It may not be related, but the search paging button does not allow one to got back, "< Previous" button at the bottom of the second page results. (On the mobile chrome browser)
A feature missing in the search function is the ability to put constraints, such as the time range, the points, and if it was stickied.
The statements imply the originals should still be archived... the documents sent for shredding were extra papers not related to the actual votes. Someone needs to get a hold of them to verify this.
Seriously, opensource code to do this. Like literally, start a github/gitlab project and samples of scanned ballots from a fast scanner, like one of those duplex top feeding units...
For the physical access / discrepancy problem, why not have two teams scanning in the same ballots. Each from different parties. Break up the ballets into bundles of 500 or so and have both teams scan it and leave the number on the screen. If the numbers are the same or really close, then seal that bundle. All parties ensure that the bundle is marked and cannot be tampered with.
If the whole system is open source software and based on commodity hardware (like less then $5k per setup) what's the harm of two or even three teams all agreeing on the count?
Back to the writers point... Dominion has been a monopoly in this too long. Get a github / gitlab project going and solicit coding help.
I'm sorry you spent all your time trying to help someone look outside their selected channels of information.
What strikes me as funny is that they have spent their time and energy consuming media, pre-digested, and not showing multiple sides of a story. If there are multiple sides, showing only the sides that support a claim.
A lie can travel around the world before the truth can take one step. This self-righteous journalistic fad, in which journalists are supporting one side or another to look what, smart? Like they get something in return to show that one side of a story is right and the other is wrong? This should not be a journalists motivation. Showing right and wrong or using words like "filled with lies" implies that they want to suggest opinions for their audience. Stick with the facts and if opinions are brought in to support a story, let those be side lined as much as possible and have the opportunity to be retracted in an area like a website. Facts can never change, opinions can. Leave opinions out of the main line reporting.
Anonymous sources or something that cannot be traced back to the source are as good as opinions. Stop including them! This shouts, I need a good scoop but didn't have enough dirt in my dig that I just substituted crap.