Massive scandal:Fulton County admits they "violated" the rules in 2020 when they certified ≈315K early votes that lacked poll workers' signatures"We don't dispute the allegation."
Here's the map:
Fulton County reported at 72% for Biden; even more in neighboring Dekalb County. Wikipedia notes that this was the first time that anyone had broken 70% in Fulton County since FDR did it 1944, at the height of the war when Georgia was part of the "Solid South." Here's what that map looked like, when FDR did it, for comparison.
9 comments:
I told you it was stolen way back when.
Link needs improvement.
Gringo
OK. I fixed that link and added a bunch more.
There wasn't much difference between the 2020 and 2024 Presidential results for Fulton County.
Rep Demo
2016 117,783 297,051
2020 137,247 380,212
2024 144,655 384,752
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_County,_Georgia
Compare to Cook County Illinois.
Rep Demo
2016 453,287 1,611,946
2020 558,269 1,725,973
2024 583,852 1,447,821
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cook_County,_Illinois
Gringo
Except that in 2024 the votes were in on election night, not many days later when they’d had time to finish the count elsewhere and know how much they needed to pad.
But I’m sure Harris won Fulton in 2024, too. Note that 375K of 380K weren’t legally valid, meaning that Fulton has just adopted the habit of not applying the law so that they can add extra votes that aren’t any more suspect than the real ones.
Anyone who was paying attention Knew it was stolen Immediately. Seriously,, when they paper over windows and manufacture plumbing problems, tell people to go home,then keep Counting,, it would require an Extreme Need to believe in the goodness of mankind to be able to blind oneself to such obvious chicanery.
Maybe it was stolen but the Zero Tape story being told now likely has nothing to do with how it was done.
I work KY elections with a very similar ballot scanning system. The primary purpose of the 'tapes' (there are three) is to record the number of ballots processed by the scanners. The 'Zero tape' is generated when opening the poll and shows a count of the test ballots run at the beginning of an election cycle to verify the scanner setup and processing but could also include counts from previous days of early voting. The two 'Results tapes' are run when the polls are closed, and give the cumulative count of ballots scanned and vote counts. The difference in ballot counts from the two tapes are compared against the number of physical ballots distributed (adjusted for spoiled and provisional ballots) to verify all ballots distributed but no others were scanned.
Two things are important to note. The 'Zero tape' and the 'Results tapes' have no function in determining the outcome of the election. The vote results are on the thumb drive in the scanner, and the tape's purpose is to audit the number of ballots distributed and processed. The tapes might be consulted if a hand recount of a race was requested but otherwise they are stored as well as used to provide courtesy results (the second results copy) to anybody who wants to gather precinct data after the polls close.
Yes, signing the zero tape is a required process for election workers but when you've got 60 minutes (or less) to open your polling place, getting signatures on the Zero tape requires somebody with a bit of OCD and a pen to walk around and collect signatures. It should be noted that the only thing you are attesting to with your signature as a poll worker is that the zero tape was generated by the machine in your polling location. You have no way to verify the numbers on tape because the actual value of the starting number is immaterial. What matters is the ballot count difference between the Zero tape and the Results tape.
Seriously, this in no way proves 300,000+ ballots were invalid. Yes, various election workers got in a rush and didn't follow the procedures manual. Does it make any difference? I suppose you could come up with a scheme for cheating that uses a fake Zero tape but that would still require you to somehow get the votes you want tabulated, and the Zero tape has nothing to do with vote tabulation. If the number of ballots distributed balances with the differences between the Zero tapes and Results tapes on the form on which those computations are recorded then the missing signatures on the Zero tapes are just noise.
I bow to your experience, of course; and clearly they do not feel that they need to contest the charge or defend their behavior. Nevertheless, as Mr. O’Guy points out, given the observed extreme irregularities in the counting fraud is not only the most obvious but the most human explanation. The fact that they set aside protocols as a matter of course probably, as you say, because it is convenient. It does however create an inability to discern which of these ballots are valid and which are not. Probably most of them are, but none of them are properly certifiable. They only needed to add a much smaller number, and their rejection of procedures created adequate noise to cover it.
My primary annoyance with the hype this story is getting is the biggest source of vote fraud is the hundreds (thousands in the case of the 2020 election) of ballots allow to be marked in uncontrolled settings and introduced into the vote tabulation system with only a fig leaf of validation they were completed by a competent registered voter. The second biggest is the use of mass vote tabulation centers with poor supervision of workers and control of ballot processing.
If you want secure elections you need to validate voters as close to the time and place they mark a ballot as possible, and count the ballots/votes in the same secure location where the voter marks it. This still allows for voting prior to Election Day (people may have other objections to that) but only in controlled environments. Allowing no-excuse absentee ballot requests and 'vote by mail' is simply a surrender of control of voting to fraudsters.
As the son of a man who was an auditor for the Archdiocese of Los Angeles for almost 30 years, I can tell you that just because you don't see the need for that procedure or verification, there's a reason for it. Getting people to follow procedure was one of the big things about his job, and basically any time you're working with volunteers they are often looking for ways to make life a little easier- I saw that plenty at PTA back in the day, and we worked to make sure people followed proper procedure as much as possible. Problems aren't always due to malfeasance, but sometimes to sloppiness. Surely, if you can't verify how many ballots a machine scanned on a given day, then it's at a minimum allowing an opening for ballots to be inserted into the stream at that point, is it not?
If the procedure is truly not needed, then it should be eliminated, and I've not seen anyone argue that. I think that's at least a little telling.
Post a Comment