I’m just going to throw this out here in case election lawyers are looking for exhibits: I have a two month old outstanding public records request with the GA SoS office, they admit there are records, but say they’re “under review” and keep not producing them.
They are clearly in violation of GA ORR Act 50-18-71 (b)(1)(A): “Agencies shall produce for inspection all records responsive to a request within a reasonable amount of time not to exceed three business days of receipt of a request”.
Receipt was Aug 20 and at that time they acknowledged there were responsive records. It’s now 2 months later and all they will say is: “Your documents are currently under review.”

The documents requested? Correspondence relating to the Jul 29 letter from the USPS to the GA SOS.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh

Keep Current with John Panzer

John Panzer Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!


Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @jpanzer

16 Oct
Hi @SenFeinstein! I wanted to call to share my views about your literal embrace of Lindsay Graham yesterday. It seems that a lot of other people have things to say, too — voicemail is full in every one of your local offices and your DC office line is continuously busy.
So I’m going to just share them here in public. Buckle up.

This was the most tone-deaf, poorly timed, badly thought out gesture ever. It’s convinced me that we need new leadership on Judiciary. I also believe that you should retire and make room for a newly appointed Senator
...who will fight for constituents and be in sync with the party when the chips are down and a key election is on the line. I realize you are not up for re election this year or next time around, but Lindsey _is_ — and we have a real shot at winning his seat.
Read 4 tweets
21 Sep
@bitchy_meats "Respiratory droplets" is what's known as a "term of art", meaning, it has implications that go beyond what we normal folk would think. It has a 100 year history in public health, and if you say "respiratory droplets" public health officials hear "not spread through air".
@bitchy_meats By which they mean, not spread by air currents, not hanging in the air for long periods of time, but in the form of droplets that quickly (a few seconds) fall to the ground, unless you're REALLY unlucky and get sneezed on.
@bitchy_meats The new guidance made it clear that being sneezed on, or picking up droplets from surfaces after they fall, isn't the current major mode of transmission. It's most likely from breathing in significant quantities of aerosolized (floating) tiny droplets < 100um.
Read 5 tweets
21 Sep
In the face of official deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. The CDC published, then pulled, guidance that the coronavirus commonly spreads via aerosols. (Which is absolutely supported by the science.)

Left: Friday's update
Right: Today's coverup ImageImage
Friday's change was hailed among researchers as a major step forward in figuring out _effective responses_ to the pandemic.

Monday's cover-up is, therefore, a major step backwards. It's unconscionable. It's dangerous. And it's going to get (more) people killed.
Here's the web page in question. Sadly, web.archive.org didn't scrape the Friday update (somebody really needs to crank up the scrape rate for CDC sites to 2x/day).


Right now it contains a banner saying the Friday update was "posted in error".🙄
Read 5 tweets
20 Sep
So this shows the kinds of clear votes that the GA scanners fail to “see”, and also, fail to flag as ambiguous, so they’re lost.

(It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you, it’s what you know that ain’t so.)
How many real voters make marks like these? We don’t know, because they don’t do human audits in GA! (By SOS regs, only votes the _machine_ days are ambiguous can be human-reviewed.)
But we can make informed guesses: New voters unfamiliar with the systems. Voters rushed or hurried because they’re filling out a provisional ballot on a side table. Voters whose first language is not English. Voters who lack good hand/eye coordination to fill in tiny bubbles.
Read 4 tweets
18 Sep
Ah. So in 2018, ahead of midterms, malware on at least 2 election registration systems existed that was capable of demographic-targeted erasure of voter records. (Found in FL.)
So this is the primary threat I’ve been concerned about since 2016 in terms of electronic hacking. These are soft targets, offices use commercial software and communicate w Internet etc., and it would be surprising if this wasn’t attempted by somebody, really.
Voters can help defend themselves against this though - by checking their registration regularly, taking screenshots and keeping records, voting early and / or by mail, and fixing any registration issues that they do detect. This isn’t undetectable — if we’re vigilant.
Read 4 tweets
14 Sep
“Overall, the focus of my organization – and most of Facebook – was on large-scale problems, an approach which fixated us on spam,” she said. “The civic aspect was discounted because of its small volume, its disproportionate impact ignored.”
The memo (excerpts) read like an employee well aware of the dangers and trying to work as hard as possible to hold back the tide -- but being chronically de-prioritized for years.
This is why I quit Facebook: They clearly DO NOT PRIORITIZE democracy. It's not that they cannot deal with the obvious inauthentic behavior on their platform -- or even that the front line workers aren't working themselves to death trying to stop it -- it's that executives have
Read 5 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!