Drag to reposition your photo

David Treibs

Joined Groups2

5 Members

remove

Politics and Elections

2 Members

Gillespie County Texas

Outreach/Activism

David Treibs

Report this User

Status Update

David Treibs

January 15, 2026 7:40 am

Open letter to the Gillespie CEC: Switching methods to hand count afterwards would presumably be under the authority of the Audit, Sec. 127.201. The term "partial hand count" is not accurate.... View MoreOpen letter to the Gillespie CEC: Switching methods to hand count afterwards would presumably be under the authority of the Audit, Sec. 127.201. The term "partial hand count" is not accurate. Using this method would not be changing the time of our hand count or partially counting, it would be completely changing our method. The SOS told us we're not allowed to count ballots twice, using both hand counting and machines, which means we would be switching from hand counting, to the electronic voting machines. The election results would be determined by the electronic voting machines, not by the Audit afterwards. When we passed our resolution, the majority of us opposed electronic voting machines for various reasons, including that they have zero transparency, and the results cannot be verified, and they played an important role in stealing 2020. Whereas, with hand counting, everything is easily verified, and the entire process is fully transparent. Also, nobody in China or Serbia can hack hand counting. We would also be completely surrendering control of our "audit" to the unelected Jim Riley. Under an audit, the EVBB counts the limited number of ballots Riley chooses. The CEC has no authority over the audit. An important element of our hand counting is that it is precinct based. The audit, on the other hand, is centralized counting, with the loss of the election judge's custody and eye-witness verification that the ballots have not been touched or swapped. --precinct hand counted: counted when received with no intermediaries, and no time gap --counted immediately and under supervision from the time a ballot is received, to the time it is counted. If we do it the next day, we have surrendered custody of the ballots and we have no guarantee something didn't happen to them in the meantime. That is a failure in our process. It is an irretrievable loss of the election judge's chain of custody. On election day, the judge/alternate is not even allowed to leave the room, much less turn them over to someone overnight, or a month (the audit gives a month!!), for safekeeping. Not counting ballots the day they are cast opens the door to Arizona style counting, where they just recount for weeks until they have the results they want. No, I'm not accusing anyone of anything, but we have a responsibility to conduct the most secure election possible. The Texas Constitution says: "the Legislature shall ... make such other regulations as may be necessary to detect and punish fraud and preserve the purity of the ballot box." Changing from counting to auditing surrenders our part of this duty.

View Less

Be the first person to like this.

Recent Photos

View More Photos