Tag Archives: Dominion Voting Systems

Protecting The Lie

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article about the arrest of Michigan attorney Stefanie Lambert Junttila in Washington, D.C.

The article reports:

Michigan attorney Stefanie Lambert Junttila was arrested in Washington, D.C., on Monday following a court hearing after she gave the alleged “evidence of numerous crimes” to law enforcement containing internal emails from Dominion Voting Systems, AP reported.

Lambert attended a court hearing in Washington, D.C., for a defamation case involving Patrick Byrne, whom she represents. Byrne, the former CEO of Overstock, is being sued by Dominion Voting Systems over his claims of election fraud.

Lambert’s arrest occurred after it was revealed that she had leaked confidential documents from to Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf, who has been actively investigating claims of voter fraud from the 2020 election, according to CNN.

The Gateway Pundit reported earlier that Barry County Sheriff Dar Leaf has made a bold move by sending a letter to U.S. Representative Jim Jordan, urging a congressional investigation into what he alleges is evidence of “foreign interference” in the 2020 election.

Gee. When does the person who leaked the Supreme Court abortion decision get discovered and arrested?

The article notes:

According to former Michigan candidate for Attorney General and constitutional attorney Matt DePerno, Lambert “was arrested on an open bench warrant for failing to appear at a show cause hearing because she refused to get fingerprinted.”

The U.S. Marshals Service later confirmed Lambert’s arrest, linking it to her failure to appear in court for her separate Michigan criminal case, according to CNN.

During the hearing, Lambert admitted to passing materials to Sheriff Leaf, asserting that she was reporting a crime to law enforcement. She has been vocal about her claims, suggesting that foreign nationals interfered with the election.

Dominion’s legal team has suggested that Lambert’s actions might constitute a criminal offense and has requested her removal from the case. A future hearing is set to determine whether Lambert violated a court order by leaking the documents. Additionally, the court has summoned Byrne to appear and respond to questions about the incident.

I wonder if she had leaded something claiming Donald Trump did something awful would she have been arrested?

I Think It’s Time To Go Back To Paper Ballots

Posted on by

On Saturday, The Gateway Pundit posted an article illustrating how easy it is to hack into a Dominion voting machine.

The article reports:

In June 2023, the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Georgia unsealed the 96-page Halderman Report – the Security Analysis of Georgia’s ImageCast X Ballot Marking Devices.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger had been hiding this report from the public for two years.

University of Michigan Professor of Computer Science and Engineering J. Alex Halderman and Security Researcher and Assistant Professor at Auburn University Drew Sringall collaborated on the report where they discovered many exploitable vulnerabilities in the Dominion Voting Systems’ ImageCast X system.

Far-left Judge Amy Totenberg sealed and covered up the results of the investigation of Dominion voting machines in Georgia and sat on the report until this week.

The article notes:

After the release of the report, Professor Halderman tweeted that Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger would not install Dominion’s security patches before the 2024 election.

Now this… on Friday, in a Federal Court In Atlanta, Georgia, J. Alex Halderman was able to HACK A DOMINION VOTING MACHINE to change the tabulation In Front Of U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg in the courtroom!

Halderman USED ONLY A PEN TO CHANGE VOTE TOTALS!

This is part of a long-running lawsuit by election integrity activists set as a bench trial.

The plaintiffs seek to remove what they say are insecure voting machines in Georgia in favor of secure paper ballots.

Does anyone really believe that if an unethical politician had the ability to change votes in an election that he wouldn’t? This totally calls into question the results of the 2020 election. It also provides further proof that if we don’t fix or change the system, the election of 2024 may well be stolen.

We Might Want To Fix This Problem Quickly

Posted on by

On Sunday, Trib 24/7 posted an article about some of the results of the forensic audit of the Colorado election in 2020. The results of the audit are disconcerting to say the least.

The article reports:

A forensic analysis of Mesa County, Colorado’s use of the Dominion Voting Systems’ Democracy Suite Election Management System in the 2020 presidential election found the system was “illegally certified” and “illegally configured” in a way that “vote totals can be easily changed,” according to Mesa County Clerk Tina Peters.

“The public must know that its voting systems are fundamentally flawed, illegal, and inherently unreliable,” Peters wrote in a March 1 letter to the Board of County Commissioners.

In a forensic analysis of the images of the Dominion system drive, cybersecurity experts found the system was found to contain 36 wireless devices and was configured to “allow any computer in the world” to connect to Mesa County’s election system server.

The analysis also found uncertified software that had been illegally installed on the system’s server, Peters noted.

The article included the following:

I am not a computer geek, but this looks to me as if someone has some explaining to do.

Colorado has an interesting political history. The once red state turned blue in 2004. The background on that change can be found in a movie called “Rocky Mountain Heist” found on vimeo. Unfortunately political gamesmanship has been a part of American politics since the country began. It just seems as it has reached new heights in the past twenty years or so.

 

 

I Wonder What They Are Protecting

Posted on by

On Saturday, The Epoch Times reported the following:

Top officials at a U.S. federal cybersecurity agency are urging a judge not to authorize at this time the release of a report that analyzes Dominion Voting Systems equipment in Georgia, arguing doing so could assist hackers trying to “undermine election security.”

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) was recently provided an unredacted copy of the report, which was prepared by J. Alex Halderman, director of the University of Michigan Center for Computer Security and Society.

The report discusses “potential vulnerabilities in Dominion ImageCast X ballot marking devices,” or electronic voting devices, according to the government.

While CISA supports public disclosure of any vulnerabilities and associated mitigation measures with election equipment, allowing the release of the report at this point “increases the risk that malicious actors may be able to exploit any vulnerabilities and threaten election security,” government lawyers said in a Feb. 10 filing in the case.

The case was brought in 2017 by good-government groups and voters who say the lack of paper ballots undermines the voting process.

U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg, an Obama nominee overseeing the case, was urged by CISA to reject attempts to release a redacted version of Halderman’s report for now.

CISA officials want to review the information in the report and help Dominion resolve the vulnerabilities identified before the report is released. They said they weren’t able to provide a date by which they’ll be finished.

Totenberg must weigh the request against the wishes of Georgia Secretary State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican and one of the defendants, who called in late January for the release to happen immediately.

The article notes that the The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) wants to review the issues and help Dominion resolve those issues. They have stated that they are not able to say how long it will take to complete the work.

How about we release the report and fix the problems before the mid-term elections?

 

Sunlight Is Always A Good Thing

Posted on by

Yesterday Just the News reported that U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg is considering whether to release a sealed report by a computer security expert who reviewed Dominion Voting Systems equipment after Georgia’s top election official and its governor urged action. The report would be released with redactions, but it still needs to be released.

The article reports:

The report was conducted by University of Michigan computer security expert J. Alex Halderman and was filed last summer under seal in a federal court case that alleges hackers had “the capability” and “easy access” to voting machines in Georgia, according to the Epoch Times.

Little has been released in public about the report though the Atlanta Constitution-Journal has reported it found hackers could change votes if they penetrated the machines.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a defendant in the lawsuit, announced last week he now supports the public release of the report to dispel “misleading media articles about the Dominion voting equipment used in Georgia.”

“The public deserves to know the context of J. Alex Halderman’s claims and his testimony regarding the 2020 election,” Raffensperger said.

The article concludes:

Dominion CEO John Poulosi said the report did not consider all “procedural and technical safeguards” in the machines but his firm supports any transparency that will give voters confidence in election counting.

“Dominion supports all efforts to bring real facts and evidence forward to defend the integrity of our machines and the credibility of Georgia’s elections,” Poulosi said in a statement released by Raffensperger’s office.

Stay tuned.

Computers Do What They Are Programmed To Do

Posted on by

The Epoch Times posted an article yesterday (updated today) about the Dominion Voting Systems and how they impacted the 2020 presidential election. This information needs to go viral. It impacts all Americans who voted with the understanding that their vote would count.

The article reports:

A man who’s made a living developing fraud detection algorithms has discovered a curious phenomenon: Counties that started using Dominion Voting Systems machines have on average moved by 2 to 3 points to the Democrat presidential candidate from the Republican compared to counties that didn’t adopt the machines.

The difference persisted even after he controlled for a number of factors, including county population and various demographic characteristics.

“I recommend we audit the machines,” he concluded.

The man is Ben Turner, who used to be the chief actuary at Texas Mutual Workers’ Compensation Insurance. He now runs Fraud Spotters, a consultancy specializing in detecting insurance fraud.

The article explains the method he used to investigate the impact of the Dominion machines:

He looked at how, county-by-county, election results changed between the 2008 and 2020 presidential races, measuring whether adoption of Dominion would have any overall effect on the changes. He picked the 2008 election because, at the time, only New York State had widely adopted Dominion, according to data from VerifiedVoting.Org. He excluded New York from the analysis, leaving him 657 counties that have adopted Dominion and 2,388 that have not as of 2020.

He found that Dominion use was associated with a 1.55 percentage point decrease in the Republican vote and a 1.55 percentage point increase in the Democratic vote in the presidential race.

He controlled for the differences in county population, the number of votes cast, urban/rural population split, population growth, international immigration rate, low-education population, high “natural amenity” areas, high “creative class” population, and manufacturing dependency.

Later, he added seven more control factors to the analysis, including race, voter preference, and population. Not only did the “Dominion effect” persist, but the probability of his results being a fluke decreased.

The effect somewhat decreased, to a 2.84-point shift, when he also controlled for age.

The probability that the results occurred by chance or due to some unobserved factor was about 1 in 1,000, the analysis showed.

In his estimation, the results were significant enough to potentially flip elections in at least four states. In Georgia, only about 0.24 percent of votes would need to be shifted from one candidate to the other for the state to flip. In Arizona, only one county—the populous Maricopa County—uses Dominion, but the margin there is so thin that shifting 0.51 percent of Maricopa’s votes could flip the state. In Wisconsin, 2.05 percent of votes in counties using Dominion would need to be shifted; in Nevada, 2.5 percent.

This is not an accident. Someone knew when they introduced these machines into the voting process what would happen. It is time for some really good research people to get to the root of where the idea to use these machines came from. Jail sentences should follow.

Computer Geeks Will Understand This

Posted on by

On November 19th, The Central City News in Central, Louisiana, posted an article titled, “How Election Was Stolen.”

The article is a detailed account of how the election fraud via computer worked on election night. I have posted some of the highlights, but please follow the link above to read the entire article.

The article reports:

Election Day in the United States, held this year on Tuesday, Nov. 3, 2020, was really a series of 51 separate elections — one in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The vote total in each determines how the electoral votes of that state or district will be cast in the Electoral College on Dec. 14, 2020.

Thirty of those states and more than 2,000 counties have something in common. The citizens of those areas vote on voting machines provided by Dominion Voting Systems with software from Smartmatic Vote Counting System.

While supporters of President Trump cast about for evidence of vote fraud in the form of unsigned ballots, mishandled paper ballots, and evidence of “retail” vote fraud, proof of massive computer-based vote fraud is right  before the nation’s eyes. It is going unnoticed in this hyper-partisan atmosphere.

Ironically, The New York Times, a vocal critic of the President, has recorded the fraud for all times, even though they have not reported it.

While the mainstream media has crowned former Vice President Joe Biden as “President-elect,” the facts on the ground are quite different, at least in two swing states that have been called for Vice President Biden

— Georgia and Pennsylvania.

The article explains:

Unraveling this mystery begins with The New York Times.  After polls closed on Election Day, The Times begin to report the results hour after hour. The coding for that data is still online, and we have downloaded it in case it is taken down.

The data from The Times shows the time, expressed as UTC, or Universal time, which is Greenwich mean time in England.

It also shows the totals for Trump and Biden, Trump’s lead, and then new votes for Trump and Biden as each change in the results was uploaded. Then it shows something very significant: The increase or decease in the lead for Trump after the new dump of votes occurred.  Therein lies this story.

Late on Wednesday, Nov. 4, at precisely 16:35 UTC, The New York Times reported President Trump was leading in Georgia by 103,997 votes.  However, a new group of votes was being dumped.  That one dump reduced Trump’s lead by 18,563 votes. Remember than number.

Three hours later, another dump occurred. This one reduced Trump’s lead by 4,656 votes. Remember that number.  Thirty minutes later, another dump reduced Trump’s lead by 4,685 votes. An hour and a half later, another dump reduced Trump’s lead by 9,323 votes. An hour and a half later, another dump reduced Trump’s lead by 9,509 votes.

Are you beginning to see a pattern?

The pattern is that all the dumps were multiples of 4,800.

But it didn’t end there!

An hour and 26 minutes later, another dump reduced Trump’s lead by 9,501 votes. At that point, Trump’s lead had been reduced to about 48,000 votes.

Then an hour and 8 minutes later, a vote dump reduced Trump’s lead by 9,606 votes.

An hour and 34 minutes later, a vote dump reduced Trump’s lead by 4,827 votes.

The article concludes:

Of course, the statistical possibility of Biden picking up multiples of 4,800 votes 16 times during this four-day period would be firmly in the impossible range.  But it happened.

How did it happen? There is no possible explanation except vote fraud — fraud by manipulation of computer programs.

This is all the more obvious in view of the fact the average of 4,800 or multiples thereof not only happened by adding votes to Biden but also by subtracting votes from Trump.  The computer had to be programmed to produce net votes for Biden without being obvious.  And they would have succeeded, if The New York Times had not kept such timely records and if somebody had not done some calculations.

The fraud in Georgia is all the more significant when one considers that exactly the same thing happened in Pennsylvania, except that the computer was programmed to add 6,000 votes at a time instead of 4,800.

In both states, the “votes” counted were not the votes of real people.  They were simply added digitally, which a complete recount of both states would detect.

We need to find the people behind the computer manipulations and they need to spend some serious time in jail.

The Foxes Are Guarding The Hen-house Again

Posted on by

Yesterday The Epoch Times posted an article about a recent statement made about the integrity of the 2020 presidential election. Based on what I have seen, the statement made no sense. The article cleared up some of my confusion.

The article reports:

After allegations emerged that called into questioned the integrity of voting machines produced by Dominion Voting Systems, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)—part of the Department of Homeland Security—issued a statement on Nov. 12 disputing the allegations, saying “the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.”

What the agency failed to disclose, however, is that Dominion Voting Systems is a member of CISA’s Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council, one of two entities that authored the statement put out by CISA.

Should we have expected them to say anything different?

The article continues:

In addition, Smartmatic, a separate voting machine company that has been the subject of additional concerns, is also a member.

The agency did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether Dominion and Smartmatic had input or were otherwise involved in CISA’s Nov. 12 statement.

The joint statement on the integrity of the Nov. 3 election was issued by the Executive Committee of the Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council (GCC), an Executive Committee representing a coalition of certain state & local government officials and government agencies, and the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC), a coalition primarily composed of voting system manufacturers that also includes Democracy Works, an organization which promotes the use of technology to increase voter participation.

Does increased voter participation only include living people? Does it only include voters who actually live in the state in which they are voting?

The article includes the following:

On Nov. 12, this publication published an article detailing a number of concerns raised about the integrity of Dominion Voting Systems in a sworn Aug. 24 declaration from Harri Hursti, a poll watcher and acknowledged expert on electronic voting security.

Hursti’s observations were made during the June 9 statewide primary election in Georgia and the runoff elections on Aug. 11, 2020, and centered primarily, although not exclusively, around the Dominion systems and equipment.

Hursti summarized his findings as follows:

    1. “The scanner and tabulation software settings being employed to determine which votes to count on hand marked paper ballots are likely causing clearly intentioned votes not to be counted”
    2. “The voting system is being operated in Fulton County in a manner that escalates the security risk to an extreme level.”
    3. “Voters are not reviewing their BMD [Ballot Marking Devices] printed ballots, which causes BMD generated results to be un-auditable due to the untrustworthy audit trail.”

As part of the article, we reached out to Dominion Voting Systems for comment on Nov. 11 about the allegations contained in Hursti’s sworn statement, to which the company did not respond. Our article was published on the morning of Nov. 12. That afternoon CISA published its statement denying any problems with the voting systems.

Please follow the link above to read the entire article. It illustrates the idea of the foxes being in charge of security in the hen-house.