TriggerFinger


How the ballot adjudication process leads to fraud


American ThinkerThere was a point in that video where we showed, it was Richard Barron, who had said that 113,000 votes were cast, a 105,000 were adjudicated. Right? Now, that’s not physically possible, you know, which we can prove mathematically but, at the same time, if you adjudicate 105,000 votes, you have to understand from a technological perspective, as we’ve delved into all the different aspects of how the vote moves along, when you adjudicate a ballot, that old reference, the image that you saw or anything like that, is completely destroyed. It’s gone. You can no longer reference that thing. And when you go run a hand recount like you did in Georgia, then you’re looking at a printout of those ballot scans. So, at no point did the original voter intent enter into that process once it’s been destroyed.

And that’s how the hand recount jived with the election information: Original ballots were counted outside of the sight of observers and then destroyed, while “adjudicated” ballots were printed up with the information the adjudicators’ chose, and no hint at all as to the voter’s actual intent.

The fact that Republican ballots were misprinted may explain how so many got tagged for “adjudication”: The printing error triggered a machine misreading that required adjudication.

No wonder that, after all the evidence was in, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee unanimously passed a motion to embrace Jovan Pulitzer’s proposal to audit Fulton County ballots to determine whether they had actually been mailed-in or had been run off a pro-Biden photocopy machine.

Shortly after the vote to allow the audit, bulk shredders showed up at the counting facility to begin shredding the ballots. That's not suspicious at all.

The good thing about this is that it manages to explain from head to tail how the fraud works -- not very clearly from the testimony but all the pieces are there for the first time.

Basically, the machines are set up to send large numbers of ballots into the adjudication process. We've seen examples of about 68% (Antrim County in Michigan, one county in Nevada) and one in GA where 93% were adjudicated (above). Maybe this is done via differences in ballot printing by region, or the use of Sharpie pens that produce bleed-through. The point is, the machines scan large numbers of ballots that they cannot read automatically. These ballots must be adjudicated by humans.

Those ballot images, after being adjudicated, are deleted and replaced with newly generated ballot images from the adjudication process. Possibly the adjudicated ballots are also printed, so paper copies would exist -- in the case of absentee ballots, paper copies that had never been folded for mailing or handled by human hands; the marks would be made by the printing device. The adjudication process itself can be done remotely over the internet with no audit logs, and the machines can be hacked into with relative ease.

The "traditional" fraud by mail-in voting, ballot harvesting, and so on still happens. But it's less necessary once the machines have sent enough ballots to adjudication. The adjudication process itself controls the results.

This entry was published Tue Jan 05 20:38:36 CST 2021 by TriggerFinger and last updated 2021-01-05 20:38:36.0. [Tweet]

comments powered by Disqus

Related Categories


Subscribe to Atom Feed

I am not a lawyer, and nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice.

This site is run on custom blog software and is being actively developed. Please be forgiving of errors.


This website is an Amazon affiliate and will receive financial compensation for products purchased from Amazon through links on this site.