This is indeed proof that the forensic audit conducted by Russell Ramsland Jr.’s company ASOG, and paid for by Sidney Powell, on December 14th was erroneous in its conclusion that the tabulators were set up to throw errors.
The errors they are referring to there are ones which allow adjudication. If there are honest folk doing the adjudications, the numbers there could match exactly.
6. The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of 68.05%. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity. 8. The tabulation log for the forensic examination of the server for Antrim County from December 6, 2020consists of 15,676 individual events, of which 10,667 or 68.05% of the events were recorded errors. These errors resulted in overall tabulation errors or ballots being sent to adjudication. This high error rates proves the Dominion Voting System is flawed and does not meet state or federal election laws.To point 6... The FEC guideline applies to the machines scanning and tabulating ballots. In this case it would be the ImageCast Precinct and ImageCast Central machines. They are tested by processing stacks of machine marked ballots. All in-person voters ballots are fed into the ImageCast Precinct machines, and if they were rejected (an extreme rarity) the precinct workers would have been immediately aware of something seriously wrong. Clearly there was no 68% error rate there. That's a patently riduclous assertion. The Image Central scanners are at the county office scan absentee ballots. There is no doubt a higher rejection rate, because those ballots are filled out by hand by the voter. A 68% rejection rate would also have been extraordinarily high because not even that many voters screw up their ballots. Those are the rejected ballots that would have to be manually adjudicated by the clerks.
To point 8... Note this is the main servers log! All the USBs from the scanner/tabulators are loaded into the main server. The error rate is calculated from this 10,667/15,676. The audit report does not specify what these errors were. This particular calculation is has absolutely nothing to do with any ballots being rejected by the tabulators. That the error was on the main server is congruent with the county clerks claim that the ballot update was only made on the particular precinct tabulators and nowhere else, which caused a "cascade of errors" when the main server attempted to reconcile the tabulations.
Finally the main server reported these erroneous election results to the state computer. So how did the county clerk manually fix the error? Each tabulator prints a paper result of its tabulation. She added these up and submitted them to the state manually to correct the error. If the tabulators had been programmed to produce errors the printed paper trail would have been incorrect. Furthermore an actual hand count of the ballots on Dec 15th reflected that the tabulated count differed by only 2 votes.
QED