Election Day

• Election Night Reporting: 373,439
• Cast Vote Records: 373,439
• Ballot Images: 373,439

Recount

• Election Night Reporting: 373,370
• Cast Vote Records: (not available)
• Ballot Images: 373,367

Aberrations

• Double counted ballots in original count: 5
• Deleted ballots not appearing in recount: 237
• New Ballots not appearing in original: 169

Original Count Overview

In the original count, there were only 5 instances of double counted ballots, which were most likely a result of a paper jam.

Additionally, a total of 237 ballots that were present in the original count were not found in the recount.

Recount Overview

In the recount, there was an addition of 169 ballots that weren't included in the original count. Interestingly, the vast majority of these newly added ballots were absentee ballots. Among this new batch, several ballots stood out due to their unusual characteristics, which we will explore in further detail in the upcoming discussion. 

Senator Only Votes

In DeKalb County, a pattern similar to what was observed in Cherokee, Fulton, Paulding, and other counties emerged with the presence of 'senator-only' test ballots. This particular batch consisted of 13 consecutive ballots, each uniquely marked only for the second senatorial choice and devoid of votes in other candidates or races. The identical nature of these ballots across multiple counties is noteworthy, highlighting a recurring trend in the ballot marking patterns.

The addition of these Jorgensen ballots in DeKalb County was notable for their organization; they were all grouped together in the same tabulator and batch. This specific placement and grouping further support the theory that these ballots were, in fact, test ballots, intentionally added together during the recount process. The consistency in how these ballots were handled aligns with the observed patterns of ballot addition in other counties, adding credibility to the hypothesis of their test nature.

Jorgensen/Senate Test Ballots

A recurring theme among counties that included senatorial test ballots is the addition of a group of Jo Jorgensen ballots, often arranged in sequential order. DeKalb County followed this trend, with 9 new votes for Jo Jorgensen being added to the recount data. This consistent pattern across various counties of introducing specific Jorgensen ballots into the recount is notable and merits further examination.

Presidential Only Recount Ballots

A significant addition of 106 new ballots was noted, each distinctly marked with the word 'Recount' was added to the recount. This pattern echoes similar occurrences in Bacon and Bartow counties, where new presidential ballots were introduced, presumably to have the ballot counts match the original count more closely.

These added ballots primarily focused on the presidential vote, as evidenced by the fingerprint 'BLA' denoting blank entries in other contests. Votes for the presidential candidates were indicated by the codes 'Don' for Donald Trump and 'Jos' for Joseph Biden. The deliberate labeling of these ballots with 'Recount' by an attentive worker was instrumental in highlighting these unique additions, enhancing clarity and transparency in the recount process.

The practice observed in the recount process, where entire batches of ballots were recreated and labeled as 'recount' ballots, raises significant compliance issues with Georgia state laws regarding the duplication of ballots. This approach suggests a deliberate strategy to ensure that the recount totals matched the original count, necessitating the introduction of these new ballots.

The act of marking ballots with ‘recount’ fundamentally contradicts the standard procedures for legal ballot duplication, thereby invalidating other explanations that might classify these ballots as legally duplicated. This deviation from the norm necessitates a thorough investigation to understand why a substantial number of original ballots were replaced with these newly created ones in the recount.

Such actions bring into question the integrity of the recount process and the motivations for these adjustments. The decision to use 'recount' ballots in place of the original ones, and the implications of this choice, are critical issues that warrant close examination.