The IT experts who conducted the forensic audit on the voting machines in Antrim, County said the machines and software are intentionally set up for voter fraud. Dominion Voting denies this. The experts pointed out that the ridiculously high rate of 68% error is absolutely ridiculous. That means an administrator could change 68% of the vote in the county.
Antrim County was already in the news after it was discovered three thousand votes for President Trump were switched to Joe Biden. other votes in the county were also in error. An initiative to allow a pot store to open originally ended in a tie. During the recount three ballots were damaged and never replaced. The initiative passed.
Although the CEO of Dominion testified before the Senate that their machines cannot be manipulated or change vote, election officials in Coffee County in Georgia demonstrated how to switch votes from one candidate to another. Videos posted to YouTube by election officials in Coffee County, Georgia,
The IT Experts said:
“It is critical to understand that the Dominion system classifies ballots into two categories, 1) normal ballots and 2) adjudicated ballots,” he continued.
“Ballots sent to adjudication can be altered by administrators, and adjudication files can be moved between different Results Tally and Reporting (RTR) terminals with no audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicates (i.e. votes) the ballot batch.
This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity because it provides no meaningful observation of the adjudication process or audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicated the ballots.
“A staggering number of votes required adjudication. This was a 2020 issue not seen in previous election cycles still stored on the server. This is caused by intentional errors in the system.
The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency or audit trail,” the report stated. “Our examination of the server logs indicates that this high error rate was incongruent with patterns from previous years. The statement attributing these issues to human error is not consistent with the forensic evaluation, which points more correctly to systemic machine and/or software errors.
The systemic errors are intentionally designed to create errors in order to push a high volume of ballots to bulk adjudication.”