C'mon are you serious? I'm not getting trolled into fact-checking 20 bogus claims. Why don't you pick one. What's the single most convincing evidence of election fraud in that list?
presumably? I'm not sure how many videos of alleged ballot fraud are floating around and the link you posted doesn't have a link to the video so I can only assume we are talking about the same thing.
>> No one told observers they had to leave, and both an independent monitor and an investigator oversaw the vote count, according to state and county officials.
The observers dispute this, and reaffirm their claim that they were asked to leave.
>> Confusion arose when election workers thought they were done for the night, but then were instructed to continue scanning ballots.
Yes, everyone was aware that vote counting was supposed to stop at 11pm but after they got rid of everyone else, this one team continued to count ballots that had been prepped and hidden.
> But investigators who reviewed the entire surveillance tape confirmed it showed “normal ballot processing,” according to Gabriel Sterling, a top official in the secretary of state’s office.
It's normal to do this? Perhaps the problem here is that the actual activities are not in dispute, but one party considers them normal and one party is unhappy that fraud is considered normal.
>> After a short period when observers weren’t present, an independent state election board monitor arrived to oversee the scanning at 11:52 p.m., Barron said. A state investigator arrived at 12:15 a.m. Both individuals remained at the facility until the count concluded for the night, he said. The Georgia secretary of state’s office said it was aware of the late-night counting, and confirmed that both its investigator and an independent monitor observed scanning “until it was halted for the night.” The office said it had launched an investigation into why partisan poll observers left before scanning ended.
Sounds like we really need to get that investigative report.
What is it that you think happened here? Like specifically how would this fraud work?
The ballots have all been accounted for, an investigation confirmed no boxes were added or removed, and all the ballots in Georgia were subsequently audited and then recounted twice.
Here is a slightly better link that further links to some source documents including that state investigators testimony (since this whole thing of course was already considered and rejected by a court) https://www.factcheck.org/2020/12/video-doesnt-show-suitcase... Do you think the investigators report would contradict their own testimony?
Not that it should matter, but all the county and state election officials involved are Republicans too.
For this to have happened they'd have to have managed to do this on the initial count and all subsequent recounts, under observation by three different parties of interest and maintained a relatively consistent final number of votes.
The other video discussed (see my comment elsewhere in this thread) shows a vote counting coordinator telling re-counters/auditors to ignore duplicated signatures. They're literally asking her, when can we report this fraud we found, and she's telling them to just keep counting because it's "not their role" to ask such questions. So how much integrity did the recounts have? After all the video seems to show a conspiracy with multiple people involved to break the counting process: it's not like it's showing one person.
I dunno. I agree it seems unlikely that this sort of thing can have swung the vote by such a huge amount - Trump still lost, for obvious reasons. But the USA has a massive problem here. It's not sufficient for a vote to be roughly correct, probably, hopefully. Election integrity is critical. It has to be seen to be unquestionably correct for democracy to work. When there are so many people swearing formally in affidavits that they saw fraud, and there is CCTV footage of blatantly very suspicious behaviours running around online, it's not a big surprise that trust in the process becomes dangerously undermined. To many people from Europe, me included, it seems bizarre and crazy that something as basic as voter ID checking has been derailed by accusations of racism (of all things).
How can people trust the voting system if there's not constant efforts made to maintain its integrity? Trump is being blamed for his rhetoric now, rightfully so, but Biden's rhetoric that COVID made it too dangerous to go to voting booths and everyone should do mail-in voting seems equally dangerous to me. Everyone knows mail voting has much bigger problems with fraud than in person voting, and a quick glance at the US test-positive curves shows that the election appears to have made no difference at all, even though plenty of Trump voters turned out in person. His warnings of medical disaster if people voted physically were wrong, but have now created an environment in which Trump can convince many people that the voting process lacked integrity. Exceptionally dangerous and in no way worth it: regardless of how bad COVID is in the USA (much worse than elsewhere it seems), large-scale civil unrest would be far worse.
> What is it that you think happened here? Like specifically how would this fraud work?
[0]
> The ballots have all been accounted for, an investigation confirmed no boxes were added or removed, and all the ballots in Georgia were subsequently audited and then recounted twice.
Can you link to the report of this investigation? How did they determine that no ballots were added? What is the chain of custody for the ballots that were removed from under the table?
> Here is a slightly better link
>> Pick theorized that the machines in the room could have totaled “18,000 ballots.” (Biden won the state by less than 12,000 votes.) But that’s wrong, according to the state election board monitor who was in the room as they counted.
One of the guys implicated in the alleged fraud says its wouldn't have been enough to change the result. Did they attempt to verify this statement?
>> The investigation remains open.
Interesting how that works. They're confident enough that there's not anything there that they're willing to make public statements, but they're not willing to close the investigation and issue a report so people's concerns can be alleviated.
> Do you think the investigators report would contradict their own testimony?
Its possible but its more likely it would show how well (or not) the claims were investigated and present the evidence that was used to substantiate or reject the claims. The affidavit doesn't present any evidence other than the testimony of the investigator (who wasn't present at the incident) and is therefore meaningfully contradicted by the testimony of people who were there.
> Not that it should matter, but all the county and state election officials involved are Republicans too.
That's correct, it shouldn't matter and it does not matter.
“Ballot stuffing” would require a lot more than sneaking in a suitcase of ballots which, to be clear, video surveillance shows is NOT what happened here. The number of ballots needs to match the number of votes cast according to the voter rolls. Is your theory that someone requested 18,000 ballots to registered voters at 18,000 different addresses and then returned them with matching signatures and also somehow ensured that none of them tried to vote themselves, which would have been immediately flagged?
In all seriousness I think you should volunteer to be an observer for the next election and you will see how crazy this sounds.
> “Ballot stuffing” would require a lot more than sneaking in a suitcase of ballots
Actually it would not require more. Sneaking in ballots that do not each correspond to one legal voter's actual vote would be technically and functionally sufficient.
> which, to be clear, video surveillance shows is NOT what happened here.
Can you refer to the chain of custody that provides evidence that these are legal ballots? Can you share the part of the video that proves these are legal ballots?
> The number of ballots needs to match the number of votes cast according to the voter rolls.
I'd need to see how these numbers were verified and what oversight was present. These ballots could have been added to the entries on the voter rolls when they were introduced into the counting facility. Without a proper chain of custody, we don't know. With suspicious behavior on film, we should investigate.
> Is your theory that someone requested 18,000 ballots to registered voters at 18,000 different addresses and then returned them with matching signatures and also somehow ensured that none of them tried to vote themselves, which would have been immediately flagged?
No, my "theory" is that the chain of custody for these ballots (the ones hidden under the table and counted in the middle of the night sans (R) observers) has not been presented as evidence, therefore it is normal for people to wonder if they are legitimate ballots. I don't need to theorize anything else in order to have legitimate concerns about election integrity.
> also somehow ensured that none of them tried to vote themselves, which would have been immediately flagged?
flagging doesn't do much when the flags are dismissed and the suspicious conduct explained as "just normal activity."
> In all seriousness I think you should volunteer to be an observer for the next election and you will see how crazy this sounds.
I think it would drive me nuts to witness misconduct, report it, swear to it in an affidavit, then hear three months of people denying my personal experience on the basis of claims by talking heads.
> how crazy this sounds.
There are a lot of disturbing things about election 2020, but somehow one of the worst is this attitude that I'm crazy if I think someone might do something illegal or unethical to sway an election, or am not convinced by the evidence-free attestations of persons who seem unable to entertain another person's perspective.
I don't think you're crazy, but I think your theory is extremely implausible based on how elections are administered and ballots counted. I sincerely think you would benefit from being a part of the process next time around -- it's kind of fun and you learn a lot.
I'm not sure it's helpful to keep going point by point, but this started because you said the video wasn't adequately explained. An observer says she was ordered to leave the room even though some counting continued. Other people in the room (including other Republicans) describe it differently. Investigators who watched the tape say it doesn't look like anyone was told to leave, but there's no audio on the tape. I'm not sure you're going to get much more of a definitive answer than that.
But there's just a massive gap between "ballots were briefly recounted on video without Republican observers" and any sort of fraud. The tape shows the ballot boxes involved were supposed to be there. And it would require a truly impressive conspiracy to manifest thousands of bogus ballots into the process at this point. It just isn't plausible.
> I think your theory is extremely implausible based on how elections are administered and ballots counted. I sincerely think you would benefit from being a part of the process next time around -- it's kind of fun and you learn a lot.
This is kind of like when footage of Wilder-Fury came out and Fury "appeared" to have something wrong with his gloves that would have been a violation of the rules. The internet was abuzz with theories about whether he had "cheated." Teddy Atlas went on a podcast and said "its impossible" for him to have cheated or had gloves that were out of regulation. Why did he say this so confidently when he wasn't even there? He generalized from other fights he had participated in, and assumed that things must have occurred the same way in Wilder-Fury because that's what he expected. This is what you're doing. You have no way of knowing that the process was respected in this case, which is why its interesting that you're so confident that it must have been respected. If we have reasons to be that confident, we should probably share them. But the quality of evidence used to dismiss concerns here is worse than the quality of the evidence that created those concerns.
> An observer says she was ordered to leave the room even though some counting continued. Other people in the room (including other Republicans) describe it differently.
Yeah, there are different accounts of what happened. Thats a red flag, it indicates that someone may be trying to hide something. Thats another reason to investigate.
> Investigators who watched the tape say it doesn't look like anyone was told to leave, but there's no audio on the tape.
Interesting how easily they draw conclusions based on no evidence.
> I'm not sure you're going to get much more of a definitive answer than that.
Then there's a problem with election integrity that hasn't been addressed.
> But there's just a massive gap between "ballots were briefly recounted on video without Republican observers" and any sort of fraud.
The gap is actually not that large, and if we presume that people who want to compromise an election are not idiots, we can easily understand that this is pretty much exactly what ballot stuffing would look like if we had a video of it.
> The tape shows the ballot boxes involved were supposed to be there.
That hasn't been supported with evidence, the investigator's report, or the chain of custody. It's just an assertion of fact by a person who wasn't there. If the ballot boxes were supposed to be there then it probably was a terrible idea to hide them under a table since it creates the appearance of impropriety and they are apparently unable to relieve that appearance by presenting evidence.
> And it would require a truly impressive conspiracy to manifest thousands of bogus ballots into the process at this point.
Not at all, it would merely require a few motivated participants to corrupt the process by introducing fraudulent/illegal ballots and running them through the machine. It would be even easier if they did it in the middle of the night, when (R) observers had left.
