6 ms·

The Dominion claim isn't the only one in Georgia. In fact, most of the lawsuits, two of which are ongoing, are regarding the changes the Georgia Secretary of St

The Dominion claim isn't the only one in Georgia. In fact, most of the lawsuits, two of which are ongoing, are regarding the changes the Georgia Secretary of State made in March 2020 to relax signature matching and ballot curing rules for absentee ballots. Since the Secretary of State is not a part of the legislature, this relaxation is alleged to be unconstitutional. You can find a breakdown of the lawsuits here. [0] There was a hand recount in Georgia. But if the dispute is over the ballots themselves and their veracity, then a recount does little to resolve it. The Georgia Governor has since called for a signature audit, but limited it to Cobb county. Most of the witness affidavits regarding signatures not being verified came out of Fulton county. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election_from_Georgia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related...

Mirioron 6y ago
I still don't understand. How does this place the blame on Dominion? It seems like they did their thing right.
- disgrunt 6y ago
  I was answering the other posters question as to why the recount on it's own didn't just resolve the dispute. However, there was a forensic analysis done of a Dominion voting machine in Michigan with some disturbing findings. You can read the report here. [0] > While the allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission (FEC.gov) guidelines is 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008 percent), ASOG’s forensic analysis observed an error rate of 68.05 percent, which is a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity. > In the ASOG audit, all log entries for the 2020 election cycle were found missing in the Dominion equipment they analyzed—meanwhile voter adjudication logs for previous years exist. Removal of these log files violates state laws and prevents a meaningful audit, even if the Secretary of State’s office wanted to conduct its own audit. > The ASOG audit also discovered software changes on Oct. 23, 2020, and then again on Nov. 5, 2020, just after the election. In accordance with the Help America Vote Act, this violates the 90-day Safe Harbor period which prohibits changes to election systems, without these systems undergoing recertification. [0]: https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20423772-antrim-county-forensics-report https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20423772-antrim-cou...
  - VikingCoder 6y ago
    That audit was performed by Russell James Ramsland Jr. who does not have a good track record of reporting on numbers. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/04/russell-james-ramsland-jr/affidavit-michigan-lawsuit-seeking-overturn-electi/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/04/russell-ja... And again - Georgia did a hand recount. And the numbers agreed. At least in Georgia, can you explain to me how the issue of Dominion Changing Votes, is not 100% resolved?
    - disgrunt 6y ago
      Ah, yes, reject evidence using an ad hominem. I'm sure you'll convince others with that tact. Dominion has yet to dispute any of the findings in this report, despite the Michigan judiciary giving them an opportunity to do so before its release in December. But this is exactly the nature of the discourse: Group A: Group B has no evidence, they're trying to undermine the integrity of our electoral process, etc. Group B: Here's some evidence. Maybe we should investigate? Just to make sure everything is on the up and up? Group A: Your evidence is from person X, which my news source has already conveniently done their best to discredit. My news source has already debunked your claims as well. Group B has no evidence, undermining integrity, etc. Sadly Georgia has not yet ordered a forensic analysis of their voting machines. However, in that report I linked to, there was an exceptionally high ballot rejection rate for that Dominion voting machine in Michigan requiring ballot adjudication. When you have a state like Georgia, which just relaxed rules regarding signature verification and ballot curing, this poses a real problem in verifying the chain of custody.
      - VikingCoder 6y ago
        I do not trust an accountant who makes blatant accounting mistakes. I do not trust the testimony of someone who has falsified evidence, or processed it incorrectly. Neither of those are an ad hominem attack of a factual claim. They show that someone is incapable or unwilling to provide evidence that should be considered. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and if the evidence presented makes demonstrably false claims, then we're done with that evidence, and should frown upon the person who presented it. They should lose credibility. If you want to find another accountant, offer up someone else's testimony, show an untainted evidentiary chain, in support of a factual claim, I will gladly consider it. I am not either "Group" in your scenario, by the way. I accept that the Constitution of the United States enacts Laws, and Checks and Balances. I accept that we have Courts to make determinations of fact. We are a nation of laws. I am not in and of myself rejecting claims, and satisfied with that as the conclusion of my interest in the matter. I am informing you, I will accept the outcomes of the courts. I accepted them when I disagreed with their outcomes in the past, and I expect others to do likewise. Not that I think each outcome is Just, but that the long arm of history bends towards Justice. When I am upset enough, I petition my representatives to change the law, or to impeach officers of government. We are a nation of laws. WHY would Georgia order a forensic analysis of counting machines, when a hand recount has agreed, within a reasonable degree? It's nonsense. Is there a paper trail for voting machines? Yes. Voters are responsible for checking the paper record. The paper record has been checked against the electronic record. Aren't we done?

Mirioron 6y ago

I still don't understand. How does this place the blame on Dominion? It seems like they did their thing right.

disgrunt 6y ago
I was answering the other posters question as to why the recount on it's own didn't just resolve the dispute. However, there was a forensic analysis done of a Dominion voting machine in Michigan with some disturbing findings. You can read the report here. [0] > While the allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission (FEC.gov) guidelines is 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008 percent), ASOG’s forensic analysis observed an error rate of 68.05 percent, which is a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity. > In the ASOG audit, all log entries for the 2020 election cycle were found missing in the Dominion equipment they analyzed—meanwhile voter adjudication logs for previous years exist. Removal of these log files violates state laws and prevents a meaningful audit, even if the Secretary of State’s office wanted to conduct its own audit. > The ASOG audit also discovered software changes on Oct. 23, 2020, and then again on Nov. 5, 2020, just after the election. In accordance with the Help America Vote Act, this violates the 90-day Safe Harbor period which prohibits changes to election systems, without these systems undergoing recertification. [0]: https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20423772-antrim-county-forensics-report https://beta.documentcloud.org/documents/20423772-antrim-cou...
- VikingCoder 6y ago
  That audit was performed by Russell James Ramsland Jr. who does not have a good track record of reporting on numbers. https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/04/russell-james-ramsland-jr/affidavit-michigan-lawsuit-seeking-overturn-electi/ https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2020/dec/04/russell-ja... And again - Georgia did a hand recount. And the numbers agreed. At least in Georgia, can you explain to me how the issue of Dominion Changing Votes, is not 100% resolved?
  - disgrunt 6y ago
    Ah, yes, reject evidence using an ad hominem. I'm sure you'll convince others with that tact. Dominion has yet to dispute any of the findings in this report, despite the Michigan judiciary giving them an opportunity to do so before its release in December. But this is exactly the nature of the discourse: Group A: Group B has no evidence, they're trying to undermine the integrity of our electoral process, etc. Group B: Here's some evidence. Maybe we should investigate? Just to make sure everything is on the up and up? Group A: Your evidence is from person X, which my news source has already conveniently done their best to discredit. My news source has already debunked your claims as well. Group B has no evidence, undermining integrity, etc. Sadly Georgia has not yet ordered a forensic analysis of their voting machines. However, in that report I linked to, there was an exceptionally high ballot rejection rate for that Dominion voting machine in Michigan requiring ballot adjudication. When you have a state like Georgia, which just relaxed rules regarding signature verification and ballot curing, this poses a real problem in verifying the chain of custody.
    - VikingCoder 6y ago
      I do not trust an accountant who makes blatant accounting mistakes. I do not trust the testimony of someone who has falsified evidence, or processed it incorrectly. Neither of those are an ad hominem attack of a factual claim. They show that someone is incapable or unwilling to provide evidence that should be considered. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and if the evidence presented makes demonstrably false claims, then we're done with that evidence, and should frown upon the person who presented it. They should lose credibility. If you want to find another accountant, offer up someone else's testimony, show an untainted evidentiary chain, in support of a factual claim, I will gladly consider it. I am not either "Group" in your scenario, by the way. I accept that the Constitution of the United States enacts Laws, and Checks and Balances. I accept that we have Courts to make determinations of fact. We are a nation of laws. I am not in and of myself rejecting claims, and satisfied with that as the conclusion of my interest in the matter. I am informing you, I will accept the outcomes of the courts. I accepted them when I disagreed with their outcomes in the past, and I expect others to do likewise. Not that I think each outcome is Just, but that the long arm of history bends towards Justice. When I am upset enough, I petition my representatives to change the law, or to impeach officers of government. We are a nation of laws. WHY would Georgia order a forensic analysis of counting machines, when a hand recount has agreed, within a reasonable degree? It's nonsense. Is there a paper trail for voting machines? Yes. Voters are responsible for checking the paper record. The paper record has been checked against the electronic record. Aren't we done?