Thanks for the forensic audit updates.

All machines in Wisconsin take digital ballot images. A goldmine!
http://electionnightmare...s-from-physical-ballots/
Those images are needed by Jill to comfirm audits.
http://electionnightmare....com/use-newer-machines-
with-numerically-pegged-ballot-imaging-to-help-verify-elections/
Election activist John Brakey and attorney William Risner assert that destroying ballot images is against Federal law: Federal law 52 U.S.C � 20701 requiring retention of federal election materials, provides a penalty of up to $1,000 fine and one year in jail for premature destruction of that material (was formerly 42 U.S.C � 1974).

For the November elections, Brakey and Risner recommend the following strategy:

� File a public record request (ASAP) asking for ballot images for the last and the next election. The request should include other critical documents like the Cast Vote Record (CVR). We can provide a draft of what to request.

� If ballot images are or have been destroyed then file a special action Temporary Restraining Order (TRO), which is usually easy to request.

� If they refuse your public records request for �ballot images,� then file another special action in the form of a Mandamus Act. When you win they have to pay all expenses and legal fees.

Additional efforts that may be necessary and are suggested by AUDIT-AZ member Mickey Duniho, a retired former NSA Cryptologist for 37 years. His recommendations are being added to our TRO.

� Do not transfer results from the DS850 to the central count computer until election day;

� Print the cast vote record serial number on each ballot so that an audit can link back to the original ballot as per how the system was federal certified by EAC;

� Mark every storage box containing ballots with the range of serial numbers contained in the box, so that an audit can easily find the box containing a ballot of interest.

The dangerous thing about this is, I don't believe the term "election fraud", which is the voting integrity activist’s term used to describe upper level election theft by election insiders, including lieutenant governors and secretaries of state like Katherine Harris in Florida's 2000 theft and Kenneth Blackwell in Ohio's 2004 theft, has ever once been used on any national news program or even on NPR.

In contrast, the term "voter fraud”" which puts any doubts in an election outcome squarely on the heads of individual democratic voters has been endlessly bandied about in the media and by Republican congressmen for years. The largest example of that would obviously be the hysteria behind the phony video promoted by the racist Breitbart "news" website, which lead to the congressional defunding of ACORN.

This gives Trump a massive advantage in his lie about "voter fraud". It's actually embedded in the minds of Americans to the point where even election activists find themselves, accidentally using the term that describes a practically non-existent problem. We’re talking about dozens of cases, out of all the millions of votes cast in a given election.

Go Donald!

Actually, now that we know Breitbart is a white supremacist outlet, it shines a new light on the ACORN episode, doesn't it?

Larry Bergen is right when he notes that the GOP's decades-long repetition of the "Big Lie" has been accepted as truth by a wide swath of the American electorate. It explains why 63.1% of deceived Missouri voters approved a constitutional amendment that mandates the presentation of photo ID at the polls.

On Nov. 8 I served as a volunteer poll worker at my precinct in Thousand Oaks, CA. A number of voters seemed baffled as to why we did not require them to produce a photo ID. They seemed genuinely surprised when I informed them that a law professor acquaintance (now member of the Justice Department) had performed a comprehensive 2014 study which revealed that during the preceding 14 years there were only 31 cases of in-person voter fraud out of more than one billion votes cast in U.S. elections.

Oh, and Larry, I sincerely believe that "Alt Right" and "White Supremacist" are simply alternative descriptors for 21st century American Nazis.

"I want the winner to win and the loser to lose."

In a republic, trust is essential to national security. But we have gone from the Commander in Chief of the Continental Forces to the gentleman from New York. The former refused a salary; the latter refuses to release his tax returns and divest his holdings.

In Washington's day, votes were counted by hand. But now pseudo-tough guys whine about doing so while calling themselves "conservative." Well, labels alone do not mean much, but, in this case, why not use the old ways? Then it would be clear who is the winner and who is the loser.