My disagreement lays on the fact that it would be illegal and someone would have been charged for that/arrested for that during the GBI investigation.

lol nm

we differ on this one...i have faith, his continued actions will convince you otherwise.

Perhaps!

and likewise me also

I'm not going to speculate about relief of election integrity when there exists no proof nor evidence of what she claimed.

This is some woman at a GOP hearing, likely associated with the GOP, making some wild claim of illegal behavior which I've seen nothing about.

You'd think the Trump-appointed adjudicator would have spoken up if this was the case.

But I guess he's just a swamp creature too, right?

Not to mention this would leave a trail of breadcrumbs.

Hence why they want the high res ballot images

Who is they? Pretty sure multiple bipartisan entities have gone over these already.

I want dueling interests argue about what they find, not "bipartisan" investigators doing that for us

Is "they" the public which aren't experts in signature matching, nor have any training regarding it, wanting high res images so they can erroneously point out perceived flaws to fit their preconceived narrative?

Bipartisan literally means dueling interests in most cases, but alright..?

no, you sighted GBI

That's not the only group of people that have gone over ballots.

Here is a question: How are you claiming the adjudication process ended up being fraudulent.

you already said it was illegal

but don't believe her

Yes, because of a variety of reasons.

so like I said lol nm

The adjudication process is DECIDED by 1 Democrat and 1
Republican poll watcher. Other poll watchers can view the process but don’t become part of the process.

When they say 80000 absentee ballots need adjudicated because they are flagged this doesn’t mean there was 80000 problems or decisions made to determine the voter. This is misinformation being spread by your “Twitter source”. When they take 100 ballots and scan them and find 1 issue and the bipartisan review fixes that 1 ballot all 100 were adjudicated. If a batch of ballots have no problems they become adjudicated. The law requires to check them more carefully for issues than in person votes. This is not evidence of fraud.

Partially incorrect.

It's 1 of each party on the ballot.

And 1 supervisor.

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/772982351520333824/795366603158978610/unknown.png

Each political party represented on the ballot gives their own representative for adjudication.

Which was a total of 4+1.

Or 3+1

Fair enough

It was 3+1.

Was Biden, Trump, and Jo on the ballot.

And they're also not poll watchers.

They're literally the vote review panel.

But from the same article showing how many ballots went through the process they explained a small fraction of the votes in the batches actually gets that review process. This was intentionally left out and they pretended the bulk of the votes were changed

Well not bulk all

Just because they go to adjudication doesn't mean they're changed, rarely does it mean they're changed.

Only really "changed" when it's an overvote.

Yeah agree that’s the crux of the adjudicators are determining the whole election fraud allegation

And overvotes are things like having held a pencil/pen on a candidate and then voted for the other.