>>11495879

>This whole watermarked thing is a LARP.

The version of the theory they could be true involves yellow-dot codes. They had to print and package the correct version of each local ballot for each addressee. How hard is it to record individual hidden marks and addresses they were sent to? It's not impossible that each mail-in ballot was not as anonymous as we usually expect them to be.

My belief in this is only about %15. Validating more than a random sampling by pulling ballots and contacting the voter is impractical. But it's the one version of the theory that is possible.

>>11495910

>Trump is gonna win all evidence and fraud in supreme court

And if he doesn't then he gets to retire in Florida and spend the rest of his days playing golf and watching from a safe distance as Plan Z plays out.

>>11495963

>the offset margins, even text spacing could be used to stored digital data specific to the voter.

This might work. The rest about microdots, isotopes, and encoded nanofibers is technobabble.

>>11495993

> some election officials print their own ballots.

I've read comments to that effect too. This might happen in some cases. But think about the volume involved. The little offices printers at county clerks' offices aren't churning out millions and millions of ballots. The vast majority will be contracted out.

>>11496097

>>11495907 You forgot a minor detail…..the ballots are tracked,

Needs sauce.

>>11496157

>Ballots are tracked was said by Steve P

Listen closely to what he said, "watermarked every ballot with what's called QFS blockchain encryption code." This is nonsense to fool stupid people.

>>11496231