Article: "Newsmax finally calls election for Biden amid Electoral College vote"

[TMC]

I am only addressing the report in Exhibit A. I do not know what DOJ and DHS looked at.

They looked at the allegations in Ex A. And found them groundless. As has every court to look at the issue.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

I am only addressing the report in Exhibit A. I do not know what DOJ and DHS looked at.

They looked at the allegations in Ex A. And found them groundless. As has every court to look at the issue.

I see, so they did not look at Exhibit A. Thank you.

 

[TMC]

I see, so they did not look at Exhibit A. Thank you.

Just saying the opposite of what I said is not effective or persuasive. The government did look at the allegations in Ex. A. Both the DOJ and DHS said they looked into the Dominion allegations. Do you have any basis for saying otherwise?

 

[Vico]

Vico:

I see, so they did not look at Exhibit A. Thank you.

Just saying the opposite of what I said is not effective or persuasive. The government did look at the allegations in Ex. A. Both the DOJ and DHS said they looked into the Dominion allegations. Do you have any basis for saying otherwise?

I did not say the opposite. You said allegations, but I referred to that specific document from Russell James Ramsland, Jr. Report Date 12/13/2020, not various allegations.

 

[PickyPicky]

We seem to have a response from Michigan to Ramsland’s accusations:

https://www.newsbreak.com/news/2126...antrim-county-michigan-was-designed-for-fraud

We shall see.

 

[PickyPicky]

It seems a hand recount has scuppered the Exhibit A allegations.

Antrim County hand tally affirms certified election results

 

[whatistrue]

You said allegations, but I referred to that specific document

You mean the specific document which has the sole purpose of placing the allegations that were refuted most soundly before the Court? That document? IOW, the document itself is of no importance (other than procedurally), it is what the document contains that matters, and the contents have been shown to be so much bunk.

 

[TMC]

I did not say the opposite. You said allegations, but I referred to that specific document from Russell James Ramsland, Jr. Report Date 12/13/2020, not various allegations.

Is there something magical about writing the same allegations on a new piece of paper? I don’t know who looked at any specific piece of paper. I do know that the DOJ and DHS have said there is no merit to those allegations.

 

[PickyPicky]

I did not say the opposite. You said allegations, but I referred to that specific document from Russell James Ramsland, Jr. Report Date 12/13/2020, not various allegations

And it is the content of that specific document that has been answered by the experts and scuppered by the manual count.

 

[PickyPicky]

Yeah, comes as a bit of a shock, don’t it.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

I did not say the opposite. You said allegations, but I referred to that specific document from Russell James Ramsland, Jr. Report Date 12/13/2020, not various allegations.

Is there something magical about writing the same allegations on a new piece of paper? I don’t know who looked at any specific piece of paper. I do know that the DOJ and DHS have said there is no merit to those allegations.

No, however there are facts about settings and tests run on the machine that show the types of events that occur with operation, such as warnings, called problems, seen in the logs. As I stated before:

I am not aware that anyone has looked into the facts contained in the exhibit submitted, regardless of any conclusions made by Russell James Ramsland, Jr. that may be incorrect or correct.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

You said allegations, but I referred to that specific document

You mean the specific document which has the sole purpose of placing the allegations that were refuted most soundly before the Court? That document? IOW, the document itself is of no importance (other than procedurally), it is what the document contains that matters, and the contents have been shown to be so much bunk.

So there is important procedural information. Also many facts are included. I think you mean some conclusions are bunk.

 

[whatistrue]

No, I mean the allegations are bunk, and the procedural referred to the document itself with respect to its place in the case procedures. No “important procedural information” in the document, but the document has a certain place in the overall procedure. Please stop trying to squeeze any meaning out of any of this - the allegations have been investigated and found to be without merit, and a hand recount held recently eliminated any possibility of the voting machines having skewed the results.

The equine in question is well and truly deceased and further strikes cannot change the facts. Trump lost, fair and square.

 

[Vico]

No, I mean the allegations are bunk, and the procedural referred to the document itself with respect to its place in the case procedures. No “important procedural information” in the document, but the document has a certain place in the overall procedure. Please stop trying to squeeze any meaning out of any of this - the allegations have been investigated and found to be without merit, and a hand recount held recently eliminated any possibility of the voting machines having skewed the results.

The equine in question is well and truly deceased and further strikes cannot change the facts. Trump lost, fair and square.

I am trying to understand what you mean. Thank you for explaining it.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

I did not say the opposite. You said allegations, but I referred to that specific document from Russell James Ramsland, Jr. Report Date 12/13/2020, not various allegations

And it is the content of that specific document that has been answered by the experts and scuppered by the manual count.

I think the conclusion of the report is likely correct in general that “The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail. This leads to voter or election fraud.” Note the definition of human errors is defined in the report, as excluding wrong software and configuration:

These are not human errors; this is definitively related to the software and software configurations resulting in error rates far beyond the thresholds listed in the guidelines.

Note that the software is used in many states some with manual adjudication and others with software adjudication. The report did address general issues with Dominion system. The report did correctly identify that the software was the wrong version and that was admittedly the reason for a count mismatch.

 

[PickyPicky]

I am not an expert on information technology, but I think you will find the statements from the election head and the company — confirmed by the manual count — show that Mr Ramsland was, shall we say, grievously mistaken.

 

[Vico]

I am not an expert on information technology, but I think you will find the statements from the election head and the company — confirmed by the manual count — show that Mr Ramsland was, shall we say, grievously mistaken.

The CEO did not show that Mr. Ramsland was grievously mistaken. The manual recount does not refute the issues raised in the forensic report as the report identified many vulnerabilities that pertain to any place where the system is used, not just in Antrim Country. Please do not confuse the specific with the general. The unofficial vote for BIden in Antrim County was later corrected to be Trump and said to be “because the clerk did not update software”.

 

[Dovekin]

Please do not confuse the specific with the general.

Isn’t this the problem? The general, from Ramsland, is that procedures could cause errors from manual adjudication, etc.

The specific is that no one has found a specific instance where this possibility happened. The courts have wanted specifics to act as evidence, but hand recounts in Antrim and in GA have shown no errors of the type identified that were not corrected during the count.

Th report’s overall view is that anything that was done to count a clear intent to vote is a violation of state law. IOW, the important thing is what the legislature established as process, not the intent of the voters.

 

[Vico]

Vico:

Please do not confuse the specific with the general.

Isn’t this the problem? The general, from Ramsland, is that procedures could cause errors from manual adjudication, etc.

The specific is that no one has found a specific instance where this possibility happened. The courts have wanted specifics to act as evidence, but hand recounts in Antrim and in GA have shown no errors of the type identified that were not corrected during the count.

Th report’s overall view is that anything that was done to count a clear intent to vote is a violation of state law. IOW, the important thing is what the legislature established as process, not the intent of the voters.

The report was provided for application in four states so is used in a general way to show that certification is questionable. A recount does not prove that adjudication was correctly done either.

In Georgia, there is no way to tie the signatures to the ballots, so only total ballots to registrations can be compared.

 

[PickyPicky]

The CEO did not show that Mr. Ramsland was grievously mistaken.

The CEO said:

Several of the allegations from the report are false and easily verifiable, Poulos said.

Among them, the report alleges “ranked choice voting was enabled” on tabulators, but Michigan does not use ranked choice voting, which requires unique ballots, and “it can’t be accidentally turned on,” Poulos said.

Tabulators were not connected to the internet in Antrim County, as the report suggests, but to a local area network which has no connection to the outside world.

He added votes could not have been “switched” from Biden to Trump using digital adjudication software, as the report claims, because adjudication was conducted manually in Antrim County, with bipartisan teams of poll workers reviewing ballots with over-votes to determine a voter’s intent.

Poulos said audits serve as the best way to refute fraud claims and confirm the accuracy of tabulators.

“The most important check on our machines is the paper ballot,” he said. If there was any machine manipulation, paper ballot results would not match the machine totals, he noted.

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s office is doing just that, Poulos said. On Thursday, the office will complete a “zero-margin” audit of Antrim County in which election officials will hand count all paper ballots to compare to machine-tabulated results

according to …

Dominion CEO: Michigan vote fraud claims ‘beyond bizarre’ and ‘dangerous’ | Bridge Michigan