,
5 tweets,
2 min read
Read on Twitter
Back in April, we @CoalitionGoodGv wondered why the SOS was lying to the Court in this document when they claimed that the county officials "proof" and approve the voting machine programming GEMS database. 
2/ The truth is that SOS doesn't even give a copy of the database to the counties to look at---much less proof. Note that they claimed that the SOS prepares the database--but truth is that ES&S does.
3/ Now it's clear why they were lying. They wanted the counties to take the heat for ES&S programming "issues" or "defects" and wanted to claim that counties were responsible for accuracy of programming. Although counties were not even given a copy to review!
4/ And the law says that the SOS SHALL "develop, program, build, and review ballots for use by counties and municipalities on direct recording electronic (DRE) voting systems in use in the state." Hmm. But ES&S does. 💵💰💵
5/ The above is in reference to this.
