I do not understand how the Georgia recount did not reveal the Vote stealing. I assume that the artifacts preserved from the vote included the original ballot the voter filled out and submitted/scanned. It was this original ballot that was counter during the recount.
Am I mistaken? Now, if voting in person was done entirely interactively and a “ballot” was generated after the fact and it was this artifact that was counted during the recount, THEN I see how this vote stealing scheme would not be detected during a recount. Is this what is happening?
As I understand, all the voting machines in Georgia are of the BMD type which means the voter enters their vote through and electronic device which then prints out their vote. This “ballot” is then fed into a reader. I’m not sure if the vote tally is done from the entry device or if it is done on the actual printed ballot. But basically the machine could print one result on the ballot in text that agrees with the voter and then the machine can print out a barcode or QR code that is actually read by the reader that indicates a different count. Then when that ballot is put through any machine, it would count up the same every time and the voter would be none-the-wiser.
I’m not really sure how this is handled but I have hear that the BMD machines are very hackable.
You can read this analysis done by a Berkley student that talks about the BMD machines in great detail and how they can be unverifiable:
https://www.stat.berkeley.edu/~stark/Preprints/bmd-p19.pdf