Right. It's supposed to be used for occasional mismarks and corrected by unbiased third parties.

Instead, they can adjust the tolerances so a high portion are rejected and need to be corrected. Then they have people out-of-sight in back-offices or off-site "correct" the ballots, destroy the original images, and flip significant portions of the vote.

Do we have numbers for % of ballots "corrected" ? Any legitimate software should have that number highly visible. EDIT: "The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of 68.05%" - link

Right. It's supposed to be used for occasional mismarks and corrected by unbiased third parties.

Instead, they can adjust the tolerances so a high portion are rejected and need to be corrected. Then they have people out-of-sight in back-offices or off-site "correct" the ballots, destroy the original images, and flip significant portions of the vote.

Do we have numbers for % of ballots "corrected" ? Any legitimate software should have that number highly visible. EDIT: "The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of 68.05%" - https://www.depernolaw.com/uploads/2/7/0/2/27029178/antrim_michigan_forensics_report_[121320]v2[redacted].pdf