4 Comments
Oct 19, 2023Liked by Jason Powers

I'm curious, since you've looked at the legal filing, what Georgia law prevents review of electronic election data looking for evidence of fraud.

Such a law, I imagine, would be intended to keep election data "secure" but in doing so also obstructs concerned citizens and journalists (if they were interested) from conducting any independent investigation into election fraud.

Personally, I think all election records should be required to be public data. I DGAF if everyone can see what/who I voted for. Especially if the price of that privacy is the possibility (certainty) of election fraud.

Expand full comment
author
Oct 19, 2023·edited Oct 19, 2023Author

It was nearly 3 years ago...I downloaded it (on another computer - its buried on in it).

But what I vividly recall of her suit was a sloppy, sloppy filing. Something no former US federal prosecutor would allow. To the issue: I'd have to dig back into this on the law side. (Edited)

Garland Favorito was closest to delivering on the case there....however, like other, he gets derailed even when testifying: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/counting-dead-georgia-voters-takes-center-stage-in-eastman-trial

The Uniparty (Republicans equally bad) has enormous sums to put their lawfare machine to work....We are outgunned in the legal sense.

I am 100% with you on transparency....I want to see the code - IF there is a machine involved. There should be a thorough review of any electronic machine.

BUT FRANKLY, it should all be paper ballots - done without technology.

Expand full comment
Oct 19, 2023Liked by Jason Powers

I have no problem with electronic voting as long as the databases are publicly accessible/verifiable and all code that interacts with the databases is open source

Expand full comment
author

Agree that would be ideal.

And yet neither is available.

Funny that.

No trust unless one can verify.

The audit in AZ showed 17,000 duplicate votes (1-3 duplications) among 1,9 million cast. That is a horrible quality control in any process. Especially one with trillions of dollars literally at stake for US citizens.

Quote:

The analysis revealed various anomalies such as: 34,448 EVB return envelope images that were 2-Copy, 3-Copy and 4-Copy duplicates (“Duplicates”) originating from 17,126 unique voters while no Duplicates were reported in Maricopa’s CANVASS report; 6,545 more unique EVB return envelopes reported by Maricopa than that by Echo Mail; 9,589 more EVB return envelopes with signatures in Maricopa’s count; and, Maricopa’s count of 587 “Bad Signatures” – equaling 0.031% of all EVB return envelopes received by Maricopa – appear to be surprisingly low, given that EchoMail itself, though not commissioned to audit or perform Signature Verification, detected 2,580 non-signature Scribbles, in the Signature Region, which would exceed Maricopa’s “Bad Signatures” percentage of 0.031%, by over four times.

The anomalies identified in this audit raise questions on the integrity of Maricopa’s EVB systems processes and support the need for further investigation including a review of Maricopa’s Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for EVB processing, Chain of Custody, and Signature Verification methods, including the methodologies for curing questionable signatures. Moreover, an independent scientific analysis of Maricopa’s Signature Verification process that involves comparing all signatures on EVB return envelopes with the voter registration signatures is warranted. Such an effort will provide a quantitative metric to assess the confidence level of Maricopa’s Signature Verification process; and, more importantly, serve as a valuable case study towards building objective metrics to assess the entire EVB systems process.

https://vashiva.com/dr-shiva-delivers-groundbreaking-audit-report-to-arizona-senate/ (page 11)

Leave aside liking or agreeing with Shiva, this to me was the clearest evidence of how we have no controls to stop election fraud.

Expand full comment