s a known exploit to do it that way and they took advantage if it (the top ballot would be the last ballot scanned if not flipped over). In a separate comment I noted how the woman with the braids keeps fiddling with just the top ballot of the stack each time she walks by.
From what I remember, they said that the workers had to manually discard a batch of ballots or else it would just keep adding onto the previous count. So even if it counted the full 50, as long as they didn't reset the count to zero, I assume it would keep adding on. Either way, if you look at Desk 2, the girl is toying with her cell phone half the time and is not worried about making sure the system is being exploited. However they exactly did it was obviously of no concern and probably easy as fuck to do.
This is the video I was thinking about around the 1:20 mark https://youtu.be/Zgs3-_sXPsg
I see what you're saying. But I'm assuming that all of them had admin rights just like this lady did in the video you sent. I remember there was one witness who said all of the USB drives and logins/passwords were just left around on the desks unsecured.
If they all had admin rights, they wouldn't need a faulty ballot as they clearly have the options to just put in and accept whatever they want with an admin login. The Batch Number and Batch Size appear to be editable fields in that video as well.
Yeah you’re right, I’m probably overthinking this. It’s likely as simple as them scanning a batch they know is almost entirely Biden multiple times.
What I don’t get though is why they would scan these ballots multiple times, when Edward Solomon already showed mathematically how the vote count totals seemed to be manipulated up at the reporting level. If that’s the case (aka they’re already manipulating the digital vote count later in the aggregation process), why would rescanning ballots be necessary? Maybe so that there are “more” digital images of ballots in the system to account for the fake numbers? But then wouldn’t an audit of the digital images show duplicates (if they have unique ids)? On a physical paper ballot recount however both the rescan technique and database/server reporting manipulation doesn’t help them because there would be a shortage of physical ballots, unless they’re added after the fact. Some things aren’t making sense to me.