Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani • Hacker News Board

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#711

Post by qwerty12345678 » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 5:45 AM UTC

rspeele wrote: post #704

qwerty12345678 wrote: post #686

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Innocence until proven guilty" is relating to an individual being formally accused of a crime in a court of law. We are talking about a PUBLIC PROCESS, which in my opinion doesn't fall into the same category. The burden of proof shouldn't fall on either side, it should be publicly verifiable . If a third-world country controlled by rebels ran a "free and fair" election, where they "counted" the presidential ballots…

Every time the states did something to check the integrity of the election, such as hand-recounting the ballots, or doing a signature verification audit, it was simply dismissed out of hand as a cover-up and not a real investigation. The bar set by the "stop the steal" crowd was that unless you uncovered that Donald Trump really won the election, you didn't investigate hard enough.

See my flagged comment below beginning with "The general consensus is that this was a dynamic hack".

That explains why hand-recounting of ballots wouldn't make a difference. Also, I don't believe signature verification was widely used, or at least wasn't used in the critical swing states where it really mattered. It should be used everywhere considering the technology is mature enough and easily available.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#712

Post by chordalkeyboard » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 5:46 AM UTC

adrianmonk wrote: post #245

adictator wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Coz there is a significant risk of penalty, of jail time. That's what a sworn affidavit is, is it not?

Where was this risk aversion during the storming of the Capitol on January 6th? I think what you say is true of most people, but it seems very clear that we have a group which doesn't behave like most people.

> Where was this risk aversion during the storming of the Capitol on January 6th?

Are you asserting that some of the same people who filed affidavits also entered the capitol own jan 6th? Is there any evidence for this?

> I think what you say is true of most people, but it seems very clear that we have a group which doesn't behave like most people.

I think we as a society are moving past the whole "judge some people by the actions of some different people" thing.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#713

Post by chordalkeyboard » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 5:49 AM UTC

aww_dang wrote: post #148

adictator wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would anyone know they are baseless unless a proper investigation is conducted independently? What about the thousands of sworn affidavits? Surely, ALL of them can't be lying.

Perhaps a more pertinent question comes from the perspective of realpolitik. Which is more damaging to US political institutions, having an illegitimate president or admitting that the election was stolen? I'd wager an admission of election changing fraud would make it almost impossible to recover any trust in political institutions. What would be the next steps from admitting that the election was fraudulent? Given…

> what can be done to restore trust?

given the foregoing, are you sure you want people to trust the government?

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#714

Post by bdowling » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 5:55 AM UTC

aw1621107 wrote: post #666

bdowling wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When cases are, as many of the Trump & allied cases were, thrown out for this reason, the court is making a finding on the merits ... That's not the way lawyers use the term "on the merits". See, e.g., [0]. [0] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/on_the_merits

From the last sentence of that link (emphasis added): > The distinction between decisions that rest on the merits rather than on procedural grounds is important because a decision on the merits is considered final and is thus bound by res judicata... Decisions that do not rest on the merits, however, are not bound by res judicata because the claims were not properly heard. Thus, these claims may be brought forth in a…

This is correct. The problem above was conflating "on the merits" with determining facts by considering evidence.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#715

Post by bettem » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 5:58 AM UTC

qwerty12345678 wrote: post #546

wcunning wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As to (3), Ken and others have also pointed out, Rudy or Sydney Powel being lawyers have a duty to know this sort of thing so there's a chance that they'll be found to have actual malice even without a finding that Rudy was knowingly lying.

Serious Question: Why is everyone assuming they're lying? And why doesn't anyone want to prove Biden won? From my perspective, the accusations he made were completely dodged by Dominion and by Democrats (since their guy was labeled the winner by the media). I'm not aware of any individual claim that was debunked via substantiating evidence. They refused to answer, refused to report it in the media, and ran full speed…

Outside of the context of this lawsuit; why should the burden of proof be on Dominion when the claims are made against them by the Trump Campaign?

To extend your line of reasoning, if accused of a crime should you have to prove you didn’t do it? Or should the burden be on the accuser/prosecution?

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#716

Post by mythrwy » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 6:01 AM UTC

You don't need fancy intriguing machines and hackers to engage in old school ballot stuffing. That has been going on since forever (_not_ a statement on the validity of the past election).

Foreign agent hacker compromised machine stories are more interesting and shocking maybe.

Still, after the Georgia recount you'd think they would have dropped the machine claims but they kept at it.

Where did those stories originate in the first place though? And why? Maybe some of this will come to light during the lawsuits.

Powell and Giuliani's behavior and claims seemed pretty far out to me. Maybe they were misled, maybe they were just foolish and looking for a sensational story. Hope we find out.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#717

Post by enigmo » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 6:07 AM UTC

jcranmer wrote: post #678

pdonis wrote: post #630

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ID verification disenfranchises How so? How many eligible voters don't already have government issued IDs?

The most common government-issued ID is a driver's license, to the point that it can sometimes be hard to get a government ID that isn't a driver's license. So anyone who can't drive has an uphill battle--predominantly blind people, as well as poor people who live in the inner city where car ownership is infeasibly expensive. Another commonish case is tribal reservations, where tribal documentation is usually suffici…

I wonder why the interested parties don't just offer to pay for ID cards. Seems like this would solve both problems, but perhaps I'm missing something obvious.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#718

Post by hota_mazi » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 6:10 AM UTC

mmazing wrote: post #513

chrisco255 wrote: post #469

I think it's nuts for a modern democracy to allow for anything but open source software being used to count paper ballots with chain-of-custody records, voter ID validation, biometric markings, and redacted ballots being published on the web for all to view and count independently. Software systems can easily be hacked, and it isn't easy to inspect and tell. A vote is a one time, one sided transaction. It's not as ea…

It's terrible to see some of the disinformation that is out there regarding open source software. Time and time again open source is shown to be the way to go, and you still hear lies about how it's not safe. I can already hear the politicians going on about how "being open source" lets "anyone put their own back door in! BE AFRAID!"

They are not lies. Open source is not safer than closed source, unless you can verify with 100% certainty that the code you saw is the code that's running.

And that's impossible.

People who think open source is the solution to the voting challenge haven't given this problem much thought.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#719

Post by perl4ever » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 6:11 AM UTC

luxuryballs wrote: post #673

perl4ever wrote: post #616

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe you are both mistaken. From what I've read, there are some states/localities that have paper ballots they can check, including swing states like Georgia, where they did audit that exact thing. But then there are other states that do not keep the paper trail, most of which went "red" according to an article I read but did not verify.

Correct, this is all in the dominion voting machine documentation. In some implementations if a ballot goes to adjudication based on some configured error threshold it means the machine operation gets a chance to look and decide what the ballot actually says, at which point it generates a new “corrected” ballot image and discards the “unreadable” one.

I'm not sure if you're under the impression that everywhere uses Dominion machines. I don't think that's the case. As I mentioned in another comment, it appears that in NY they're made by ES&S.

Re: Dominion Voting Systems Sues Rudy Giuliani

#720

Post by jb775 » Tue, Jan 26, 2021, 6:14 AM UTC

luxuryballs wrote: post #668

enkid wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence of any of this? If so, why was this not presented in any of the 60 court cases?

You can look up each case and see what the rulings were, in some cases the lawsuits were dismissed before evidence could be presented. I have seen other people claim this and get buried which confuses me, is it just not ok to talk about the idea that there was election fraud which has been noticed but not confirmed? It should be OK to talk about this, especially in a democracy.

Exactly.

Everyone seems to agree that diversity is a good thing that leads to better overall outcomes, but then some of those people think that doesn't apply to diversity of ideas. Much of America's success can be attributed to being a melting pot of all types of people, and the mix of ideas they brought to the table. This recent trend of extreme censorship and "cancel culture" is bad for everyone long term, even if you agree with it in the short term.