The Biggest Lie- Episode 6: 100.00% Accurate- Trust Me
09/13/2022 VANCOUVER, WA.
Several weeks ago, 24 year incumbent auditor Greg Kimsey answered a question posted on Facebook that almost sounded logical. If you didn’t know better, you might actually believe that it was true. It’s so smoothly written, and so carefully crafted to deflect, answer questions never asked, and gaslight its reader- you might actually fall for it. I actually had to read it twice before I realized that every sentence in it was dishonest.
It’s hard to believe. I know. Which is why I’ve been dissecting Greg Kimsey’s Big Lie, sentence by sentence. Word by word. So you can see exactly how those who are actually responsible for the real lies, get away with blaming it all on you.
Sentence number 6.
“The best audit of an election is a recount. During my time in office each recount confirmed the original results. Two recounts in 2021 again demonstrated that our voting system hardware and software was 100.00% accurate.”
Sounds logical, right?
Except that it’s complete nonsense and does absolutely nothing to demonstrate that the hardware and software is 100% accurate. And a recount is simply NOT the best audit of an election. An actual AUDIT is. That’s why they call the guy in charge an Auditor instead of a Recounter.
First, you must understand that a) recounts are NOT forensic audits and b) recounts rely on data provided by the machine itself, to verify that the same machine counted accurately. It’s like asking the student to grade his own essay test.
The recount system used by Mr. Kimsey in Clark County is called a hybrid recount system. If you thought that ALL ballots from ALL affected precincts were ALL manually inspected for the recount, you thought wrong. In fact, only a small percentage of the total number of ballots are actually recounted, and that exact number is actually determined by the machine itself.Once that sample number has been reached by the machine, it then sends only those ballots to humans for manual inspection.
But how exactly does that demonstrate that the hardware and software is 100% accurate? Without understanding or inspecting the hardware and software through a full forensic audit, there is no way that a manual recount can
Guarantee that the ALL the CVRs match ALL the paper ballots received
Certify that there is no code or communication ability between the machines and the outside world
Determine that the software code has not been tampered with, nor contains malicious code.or hidden executable files
determine the source or chain of custody of each ballot received
certify the eligibility or identification of a voter who submitted a ballot
What the Auditor would like you to believe is that he’s conducting a full manual recount. He is not. He is merely performing a replication of counting, using the same machines to count the second time, as he used to count the first time. In a proprietary process designed and conveniently hidden by the machine manufacturer itself.
It’s just more security theater. It is NOT an audit. It’s not even close. And the only reason that Mr. Kimsey is even conducting a recount at all, is because the laws of the State of Washington REQUIRE him to.
The truth is, Washington State law requires an automatic machine recount for any election if the number of votes cast for the closest defeated candidate is less than 2,000 and less than 0.5% of the total number of votes cast for both candidates.
A manual recount is required for narrower margins.
For statewide elections: if the difference in the number of votes cast for the apparent winner and the closest defeated candidate is less than 1,000 votes and less than 0.25% of the total number of votes cast for both candidates, a hybrid manual recount is required.
For non-statewide elections: if the difference in the number of votes cast for the apparent winner and the closest defeated candidates is less than 150 votes and less than 0.25% of the total number of votes cast for both candidates, a hybrid manual recount is required.
A hybrid recount is also automatically required if a requested partial recount changes an election outcome.
These requirements are the same for elections featuring candidates and those regarding statewide ballot measures. They do not apply to state advisory votes or local ballot measures.State law does not specify a deadline for the completion of an automatic recount.
But the law does not require a forensic audit. Ever. So guess whose never conducted one? Ever. Not in 24 years. Think it’s about time you had an Auditor who actually audits your election? So you can know that it’s safe and secure? So you can know that your vote was counted correctly and was not disenfranchised by an ineligible voter’s vote? So you can trust your elections department and your auditor again because he proves each year that he has nothing to hide from you?
Clark County deserves better.
So when you hear Kimsey say,
“The best audit of an election is a recount.”
“During my time in office each recount confirmed the original results. Two recounts in 2021 again demonstrated that our voting system hardware and software was 100.00% accurate.”
Now you know how completely misleading those statements really are.