I listen to Pulitzer often (I subscribe to his youtube) - and while I agree that it can pick up many artifacts such as folding, whether a human made the marking or a machine, whether the paper is genuine, etc..... I don't think it's possible from scanning a piece of paper to know what happened to that paper between the factory and landing in the ballot pile. There would be no visual difference (artifacts etc...) on a piece of paper that was in an 'unopened' package that was sent to two different locations and then both sent to a single location before opening the package.
I've never heard Jovan even make such a claim. He does, however, claim that they can somehow tell if the paper was actually mailed - he's never explained how but I tend to trust him.
To be mailed as a ballot it will have creases from folding it to fit in the envelope. There are some who say they discovered pristine unfolded mail in ballots.
I listen to Pulitzer often (I subscribe to his youtube) - and while I agree that it can pick up many artifacts such as folding, whether a human made the marking or a machine, whether the paper is genuine, etc..... I don't think it's possible from scanning a piece of paper to know what happened to that paper between the factory and landing in the ballot pile. There would be no visual difference (artifacts etc...) on a piece of paper that was in an 'unopened' package that was sent to two different locations and then both sent to a single location before opening the package.
I've never heard Jovan even make such a claim. He does, however, claim that they can somehow tell if the paper was actually mailed - he's never explained how but I tend to trust him.
To be mailed as a ballot it will have creases from folding it to fit in the envelope. There are some who say they discovered pristine unfolded mail in ballots.
This could absolutely be identified by the scan. However they've had 4 months to fold all of the ballots.......
Good point