Your Honor, I will present this evidence only if you do not allow any cross-examination of our experts' testimony about it, and accept that everything I assert is true and honest.
Otherwise I will say you're part of the globohomo conspiracy online. You are not allowed to raise any objections or I will leave a negative yelp review of you.
This woman testified before the Georgia senate committees, which all did their very best to order investigations into each and every item. Each of those inumerous vote audits resolve all of the possible abuses that she displays (and isn't sure would happen). That is, if someone tried to 'adjudicate' the ballot differently from how it appeared, the vote audit would catch that.
The exception would be if someone wrote on the ballot before scanning it -- which would contradict the vote totals recorded by the people opening the ballots in the first place. Scanning the same ballot twice produces an item with the exact same SSN information, so that clearly doesn't go into an extra total. The suggestion is then limited to the -idea- that someone scanning batches of ballots flips through each and every single ballot that somehow has not voted for -any- presidential candidate, and bubbles that in for their preference.
If someone tried to discard ballots from a batch, it would again contradict the count from the people opening the ballots. There's a reason they had those people doing that. Her thing with the blank ballot would have to be tied to an SSN, and an audit of the ballot would show a discrepancy between how it appears in the database and whether the ballot physically has been marked. That would be why this helped to get GA to audit its entire vote count, matching up the votes on the ballots to the votes in the system.
Which of course led us to the signature nonsense, which I didn't realize was as stupid as it was until a few days ago (nothing tethers the signature on the outer ballot to the inner ballot).
