Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

cbc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 839 posts

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#521

Post by djrogers »

enzanki_ars wrote: post #332
pdonis wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you take the printout from one machine and insert it into another to be scanned? I agree that would satisfy auditability, since you can look at the printout and make sure it's correct. Were these Dominion voting machines?

In Ohio, we used the same Dominion voting systems with the same process: Poll worker validates proper ID, get ballot code for your precinct, walk to voting system, poll worker enters the precinct, voter validates info on screen, voter votes on the touch screen, system prints out choices, walk to scanner system, vote gets scanned, scanner stores those ballots in it's tray in case need for audit.

I feel so disconnected from this process here in California - I haven't been asked for ID to vote ever. AFAIK, we're not allowed to verify ID here...

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#522

Post by dragonwriter »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #488
jliptzin wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can’t possibly be the case that a President who never won the popular vote and never polled above 50% approval during his entire term lost an election in which almost every poll leading up to it predicted his loss.

I'd love to see these so called patriots champion installing Gore for a bonus term since he was actually shafted by a mismanaged election. Nobody went looney bin insane over that.

> I’d love to see these so called patriots champion installing Gore for a bonus term since he was actually shafted by a mismanaged election. Nobody went looney bin insane over that.

Actually the same people, or at least political faction, did. Over the idea of looking into and correcting the mistakes, of course, not over the idea of letting a potentially mismanaged election stand without further review.

Google “Brooks Brothers riot” for one example.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#523

Post by throwaway31831 »

javagram wrote: post #486
throwaway31831 wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why are you talking about mail-in ballots in a thread about Dominion Voting Systems? Mail-in ballots get counted by machines.

The machine count of mail-in ballots is checked by a hand count audit. For instance, in Georgia every ballot was recounted by humans to confirm the accuracy of the machine count.

The hand count didn't address any of the risks people were actually worried about. It could not have caught either of the types of fraud I mentioned above, for example.

Read the interview I posted with Philip Stark, Berkeley Math Dean who is probably the leading expert on election auditing having designed the procedures for conducting risk-limiting audits in many states. He explains this in detail.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#524

Post by newacct583 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #181
javajosh wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"[Dominion will probable be] treated as a public figure." Why? I'd never heard of them before November 2020, and I imagine that is true for most people. I'd also be curious to learn more about what counts as "reckless disregard for the truth", if you're willing to share.

https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-malice... Dominion seems to be very clearly a “Limited Purpose Public Figure” in the domain in which the disputed statements apply. Their lack of general celebrity is a good argument that they aren’t an “all purpose” public figure.

This is a situation where I think the law sort of fails us, alas. The spirit behind the idea of "public figure" in defamation suits is that these things should not be allowed to become tools used by the powerful to protect themselves from the weak. Being public means you are expected to tolerate criticism that would be tortious when aimed at normal citizens.

But the defamer in this case is the President of the United States and his legal team. That sort of falls down.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#525

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #438
dragonwriter wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As far as I know he only said that in the Pennsylvania case They specifically either did not make or withdrew fraud allegations in many cases. It's true that the PA case is the only one where Giuliani was stupid enough to repeatedly invoke fraud in arguments despite it not being in the allegations or evidence in that case, thereby getting questioned by the judge on that point, and thus being forced to admit his arg…

> They specifically either did not make or withdrew fraud allegations in many cases. The general point being that they did make and did not withdraw fraud allegations in other cases. > A number of the election cases went to trial (6 out of 54 tracked on Wikipedia reached a final verdict after trial, and 1 is listed as trial ongoing, though that may be out of date) Which implies that the large majority of them didn't,…

It's worth noting that many of the claims were dismissed due to the procedural problem of not making a legal claim. If you file a lawsuit in which you yell at the opposing side without making any specific allegations as to what happened that deserves legal remedy, your case will be thrown out because it doesn't make any sense. That was what happened to about half of the election cases. Accusations of fraud need to be plead "with particularity". This means that in your initial filing, you have to allege a specific fraudulent action that was carried out by a specific group of people. The main thing that led election fraud cases to be thrown out was that no fraud was found, and none of the lawyers were willing to get disbarred by lying to the court. As such, all of the cases that shouted fraud were missing the description of what the fraud actually was. As such, the judges dismissed them because there wasn't a viable claim.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#526

Post by [deleted] »

akiselev wrote: post #338
vsareto wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rudy also had a cybersecurity company and was named as a cybersecurity advisor. Would that help Dominion's side that this wasn't just crazy beliefs on Giuliani's part and be in favor of actual malice?

IANAL but "they should have known" doesn't follow from how they market themselves as a business unless it's a licensed profession. It's not uncommon for defendants to completely contradict their previous public statements under threat of a lawsuit like all the Fox News lawsuits where their lawyers win by claiming that it's an entertainment channel and their viewers should know better [1]. Beyond that, one can easily…

[deleted]

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#527

Post by javajosh »

newacct583 wrote: post #524
dragonwriter wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/proving-fault-actual-malice... Dominion seems to be very clearly a “Limited Purpose Public Figure” in the domain in which the disputed statements apply. Their lack of general celebrity is a good argument that they aren’t an “all purpose” public figure.

This is a situation where I think the law sort of fails us, alas. The spirit behind the idea of "public figure" in defamation suits is that these things should not be allowed to become tools used by the powerful to protect themselves from the weak. Being public means you are expected to tolerate criticism that would be tortious when aimed at normal citizens. But the defamer in this case is the President of the United…

That is a very powerful argument I am sure Dominion will make.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#528

Post by Pxtl »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #494
Pxtl wrote: post #439

Earlier quoted context omitted.

googles wiseenergy . Oh look it's the successor to WindpowerFacts.info, run by a climate change denier. I'm so ready to trust his opinion on legal matters.

You think those are fake links to stanford law on his site? The sources are of equal validity regardless of the messenger.

Do you regularly find yourself relying on a Gish Gallop of information provided by pathological liars to support your theses?

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#529

Post by CyberDildonics »

covidthrow wrote: post #79
rpiguyshy wrote: post #14

before donald trump was ever in office, i always believed that these voting machines are complete bullshit. our entire voting system is bullshit. and it would be easy to fix. these machines have been shown to be massively flawed and vulnerable to hacking/tinkering. again, this was my opinion before donald trump was elected.

And if Trump had won, I suspect most of these comments would be critical of the absolutely sub-par security of our voting infrastructure. But tribalism still rules, so lots of praise abounds about how well things went. Mostly because their opponent lost. Frankly, we need publicly auditable records. For some reason we can request practically any non-classified data from the government... but not fine grained, anonymou…

You don't have to wonder what would happen if trump had won, because he actually did win four years ago.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#530

Post by dragonwriter »

aw1621107 wrote: post #464
lettergram wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

~None~ Many were not discussed on merits. See link: http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.ht... Many are still active (~30) Edit: correction

That link contradicts you. If you take its contents at face value, there were multiple cases decided on merits. If anything, I can see the potential for an argument to be made that that that site's definition of "decided on merits" is too narrow. For example, depositions were submitted in Law v. Whitmer , significant parts of the decision were dedicated specifically to discussing the merits of the case, and the concl…

Yeah, there is a sense in which dismissal for “failure to state a claim” (which is very common for the Trump cases, often alongside other grounds like laches and/or lack of standing) is “procedural”, but it definitely and unequivocally amounts to a finding on the merits, since it is literally “does the plaintiff allege the actual elements of an offense, with specific alleged factual bases, and profer evidence which would suffice, if not countered, to prove each”. If you lose on that, it is exactly the court say that “ignoring everything else, if you went to trial, presented everything you say you have, and the defendant’s legal team slept through your whole presentation and then decided not to present a case of their own, you would still lose”.
Post reply on HN