peacedude said:

---

Lara Logan has a documentary coming out soon about Tina Peters (the left hate that she's a gold star mom and good person), and it's supposed to delve deep into the whole Colorado story.

That said, I hope Tina outlines how all of their processes are supposed to work, and how the various state's SoS's seemed to be working in conjunction with one another out of a developed playbook for machine fraud.

---

Why am I not surprised?

Let's go back to the Edison Data.

Quote:

---

Draza Smith and Jeff O'Donnell are two data experts who began looking at this data. They made numerous observations after doing so as noted in the article below. Some key points are:

• Edison data with state totals are provided to mainstream media outlets like the New York Times showing reportedly up-to-date results of the election for each state
• There is a separate stream of election data based on county reporting that goes to the state
• The Edison state data supplied to the media and the county data supplied to the state don't mirror each other and don't agree until very late in the process these results should mirror each other at all times accounting for timing issues
• During the 2020 Election, all Edison data results for all states went to zero, and then when the numbers were reported again the Edison state data showed that President Trump had lost votes in many states. It appears that this 'Edison zero' event was done to make it look like President Trump was doing worse in several states
• The Edison state data and county data cannot be reconciled
• Edison state data was always less than the county data (except with DC)
• Ultimately both the Edison state data and the county data come to an agreement at the end of the election
• The Edison state data appears almost completely fictional to paint a story to the public
• The county data may be fictional as well to some extent but not as off as Edison state data.
• Edison data reporting is most likely related to an algorithm or pre-determined value
• Battleground states actually had more refined reporting down to the precinct level rather than county level as in other states
• The ratio of Trump to Biden votes in the Edison data appears preset for each state before the election
• But when Texas and then Florida went to Trump voting had to stop while they rearranged the remainder of the swing state votes
• The Edison zero moment occurred after Florida was called for Trump
• All states show this pattern
• There may be some type of controller that manages the votes a device similar to ones used in multiple industries
• Jeff O'Donnell "I have probably done a fairly deep dive on 12 different states and I have found unacceptable, unacceptable things in all 12. Even in my worst nightmares previous to this election, I never dreamed that anything like this on such a massive scale could happen. We need answers to so many questions."
• Draza Smith shared: "Everything we've put together with the idea of how things happened here, played out exactly the same way in the California recall election. Why did all those people…go in and vote and be told, oh you can't vote, you've already cast a vote…So the things that we're seeing happening are falling into line that it's the same, it's the same, it's the same. We need to start demanding the answers as to why the same, the same, the same."
• We need an audit of our time stamps. We need to get a better idea of how a ballot goes from the voter, to the tabulator, to the state and Edison and eventually to the New York Times.

---

Quote:

---

The county results reported in the Edison data don't agree with the state results. They should. So another data set to compare these results to was needed. This is where 'Cast Vote Records' come in.

"Cast Vote Records" are inventories of votes recorded in the voting system. These records can be downloaded onto a spreadsheet and they show all votes for each ballot counted in the election through the election system. Each row represents each ballot tabulated in the election and which tabulator it was cast on, what image number it was given, what type of vote it was, ballot type or precinct, and what all the votes were for the races on that ballot.

---

Quote:

---

Unfortunately, and perhaps by design, the Cast Vote Records do not include time stamps for when the ballots were cast or tabulated. The Cast Vote records in the order they are provided from the voting system do not agree with the Edison data.

Numerous states were reviewed and none of the Cast Vote Records for any state agreed with the results for the state reported through Edison.

Erin Clements shared that the order of the votes in the Cast Vote Record is impossible to achieve in most counties. Votes are clearly being shuffled and possibly made up altogether. Small, red counties don't necessarily show shuffling, but ballot stuffing in absentee ballots for some races usually pops out.

---

Quote:

---

At this point in the 2020 Election the Edison data that was used to report the status of the election results across the country, can't be reconciled to anything.

---

Link

aggiehawg said:

---

One other thing I thought about was whether any numbers were being sent to the Sec of State's office during the early voting period? Wouldn't they have noticed these issues?

---

According to the findings, no.

Quote:

---

The manipulation would not be identifiable to an election official using the voting systems, nor to an observer or judge overseeing the election conduct, much less to citizens with no access to the voting systems; without both cyber and database management system expertise

---

I do like this.....

Quote:

---

Dominion's installation of the Trusted Build update on the EMS in May of 2021, as ordered by the Colorado Secretary of State, destroyed all data on the EMS hard drive, including the batch and ballot records that evidenced the creation of new databases and reprocessing of ballot records described in Findings 1 and 2 above.

---

November 2020 + 22 Months retention (by law) = September 2022.

The SoS actions broke the law regardless of what the manipulation.

ETA: I stand corrected. Colorado law states 25 months, so December of 2022

Quote:

---

CRS 1-7-802 requires the preservation of election records for 25 months after elections.

---

More on Edison Data

Quote:

---

Edison Reporting of 2020 Election in Chester County, PA

---

Video at Link

Quote:

---

Clown World - Philadelphia Edison Data Reporting

---

Video at Link

This is maddening, the fact that there are not multiple tables and reference points is insane. There should be a transaction table which has timestamps and GUID's which connect everything. If you cannot confirm when ballots were submitted and in which batches, and what times those event happened, you cannot audit/confirm anything.

This should all be locked down to what device performs what task. As an example, when a ballot is submitted and the record is created. The machines that submit those should be the ONLY devices allowed to execute the stored procedure which inserts the information to the database. No other person, or machine should be able to execute that step or any subset of that step....and so on....and so on....unique identifiers of every device should be tagged on every transaction. Then you could look at the logs from the machine to see when it submitted the ballot and when the DB said the ballot was submitted. Everything should line up.

At that point, in real-time, you can have read-only procedures running and reporting if anything doesn't line up. Say one machine's clock is off, or is malfunctioning, you could no right away to remove it from the equation.

And Peters among others are being prosecuted for ensuring those records were retained according to state law.

aggiehawg said:

---

And Peters among others are being prosecuted for ensuring those records were retained according to state law.

---

She is not going to get a fair shake, but man it would be nice to pump some money into her defense fund and get a team to go scorched Earth on discovery.

We fixed the keg said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

And Peters among others are being prosecuted for ensuring those records were retained according to state law.

---

She is not going to get a fair shake, but man it would be nice to pump some money into her defense fund and get a team to go scorched Earth on discovery.

---

Problem here is how corporate witnesses are determined, as in, it is up to the corporation to designate their "official witness with knowledge." So sending a subpoena to Dominion asking for the employee with the best knowledge of the software installed for that "Trusted Build" i.e. who wrote the program, there's no control over who Dominion designates.

Saw that in the Depp/Heard trial with the Disney corporate delegated witness completely out of the loop as when and how the Pirates Six movie was shelved, etc.

I'm sure you see the problem there. Get some jackwad like Eric Coomer or his boss Poulos or whatever his name is and they don't know s***. That's what happened in the Curling case in Georgia. Dominion and Raffensperger kept delaying access to either the machines or the ones most knowledgeable about the software system until the Judge ordered the plaintiff's own experts get to look. Ran out the clock before the election in that manner.

oh no said:

---

Probably nothing they can do in Michigan, Pennsylvania etc., not sure about NM, NV, others, but if enough states with R-controlled state legislatures (TX, FL, GA, AZ, etc.) pass some election integrity laws and implement them properly -outlawing insecure drop boxes, requiring ID, securing and updating registration rolls, ensuring an audit trail can exist, outlawing zuckerbucks that fund harvest campaigns, outlawing the outsourcing of local election work to NGO's, severe punishments for voter fraud, etc. then maybe there's a chance for conservatives to take control of both chambers of Congress.

Then, they will need to make sure there can't be a way for the authoritarian left to nationalize / federalize elections in the future. They openly call for federalizing it and if that happens, authoritarian left will win every election for forever in a new one-party system the same way Saddam Hussein, Fidel Castro, and Hugo Chvez always won their elections and the same way Biden was placed in his position.

---

with the number of compromised RINO's in office in DC, we already effectively have a one-party system. This is why they absolutely lost their minds over Trump since he was an outsider and was not beholden to china.

agree with your points however, as at least there is a hope of righting the ship somewhat instead of ceding every future election to the godless commies...

peacedude said:

---

Lara Logan has a documentary coming out soon about Tina Peters (the left hate that she's a gold star mom and good person), and it's supposed to delve deep into the whole Colorado story.

That said, I hope Tina outlines how all of their processes are supposed to work, and how the various state's SoS's seemed to be working in conjunction with one another out of a developed playbook for machine fraud.

---

I'm hoping that a lefty judge doesn't gag-order her into not speaking about the election processes she observed and is aware of...

ravingfans said:

---

peacedude said:

---

Lara Logan has a documentary coming out soon about Tina Peters (the left hate that she's a gold star mom and good person), and it's supposed to delve deep into the whole Colorado story.

That said, I hope Tina outlines how all of their processes are supposed to work, and how the various state's SoS's seemed to be working in conjunction with one another out of a developed playbook for machine fraud.

---

I'm hoping that a lefty judge doesn't gag-order her into not speaking about the election processes she observed and is aware of...

---

At this point why would she obey such an order. But nothing like that is going to work. You see how the reaction is. Only the most point-blank smoking gun would have a shot of persuading a resolved skeptic.

will25u said:

---

The Colorado Sun: Judge orders arrest of indicted Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters for bond violations.

— The Bias (@thebias_news) July 15, 2022

---

The warrant was quashed, but they basically put her on house arrest. The judge said if she leaves even 1 minute before she is allowed to do so, he'll toss her in jail in a second.

Quote:

---

Passed by the state's Republican-majority legislature and signed into law by Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf on Monday, the legislation (SB 982) mandates that Pennsylvania public officials "may not solicit, apply for, enter into a contract for or receive or expend gifts, donations, grants or funding from any individual, business, organization, trust, foundation, or any nongovernmental entity for the registration of voters or the preparation, administration or conducting of an election in [the] Commonwealth."

---

Surprised the Governor signed that.

Link

So NO to Zuckbucks, right?

This sounds awesome!!

Edison Data from election night 2020 and beyond for Fulton County. Really bizarre.

Video at bottom of Link

AP covering for the 2020 fraudsters.

No major problems with ballot drop boxes in 2020, AP finds

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Passed by the state's Republican-majority legislature and signed into law by Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf on Monday, the legislation (SB 982) mandates that Pennsylvania public officials "may not solicit, apply for, enter into a contract for or receive or expend gifts, donations, grants or funding from any individual, business, organization, trust, foundation, or any nongovernmental entity for the registration of voters or the preparation, administration or conducting of an election in [the] Commonwealth."

---

Surprised the Governor signed that.

Link

---

Maybe he is a Pennsylvanian first.

titan said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Passed by the state's Republican-majority legislature and signed into law by Democrat Gov. Tom Wolf on Monday, the legislation (SB 982) mandates that Pennsylvania public officials "may not solicit, apply for, enter into a contract for or receive or expend gifts, donations, grants or funding from any individual, business, organization, trust, foundation, or any nongovernmental entity for the registration of voters or the preparation, administration or conducting of an election in [the] Commonwealth."

---

Surprised the Governor signed that.

Link

---

Maybe he is a Pennsylvanian first.

---

Maybe the governor knows that this, like most laws out there, will only be enforced on one party.

Quote:

---

The data analysts then went on to claim that for a candidate to receive 75% or more of all the votes in a precinct is abnormal. Receiving over 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud. Then the experts provided a chart showing that in Fulton County, Georgia alone there were 51 precincts with 90-93% of the ballots for Joe Biden, 51 precincts with 94% of the ballots for Joe Biden, 36 precincts with 95% of the ballots for Joe Biden and another 36 precincts with 96 to 100% of the ballots for Joe Biden. Overall, over 150 precincts in Fulton County voted 90% plus for Biden which was over 152,000 Biden votes. This was clearly suspicious or outright fraudulent activity.

The data experts next presented data on DeKalb County. In 94 precincts Biden received 90% or more of the vote. Again, this was suspicious or fraudulent activity.

Then the experts discussed Dodge County where 7,008 votes were removed from President Trump's vote totals. In Putnam County where 5,935 votes were removed from President Trump's totals and Dougherty County 17,650 votes were removed from President Trump. In total in these counties, President Trump had over 30,000 votes disappear.

---

Quote:

---

Dave Lobue shared the following in his presentation:

Quote:

---

We objectively focused on numbers, data, and machine network systems. Based on our extensive analysis against precinct, county and state voting results we've identified over 40 data points where negative voting, and outright vote switching across candidates has totalled over 200,000 votes. Separately we've applied machine learning algoriths that are regularly used for anomoly detection of fraud and financial services that flagged over 500 precincts with over one million corresponding votes that exhibited suspicous activity.

---

---

Quote:

---

Next, the analysts talk about how your vote eventually makes it to the New York Times and other mainstream media outlets.

After you check in at a poll pad, you make your choices and then cast your vote and a ballot image is created on your machine. When the polls close SD cards containing all the ballot images are removed from the terminals and transported by car to a drop-off location. Then they are transferred by police escort to an election warehouse.

Inside the warehouse, the SD cards are run through tabulation software like Dominion's Democracy Suite. The ballots are counted at this time and forwarded to a Dominion server that inserts those totals into a SQL server database. From that point, it's directly transmitted to the SCTYL election night reporting server. This server transmits the totals to the secretary of state and data aggregators like Edison for reporting to the mainstream media.

In the data entry process for county updates, the following options are available to anyone with access to these computers working with election software as noted in the middle box in the diagram below. These users can create new batches, reject batches, validate batches and validate and publish batches. Anyone with access to the system at this point can manipulate and create large batches of votes.

---

Quote:

---

There is no manual interface in the process involved above because data is moved between machines and accumulated, it's not manually tabulated by individuals. Therefore the data showing the 50,000 ballots netted from President Trump was done through the machines. At no point in this process should President Trump's votes be reduced. This is an incremental process and not a decremental one. To date, there has been no rationale for why all these ballots were reduced from President Trump.

---

No one has ever been able to explain that. Human error is not a factor.

Quote:

---

Finally, for the ballots that were adjudicated, the original image is deleted and replaced with the new image. The original image is gone forever. Therefore the ballot recount didn't include the original ballot images that were previously destroyed. Also, from an audit perspective, we have no idea who made the changes and created the new images.

---

The guy who invented the Risk Limiting Audit said his process would not work on Dominion's system for this among other reasons.

If you wish to view the presentation done to the Georgia Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Elections back in December 2020, the video is at the bottom of this.

Link

Most secure election evaarrrr!!!

Look, proven data science doesn't apply to this election because Trump sent out mean tweets!

Decay said:

---

Look, proven data science doesn't apply to this election because Trump sent out mean tweets!

---

Yeah. The number of statistical anomalies, even impossibilities ALL HAPPENING IN THE SAME ELECTION AND EXCLUSIVELY IN ONE DIRECTION ONLY is a nothing burger because of mean tweets.

This real?

pic.twitter.com/maCxMSYFZJ

— sunny Florida (@sunnyFlorida13) July 16, 2022

Those stemmed from a different election, not 2020, I believe.

aggiehawg said:

---

Those stemmed from a different election, not 2020, I believe.

---

Maybe this case?
Texas official and 3 others indicted on 134 felonies in mail-in ballot fraud case
quote from the article

• The office of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton announced 134 felony charges were filed against Gregg County Commissioner Shannon Brown and three co-defendants in connection to an alleged vote harvesting scheme involving a Democratic primary in 2018.

Article from Sept 2020. Could be these conspirators had a trial run in 2018, didn't get caught until 2020.

Just imagine this on a national level with blue states completely ignoring the corrupt, not investigating and the Democratic Party leadership making sure they maintain their political power illegally. Maybe some states aren't as blue as we're led to believe?

Encyclopedic listing of voting irregularities, broken election laws, missing ballots and ballot images with links to supporting documentation.

Link

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

The data analysts then went on to claim that for a candidate to receive 75% or more of all the votes in a precinct is abnormal. Receiving over 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud. Then the experts provided a chart showing that in Fulton County, Georgia alone there were 51 precincts with 90-93% of the ballots for Joe Biden, 51 precincts with 94% of the ballots for Joe Biden, 36 precincts with 95% of the ballots for Joe Biden and another 36 precincts with 96 to 100% of the ballots for Joe Biden. Overall, over 150 precincts in Fulton County voted 90% plus for Biden which was over 152,000 Biden votes. This was clearly suspicious or outright fraudulent activity.

The data experts next presented data on DeKalb County. In 94 precincts Biden received 90% or more of the vote. Again, this was suspicious or fraudulent activity.

Then the experts discussed Dodge County where 7,008 votes were removed from President Trump's vote totals. In Putnam County where 5,935 votes were removed from President Trump's totals and Dougherty County 17,650 votes were removed from President Trump. In total in these counties, President Trump had over 30,000 votes disappear.

---

---

I'm going to disagree with 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud. Just the way districts are drawn, there can be heavily Republican or heavily Democrat precincts in said districts. Look at Gilmer and Glascock Counties in Georgia. I'm willing to bet there's a precinct there with 90% over Trump. What they should look at is deviations from past historical performance. Fulton County went for the Democrat candidate at 59%, 67%, 65%, 69% and 72% in the past 5 presidential elections. The question is what drove that change? Turnout? Vote harvesting? Demographic changes?

Quote:

---

I'm going to disagree with 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud. Just the way districts are drawn, there can be heavily Republican or heavily Democrat precincts in said districts. Look at Gilmer and Glascock Counties in Georgia. I'm willing to bet there's a precinct there with 90% over Trump. What they should look at is deviations from past historical performance. Fulton County went for the Democrat candidate at 59%, 67%, 65%, 69% and 72% in the past 5 presidential elections. The question is what drove that change? Turnout? Vote harvesting? Demographic changes?

---

Fair point but that 90% marker is not the sole data point these experts looked at.

The Edison Research data feed in real time shows additions and subtractions to total votes, in person votes and mail-in votes.

Quote:

---

Edison Research provided the live Edison reports for the 2020 election. According to its website Edison Research provided the NEP with a fast and accurate vote count throughout the nation, providing data for all statewide races and all House races. The national media outlets used the Edison data to report on and project national and state races.

When you see the data manipulation going on within the official data sets provided to the media there is no doubt that the 2020 Election results in the state were manipulated.

---

Watch the video at the bottom of the Link

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm going to disagree with 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud. Just the way districts are drawn, there can be heavily Republican or heavily Democrat precincts in said districts. Look at Gilmer and Glascock Counties in Georgia. I'm willing to bet there's a precinct there with 90% over Trump. What they should look at is deviations from past historical performance. Fulton County went for the Democrat candidate at 59%, 67%, 65%, 69% and 72% in the past 5 presidential elections. The question is what drove that change? Turnout? Vote harvesting? Demographic changes?

---

Fair point but that 90% marker is not the sole data point these experts looked at.

The Edison Research data feed in real time shows additions and subtractions to total votes, in person votes and mail-in votes.

Quote:

---

Edison Research provided the live Edison reports for the 2020 election. According to its website Edison Research provided the NEP with a fast and accurate vote count throughout the nation, providing data for all statewide races and all House races. The national media outlets used the Edison data to report on and project national and state races.

When you see the data manipulation going on within the official data sets provided to the media there is no doubt that the 2020 Election results in the state were manipulated.

---

Watch the video at the bottom of the Link

---

Edison provided the data, but no one has ever said what the process was for the networks when they get that data. Does it auto-update? Does a human deal with it? Some other process? I remember seeing 2 different on 2 different channels.

What was the source for the numbers in the video? I don't ever remember the networks showing a count of ballot type on election night. I remember them having percentage of votes earned by each type.

Quote:

---

The experts in Georgia used the SCYTL source data and the New York Times Edison data as noted in the chart below.

---

Machine to machine.

Now I am confused. My understanding on how Arizona mail in ballots were handled (that actually went through the postal service) was that Runbeck picked them up at the centralized Phoenix sorting facility, took them back to their facilities, run them through their scanners, voter signature images were sent ot election officials during this process and comparisons made. If sig did not match or was questionable, those ballots were flagged and were supposed to be segregated for further in person review by election officials at the counting location.

However, here is this report:

Quote:

---

The AZGOP recently became aware that County GOPs have not used their power to appoint early ballot challengers, according to a letter asking County Chairmen to make these appointments before the next election. These challengers are different from regular poll watchers. They are tasked with challenging early ballot signatures according to the Arizona Secretary of State's Signature Verification Guide.

---

Quote:

---

"We suggest that you take steps to ensure that early ballot challengers will be able to observe the signatures on unopened early ballot envelopes and the signatures that they are being compared to and that a record will be made of which voters' envelopes were challenged," states the letter obtained by The Gateway Pundit.

---

Again, Runbeck should have that info, no?

Quote:

---

According to multiple sources, Maricopa County GOP Chairwoman Mickie Niland refuses to fulfill this request to secure mail-in voting.

"Early ballots; processing; challenges" states,

Quote:

---

C. The county chairman of each political party represented on the ballot, by written appointment addressed to the early election board, may designate party representatives and alternates to act as early ballot challengers for the party. No party may have more than the number of such representatives or alternates that were mutually agreed on by each political party to be present at one time. If such agreement cannot be reached, the number of representatives shall be limited to one for each political party.
D. An early ballot may be challenged on any grounds set forth in section 16-591. All challenges shall be made in writing with a brief statement of the grounds before the early ballot is placed in the ballot box. A record of all challenges and resulting proceedings shall be kept in substantially the same manner as provided in section 16-594. If an early ballot is challenged, it shall be set aside and retained in the possession of the early election board or other officer in charge of early ballot processing until a time that the early election board sets for determination of the challenge, subject to the procedure in subsection E of this section, at which time the early election board shall hear the grounds for the challenge and shall decide what disposition shall be made of the early ballot by majority vote. If the early ballot is not allowed, it shall be handled pursuant to subsection G of this section.
H. Party representatives and alternates may be appointed as provided in subsection C of this section to be present and to challenge the verification of questioned ballots pursuant to section 16-584 on any grounds permitted by this section. Questioned ballots that are challenged shall be presented to the early election board for decision under the provisions of this section.

---

The Maricopa County GOP has never used its legal authority to secure elections with an early ballot challenger.

---

Link

So GOP didn't have observers present during that electronic checking of the signatures? Again, outsourcing elections to private companies is a very bad idea.

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

I'm going to disagree with 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud. Just the way districts are drawn, there can be heavily Republican or heavily Democrat precincts in said districts. Look at Gilmer and Glascock Counties in Georgia. I'm willing to bet there's a precinct there with 90% over Trump. What they should look at is deviations from past historical performance. Fulton County went for the Democrat candidate at 59%, 67%, 65%, 69% and 72% in the past 5 presidential elections. The question is what drove that change? Turnout? Vote harvesting? Demographic changes?

---

Fair point but that 90% marker is not the sole data point these experts looked at.

The Edison Research data feed in real time shows additions and subtractions to total votes, in person votes and mail-in votes.

Quote:

---

Edison Research provided the live Edison reports for the 2020 election. According to its website Edison Research provided the NEP with a fast and accurate vote count throughout the nation, providing data for all statewide races and all House races. The national media outlets used the Edison data to report on and project national and state races.

When you see the data manipulation going on within the official data sets provided to the media there is no doubt that the 2020 Election results in the state were manipulated.

---

Watch the video at the bottom of the Link

---

You're right, the 90% marker might wasn't the sole data point these "Experts" looked at, but they didn't look much past it. If they had, they would have discovered that these same precincts in Fulton and DeKalb counties that were >90% Biden in 2020 were also >90% Abrams in 2018 and >90% Clinton in 2016, as taken from the GA SOS website they apparently got their data from.

So, in their "Expert opinion" a result on >90% for one candidate indicates "a marker for fraud" but nobody thought there was fraud in these precincts in 2018 or 2016. It sounds as if their "Expert opinion" isn't worth the paper it's printed on. In fact, the data they are relying on to make this accusation indicates their premise is fake. Easily proven by the data. I would expect an "Expert" to realize that.

So, these "Experts" lead their report with a fake premise. It's obvious that they don't expect their audience to question their opinions, since when you preach to the choir, you don't expect them to be critical. So, if their strongest claim is fake, how can you trust their "Expertise" to carry any weight?

This it the problem with all of the "Election Fraud" claims. So much of what those who are pushing this narrative is obvious BS, it is difficult to believe any of it. If there was any "Good Evidence" why do they hide behind sensational, but easily proven to be false accusations? If they were dealing in truth, they wouldn't have to.

aggiehawg said:

---

Now I am confused. My understanding on how Arizona mail in ballots were handled (that actually went through the postal service) was that Runbeck picked them up at the centralized Phoenix sorting facility, took them back to their facilities, run them through their scanners, voter signature images were sent ot election officials during this process and comparisons made. If sig did not match or was questionable, those ballots were flagged and were supposed to be segregated for further in person review by election officials at the counting location.

However, here is this report:

Quote:

---

The AZGOP recently became aware that County GOPs have not used their power to appoint early ballot challengers, according to a letter asking County Chairmen to make these appointments before the next election. These challengers are different from regular poll watchers. They are tasked with challenging early ballot signatures according to the Arizona Secretary of State's Signature Verification Guide.

---

Quote:

---

"We suggest that you take steps to ensure that early ballot challengers will be able to observe the signatures on unopened early ballot envelopes and the signatures that they are being compared to and that a record will be made of which voters' envelopes were challenged," states the letter obtained by The Gateway Pundit.

---

Again, Runbeck should have that info, no?

Quote:

---

According to multiple sources, Maricopa County GOP Chairwoman Mickie Niland refuses to fulfill this request to secure mail-in voting.

"Early ballots; processing; challenges" states,

Quote:

---

C. The county chairman of each political party represented on the ballot, by written appointment addressed to the early election board, may designate party representatives and alternates to act as early ballot challengers for the party. No party may have more than the number of such representatives or alternates that were mutually agreed on by each political party to be present at one time. If such agreement cannot be reached, the number of representatives shall be limited to one for each political party.
D. An early ballot may be challenged on any grounds set forth in section 16-591. All challenges shall be made in writing with a brief statement of the grounds before the early ballot is placed in the ballot box. A record of all challenges and resulting proceedings shall be kept in substantially the same manner as provided in section 16-594. If an early ballot is challenged, it shall be set aside and retained in the possession of the early election board or other officer in charge of early ballot processing until a time that the early election board sets for determination of the challenge, subject to the procedure in subsection E of this section, at which time the early election board shall hear the grounds for the challenge and shall decide what disposition shall be made of the early ballot by majority vote. If the early ballot is not allowed, it shall be handled pursuant to subsection G of this section.
H. Party representatives and alternates may be appointed as provided in subsection C of this section to be present and to challenge the verification of questioned ballots pursuant to section 16-584 on any grounds permitted by this section. Questioned ballots that are challenged shall be presented to the early election board for decision under the provisions of this section.

---

The Maricopa County GOP has never used its legal authority to secure elections with an early ballot challenger.

---

Link

So GOP didn't have observers present during that electronic checking of the signatures? Again, outsourcing elections to private companies is a very bad idea.

---

I think we found another Rat on the Take.

By a combination of running out the clock on lawsuits and diluting reform initiatives passed by voters, Republicans have now successfully thwarted redistricting reform measures in FL, OH and UT - accounting for their entire national gain from new maps.

— Dave Wasserman (@Redistrict) July 19, 2022