>> Nothing to do with processing issues like custody of votes
I really understand when someone, say, CJ, doesn’t understand that systems are building on designs that have to be respected from end to end, or they break down. If chain of custody is not treated with respect it creates a security hole. The question that must be answered is, “Why can you not produce the required documentation?” And if the documentation isn’t produced, there must be consequences — in this case, all undocumented votes denied. Period. This is how the process should, must, work, if you are going to have secure elections.
Disenfranchisement is the punishment for cheating. Without which, voters have no motivation to solve the problem.
You cannot allow cheaters to go unpunished.
The reason I, and millions of others, do not believe this election was fairly conducted is there were a large number of such security holes(more than in any election in your lifetime or mine), and the overwhelming evidence is that many of them were created intentionally as weapons to defeat Trump. That is, these aren’t just strange coincidences. They were as-designed in the few months prior to the election when it became apparent (David Plouffe's book) Democrats couldn’t win utilizing legal voting procedures.
In the case of GA, it was apparently a one-off, but seems apparent the other states intend to make this their model vote theft program.
They can do it with the utterly stupid notion that the country is well served if EVERYONE votes, an intuitive bad idea that ought not be embraced.
I’m not sure why you aren’t inquisitive about this. I’ve worked in the fraud detection business in the past, and it seems to me that lots of huge security holes just naturally draw your attention. |
