Re: Is Adjudication of Absentee Ballots Rejected by Dominion ClearCast Scanners a Conflict of Law?
Adjudication of massive numbers of rejected ballots (up to 68% of absentee ballots reported) is in conflict with felonious voting of another person’s absentee ballot.[1] The potential for error and fraud is too great, and impossible to correct except through lengthy, contested audits.[2]
The failure to bring these questions of law to trial, or fully conclude legislature-ordered audits, proves any election rule vulnerable to voter disenfranchisement or fraud through verification and tabulation abuse must be avoided. As Benjamin Franklin is advised, long ago, ‘An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.’
2020, the New Mexico voter turnout increased from 600K (2018) to over 900K. With non-governmental groups mass mailing applications for mail ballots, perhaps this explains an unprecedented turnout with 400,000 absentee ballots.
In 2018, the Doña Ana County Clerk was unable to process the ballots, let alone legally verify, tediously, by hand, thousands of ballot applications. How much more difficult was it in 2020?
This is especially of concern with County Clerks relying solely on manually checking the birth date and signature, and every application having to be answered manually. By contrast, applications through the Secretary of State Office Internet portal require four ID-points, and are verified digitally.
Audits take too long, and the evidence required proving a legal standard of fraud has proven an impossible and unreasonable task. In the case of adjudication (i.e. votes) described in the Mitre Critique, it is impossible to audit what was put on the replacement ballots.
Conclusion:
In the case of expanded no-excuse Absent Voter laws, we have two disparate registration verification standards, violating both state and federal constitutions, resulting in the potential unconstitutional disenfranchisement of qualified voters.
The statutes controlling Absentee Ballots are unconstitutional under Equal Protection violations, and bans on ‘special laws’ in elections. It is also is a Conflict of Law, as a person filling out someone else’s absentee ballot is a felony, but somehow permissible for an unaccountable election worker, regardless of any exemption from the law in legislated Absentee Ballot rules.
[1] See NMSA 1978 Ch 1 Art 20 § 1-20-8, and § 1-20-8.1(E)
[2] “The investigators stated that ballots sent to adjudication “can be altered by administrators…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.” See page 19, https://election-integrity.info/MITRE_Critique.pdf See also the Mitre Critique chart showing the 119,811 Biden votes dumped at 1:32AM, which corresponds to the security camera footage showing the election workers scanning furiously ballots pulled out from under a table. When they transmitted, those votes showed up in real time and put Biden ahead.
Paralegalnm's Blog 
Leave a reply to Is Adjudication of Absentee Ballots Rejected by Dominion ClearCast Scanners a Conflict of Law? – Paralegalnm's Blog Cancel reply