The counter argument to Dr. Pieczenik claims of the ballots printed with watermarks blockchain encryption

I hope Dr Steve is right

[link to www.brighteon.com (secure)]

Your link is not addressing the point that I'm making

The ballots are not printed locally

[link to www.brighteon.com (secure)]

Each State contracts a certified Printer to print secured ballots who then orders the specific security embedded paper stock from a specialty paper producer of which there are few in the US.

They do not need the process with all the states because they already know the states most probable to provide the swing votes that determine the final results.

Less than 8 state fit this criteria and they already have their preferred printers wo istorically has been used in the past.

I think less than 5 Specialty Paper producers make the Security embedded Paper stock which can include UV threads, watermarks, speckles,etc...on top of the State's requested security requirements.

The embedded features are usually custom paper runs anyway to provide the unique requirements of the printer's customer.

The state has no idea who is producing the paper. They are buying security features from the printer that includes embedded and printed security features offered in their catalog.

The Printed security features added by the printers are inconsequential to the sting operation.

DHS only needs to conscript 5 papers producers and the 5-10 certified Ballot printers are all covered by the venture.

It is possible, but is it probable?


.