Last Updated:- No Author? Please read our Author name suppression policy for more information by clicking here. Do you have a story? send newstips to [email protected]
Do you believe in independent owned news? please help us keep the independent industry alive by contributing for as little as $5 /moDonate
Special thanks to douglasnow – this video was reuploaded with permissions.
Here is how an Election Supervisor named Misty Martin from Coffee County switched votes from one candidate to another, even removing votes completely making it a blank ballot in a demo; to change the U.S. Elections in Georgia.
The video was filmed on November 12, just 9 days after November 3 when the Presidential election race to 270 took place.
Georgia’s Secretary of State’s Office (SOS) announced that it opened an investigation into Coffee County’s election handling of the Presidential election recount that was meant to be finalized on December 2.
It was required that all counties completed their recounts at midnight on Wednesday. However, by Thursday, six counties were still finalizing their recount uploads. Coffee County officials worked with the Secretary of State’s office and Dominion Voting Systems to resolve a difference of 50 votes.
Coffee Country was the only county that did not complete their recount uploads before the deadline. On the morning of December 4, the Secretary of State’s office received a letter from the Coffe County’s Board of Election which said they could not certify their recount results.
A statement read: “The Coffee County Board of Elections and Registration cannot certify the electronic recount numbers given its inability to repeatably duplicate creditable election results. Any system, financial, voting, or otherwise, that is not repeatable nor dependable should not be used.”
“To demand certification of patently inaccurate results, neither serves the objective of the electoral system nor satisfies the legal obligation to certify the electronic recount.”
Ms Martin said a hand audit showed that they were off by one vote from the first original count. Following the recount, it showed Coffee County’s tally was off by 51 votes — the county’s tally showed two batch uploads of 50 ballots each which resulted in Ms Martin becoming unaware whether she scanned a batch of 50 ballots twice.
The Secretary of State’s Office rules out that the Coffee County’s letter blamed the voting system for the 51-vote discrepancy, but, officials hadn’t specified what issues were wrong in the mechanical side of the voting systems.
A press release from the Secretary of State’s office acknowledged that Ms Martin had to resolve the recount, recertifying and to upload the recount results.
“Director Harvey informed her that the recount required the scanning of the ballots. Ms Martin stated she was going to rescan some of her ballots and try to resolve the issue.”
“Mr Harvey called her back later Friday afternoon. Ms Martin said she was scanning ballots, but that the scanner was stopping intermittently. Mr Harvey called Dominion to make sure they could send a technician to help.”
At around 4pm on Friday afternoon, Mr Harvey attempted to call Ms Martin to check on Coffee County’s progress, but he could not get her on the phone after many attempts. Mr Harvey attempted to text message her, but again, got no response.
Mr Harvey later found out from Dominion that the Board told her to ‘go home’ and they would further start again on Monday.
“On Monday morning, members of the Secretary of State’s Elections team spoke with Ms Martin. She said that they were planning to start scanning again around noon. Ms Martin completed the recount upload and provided the Secretary of State’s office with the documentation from their Election Management System to back up their uploaded results.”
A further investigation was sparked by the Secretary of State’s office and said that Coffee County would undergo checks for its recount procedures and ascertain if the cause needs to be moved forward to the State’s Election Board for a review and action if necessary.
This video shows that it is very easy for a dishonest supervisor to change any vote, which would ultimately mean the course of who’d win as President could be changed. However, any supervisor can face prison if they attempt to manipulate the system and that it doesn’t change the original printed ballot paper.
A reminder that when votes get counted, there’s usually a member from Democrat and Republican parties. An election board member is also present to watch over the processes.