Hi again!
I'm Justin Mealey, and I testified at the Georgia Senate hearing today. Our team provided hard evidence of voter fraud, using the same data the Georgia certified the state with.
Here's a copy of the testimony: https://rumble.com/vcay7j-data-scientists-shocking-election-testimony.html
I wanted to do an AMA so that people can ask more questions related to our data methodology, clarify items about the voting process which we painstakingly investigated across multiple states, and hear your ideas about we could better get the word out about the fact that we seem to be one of the only groups operating off of hard, irrefutable conclusions based off of data.
EDIT: Thanks so much for the questions (heading to bed) -- hope I was able to clarify a few things for you guys. We'll ask Dave (the head data scientist who also testified from my group) to come do any AMA tomorrow as well.
EDIT 2: I'm sort of back right now (9AM EST) so will be periodically checking for new questions as I refresh tdw looking for spicy memes to repost on facebook.
EDIT 3: (10:32AM EST) I'm going to post a reply to a MrCaveman (which, thank you for the question) that I really want everyone to read:
https://thedonald.win/p/11RO7PRc9Q/x/c/4Drwoe2gIJ7?d=50
When doing work that you deem is important, the most vital thing you can have is focus. A lot of the times that means putting to the side all of the noise that surrounds a certain path. The poll pads are the noise when it comes to the actual ability to commit fraud during this election.
If you were creating a system to enact a fraud, how many points of contact would you design for that system to interface with in the voting process? How many confederates would you need to enable in that system? One way we've discovered only requires one true confederate to enact in a county, and we've actually identified some of these actual confederates. Depending on how things go, we might have to just release that in a video in the future.
My point being, that while your intentions are good (as most everyone's on this site's are), they distract from the actual fraud. By distracting from the actual fraud, parts of which we've proved through hard data analysis, it actually detracts from the ability for us to bring that fraud to light and abolish it.
Please, for the love of God, stop talking about poll pads.
"Their service has absolutely no functionality associated with validating addresses, rejecting voters, or anything of that nature."
WRONG!
"What Can E-Poll Books Do?
There are a variety of e-poll books on the market, and many jurisdictions design their own. An e-poll book typically provides one or more of the following functions:
Allows voters to sign in electronically. Allows poll workers to easily redirect voters in the wrong location to the correct polling place. Scans a driver’s license to pull up a voter’s information, avoiding data entry errors. Allows poll workers to look up voters from the entire county or state. This can reduce time spent checking in voters, one of the bottlenecks in the voting process. Allows real-time updates of voter history. Notifies poll workers if a voter already voted absentee or during the early voting period. Produces turnout numbers and lists of who voted. In states that have same-day registration, e-poll books may be used to register voters. Uses a photo to verify a voter’s identity. This could be a method to prevent voter fraud, but it is not yet in place anywhere. E-poll books in some states (Maryland and Indiana, for example) are networked and receive immediate updates on who has voted in other voting centers. Other states (Minnesota and Michigan, for example) specify that e-poll books may not be connected to the network."
Ref: https://www.ncsl.org/research/elections-and-campaigns/electronic-pollbooks.aspx
Re-read what you just put. The validating of identification is falling upon the election worker. The poll pad is basically allowing for database search of voter records, and updates to those voter records.
Look... we're on the same side, and I am kindly asking for the favor of your attention to a detail I believe quite important about the role Knowink played in GA's contract with Dominion. I do very much appreciate your indulgence, and ask that you read this one article: https://www.tapinto.net/categories/news/articles/elections-officials-contractor-hired-to-provide-basic-voter-details-did-faulty-work
When doing work that you deem is important, the most vital thing you can have is focus. A lot of the times that means putting to the side all of the noise that surrounds a certain path. The poll pads are the noise when it comes to the actual ability to commit fraud during this election.
If you were creating a system to enact a fraud, how many points of contact would you design for that system to interface with in the voting process? How many confederates would you need to enable in that system? One way we've discovered only requires one true confederate to enact in a county, and we've actually identified some of these actual confederates. Depending on how things go, we might have to just release that in a video in the future.
My point being, that while your intentions are good (as most everyone's on this site's are), they distract from the actual fraud. By distracting from the actual fraud, parts of which we've proved through hard data analysis, it actually detracts from the ability for us to bring that fraud to light and abolish it.
Please, for the love of God, stop talking about poll pads.