Fraud Witness: To Testify About Counterfeit Ballots in Georgia

A witness in Georgia will be testifying that there were ballots that were different than the official ones.

He will say that the paper is different and the area where you vote is solid grey instead of transparent like the ones the state sent out. He says there were stacks of pristine ballots that appeared to have been marked for Biden by a machine.

Sidney Powell’s lawsuit points out several anomalies of which this is just one, but a very important one. If what he says is true, these ballots were manufactured not by the state, but by someone who wanted to assure that Biden won the election.

The witness claims the ballots did not look like they had ever been handled and the vote could have been added by a copy machine.

Many of the other witnesses claim they saw votes for President Trump were added to the Biden voter pile. Huge stacks of votes were run through the machine and were 100% for Biden and none for our president. That is a mathematical impossibility. Since Powell and Wood only need to prove their case by the preponderance of the evidence, this should be sufficient to affect the election in Georgia.

On page 35 of Sidney Powell’s filing, the affiant testified about “the use of different paper for ballots, that would constitute fraud stating”:

I noticed that almost all of the ballots I reviewed were for Biden. Many batches went 100% for Biden. I also observed that the watermark on at least 3 ballots were solid gray instead of transparent, leading me to believe the ballot was counterfeit. I challenged this and the Elections Director said it was a legitimate ballot and was due to the use of different printers. Many ballots had markings for Biden only, and no markings on the rest of the ballot.

Another affiant (same witness who gave sworn statement in Wood v. Raffensperger) explained she observed batches of pristine ballots with different texture paper with machine-stamped bubbles that went 98% for Joe Biden:

Most of the ballots had already been handled; they had been written on by people, and the edges were worn. They showed obvious use. However, one batch stood out. It was pristine. There was a difference in the texture of the paper – it was if they were intended for absentee use but had not been used for that purposes. There was a difference in the feel.

These different ballots included a slight depressed pre-fold so they could be easily folded and unfolded for use in the scanning machines. There were no markings on the ballots to show where they had com~ from, or where they had been processed. These stood out.

This is shaping up to be a real knock down drag out fight.

Please Share