Posted on 11/25/2020 9:12:08 PM PST by raynman33
See link to pdf
THAT was a most informative read. Thanx for the work you are putting in. And friends, THIS is why we fund Freerepublic. The talent herein is not matched at any other self-funded porum.
Please tell me where I am being dishonest and I will be glad to discuss with you. Hit me with where you think I am telling the biggest whopper.
Beach, there were no auditors. And GOP observers had no way of viewing the recount because of the table to monitor ratio. They were not allowed to clearly observe the signature matching the first count, nor the next two counts. This has been in multiple lawsuits and there is sworn testimony of observers.
Yeah, troll-boi.
This is a civil case at this point.
“Preponderance of the evidence”, not “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
You overshot the mark again.
I already did, more than once, and you ignored every point I made. Others have as well. I am not going to waste my time, trying to convince you, I am just going to call you out when I see you post lies.
I was mocking the disciples of doom and the conga-line of political posers who now reside here. It just went right over his/her head. Oh well.
How do you know that?
I have a little kitty, Abby, who comes to my office and reaches up to put a paw on the keyboard when she wants my attention for various things she demands. It is almost like she is putting a halt to whatever is so consuming that my hands are tapping constantly on these keys.
I know, but they need to audit the bar codes.
How do you think it proceeded?
My God you’re stupid.
If I have a stack of money, and I’m told the stack may contain x% of counterfeit bills, simply re-counting the stack provides ZERO evidence of how many counterfeits there are.
Repeating the statement below for Religion and Politics. Discuss.
Maybe one of them was reading the first letter of the bar code and the second one was reading the text.
Well, this last time you called me out you stated that there was no audit. I am sure that are differences will be found in semantics, because I have already offered the link regarding the results of the audit. If you choose to call it something else and therefore you think that makes me a liar, then I can't help that.
Here again is the link from the Georgia Secretary of States office regarding the results from the ordered hand recount audit. Just read the title and quit calling me a liar. HISTORIC FIRST STATEWIDE AUDIT OF PAPER BALLOTS UPHOLDS RESULT OF PRESIDENTIAL RACE
Bravo!
Which means the "hand recount" did not actually confirm what the computer actually counted.
The hand recount only counted what the computer printout told you it wants you to think was counted.
So neither you or anyone who voted there can determine what your vote was counted as, since you can't read the computer code yourself. You don't seem to outraged, considering.
The problem with even this kind of possibility is that ultimately the hand recount yielded the same count result as the machines. There weren't systemic issues found and they would have with the process Georgia undertook to manually count the paper ballots produced by the Dominion system.
It explains exactly how the recount could come out very similarly in the absence of oversight.
So your sample size is one, i.e. your printed GA ballot?
Could it be that you voted in an area that was following the law? It’s not as though there are no indications that election law was NOT rampantly ignored across your state, so why should anyone believe it was suddenly routinely followed, and everywhere, on the point of printed ballots? I just don’t buy it. Neither should you.
Assuming paper ballots were the universal norm across GA, how good was the education campaign to ensure every voter understood that they needed to get a paper ballot after filling stuff out on the machine? Typically, you’d think punching your selections on the screen and hitting “enter” was how you voted, unless you were specifically told to expect a printed ballot. This wouldn’t be an unreasonable assumption in this day and age. Hopefully many people would be highly skeptical of “the machine” correctly counting their inputs with no paper trail, but government-trusting idiots are absolutely everywhere (exhibit a: people in masks).
You still haven’t answered my question about what is GAINED from a computerized system that prints out paper ballots over just printing out ballots from the get-go and filling them in with a pen. Sounds like an improvement over Diebold, but still, why over-complicate things??
I’m willing to suspend my disbelief to grant plausibility to what you’re saying about the paper recount simply being an exercise in verifying the count from Dominion machines/that they were not hacked. But it still ignores the fact that this recount was a sham from the start since it did absolutely nothing to remove fraudulent paper mail-in ballots from the pool of (re)counted votes. If anything, it was only an audit of the Dominion machines not an actual recount of legal votes. Shouldn’t counting all legal votes be what we care about here??
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.