Re:In Praise of Chris Krebs
by gamblor956 on Saturday November 21, 2020 @09:24PM
(#25174368)
(Responding to dead commentator)
I would, except that the GOP redacted all names in the document so that nobody could actually verify whether the affiant was a poll worker, as claime, or even whether they exist.
But since they included the "Center" portion of the polling place and described the parking lot, it limits the locations where the supposed individual could have been a poll worker to literally none of the polling centers in Clark County. (There are no polling centers in Clark County that have both "Center" in the name and also have a narrow parking lot.)
Point 5. Is clearly false and demonstrates that affiant does not know the id requirements for Nevada voting. https://www.clarkcountynv.gov/government/departments/electio.... The DMV interim document includes appointment information but the point of the document is not the appointment date, it is that the DMV has verified on a preliminary basis that the person is who they say they are.
Point 7: this is okay fine since the activities were more than 100 feet from the polling place; the statement conveniently leaves out the part where the GOP also had tables in the parking lots of polling places.
Point 9: this is not how mail-in ballots work. Also, Nevada does not use "pink and white" envelopes for mail-in ballots. The white envelopes are the cover envelope sent to the voter that include the mail-in ballot and the pink reply envelope; the pink envelopes only contain the ballot. The white envelope cannot be reused once it is opened, and it would not fit in the small pink envelope. Thus, in alleging that ballots were placed in "white and pink envelopes" it is clear that the affiant is lying.
Point 12: this is clearly a lie, as noted above. Ballot reply envelopes were pink, not pink and white.
Point 13: this is allowed. Family members, for example, are allowed to drop off ballots for spouses, parents, etc.
I would, except that the GOP redacted all names in the document so that nobody could actually verify whether the affiant was a poll worker, as claime, or even whether they exist.
But since they included the "Center" portion of the polling place and described the parking lot, it limits the locations where the supposed individual could have been a poll worker to literally none of the polling centers in Clark County. (There are no polling centers in Clark County that have both "Center" in the name and also have a narrow parking lot.)
Point 5. Is clearly false and demonstrates that affiant does not know the id requirements for Nevada voting. https://www.clarkcountynv.gov/government/departments/electio.... The DMV interim document includes appointment information but the point of the document is not the appointment date, it is that the DMV has verified on a preliminary basis that the person is who they say they are.
Point 7: this is okay fine since the activities were more than 100 feet from the polling place; the statement conveniently leaves out the part where the GOP also had tables in the parking lots of polling places.
Point 9: this is not how mail-in ballots work. Also, Nevada does not use "pink and white" envelopes for mail-in ballots. The white envelopes are the cover envelope sent to the voter that include the mail-in ballot and the pink reply envelope; the pink envelopes only contain the ballot. The white envelope cannot be reused once it is opened, and it would not fit in the small pink envelope. Thus, in alleging that ballots were placed in "white and pink envelopes" it is clear that the affiant is lying.
Point 12: this is clearly a lie, as noted above. Ballot reply envelopes were pink, not pink and white.
Point 13: this is allowed. Family members, for example, are allowed to drop off ballots for spouses, parents, etc.