I’d like to see a return to the voting booths with the little levers with counters. Paper ballots still need to be tabulated in corrupt machines.
There is no “They”. There is only “Who”?
Well, The Runbeck Company should be behind bars.
I am hearing a lot about this. Sadly none of it is being explained in an intelligent manor. The information is so loosely explained that it is hard to take real seriously. I thought the ballots were being rejected on election day. I never heard anything about them jamming. In some places I am reading that 20 inch is what they should be. But that 19 inch images were used.
Really... Those who are writing these stories need to get all the facts straight and explain them with accuracy.
That is an absolutely racist and transphobic article from GP. They are just making this up. I didn’t hear anything about this on CNN or MSNBC. In fact, it must be an attempt to distract. According to MSNBC they are closing in on Trump. He’s going to be indicted and thrown in prison any day now.
12/8/2022, 1:03:16 PM · 743 of 2,137 TEXOKIE to spokeshave To:
TEXOKIE
Undercover FBI agents posing as election officials sabotaged machines during election day causing outages and delays
A quick tweak to the input tray would cause a miss feed.....and could easily be “un-tweaked” later
“See the machines are working correctly.”
Say for example setting the input tray to 19 inches when the ballot is 20 inches long.
641 posted on 12/8/2022, 5:30:35 AM by spokeshave
The ballots did not “jam” the tabulators. The tabulators could not read the ballots and would reject them. I had to feed my ballot 7 times into two different tabulators before it would read.
Bkmk
Bring back Hanging Chads. Will this nightmare ever end with The Hobbs behind bars? Hope so.
This story has several details wrong.
The failing ballots were printed on demand at the polling locations, not at Runbeck.
The failing ballots didn’t “jam” the machines, they simply weren’t recognized and were spit out.
The failing ballots were not on the wrong size paper, they were the wrong size image printed on the right size paper.
I think the printing company needs to be questioned too.
It is way too easy to cheat.
The ballots should be serialized, scanned, and posted online, so the public can audit them.
Because Maricopa County is corrupt
Can anyone be hung for treason?
The voter centers without working machines:
59 were in solid red districts
2 were in lean red districts
4 were in lean blue districts
5 were in solid blue districts.
Actual Voter Suppression!!!
In short..they were all printed in a McCain machine.
Seriously, we will find that the McCain criminal cabal is in on this with the nazicRATS.
Ping
The Left attacks the voting process on all fronts, No stone is unturned, and tampering with hardware to achieve a fraudulent result is de rigueur.
The forensic analysis done in Antrim County in Michigan after the 2020 election showed that in various precincts in the county, 68% of scanned ballots failed to be read (with a failure rate of 90% in at least one county) and the failed scanned ballot images had to be shunted to an adjudication queue, where humans had to manually view them and assign them to various candidates.
If my memory serves me correctly, the critical log files showing the adjudication process (what logged in user adjudicated what votes, for whom, and at what date and time) on the Dominion servers were...gone. Missing. Deleted.
But they did not delete the log file that showed the optical scanning errors. (They probably didn’t know it was there, or thought it was unimportant)
And in the log file on the scanning process, they could see the results clearly for successful and unsuccessful scan attempts, resulting in the failed scanned ballots being shunted into the adjudication queue. That gave them the 68% failure rate.
The Federal Election Commission allows a maximum error rate of just 0.0008 percent for computerized voting systems.
Furthermore, the cause was found to be anything ranging from gunk on the lens of the optical scanner (which as anyone knows who has to work with a lot of document scanners as I have...can happen) to the lens of the scanner being out of adjustment.
I found that “out of adjustment” reason to be interesting. Hardware adjustment, or software adjustment? They did not specify. But suspicious minds would wonder about that. If there is a calibration file for a printer (especially very expensive, purpose-built, high end document scanners such as these) then someone could manually edit that calibration file. Even edit it remotely.
Obviously, a hardware setting such as a manual adjustment screw which would require manipulation and then verification via testing that the optics were back within specifications would be harder to do, but...not impossible.
That would render the optics unable to correctly read the scanned document, resulting in a failure.
well ok but if the hand counted them then there is no fraud. However any process that is not auditable is on its face fraudulent. All election processes are not auditable, therefore they are all fraudulent.