WASHINGTON STATE ELECTIONS FIASCO
August 29, 2022
After the 2020 elections I noticed several glaring issues regarding our elections. I then began a deep dive into learning all I could about elections to try and improve the processes. To fix something, we need facts and accurate data to correct the problems. Listed below are some of the things that need attention and further investigation:
WE MUST CLEAN OUR VOTER ROLLS
In Spring of 2021 in Skagit County using county elections data provided by the auditor and SOS we began volunteer door-to-door canvassing efforts to verify the accuracy of the voter rolls. The results were shocking as about 45% of the verified voter registration addresses canvassed averaged one *anomaly. By the end of 2021, Skagit Election Integrity volunteers found a total of 1,632 voter anomalies and provided 1,937 volunteer signed affidavits. Report Here. Most of the anomalies were “voters” that were registered to vote at the address, voted from that address, but didn’t reside at the address.
Later in 2021 via the Washington Voter Research Project, several other counties in WA State also began similar canvassing efforts to help clean the voter rolls. Benton, Chelan, Clallam, Clark, Island, Jefferson, King, Kittitas, Kitsap, Lincoln, Mason, Snohomish, Spokane, Thurston, Walla Walla, Whatcom and others all had similar results. In fact, Clallam had over a 100% anomaly rate, and Spokane had an over 200% anomaly rate (meaning that for every verified address canvassed there was an average of two anomalies).
*”Anomaly” refers to a voter who cast a vote from an address where they do not reside, a deceased voter who voted, a voter who received multiple ballots for the same person, and a voter who was registered to vote at a non-residential, vacant, or nonexistent address.
The canvassing volunteers diligently recorded the information and provided the data to the county auditors in the hopes that the elections officials would clean the voter rolls by removing the thousands of recorded anomalies. The results were mixed as many of the anomalies were removed, however many still today remain on the rolls. I.e. In Skagit 293 of the 1,632 voter anomalies that voted in the 2020 election also voted in the Aug 2, 2022, primary election.
Also concerning, was that in Snohomish County about 29,000 “voters” voted in the 2020 election, but they were not on the registered voter list sent to the printer of the ballots. 7,000 of these are possibly explained, but at least 22,000 are still questionable. In Skagit there were over 6,000 “voters” that voted in 2020 but were not on the registered voter list sent to the printer. About half of these were explained but around 3,000 are questionable.
WHISTLE BLOWERS COME FORWARD
In August of 2021 in Bow, WA, a public hearing was held with about 500 in attendance that featured several important whistle blowers exposing the corruption of Washington State’s elections. Also, in August 2021 there was a Snohomish County public hearing with over 1,200 in attendance. More hearings and town halls followed later in 2021 and 2022 in Post Falls Idaho (Spokane County), and Clark and Mason Counties showing the many vulnerabilities of Washington State elections.
Homeless Whistle blower Exposes WA State Voting Irregularities
San Juan former county elections worker delivers testimonial at Public Hearing
Former WA State DOL employee delivers testimony at Public Hearing
Former Assistant State Auditor testifies at Public Hearing
WE NEED TO SEE THE CAST VOTE RECORDS
What are Cast Vote Records (CVRs) and why are they so important? The CVR is a report generated by the actual voting machines that shows the cumulative votes, and how they add up in series. There are several different types of CVRs that record many specifications for multiple variables in an election. They are digital records of all the votes for candidates and measures for all the ballots cast in an election. For the purpose of this report, I am referring to the type of CVR that shows lists, rows and columns in a spreadsheet format. It shows the unidentified voter selections that were tabulated on one combined record. They are NOT ballots and are NOT ballot images. They are interpretated data sets of what the voter put on the ballot. They are listed in order by time of vote cast during the entire election. Here is an example of a CVR.
According to The National Institute of Standards and Technology - NIST Special Publication 1500-103
* Simply put, a cast vote record (CVR) is an electronic record of a voter’s ballot selections, and its primary purpose is to provide a record of voter selections that can be counted in an efficient manner to produce election results.
* CVRs get created by the batch fed scanners used to scan our mail-in ballots.
* To produce a CVR, the scanner must interpret the voter’s selections according to the rules of each contest to determine which selections can be counted.
We have been asking most all WA State counties for CVRs for the past year and a half. The SOS is telling the counties to not release CVRs, saying it violates WAC 434-261-114 and White v. Skagit and Island / Clark County Court Cases. Here is a typical example of an answer we are getting from county auditors:
The term “Cast Vote Record” is a term of art with specific meaning under Washington State election law. The term is defined by WAC 434-261-114 (5) as the “record of all votes produced by a single voter in electronic form.” In other words, the Cast Vote Record is the electronic version and associated metadata that records the votes cast by voters.
RCW 29A.04.008(c) defines "ballot" as, "a physical or electronic record of the choices of an individual voter in a particular primary, general election, or special election." The cast vote record contains the choices of individual voters in electronic form and therefore constitutes an electronic copy of each voter's ballot under the definition set forth in RCW 29A.04.008(c).
We conclude that in Washington, all “ballots,” including copies, are exempt from production under the Public Records Act by Title 29A RCW—an “other statute.” The exemption is necessary to protect the “vital governmental function” of secret ballot elections. Under state election law, RCW 29A.60.110, 29A.60.125 and WAC 434-261-045, and the State Constitution, Article IV, Section 6, the records of a voter’s cast ballots are not public information. This was the clear holding of White v. Skagit County, 188 Wn.App. 886, 898 (2015) where the Court held:
In White v. Skagit County and Island County, Wn. App., No. 72028-7 (2015), the Court of Appeals Division I held that ballots are exempt in their entirety. Additionally, in White v. Clark Cty. II, 199 Wn. App. 929, 401 P.3d 375 (2017), the Washington Court of Appeals has held that RCW 29A.60.110 and WAC 434-261-045 “provide an ‘other statute’ exemption for tabulated ballots.” Id. at 934. Accordingly, your request for the cast vote record is denied pursuant to RCW 42.56.070 (1); RCW 29A.60.110 and WAC 434-261-045.
_______________________________________________________________________________
I completely disagree with the White court case rulings and the SOS / WA State County interpretation of the court case applying them to Public Records Requests for CVRs. And CVRs are NOT even ballots or ballot images!
When access to CVRs is prohibited, transparency, public oversight, and the public's right to validate free and fair elections are gone.
WHY ARE THEY HIDING THE CVRs FROM US?
Our state SOS and county auditor should allow the CVR data to be provided if there is nothing to hide. CVRs are important election records and could show if county voting machines were accurate or if any election results were manipulated. CVRs should exactly match and verify the reported county and state SOS reported vote totals.
WITHOUT CVR DATA WE MUST RELY ON THE “EDISON DATA”
Engineer and Scientist Draza Smith (who holds two master's degrees and 7 patents) has been using SOS provided “Edison data” with very detailed analysis across the country.
Draza works closely with Jeffrey O’Donnell (featured in Selection Code and who presented CVR data at the MOT Summit in August 2022). Most recently Draza presented very compelling Edison data evidence via her Power Point presentation showing the 2022 WA State SOS race was controlled and manipulated via an algorithm and very possibly stolen from SOS Candidate Keith Wagoner.
As you can see in the below graph looking at the total number of reported votes, the total votes for the top 3 candidates came in remarkably proportional over time. Note that Hobbs’ votes are plotted against the second y-axis, since the magnitude was greater.
Anderson (Blue) and Wagoner (Red) vote totals are on the left-side column. Hobbs’ (Purple) vote totals are on the right-side column. The ratios used in the algorithm showed the Anderson, Wagoner and Hobbs’ votes all paralleled each other consistently. These voting patterns are not normal representations of human behavior. The nature of the votes received should be random over time. The Anderson and Hobbs ratios are virtually an exact match. This is impossible without a computer algorithm working in the election!
Comparing the Secretary of State votes to those of the House Congressional Race 3 (below graph), the votes are also very proportional between Perez and Herrera-Beutler, but Kent’s ratio diverges and climbs over time. This effect would be seen if an abnormal number of votes for Herrera-Beutler were present in the initial ballots counted and then the remainder of the ballots followed the Law of Large Numbers to a ratio higher than the initial count described.
Kent knows that vote manipulation is being done by the fraudsters using the mail-in ballots ahead of time, and with an election day late surge turnout, the cheaters have no way of knowing how many fraudulent ballots to infuse into the election. This strategy implemented by Kent and his campaign team worked well, overwhelmed the system and broke the algorithm being used by the cheaters. In AZ Kari Lake and Mark Finchem used the exact same messaging to their supporters and the strategy worked to perfection. Aug 6 Video.
Edison Research is the company that provides the “Edison data “which are real-time election updates from individual states and is the source of election data for the news reports. According to the Edison Research Website: Since 2004, Edison Research has been the sole provider of Election Day data to the National Election Pool, consisting of ABC News, CBS News, CNN, and NBC News.
Draza has told me that in most all her analyses the CVRs and Edison data have large disparities, showing evidence of manipulation of voting machines using controlled algorithms. CVR data is not necessarily the holy grail, as "ballot box stuffing" (like what 2,000 Mules showed), and the potential altering of ballot images (which is now understood to be very easily done) still would not necessarily be detected. However, it is important to note that in Georgia Garland Favorito was able to compare the CVR to ballot images and expose time stamp manipulations with the image files and thousands of ballot image files being modified or replaced.
Other states like California, Oregon, Rhode Island, Wisconsin, etc. have no problem providing Cast Vote Records to the public. Disclosing CVRs via a Public Records Request does NOT violate the State Constitution.
In actuality, Cast Vote Records DO provide ALL voters Absolute Secrecy in Preparing and Depositing their Ballot.
A review of CVRs allows data analysts to "replay" the election ballot by ballot and to detect and verify natural or unnatural patterns of voting. It is a very simple way to audit an election and give peace of mind to the voter so we can all know that the election was fair. The order of vote cast is important so the "law of large numbers" can be used to see the election progressing. As more and more votes are cast, the effect of the next vote, as a percentage, affects the total less and less.
CVRs contain some or all of the following fields in rows on a spreadsheet:
* CVR Number
* Tabulator ID
* Counting Group (or another name - this tells how the vote was cast)
* Batch ID
* Precinct ID
* Ballot Type
ADMINISTRATIVE STATE CORRUPTION
The last several years many WA State Election Laws have been enacted that take away transparency, some of them include HB 1068: 2020-2021 (RETROACTIVE): An ACT exempting election records information from public records disclosure. And HB 1953, which was passed in 2022 to further codify and restrict our right to witness and verify that your county can request an audit of the election.
Additionally, Deputy WA State Secretary of State Randy Bolerjack made several very troubling amendments to the Washington Administration Code May 25, 2022 (effective June 25, 2022). SEE IN BOLD UNDERLINED BELOW:
WAC 434-261-114 Definitions.
As used in this rule, unless stated otherwise:
(5) "Cast vote record" or "CVR" means a record of all ((votes)) voter markings produced by a single voter on a ballot card, presented in electronic form, and is defined as a ballot in accordance with RCW 29A.04.008.
AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending WSR 19-19-033, filed 9/11/19, effective 10/12/19)
WAC 434-261-116 Preparing for a risk-limiting audit.
(7) ((Comparison audit uploads.)) At the time the unofficial results are produced.
(8) Copies of cast vote records used during the risk-limiting audit will be destroyed no later than 10 days following county certification.
How can an unelected bureaucrat write a WAC amendment that mandates the destruction of election records “no later than 10 days following county certification?” AGAIN, WHAT ARE THEY TRYING TO HIDE? This rule violates Federal Law 52 USC 20701, and 42 USC 1974 which requires all election records to be kept for 22 months and also violates State Law RCW 29A.60.110, WAC 434-262-200 and WAC 434-261-045.
More troubling is the following amendment to WAC 434-335-260 that just went into effect, written by Stuart Holmes, the WA State SOS Deputy of Elections.
1) The secretary of state may decertify a voting system or vote tabulating system or any component thereof and withdraw authority for its future use or sale in Washington if, at any time after certification the secretary of state determines that: (a) The system or component fails to meet the standards set forth in applicable federal guidelines or state statutes or rules; (b) The system or component was materially misrepresented in the certification application; or (c) The applicant has installed unauthorized modifications to the certified software or hardware; or
(i) County auditors shall not provide physical, electronic, or internal access to third parties seeking to copy and/or conduct an examination of state-certified voting systems, or any components of such systems including, but not limited to: Voting software and systems, tabulators, scanners, counters, automatic tabulating equipment, voting devices, servers, ballot marking devices, paper ballot printers, portable memory media devices, and any other hardware, software, or devices being used as part of the voting system.
In other words, in Washington State: “The Fox is Guarding the Hen House.”
WASHINGTON STATE SHAM AUDITS
But wait, it gets worse…we are now left with sham audits to verify that our elections are fair and accurate. I.e., for Spokane county’s 2022 primary election it was decided to conduct a “Risk Limiting Audit”(RLA) - The 3rd Legislative District Position 2 race was “randomly” selected by the SOS. Spokane County Auditor Vicky Dalton submitted the RLA parameters to the SOS. It was to be an "audit" of the race, but only an "audit" (ballot comparison) on the 2nd and 3rd place candidates in a three-candidate race – not an audit of the winning candidate (a Democrat).
Through the ARLO Software Algorithm Program, a "random" sample size of 71 ballots were chosen to audit. 39,342 ballots were counted in the 3rd Leg. Race. 144,334 total ballots were counted county-wide.
The RLA process resulted in about 45 ballots being selected that were NOT in the 3rd Legislative District but were from other legislative districts within Spokane County. Meaning about only 26 ballots were audited for the actual Legislative 3 race. In fact, no ballots "audited' had a vote for the candidate in the 3rd position.
PROBLEM #1: Why would you "audit" a race and not "audit" ANY votes for the leading candidate in the race?
PROBLEM #2: Why would you audit a race and not audit ANY votes for the 3rd place candidate in the race?
PROBLEM #3: Spokane County includes 5 Legislative Districts - The Legislative District 3 RLA had about 45 of 71 ballots chosen to audit that were NOT in Legislative District 3.
PROBLEM #4: How can an audit of 26 ballots in the 3rd Leg. District Pos 2 race, that includes NO ballots for the first or third place candidate in the race, be in any way considered an audit?
PROBLEM #5: Why would you audit ballots from all over the county OUTSIDE the 3rd district for a 3rd district race?
PROBLEM #6: Election observers were not allowed to witness the physical ballots or the imaged ballots, side by side.
PROBLEM #7: All Cast Vote Record (CVR) data and images from the RLA were made available via password and were EMAILED to the *ARLO RLA Team in Colorado to evaluate the process, showing the Election System data was connected to the internet.
PROBLEM #8: Spokane County elections observers were not allowed to have a copy of the RLA report to see the composition of the RLA process. The election observers were not allowed to review the mathematical formulas supporting the plan of the RLA, nor were they allowed to see calculations on how the race and candidates were determined. When asked why they could not get a copy of the report, they were told because “We can't give you access to Cast Vote Records” and "You have to Trust Us."
PROBLEM #9: When the Spokane GOP elections observers asked Democrat Auditor Vicky Dalton about this process, she doubled down and said, "This is a ‘True Audit’."
OF NOTE: Washington State is one of the only a handful of states in the country where Cast Vote Record (CVR) data is not available to the public.
OF CONCERN: Auditor Dalton has chosen to eliminate the Random Batch Audit and replace it with the Risk Limiting Audit for Spokane County. This "Sham" RLA that was just conducted in Spokane county is supposed to give us full confidence and faith that ALL the 2022 Spokane County primary elections were conducted fairly and honestly…This is absolute total lunacy!
OTHER ISSUES: By design the RLA is supposed to be preceded by an ‘Audit Trail’ of the Election System. Which there is none…
RISK LIMIT AUDIT (RLA) FACTS
The 2021 elections in WA State had a pilot program in 9 counties implementing "Risk-Limiting Audits" (RLA). According to the WA SOS, a RLA is a post-election audit that ensures election results match what the voters selected.
Another problem, in the RLA software program called Arlo, there is an algorithm connected to all the ballot images from the election, the software program then can tell the elections officials which ballots to pull to "audit" the election.
In Nov 2019, the US Department of Homeland Security announced it would partner with Voting Works to Pilot the use of its Arlo vote verification software in the six key battleground states during the November 2020 election. Arlo is touted as ensuring the outcome of an election is "statistically likely" and is being promoted through Voting Works (a 501 non-profit). Voting Works was created by the left-leaning Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT), a major donor is George Soros through his Foundation to Promote Open Society.
These types of "audits" are not genuine audits and do nothing to verify if the ballots themselves are counterfeit.
MORE PROBLEMS
Just like Spokane County, the plan in some WA counties is to replace the current “Random Batch Audits” (which are almost as bad, but at least have a human element) with the new “Risk-Limiting Audits.”
FLAWED "AUDITS"
Depending on how close the election is (only about 1/10 of 1% of election results are supposed to be checked) ballot images from the election are used to determine which ballots the election officials are to select to verify the election. I.e., Thurston County GOP election observers in a RLA reported that in a Nov 2021 election of 60,000 + votes counted, only 63 ballots were audited via the RLA Arlo program.
If elections can have predetermined outcomes via ballot box stuffing (like 2,000 Mules showed) and computer algorithms controlling the outcome of the election, like many have shown and believe, (Jovan Pulitzer, Dr. Frank, Draza Smith, Jeffrey O'Donnell, Dr. Walter Daugherity, Professor David Clements, Colonel Shawn Smith, Joe Kent and others) then the RLA could easily be “rigged audits” and potentially part of a cover up for an election, as much of the human element is now taken out of the equation.
OF NOTE: The current "Random Batch Audits" are also not true "audits" and only look at a very small percentage of ballots / ballot images in an election; in most WA State Counties it is 6 batches of 50 per batch (300 ballots total). RCW 29A.60.170 (3). This RCW requires checking the results for one office by randomly selecting three precincts or six batches for the audit.
TRANSPARENCY AND ANY TRUE AUDITS OF ELECTIONS IN OUR STATE HAVE NOW BEEN OBLITERATED!
IF THERE IS NOTHING TO HIDE THEN WHY ARE COUNTIES AND VOTING MACHINE VENDORS ILLEGALLY DELETING ELECTION RECORDS?
In July, 2022, * Litigation "Hold Letters" were emailed out from a team of attorneys to 25 counties in Washington State that admit via PRR that 2020 Election Log Records were Entirely Deleted (or they are unable to provide) and were not "backed up" in the following counties: Asotin, Benton, Clallam, Columbia, Cowlitz, Douglas, Ferry, Franklin, Garfield, Grant, Grays Harbor, Island, King, Kitsap, Lewis, Mason, Okanagan, Pacific, San Juan, Skagit, Skamania, Snohomish, Stevens, Whatcom and Yakima Counties.
* A litigation "Hold" Letter / Notice is written correspondence directing an entity or an individual to preserve documents and data that may be relevant to a threatened litigation.
Deleting these election logs violates Federal Law 52 USC 20701, and 42 USC 1974 which requires all election records to be kept for 22 months and also violates RCW 29A.60.110, WAC 434-262-200 and WAC 434-261-045.
Additionally, the Election Assistance Commission requires voting systems and tabulation equipment to create a “real-time audit log” which records the events of an election. Read the EAC Decision on Request for Interpretation (Audit Logs) for details on what logging is required.
Cyber Security and Election Integrity Experts all agree that these types of computer logs and records are vital components of the election itself. WATCH SELECTION CODE (45 Min Mark)
Watch Here at 13 min of Video 3-15-22 Nye County Commissioner meeting -- expert witness explains how election log files indicate how these voting systems are operating that are responsible for tabulating our votes, and if there was a hack or break-in, these are the files to determine if that existed.
There is absolutely no reason why Election Machine Web Activity Logs should be illegally deleted! Good news however, the recent Moment of Truth Summit gives reason for much optimism. Pete Santilli Bombshells Interview
UNCERTIFIED ELECTIONS EQUIPMENT
Voting machines were not legally certified in 25 WA State counties for the 2018 and 2020 elections due to testing laboratories lapsed EAC Certifications. The Pro V & V lab EAC 2-year certification lapsed Feb 25, 2017 and was not renewed until Feb 1, 2021.
For all other industries, i.e. an expired Business License, Insurance license, Real-Estate license, Contractors License, Driver’s License, etc. you are not allowed to operate legally and are forced to pay a fine, have license revoked, or even perhaps go to jail, until renewal of such licenses occurs. But in the case of the most important and sacred principle of our Republic, the election, it is somehow not relevant if a lab accreditation by a government agency has lapsed, and that lab is continuing to do business in their normal capacity. I contend that any certification of voting machines should be invalid if the testing lab is not certified / approved; this is backed up by:
WAC 434-335-040 Voting system requirements.
(1) No voting device or its component software may be certified by the Secretary of State unless it:
(f) Has been tested and approved by the appropriate voting system test laboratory approved by the United States election assistance commission.
RCW 29A.12.080: No voting device shall be approved by the Secretary of State unless it: (5) Except for functions or capabilities unique to this state, has been tested and certified by an independent testing authority designated by the United States Election Assistance Commission.
All voting systems, voting devices, and vote tallying systems must meet applicable federal standards and be certified and approved by the Secretary of State before they can be used in Washington state pursuant to RCW 29A.12.020. WAC 434-33-010.
Additionally, it says on the WA State SOS website - System Security / Tabulation Systems: Before a System is Washington State Certified, it must be tested by an Election Assistance Commission (EAC) accredited, independent testing authority.
The Pro V & V Voting System Testing Lab (VSTL) chose to allow their accreditation to expire, and therefore they no longer met the Federal Standard they were contracted to adhere to. The EAC and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) regulations are very clear, VSTL's MUST BE ACCREDITED EVERY TWO YEARS!
To make matters worse, according to the EAC website VSTL reports used outdated 2005 voluntary voting system guidelines and the WA State 2020 Clear Ballot elections systems had many known defects that were subject to vulnerability, and election log files may have been corrupted. Some examples of these known defects from the report include:
* An unhandled exception in the system log caused the DataTable in the front-end JavaScript to crash.
* The image accompanying the rejection message for judge's initials disappeared if the language changed.
* On ballots with multiple errors, some error messages previously failed to appear.
* The write-ins report did not filter- out overvoted choices.
* Reporting data was lost when the paper was removed and not replaced for 48 hours or more.
* The logs would be corrupted when shutting down the system.
Also, reported ClearCount UI Enhancements included: Removing the pop-up message asking for confirmation of a modification: "This already got adjudicated by an algorithm."
The question needs to be asked: How did the defects in the WA State Voting Systems affect the results of our state's elections?
In 25 WA State counties VSTL's were not accredited to certify the voting machines software or hardware. Because of the 49 state legislative districts overlapping the 39 state counties, this directly affected the majority of state legislative races. If we were following the law most all of the WA State 2020 elections should have been Null & Void.
MORE SERIOUS ISSUES
Currently seven counties in WA State are not using properly certified election machine voting systems. The Clear Ballot Group 2.1 Voting System software configuration being used by Ferry, Grays Harbor, King, Mason, Pend Oreille, Spokane, Wahkiakum and Whatcom counties were not certified for the 2020 and 2021 elections, and are not certified for the 2022 elections according to the Elections Assistance Commission (“EAC”) website. This violates RCW 29A.12.080, RCW 29A.12.101, and WAC 434-335-060. There is definitely something wrong when our elections are somehow allowed to be certified when counties are not using properly certified equipment.
WE MUST BRING TRANSPARENCY BACK TO THE ELECTIONS PROCESS
The current computerized electronic systyem has numerous drawbacks that restrict transparency. Additionally, when voting machine vendors can erase elections records with "Software Updates," it makes it challenging to catch potential fraud. The most obvious solution is to go back to precinct level same day voting, hand counting of paper ballots, and voter ID which is the way many other countries do it, because of the advantages it brings.
The present mail-in voting system requires drawn out elections over several weeks which allows for more opportunity for nefarious activity to occur. This contributes to a lack of transparency for the public. Hand counting allows for one day elections significantly reducing this problem.
Black Box Voting is what happens with computerized election systems because the vendors of the systems are private companies insisting on protecting their intellectual property rights by deleting election records and withholding software source code. Hand counting gives full transparency and eliminates the need for voting machines and their vendors with lucrative contracts; Clear Ballot, Dominion, ES&S, Hart InterCivic, etc. to control the process.
Centralized electronic voter rolls allow for nefarious activity that, combined with computerized systems are fraught with peril, obscuring transparency to the public. Hand counting at the precinct level would greatly reduce this problem as ballots would be brought to the precinct voting center by the voter with ID, greatly reducing, if not eliminating, ghost voting, duplicate voting, and noncitizen voting.
The complexity of the computerized elections system has layers upon layers of complexity and is a great hindrance to transparency for the public. Only those who are highly trained in the multiple aspects of the system can grasp what’s going on. And many of these highly trained individuals will admit that the complexity hampers even the highly trained from gaining access to the system in a meaningful way in order to be able to have a transparent view of the system. This complexity is also a hindrance to gaining public trust of the system. Hand counting eliminate this complexity and returns us to a system that is easily understood by the public in general.
Signature verification is done by elections staff who, in comparison with the professionally trained, get minimal training, and are under pressure to make evaluations in as little as 5 seconds per signature. This would arguably be difficult for the professionally trained to do. Hand counting totally eliminates this aspect of the election process.
Also, the (manual) signature verification process they follow is heavily dependent on VoteWA. Almost every aspect of the signature verification is done in VoteWA - since both the registration signatures and the uploaded signatures from the incoming ballots (via the Agilis machines which are connected to the internet) are all stored in VoteWA. The browser-based VoteWA app shows voter information (name, voter ID, ballot ID, DOB), the signature on the ballot, and signatures from VoteWA - including all historical registration signatures for the voter and signatures of other household members (same address - determined by 'research') in case someone in the same household 'accidentally' signed the wrong ballot return envelope...
Using uncertified elections equipment, illegally deleting election records, hiding Cast Vote Records, Totalitarian State Administrative Code changes, absurd and ridiculous “audits,” election voting machines open to manipulation, and a mail-in voting system ripe with fraud opportunities are all reflective of efforts by the Voting Machine Vendors, the WA State SOS and the State’s County Auditors to control our elections, eliminate government transparency and hide the true results of elections from We the People. Under the current structure it is virtually impossible to verify any election in Washington State as in any way legitimate. We are told to fix this we simply need to vote the corrupt bureaucrats and politicians out of office and change the laws. Do you see the problem???
Respectfully Submitted by Bill Bruch
The above article is the sole opinion of Bill Bruch; WA State GOP Election Integrity Chairman, Skagit County GOP Chairman, Business Owner, Former Town Council Member and 2020 WA State LD 10 House of Representative Candidate.
Share This Post...
