Goodness - I was in the process of whining about us losing every motion in AZ. As I typed it, the judge denied the TRO. I am quite surprised.
Now, we need to win the blocking of policies and procedures release on appeal.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (28)
sorted by:
Precisely what Doug2 said above. The reason they want this made public is to have a vector for attack in this audit and to be able to prepare in advance of the audits that will be triggered from it.
As an example, they don't want to know that the ballots are checked to confirm that they were properly mailed before being counted as mail-in ballots. Instead, they want to know that we are looking for X, Y and Z as kinematic artifacts to indicate that they were mailed. To look for them, we are using device X, Y and Z.
Armed with this information, they have a plethora of new attack vectors. They can go after the training for the processes and devices. They can use expert witnesses to dispute the efficacy. All they need to do is provide activist judges with enough cover to put in a TRO to answer these "important questions raised in review of the untested processes blah blah..."
Further, as they scramble to fix the fake ballots in PA, MI, WI, GA, VA, NH, NV, etc, they know the specific methodology, frequencies, tests, etc. They can better prepare their fraudulent ballots.
True, but he did give 24 hours for appeals. So, we have a shot still.