Replies

They made three points, one of which is debatable. The debatable one is that they claim that 90% BIden precincts are statistically impossible. That's not true, and that kind of thing happens all the time. It may well be that 90% precincts or 100% Obama zero Romney in some Philly divisions (which can be 1,000 votes) are the result of fraud but the presenters ruled out an analysis of that type of fraud at the beginning of the presentation.

Point 2: adjudication without any preservation of records or paper trail. There were 105,000 adjusticated ballots in Fulton according to the head of Fulton county elections. Those are changed votes and nobody has any idea what they were changed from. The post-election audit could not validate those changes. R-burger was only recounting the changed ballots. So the post-election audit was not really an audit.

Point 3: the machine process decremented votes. According to these presenters there is no human error that would cause the decrement. A human error would allow the possibility of a mistake then the fixing the mistake by decrementing or switching the votes.

On point 1, there's not much we can do except convince more blacks to vote Republican. That happened already with Trump and needs to continue. On point 2, the adjuication process needs to be auditable. Otherwise we can never trust the election results. On point 3, more investigation is needed. I haven't heard of any explanation of how the votes were decremented.

there's not much we can do except convince more blacks to vote Republican. That happened already with Trump and needs to continue

Except a) Blacks would be crazy to vote Republican; and b) there are A LOT more white voters, half of whom (give or take) vote Democrat.

Trump was elected by exactly those people - whites who voted twice for Obama and then voted for him - and if he had not turned his back on them he would be starting his second term in three weeks.

Point 3: the machine process decremented votes. According to these presenters there is no human error that would cause the decrement. A human error would allow the possibility of a mistake then the fixing the mistake by decrementing or switching the votes.

My head is spinning. DID THIS REALLY HAPPEN? If it did, it should be like child's play to spot, and not possible to spin.

They made three points, one of which is debatable. The debatable one is that they claim that 90% BIden precincts are statistically impossible.

I agree that individual 90% precincts are certainly possible. The rather rushed testimony includes the large number, and the semi-linear nature of their number, compared to the county as a whole.

I’d agree that that point needs more elaboration, and is not correct within the limited comment - though seems likely to be true in context.

Point 3: the machine process decremented votes. According to these presenters there is no human error that would cause the decrement. A human error would allow the possibility of a mistake then the fixing the mistake by decrementing or switching the votes.

In theory there aren’t supposed to BE humans inserted there into that process, so human error is dubious, and not only the human error, but the insertions of humans into that process needs to be explained before it can be accepted.