re: Fulton County admits they did not follow the rules.

quote:

---

Precisely.

---

I am not shocked that you don't understand what's actually going on in this story

It’s possible to do a lot. Our voting systems are intentionally insecure. There is one party who fights to keep it this way.

5 Years Too Late, Fulton County Proves Trump’s Call To Raffensperger Right

Fulton County, Georgia, recently made an admission that should have commanded national attention. During a hearing before the Georgia State Election Board, county officials acknowledged that approximately 315,000 early ballots cast in the 2020 presidential election were unlawfully certified yet were nonetheless included in Georgia’s final, official results, in a race Joe Biden was officially declared to have won by just 11,779 votes.

The admission arose from a challenge filed by David Cross, an election integrity activist, who alleged that Fulton County violated Georgia election law in its handling of early voting. Under state statute, each ballot scanner is required to produce tabulation tapes at the close of voting, and poll workers must sign those tapes to certify the reported totals. These signed tapes are not merely an administrative safeguard. They are central to determining whether the vote count itself is legitimate.

The tapes certify that each machine began the day at zero, that no residual data from prior elections or test runs remained on the memory cards, and that the final totals were fixed the moment voting closed. Without signed tabulation tapes, there is no verifiable starting point and no verifiable endpoint. In legal terms, there is no verified election result. Yet in Fulton County, hundreds of thousands of early votes that were never lawfully certified were still included in the official totals.

Once Fulton County transmitted its early voting totals to the state, the responsibility shifted to Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger. He had a duty to ensure the results were properly certified and above board. Yet his office accepted Fulton County’s numbers on trust and included them in Georgia’s official results without verifying that the required procedures had been followed. This is especially important in light of the events that followed the 2020 election, particularly President Trump’s challenge to Raffensperger.

On Jan. 2, 2021, Trump called Raffensperger to discuss the irregularities in Fulton County, mentioning the county no fewer than 14 times during the call and stating flatly that it was “totally corrupt.” Trump cited estimates of “250 to 300,000 ballots” that had been “dropped mysteriously into the rolls,” repeatedly noting that Fulton County had never been “checked.” In light of what has now been formally admitted, those claims read less like hyperbole and more like an uncannily accurate description of what actually occurred.

Rather than taking those concerns seriously as questions of whether the law had actually been followed, Raffensperger dismissed them outright, insisting that “we do have an accurate election.” What he did not disclose was that his chief of staff, Jordan Fuchs, was secretly recording the conversation in violation of the law, as The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway reported last year. Immediately after the call, Fuchs leaked the tape to The Washington Post, where, the very next day, it was selectively framed to create the now-infamous narrative that Trump had pressured Raffensperger to “find 11,780 votes.”

That framing inverted the substance of the exchange. Trump’s point was not that votes should be manufactured but that since he was asserting large-scale illegality, identifying 11,780 unlawful votes, the margin of Biden’s supposed win, should have been straightforward. Raffensperger’s leaked phone call, however, proved politically effective. Within days, following the events of Jan. 6, the selectively edited conversation became a central exhibit in the broader effort to portray Trump as having attempted to criminally overturn the election, rather than as challenging what was in fact an election that had been illegally certified.



Trump was right. He’s always right.

He knows everything about everything! Politics, religion, finances, Greek revival architecture, fine cigars, homeopathic medicine, how to properly make love to a west African woman, how to surgically repair a hairlip … anything you want to know.

Just ask him he’ll gladly tell you.

quote:

---

You mean, like these safeguards???

---

They did multiple recounts post-election.

The Federalist makes a shitty argument that relies on people being ignorant both of the issue in play, the potential consequents, and the post-election safeguard procedures that were done multiple times.

quote:

---

You mean, like these safeguards???

---

The safeguard in this case was an independent investigator who spent his own time and money…not the election system itself.

quote:

---

The safeguard in this case was an independent investigator who spent his own time and money…not the election system itself.

---

And he wasted his time outside of getting a reputation within the MAGA echo chamber.

quote:

---

If there were 1k votes on the rolls prior to voting, then there would be 1k more votes AFTER hand counting.

---

Now you're getting it.

Nothing was stopping them from supplementing a discrepancy in numbers.

quote:

---

Kinda like counting the same bad ballots over and over.

---

If the machines were not at 0, it would not be this.

If there had been more votes on those machines, the hand counts would have shown this issue.

quote:

---

Counting the same ballots over and over doesn’t make it correct. I

---

Again, counting those ballots shows the alignment in the machine totals and actual ballots.

If the machines were at 0, the hand counts would have shown a number less than the machines.