If the watermark thing is true, then was Krebs a good guy?
He repeatedly claimed the election was the most secure. He one of the experts used to dismiss the fraud allegations.
Was it a trap?
To get all the rethoric on the fraud out there, to have Krebs confirmed as the authority on the matter, and then make the audits happen?
How do we know they are officially checking for watermarks? Is there somewhere where it explains each stations responsibility? That’s the part I don’t understand they have went out of their way to make this transparent but I have yet to see a break down of stations and color meaning
I’ve only heard Jovan talk about analyzing the paper. Nothing from him about watermarks
I agree - I am not seeing any basis in fact for this 'watermark' probe. This is the kind of thing that can make this site look stupid and CTish by not sourcing it properly.
The colors and cameras are to make it easy to tell who belongs where and to restrict the movement of ballots.
Yeah it could be nothing. Well see