Trump’s Georgia Lawyer Letter Demands Audit of up to 45,000 Ballot Signatures

[NightHawkeye]

From the "So simple", files: Trump’s Georgia Lawyer Letter Demands Audit of up to 45,000 Ballot Signatures

Smith concluded that it’s impossible for the secretary of state’s office to certify the results of the presidential race between Trump and Democrat Joe Biden unless a “thorough audit” of signatures is carried out. He noted that the campaign made the request four previous times in writing but was rejected.

“You cannot in good faith conclude the ongoing statutory recount until you have institute[d] a Signature matching audit,” Smith added. In the letter, he said it is unusual that Raffensberger is unwilling to take steps to audit the signatures before the current recount is carried out.

“Until the signatures are matched, the vote count in Georgia is a complete fraud,” former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani added in the news release. “There is no way of knowing which ballots are honest and which ballots are fraudulent.”​

Georgia House Speaker Calls for Signature Verification of Absentee Ballots

“I am reiterating my call for @GaSecofState to request the signature verification of absentee ballots. Free and fair elections are the cornerstone of our democracy, and we must use all available tools to protect the integrity of the vote,” Ralston said, referring to Georgia’s Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, according to Shafer’s statement.
...
While the process Shafer describes would not match the signatures on envelopes to specific ballots and so could not change the vote tallies of individual candidates, it may provide a good indication of the overall number of potentially fraudulent ballots, and so be grounds for other remedial moves, such as decertification.
​

It's hard to see how Georgia can maintain the steadfast refusal here ... given mounting pressure ... and why would the Secretary of State and the Governor want to persist in denial anyway?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Didn't Georgia perform an audit as part of their hand recount?

 

[trunks2k]

Didn't Georgia perform an audit as part of their hand recount?

Not of signatures because in their view, it won't accomplish anything. They say the signatures had already been checked twice (one for the application for a mail in ballot and one for the ballot itself), and you can't match a signature to a ballot anyway since once the signature is verified, the ballot is separated from its envelope so the vote remains anonymous.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Not of signatures because in their view, it won't accomplish anything. They say the signatures had already been checked twice (one for the application for a mail in ballot and one for the ballot itself), and you can't match a signature to a ballot anyway since once the signature is verified, the ballot is separated from its envelope so the vote remains anonymous.

With that logic, there would be no need for recounts at all.

 

[Albion]

From the "So simple", files: Trump’s Georgia Lawyer Letter Demands Audit of up to 45,000 Ballot Signatures

Sounds more than reasonable, doesn't it? That's a rather small number of ballots, considering that there were millions of them tallied and recounted.

​

 

[Hans Blaster]

you can't match a signature to a ballot anyway since once the signature is verified, the ballot is separated from its envelope so the vote remains anonymous.

This is the important part. A bad signature match at this point can't be tied to a ballot.

 

[Vylo]

Yet another one where its been certified as well. You guys are beating a horse that isn't only dead, but is buried. Appeal to the electors, they are the only ones who can change the outcome at this point.

 

[MIDutch]

Yet another one where its been certified as well. You guys are beating a horse that isn't only dead, but is buried. Appeal to the electors, they are the only ones who can change the outcome at this point.

Not entirely true.

There's always the "change the command structure at the Pentagon and see if we can start a military coup" option, and the "second amendment" option that trump mentions every once in awhile.

Neither are likely, but I wouldn't put it past trump to try one or the other.

 

[Hank77]

Appeal to the electors, they are the only ones who can change the outcome at this point.

The SCOTUS ruled on 'faithless voter' laws. I suggest reading the whole article. The vote was unanimous. This was in June/July 2020. NOTE: GA law wouldn't stop faithless electors.

Writing for the court, Justice Elena Kagan, in a decision peppered with references to the Broadway show Hamilton and the TV show Veep, said Electoral College delegates have "no ground for reversing" the statewide popular vote. That, she said, "accords with the Constitution — as well as with the trust of the Nation that here, We the People rule."
...
Nothing in the Constitution prevents the states from "taking away presidential electors' voting discretion," she said. For centuries, almost all electors have considered themselves bound to vote for the winner of the state popular vote. If the framers of the Constitution had a different idea, she said, they never committed it to the printed page.


Justice Clarence Thomas, joined in part by Justice Neil Gorsuch, agreed with the outcome but wrote separately to explain his different reasoning.


Rather than interpret the Constitution's sparse language about the Electoral College as authorizing states to impose conditions on electors, Thomas argued that power is reserved to the states by the 10th Amendment.
...
Justice Samuel Alito observed that if the popular vote is close, the possibility of "changing just a few votes" in the Electoral College would rationally "prompt the losing party ... to launch a massive campaign to try to influence electors, and there would be a long period of uncertainty about who the next president was going to be."


Similarly, Justice Brett Kavanaugh alluded to what he called "the chaos principle of judging, which suggests that if it's a close call ... we shouldn't facilitate or create chaos."
...
Supreme Court Rules State 'Faithless Elector' Laws Constitutional