well the signature verification portion is pretty subjective and so just because historically there was a higher rejection rate doesn't mean that rejection rate is the correct rate ... so if you're a judge are you going to want to possibly disenfranchise voters based on subjective re-analysis?
if they get 200,000 ballots in the mail they have the total number and then if you are counting them and 50,000 ballots just show up in "briefcases" they counted 250,000 total
Well according to that Melissa chick.... if what she said happened actually happened they would have over 200,000 extra votes in one county (not the state)
@DrSammyD understand what I'm saying if some signatures don't look like the original there could be valid reasons for that ... NOW if you found whole batches of signatures of supposedly different people that all looked the same, like one person that signed for a bunch of people then you may have something there
So wait... are you seriously telling me that you believe that two document experts cannot disagree as to the authenticity of a signature?
Because I can assure you it happens in courts every day in the US.
She always sounded sleepy but she really hammed up the rudeness in the hearing. Maybe that’s her all energized coffee or cocaine . She also said she worked for 24 hours straight @MatiLuc
Hi guys the court cases at state level in state courts is there somw kind of national court cases site for the casse filing and doucments and Exhibits and affidavits. I have access the federal court public filing system called PACER vier courtlistener website witch posts only federal cases not state or county cases thanks for your help.
Ok, more realistic. But... that does not change the fact that you are asking a court to put a paid expert in a position to examine hundreds of thousands of ballots and decide if we keep them or not.
I would suggest that it makes more sense that if there are any ballots than can justifiable be challenged contact the voter.
You say that is an unlawful cure.
My response is that your expert is spoiling a ballot and he should not be a part of that process per the statute.
But before we ever get to any expert looking at the first ballot you have to establish a reason more than a suspicion.
@Alondraz how were they able to this because Guliani team are not a able to investigate this machines .. they dont have a court orders.
Probably some random machine they bought and hack
No, initially I'm asking that a sample occur to determine the rate at which they would be rejected, and then if it's significant, they should continue.
