Not the judge's fault the Lake team couldn't get one single witness to say they saw direct tampering. At the end of the day, that's on her and her team. Either the legally decisive evidence they claimed to have never existed, or they were unwilling to play the crooked game and risk perjury to push this thing along.
No, it wasn't plain to see. The only evidence was that things had changed. For 1200 ballots. That were flagged and then done by hand so every vote was counted. The state's explanation for the change was an error as a result of IT changing all the settings trying to get the printers to work. Anyone who's worked with printers professionally knows that these machines do not always behave logically, and you sometimes just got to try a bunch of different settings until one of them works. One of those settings is "size-to-fit", which ironically is an option that can make things not fit, because of how the computer recognizes margins.
Kari Lake's team could not come up with any evidence to counter this narrative for why the mistake happened, and again, the mistake was caught and rectified day of. This caused delays which her team complained about, but those delays were a result of publicly appearing to take a problem seriously and take the slow necessary steps to rectify a discrepancy. There's just not much legally here to stand on.
If anything, it's an endorsement for the Oregon system of mail-in only with hand-only count, since that avoids both the problems Maricopa ran into with ballot scanning. But I know y'all hate that.
25 year IT professional here. I work large installation of servers (100k to millions) running banking software including HIPAA, PII, & PCI data.
Stop speaking for us. The IT folks you talking about are incompetent.
You don't go into election and try a bunch of settings until they work. Are you insane? You certify a configuration and use that configuration. There are laws (that apparently aren't followed) that require election to be run of certified equipment and software.
Who had access to make the changes? At whom direction? What exactly was the issue? Etc.
It was a fucking shit show and the judge should see through it.
What about the chain of custody laws that were not followed? And many other anomalies that came to light during the trial. Even if a specific person could not be held out as the one who threw the election it does seem there was enough evidence to show that the possibility of a incorrect outcome of this election is possible. Justice was not served here, IMHO.
You said it right there. You, you said it. In your post. And then concluded with "justice was not served here". Amazing.
Sorry, but damn, you are not good at this. You just said the evidence showed "The possibility of an incorrect outcome of this election is possible." THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. Possibility is conjecture! That is not enough in our current legal framework. The evidence has to show that an incorrect outcome happened, not that it's possible. You might not like that morally/spiritually, but that's legally how the law works.
The law was served correctly in this case. The judge made the correct decision with the evidence, or lack thereof he was given. That of course doesn't mean justice was necessarily served, but if you expect the law and justice to always be on the same page, I've got some dry land on the Florida coast to sell you. Cheap.
Then take the word "possibly" out and conclude that if the law is broken then the vote count can not be relayed on to be accurate. It is so obvious to most people commenting here and everywhere else that the judge got this wrong. Keep defending his actions like you know the law so we'll, but it really just makes you sound like a troll.
The judge publicly declared itself as an accessory to the crime.
The judge did not want to kill himself
Not the judge's fault the Lake team couldn't get one single witness to say they saw direct tampering. At the end of the day, that's on her and her team. Either the legally decisive evidence they claimed to have never existed, or they were unwilling to play the crooked game and risk perjury to push this thing along.
I don't agree at all.
The evidence of tampering was plain enough to see. Plain enough that not to see it took some heavy-duty willful blindness.
That they didn't have that "one guy" to pin it all on was bullshit.
And when they do get that "one guy" to pin it all on, the goalposts will shift again.
And keep in mind, most of what we know about what went on was filtered through media and talking heads.
No, it wasn't plain to see. The only evidence was that things had changed. For 1200 ballots. That were flagged and then done by hand so every vote was counted. The state's explanation for the change was an error as a result of IT changing all the settings trying to get the printers to work. Anyone who's worked with printers professionally knows that these machines do not always behave logically, and you sometimes just got to try a bunch of different settings until one of them works. One of those settings is "size-to-fit", which ironically is an option that can make things not fit, because of how the computer recognizes margins.
Kari Lake's team could not come up with any evidence to counter this narrative for why the mistake happened, and again, the mistake was caught and rectified day of. This caused delays which her team complained about, but those delays were a result of publicly appearing to take a problem seriously and take the slow necessary steps to rectify a discrepancy. There's just not much legally here to stand on.
If anything, it's an endorsement for the Oregon system of mail-in only with hand-only count, since that avoids both the problems Maricopa ran into with ballot scanning. But I know y'all hate that.
25 year IT professional here. I work large installation of servers (100k to millions) running banking software including HIPAA, PII, & PCI data.
Stop speaking for us. The IT folks you talking about are incompetent.
You don't go into election and try a bunch of settings until they work. Are you insane? You certify a configuration and use that configuration. There are laws (that apparently aren't followed) that require election to be run of certified equipment and software.
Who had access to make the changes? At whom direction? What exactly was the issue? Etc.
It was a fucking shit show and the judge should see through it.
What about the chain of custody laws that were not followed? And many other anomalies that came to light during the trial. Even if a specific person could not be held out as the one who threw the election it does seem there was enough evidence to show that the possibility of a incorrect outcome of this election is possible. Justice was not served here, IMHO.
You said it right there. You, you said it. In your post. And then concluded with "justice was not served here". Amazing.
Sorry, but damn, you are not good at this. You just said the evidence showed "The possibility of an incorrect outcome of this election is possible." THAT'S NOT ENOUGH. Possibility is conjecture! That is not enough in our current legal framework. The evidence has to show that an incorrect outcome happened, not that it's possible. You might not like that morally/spiritually, but that's legally how the law works.
The law was served correctly in this case. The judge made the correct decision with the evidence, or lack thereof he was given. That of course doesn't mean justice was necessarily served, but if you expect the law and justice to always be on the same page, I've got some dry land on the Florida coast to sell you. Cheap.
Then take the word "possibly" out and conclude that if the law is broken then the vote count can not be relayed on to be accurate. It is so obvious to most people commenting here and everywhere else that the judge got this wrong. Keep defending his actions like you know the law so we'll, but it really just makes you sound like a troll.