Posted on 11/25/2020 9:12:08 PM PST by raynman33
See link to pdf
“A typed document was run through a pdf scanner.”
She is old enough (I am younger) to have used a Type Writer for many years in her career. If she used a typewriter for this.
One would not expect to get many errors scanning in type written papers.
If you make less than desirable copies of the type written papers and scan those in you will start to have problems with OCR recognizing the input.
Maybe you didn’t evade the question and simply missed it. Once again, you base that on what?
Paragraph 74 is what was burned into my brain, but I now see that was just for “some counties.” GIven this, seems like yet another Equal Protection argument can be woven into disparate recount techniques across GA.
I’m not positive on the definition of a hand RECOUNT vs. a hand AUDIT (what the SoS called “risk minimizing audit” or something like that). What I think happened was closer to the hand audit side of things than to a hand recount as the average person understands it (i.e. seeing, touching, and counting literally every ballot again). Most likely, they randomly selected a statistically meaningful number of ballots from each county/precinct/whatever and hand checked those (I still don’t think they verified signatures or ensured envelopes matched the ballots - illegal). If enough of those turned out to be acceptable - under whose watchful eye, I do not know - then the entire county/precinct/whatever was declared acceptable as well, and the entire batch of original ballots was re-counted with the machine. Some of this is speculation on my part based on what I read and heard around the time of the “hand recount” in GA. Correct me if I’m wrong.
Bert, I wonder, can see eye ay change the sign on date for someone they insert into the freeper realm? There seem to be several Debbie downers doing more than just sadsacking posts, with sign on dates back to 2004.
I see where Powell claims some counties did a machine recount instead of a hand recount audit. I will wait to see those, but I would offer that this may be for local races where a recount was done. That would have been done by machine, just like the recount that Trump requested after the certification in Georgia will be a machine recount.
The SoS office has this article regarding the hand recount audit and even has links for downloading the results. SoS of Georgia re: Hand Recount Audit
Rudy has done this before with the NYC mob families, he wrote the book.
As in social media, if the spelling nazi is after you, your content must be pretty damn good!
You are probably getting the idea by now, but it seems that ALL documents submitted to court are put through a OCR process.
This is to ensure that the text in those documents is searchable to (e.g.) Research Attorneys and other legal professionals.
Never mind that Sydney would certainly have submitted a write-protected PDF that was already searchable - I suspect that each court she submits to carries out the following steps:
* Print out any electronic files to paper.
* OCR all received hardcopy, and so expose all of the text to the court library systems.
The fact that large font titles seem to get particularly hacked about by OCR may because they are in a cursive font.
Hope this is helpful.
Another suit is filed in Michigan: https://defendingtherepublic.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/11/Michigan-Complaint.pdf
Note that Congress doesn’t COUNT electoral votes until Jan 6. The December 14 deadline is arbitrary and unenforceable. Dec 23 is when the electoral votes must be delivered to Washington, however, there is no penalty for a state not doing this. Interesting synopsis of the Electoral College timeline (note the absence of penalties associated with deadlines): https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11641
I consider the December dates being bandied about by the fake news meaningless and meant simply to impose a window on us for pursing our claims. If the government is truly interested in resolving election disputes and eliminating the appearance of fraud undermining these results, there are allowances in the Constitution and Electoral College for making that happen. Our Founders were both brilliant and astute observers of highly-flawed human nature.
You know what, by golly I will!
Can you read a QR record? No; not likely.
Dominion Voting Systems ImageCast X, where you sit or stand, to mark your votes electronically, prints (via a connected laser printer), a “voter record.”
You see on the printed “voter record” areas (circle/ellipse/oval or such) that are filled according to your votes.
But, the Dominion Voting Systems ImageCast X also prints a QR code on your “voter record.”
You next take your ICX paper “voter record” over to a Dominion tabulator and feed your record into the tabulator.
The Dominion tabulator reads the QR record, NOT what you saw in the “fields” (cirle/ellipse/oval).
In order to *hand count* or *audit* such a “voter record”, the “voter record” must be fed into a scanner, so that the person and persons responsible for handling and observing this “voter record” can verify that:
a) what you saw on your “voter record” - the fields, filled
b) matches with the QR code THAT YOU CANNOT DECIPHER VISUALLY.
Ref. on the matter of how the Dominion ImageCast X works:
In the following setup, a Dominion system:
- creates a QR record that represents the marks made by the voter
- prints out an ICX paper “voter record” that the voter then takes to a Tabulator
The ICX paper “voter record” is NOT a paper ballot, unless the program in the machine is set up to print voter’s choices on an official paper ballot.
Dominion Voting Systems ImageCast X
https://verifiedvoting.org/election-system/dominion-imagecast-x/
ImageCast X Configuration #1 – Ballot Marking Device Only
When configured exclusively as a ballot marking device (which is how most jurisdictions deploy it), ImageCast X does not have scanning or tabulating capabilities. Accordingly, after reviewing choices on the summary page, the voter selects when to print a paper record of their choices. The paper record lists voters’ choice(s) in each contest (rather than all options, like a traditional format ballot), and ImageCast X encodes the voter choices in a non-human readable QR code.
To cast the vote, the voter must insert the paper record into a separate scanning tabulator. The scanner most commonly used with ImageCast X is the ImageCast Precinct.
Dominion tabulators for the ICX paper records always count votes by reading the computerized QR code, NOT the human-readable text that the voter sees.
That you said it was mumbo jumbo.....it’s not.
Actually two distinct spelling errors one of them especially creative: “DISTRICCT COURT, NORTHERN DISTRCOICT OF GEORGIA”
Hope this is not representative of the accuracy of the document.
In Georgia, after voting an official paper ballot was printed showing the voter's choices and the voter checks and verifies that it represents their choices. It is this paper ballot that was hand recounted. The hand recount did not use the QR code. An example would be the video where one auditor called ballots for Biden 3x in one minute or something like that. The auditor looked at the ballot and saw the same selection that the voter saw when they validated it represented their choices.
Reading the first Exhibit to the lawsuit in Michigan, shows the software was hand-designed to Maduro's specifications to allow the changing of votes electronically, invisibly to the voter and without leaving an audit trail.
You're setting up what would be an impossible standard. Except that other people, more intelligent and honest than you, have made the study of voting systems their professional life's work.
Go read the attached statement by the Princeton professor about standards in voting systems, to include audit trails which are inaccessible to the operators.
Then go read the statements of the people from Texas evaluating and rejecting Dominion systems.
Then go read the Exhibit from the cases where it shows Dominion servers were accessed by both the Iranians and Chinese.
Different states have different monsters to slay.
PA cannot stand - just a clusterf** all the way around, including ignoring the USSC and unconstitutional changes to voting laws.
GA and some other areas the issue is ballot stuffing with illegal mail-ins.
MI, WI, NV had massive fraud and verification problems in addition to the foreign-owned Dominion machines.
PA and possibly several other states could be taken away from Biden. The Force is with us, but we'll see.
Grab your nads.
Fantastic! Thanks! So if I’m seeing this right, these suits will be decided by courts in each of these states and if they rule against Trump he can bring it to SCOTUS and if they rule for him, he therefore is declared the winner of the election?
A “100% sample” doesn’t make sense as a concept. A sample is by definition not 100%. I digress.
A recount of all paper ballots without signature verification will not change the outcome, hence why the outcome...didn’t change (other than the 3k+ magical ballots found on those magical USB drives that are part of the “most secure election in US history”). GA’s mail-in ballot rejection rate is comically LOW; illegal paper ballots unquestionably exist (Sidney thinks at least 4,600). Simply sending fraudulent paper ballots through the system one more time is utterly pointless to anyone looking to conduct an honest, meaningful recount. But hey, everyone just shutup, because we did a recount!
Additionally, after reading a bunch about Dominion, part of the problem with it is no paper ballots are used. How then are votes cast on Dominion/Smartmatic systems recounted? They aren’t.
So, technically, is the SOS correct in saying all paper ballots were “recounted”? Yes.
But...
Were all votes cast via paper ballot? No.
Were all votes cast via paper ballot legal? No.
Were all paper ballots included in the recount verified as legal? No.
According to SOS’s definition of recount, it was achieved; according to common sense, the recount was nothing but a farce.
BTTT !
Looks like you need lessons in how to distinguish deadpan humor/sarcasm and reality. Get a grip.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.