“An immediate concern of top officials is Russia's efforts to interfere with the mechanics of voting and tabulation.” via @peterdau #handmarked #paperballots #PaveAct axios.com/summit-sneak-p… 1/
Call, write, & email ur state & county election officials and demand HAND MARKED PAPER BALLOTS--not COMPUTER MARKED paper ballots--counted manually or on optical scanners. Tell them the scanners should NOT HAVE MODEMS and to avoid the ES&S DS200, which come w/ cellular modems! 2/
Senator Wyden’s #PaveAct is the ONLY federal election security bill that requires states (a) to give voters the option to mark their ballots by HAND & (b) to conduct real Risk Limiting Audits for every federal race. Demand that ur Members of Congress pass it now! cc @ronwyden 3/
If you think COMPUTER printed paper printouts are “voter verifiable” and thus an acceptable substitute for #handmarked #paperballots, you have been misled like most of the country. Please read this Thread. 4/
Here is my article explaining that vendors, election officials & even some election integrity groups mislead when they refer 2 paper summary cards from touchscreen ballot markers as “paper ballots.” These are NOT paper ballots & NOT a rzbl substitute! medium.com/@jennycohn1/pr… 5/
Here’s my sourced article explaining that IT experts who recommended so-called “Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails” didn’t bother 2 conduct usability testing 2 see if voters & auditors cld & wld use them successfully. It turns out they can’t and don’t! medium.com/@jennycohn1/to… 6/
Quote from IT election expert Harri Hursti that sums up the “Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail” scam. 7/
@LuluFriesdat’s investigative expose shows why Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trails & summary cards—some misleadingly call them “paper ballots”—from touchscreen ballot markers like ES&S’s ExpressVote are NOT a rzbl substitute 4 #handmarked #paperballots. 8/
Re: the #PaveAct discussed in post 3, demand also that Members of Congress change the effective date of the #handmarked #paperballots clause to 11/1/2018. All or most states already use scanners 4 absentee ballots. Thus, they can use these scanners or hand count 4 the midterms 9/
The current effective date is 2020, which is too late for the midterms. As explained in Post 9, there is no legit reason that even paperless states cannot use #handmarked #paperballots in the midterms. Thus, we must demand that the effective date be moved up to 11/1/2018. 10/
Election integrity advocate @MarilynRMarks1–whose lawsuit in Georgia demands the use of #handmarked #paperballots in the midterms—has long explained that even paperless states like GA can and must use #handmarked #paperballots in the midterms! 11/
IT election experts @duncanbuell (University of SC), Rich DeMillo (Georgia Tech), & Candice Hoke (legal and cyber expert) explain in this USA Today op-Ed how all states must and, yes, CAN transition to real #paperballots in time for the midterms! 12/

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with jennycohn@toad.social ✍🏻 📢

jennycohn@toad.social ✍🏻 📢 Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jennycohn1

Jan 13, 2019
Study shows that people of all political persuasions are willing to modify their beliefs based on corrective info from reliable sources, but “subjects ‘re-believed’ the false info when retested a week later.” 1/ news.northeastern.edu/2018/06/18/tir…
2/ The author of the article says It may help to warn people in advance that they are likely to forget the correction bc “this helps them mentally tag the bogus information as false.”
3/ It’s also “important that the corrective information be repeated as frequently, and with even greater clarity, than the myth.”
Read 6 tweets
Oct 9, 2018
I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings but elections have been electronically suspect starting long before the Trump/Russia scandal. This article is lulling folks into a false sense of security, which is dangerous. Domestic hackers & insiders were always an equal threat. 1/
Read 11 tweets
Oct 9, 2018
I agree, tho not enuf time (and 0 political will) to do this in Nov. Wish it were different. For now I hope to stop states from doubling up on electronics w/ touchscreen ballot markers. Using electronics to count votes is bad enuf. Having them mark our ballots too is nuts. 1/
Nuts except for those who are unable to hand mark their ballots. Once you have hand marked paper ballots they can be either scanned or hand counted (my preference) or both. 2/
Any time u put a machine between the voter and the paper record of voter intent there is an opportunity for programming mischief. Here is just the latest example.: 3/
Read 8 tweets
Oct 8, 2018
I’m hoping some of the cyber experts who signed the letter about the risks of using cellular modems to transfer election results can answer this question. Thx! @philipbstark @SEGreenhalgh @rad_atl @jhalderm
P. 79 describes the modem elections.wi.gov/sites/default/…
Seeing as no one has answered yet, I will say that even if the cellular modems CAN be configured to bypass the internet, we should not have to blindly trust that vendors or whoever else is hired to set them up will do that. 1/
Read 4 tweets
Oct 8, 2018
Kathy Rogers, the face & voice of @ESSVote, which has installed CELLULAR MODEMS in tabulators in WI & FL, is cozying up to @DHSgov which refuses to advise states to remove the modems despite a letter from 30 cyber experts & EI groups stating it should do so. #CorruptElections 1/
Here’s the letter. drive.google.com/file/d/1-Fd8a8… 2/
Read 16 tweets
Oct 8, 2018
The notion that cellular modems affect only “unofficial” results is bogus bc, among other reasons, in certain jurisdictions, unofficial results become the official results once added to absentees & provisionals—sometimes w/o ever comparing them to the precinct results tapes! 1/
And Wisconsin doesn’t even require that counties publicly post the results tapes so that the public itself can make this comparison! (I don’t know about Florida, Michigan, & Illinois.) 2/
Thus, we must simply trust that someone trustworthy is conducting this due diligence. In Johnson County, Kansas, the County acknowledged that it does NOT conduct this basic due diligence. 3/
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!


0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy


3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!