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.
The judge publicly declared itself as an accessory to the crime.
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.