Anyone really know if they can be faked? Surely there are anti counterfeiting measures. Wouldn't they have to use the same printers, have distinct handwriting. Basically it might be that it would be much harder to cover this up then anything we saw thus far and we all know they didn't do a good job on that.
Edit: would be nicr to hear from someone who professionally knows this stuff but my assumption is that there is a real chance shit will be discovered.
If they had an easy way to counterfeit the evidence, they probably wouldn't have resisted for so long. For example, if it only took them a week to fake everything, they could have said "check us" in early December so they can claim that there was no fraud and make us look dumb.
But nearly three months after the election, it's not hard to believe they eventually figured out the best way to fake the evidence. Otherwise, they may have blamed some random arsonist that committed suicide with a few gunshot wounds to the back of the head for destroying everything. Then the press reveals that the arsonist had social media pages created a week ago with nothing but pro-Trump stuff on them.
It's easy to fake. The only hard part is making sure that no one involved spills the beans. The more people you bring in to help, the faster it goes, but the greater the risk you get exposed by a slip up or whistleblower. This way, with months to work with instead of days, they can prepare for the audit it with just a small number of people, get their stories straight, etc. The "tamper proof" seals for example can just be sealed after the fact as long as all parties that signed off are in on it, and so on.
Compare the ballots in the boxes to the images of those ballots electronically. Easy to prove they are or are not the same physical ballots, or if they were scanned unfolded and folded after the fact. They cannot have folded the ballots, and then rescanned them in preparation for the audit, then somehow replaced all the scanned ballot images with the new images.
From what I have heard is the 'scanned ballot' isn't a photocopy like would think it is. I've heard its a computer generated print out of what the ballot should be (or what they adjudicate it to be). I could be wrong but I have seen this in a ton of sources.
What we're looking for IS fakes. We actually hope there are fakes because we can prove the fraud. Jovan Pulitzer is updating on the situation: https://youtu.be/nAZiBpf-xtM
They folded way to quickly when they still had additional stall options. Either they're totally f*cked or they covered things to the point that they dont care who knows.
Yeah, one thing Bureaucracy does well is theres always a way to drag ones feet. Have you seen the Supreme Court non-rulings recently? Even they know how to avoid doing the proper thing until its way to late.
At a minimum there should be finger prints all over the ballots, either by the voters in which case there should be hundreds of thousands, or by the fraudsters in which case there should be very very few, or none, both of which would be an indication of fraud.
Anyone really know if they can be faked? Surely there are anti counterfeiting measures. Wouldn't they have to use the same printers, have distinct handwriting. Basically it might be that it would be much harder to cover this up then anything we saw thus far and we all know they didn't do a good job on that.
Edit: would be nicr to hear from someone who professionally knows this stuff but my assumption is that there is a real chance shit will be discovered.
If they had an easy way to counterfeit the evidence, they probably wouldn't have resisted for so long. For example, if it only took them a week to fake everything, they could have said "check us" in early December so they can claim that there was no fraud and make us look dumb.
But nearly three months after the election, it's not hard to believe they eventually figured out the best way to fake the evidence. Otherwise, they may have blamed some random arsonist that committed suicide with a few gunshot wounds to the back of the head for destroying everything. Then the press reveals that the arsonist had social media pages created a week ago with nothing but pro-Trump stuff on them.
It's easy to fake. The only hard part is making sure that no one involved spills the beans. The more people you bring in to help, the faster it goes, but the greater the risk you get exposed by a slip up or whistleblower. This way, with months to work with instead of days, they can prepare for the audit it with just a small number of people, get their stories straight, etc. The "tamper proof" seals for example can just be sealed after the fact as long as all parties that signed off are in on it, and so on.
Compare the ballots in the boxes to the images of those ballots electronically. Easy to prove they are or are not the same physical ballots, or if they were scanned unfolded and folded after the fact. They cannot have folded the ballots, and then rescanned them in preparation for the audit, then somehow replaced all the scanned ballot images with the new images.
From what I have heard is the 'scanned ballot' isn't a photocopy like would think it is. I've heard its a computer generated print out of what the ballot should be (or what they adjudicate it to be). I could be wrong but I have seen this in a ton of sources.
Yeah it's not an actual copy of any kind, and chain-of-custody is completely broken. Those digital ballots are not evidence.
This is correct
What we're looking for IS fakes. We actually hope there are fakes because we can prove the fraud. Jovan Pulitzer is updating on the situation: https://youtu.be/nAZiBpf-xtM
They folded way to quickly when they still had additional stall options. Either they're totally f*cked or they covered things to the point that they dont care who knows.
You sure they had options?
Sure, appeal to SCOTUS. That gives them at least 8 more months.
Yeah, one thing Bureaucracy does well is theres always a way to drag ones feet. Have you seen the Supreme Court non-rulings recently? Even they know how to avoid doing the proper thing until its way to late.
Wonder who got picked to audit...either they found a complicit team, or they doctored the evidence.
At a minimum there should be finger prints all over the ballots, either by the voters in which case there should be hundreds of thousands, or by the fraudsters in which case there should be very very few, or none, both of which would be an indication of fraud.