The Fight for Election Integrity Continues -- Audits, Criminal Investigations, Legislative Reform

originally posted by: vkey08

originally posted by: IndieA
From the horse's mouth, an outline of the DHS's involvement in our elections.

www.dhs.gov...

Let me get this straight.

You want election security, but only when it's provided by your approved people? Am I getting this right?

The Department of Homeland Security is exactly the agency that should be handling this, it falls under their operating protocols.

that's like calling EVERY FBI agent a lying crook. When in fact most are just hard working people that want to go home alive at the end of the night.

The problem is: "every FBI agent" isn't who will be watching. It will be whichever agent is assigned. Or a small group of assigned agents.

Don't need the whole agency to be corrupt. You just need the person who's setting up the assignments, and then a small number of people for them to assign.

originally posted by: IndieA

People are not to have more than 2 non-family ballots, but there is no mechanism is the law for enforcement. We were told that we may see people with small stacks of mail in ballots to be desposited.

I don't think this form of fraud had any real impact on the 2020 election. It may have happened sometimes, but it's not the big issue. A losing candidate would only flip to a winner in an extremely narrow election.

You'd have to prove each case individually, and then at least one person on the conservative side would do it too, and then it will keep going back and forth. No matter who wins, the other side can say they lost unfairly.

We can't refuse to honor results over stuff like this.

What is too dangerous to overlook is when one person can flip 100,000 votes, or add 100,000. Then we'd have to ask ourselves : why are we even bothering to have a vote?

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

We can't refuse to honor results over stuff like this.

You've brought up a good points and I don't necessarily disagree..
But maybe the cheaters are okay with mules being caught and prosecuted as long as the illegal votes are counted. I don't think there's any way to single them out after the fact and un-count them.

With public real-time updates to the count, flipping votes isn't as easy to hide.... but are easier to correct/reverse if caught. Or at least declare the results invalid.

Whatever they got away with in 2020, it won't be as easy in the future because folks know better what to watch for. And because laws and procedures have been changed. It doesn't mean they'll stop trying just that they'll have to do better.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: vkey08

originally posted by: IndieA
From the horse's mouth, an outline of the DHS's involvement in our elections.

www.dhs.gov...

Let me get this straight.

You want election security, but only when it's provided by your approved people? Am I getting this right?

The Department of Homeland Security is exactly the agency that should be handling this, it falls under their operating protocols.

that's like calling EVERY FBI agent a lying crook. When in fact most are just hard working people that want to go home alive at the end of the night.

The problem is: "every FBI agent" isn't who will be watching. It will be whichever agent is assigned. Or a small group of assigned agents.

Don't need the whole agency to be corrupt. You just need the person who's setting up the assignments, and then a small number of people for them to assign.

originally posted by: IndieA

People are not to have more than 2 non-family ballots, but there is no mechanism is the law for enforcement. We were told that we may see people with small stacks of mail in ballots to be desposited.

I don't think this form of fraud had any real impact on the 2020 election. It may have happened sometimes, but it's not the big issue. A losing candidate would only flip to a winner in an extremely narrow election.

You'd have to prove each case individually, and then at least one person on the conservative side would do it too, and then it will keep going back and forth. No matter who wins, the other side can say they lost unfairly.

We can't refuse to honor results over stuff like this.

What is too dangerous to overlook is when one person can flip 100,000 votes, or add 100,000. Then we'd have to ask ourselves : why are we even bothering to have a vote?

It occurred to me today, that if someone had 50 mail in ballots they wanted to vote, they don't have to use the drop boxes, they could just use 50 stamps and any mailbox.

But I have to agree with you that massive and sophisticated election fraud would go beyond ballot stuffing, but would also likely be multifaceted, so ballot stuffing could be a small component, or at least a consideration.

Oh! If that's what you mean, then yeah: why not mail them in?


People keep bringing up the "neighbor" they know who got 10 ballots mailed to them. If someone is printing their own ballots, that wouldn't happen. Why would you ever mail them out to anyone's address? You've already got them in hand.

But if you're talking about ballots being mailed back in to the election office, yeah. Why not?

They wouldn't send them all via mail, because when you're cheating on an election, you have to make sure and cheat by the right amount. Just enough to get over the top. (People can believe the underdog winning by a narrow margin. Less likely to believe it if they win by a landslide.)

The late evening "2000 mules" stuff would start once votes have started to be counted, and they actually have reliable data to tell them how many will be needed.



So like: if your polling data says Biden is going to lose by 200,000 votes in the state, give or take 100,000, then maybe you go ahead and mail 100,000 ballots in the normal way (since that's the minimum you'll need). But you print 300,000 total, just to be sure and then on election night you wait to get better data, and hopefully zero it in a bit, and use however many you still need to get over the top. Then burn the rest.

a reply to: IndieA

It occurred to me today, that if someone had 50 mail in ballots they wanted to vote, they don't have to use the drop boxes, they could just use 50 stamps and any mailbox.

I've wondered about that once or twice. Which then made me wonder if potential penalties might be more severe for mail fraud than election fraud.

I never checked it out further tho...

I'm back with some more info.

First off, I want to say that the election officials that I have encountered locally, seem like honest hard-working people who are doing their best to do their jobs. They take their responsibilities seriously and are forced to be accountable to the voters here.

Secondly, my county and my state of Florida, has much more secure laws, procedures, and adherence to those laws and proceedures, than say states like Georgia and Arizona. I can conclude that it would be much easier to commit massive election fraud in states like Georgia or Arizona, and leave much less of a trail, than it would to do the same in Florida. Election security is tight here, compared to other states.

Most people don't suspect 2020 election fraud in Florida, and I didn't at first, but two things got me thinking that it might have occurred here. First, If a percentage of the 81 million votes were added to flip the election, it's most likely that these added votes would have to be spread out between all 50 states, or at least most of them so to have an even, uniform distribution which would be less suspicious, and because turnouts of over 100% wouldn't make sense. So fraud likely occured in every state, or at least most states including Florida. The other thing is that my county had a high voter turnout of over 80%. When turnouts exceed average turnouts significantly, it's an indication of ballot stuffing. If you had a 100% turnout, but knew people that didn't vote, you would know that something was wrong, just as you would if a canvass reported that only 70% of people said that they voted.

One thing that we can do is check to see if our votes were counted. Many states have websites you can go to see if your vote was counted. People who didn't vote should check to see if there is a record of them voting or not, and if there is, they should report it to there election supervisor. Because if ballot stuffing is happening, inactive voter's names and addresses can be used to cast illegal votes. Canvassing can help detect stolen votes and significant election fraud...

originally posted by: IndieA

One thing that we can do is check to see if our votes were counted. Many states have websites you can go to see if your vote was counted. People who didn't vote should check to see if there is a record of them voting or not, and if there is, they should report it to there election supervisor. Because if ballot stuffing is happening, inactive voter's names and addresses can be used to cast illegal votes. Canvassing can help detect stolen votes and significant election fraud...

It might also be a good idea to see if you "voted twice", but only remember voting once.

With mail in votes, if two ballots from the same person come in, only the first to arrive gets counted.

If stolen data were used to make fake ballots for a group of registered republican voters, and then mailed in at the earliest possible time, that would fully flip votes from R to D.

All without even changing the total number of registered voters.

(However, if this had been done, then Trump wouldn't have been leading early on election night, unless the early mail in votes still hadn't been counted yet. )

I took in a lot of information today and I'm still processing it.

I am now 100% qualified to work my county's elections as either a equipment inspector poll worker or a deputy poll worker. I'm cross-trained. I will actually get paid for my training too, which was a nice surprise.

I haven't eaten yet today. Let me do that and process some more, and I'll be back to share more information later.

I still need to get into the "secure network" that is used, DHS involvement, and my take away from speaking directly with my Election Supervisor.

Here's a little tidbit. Regarding nursing homes, my county uses supervised voting assistance. An election worker from each party can assist the elderly with voting, however this practice was not used in 2020, due to covid. They admitted that freely and said that they are back to doing the supervised voting. They also said that no covid measures are in place this year and they are not planning on providing any PPE.

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

originally posted by: IndieA

One thing that we can do is check to see if our votes were counted. Many states have websites you can go to see if your vote was counted. People who didn't vote should check to see if there is a record of them voting or not, and if there is, they should report it to there election supervisor. Because if ballot stuffing is happening, inactive voter's names and addresses can be used to cast illegal votes. Canvassing can help detect stolen votes and significant election fraud...

It might also be a good idea to see if you "voted twice", but only remember voting once.

With mail in votes, if two ballots from the same person come in, only the first to arrive gets counted.

If stolen data were used to make fake ballots for a group of registered republican voters, and then mailed in at the earliest possible time, that would fully flip votes from R to D.

All without even changing the total number of registered voters.

(However, if this had been done, then Trump wouldn't have been leading early on election night, unless the early mail in votes still hadn't been counted yet. )

He likely wouldn't be leading by as much, but he could still be leading.

Like I said, I think this level of sophistication is multifaceted. Remember the spikes after the election end are what moved Biden into a winning position.

Disclaimer: At no point did I agree, was told, or even asked, not to share any of this information. I'm sharing this information freely as it was shared with me and my classes.

Having suspected government involvement with massive election fraud and the cover-up of it, along with Jovan Pulitzer's assertions that the DHS was activated in 2016 to closely watch elections with the help of Sheriff's departments, I sought to investigate these things at a local level through my election poll worker training classes and my election officials.

During my training, I was informed that our election tally machines transmitted their results at the end of election day over a "secure network", and that this network does not touch the internet. Of course, I had to investigate this as well.

As far as Sheriff and DHS involvement, this is what I found out:

Sheriffs are much more concerned about their day to day jobs of saving lives and fighting serious and violent crimes. Election fraud seems to be towards the bottom of their list of concerns, especially since its elections are few and far between.
I did learn that our new Sheriff's department has an intelligence center complete with federal assets, and that was pretty cool to tour. See my I saw Big Brother post for more information on that. When I asked the head of intelligence if they had any involvement with securing our election network, he had no idea what I was talking about and elections seemed of little concern to him. He did say that they can assist during elections by identifying and helping respond to threats that they encounter, or get posted to social media.

After the intelligence center tour, the election supervisor for my county, came up to me and said that the DHS is more involved with securing our network and that she would have her security guy answer any questions I had. She also said, that she wished I had taken a tour of the election facility when I had a chance. I tried, but was too late.

I asked her if she had to have security clearance to run elections, and she said no, she was an elected official and that she works for the voters. She mentioned that Sheriffs are also elected officials, and because of that, they technically don't even need to be law enforcement officers.
How scary to think that if we were to lose control of our elections to corrupt politicians, deep-state government, and or special interests to the point of people being promised elected positions, that these positions would include our sheriffs.

To be continued

A big positive move in the state of Wisconsin. No more dropboxes dropboxes for the mules to fill.

truthsocial.com...

a reply to: IndieA

You've shared so much valuable information, and I find it all very interesting, and very much appreciated.

But I also find myself pondering all that can be misused and abused. There's so much that can go wrong. So much room for abuse, but also the law of unintended and unforeseen consequences.

It's a lot to think about.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: IndieA

I've wondered about that once or twice. Which then made me wonder if potential penalties might be more severe for mail fraud than election fraud.

Of course they are... haven't you seen 'The Firm'?

ETA: this is the best clip I could find:

a reply to: tanstaafl

I saw The Firm when it came out... that's probably where I got the idea!

Thanks for posting the link.

From Rasmussen:< br />

Fifty percent (50%) of voters think it is at least somewhat likely there will be widespread cheating that will affect the outcome of this fall’s congressional elections, including 24% who say it’s Very Likely. Forty-one percent (41%) don’t believe cheating is likely to affect the November midterms, including 22% who say it’s Not At All Likely.

I'm actually surprised at these numbers. Apparently more people think that cheating affected the 2020 elections than think cheating will affect the upcoming election.

Maybe folks think previous problems were fixed? That's the only thing that makes sense to me...

originally posted by: Boadicea
From Rasmussen:< br />

Fifty percent (50%) of voters think it is at least somewhat likely there will be widespread cheating that will affect the outcome of this fall’s congressional elections, including 24% who say it’s Very Likely. Forty-one percent (41%) don’t believe cheating is likely to affect the November midterms, including 22% who say it’s Not At All Likely.

I'm actually surprised at these numbers. Apparently more people think that cheating affected the 2020 elections than think cheating will affect the upcoming election.

Maybe folks think previous problems were fixed? That's the only thing that makes sense to me...

There's much less riding on the mid-terms in the grand scheme of things. Here we are expecting a 30% turnout, compared to the over 80% turnout we had in the 2020 election.

I still can't help but wonder what percentage of that over 80% was stolen votes.

I know at least a couple of people who didn't vote here, I'm going to ask them to check online to see if the county received a vote from them, or not.

Right now I'm estimating that if there were stolen votes, it could be as high as 5% or more.

5% of the remaining 30% is one in six.
Is it possible that one in six people who didn't vote, had votes cast for them anyway?

a reply to: IndieA

There's much less riding on the mid-terms in the grand scheme of things.

Good point. Emotions are running high here and I'm expecting a pretty high turnout for the midterms, so I'm probably looking at the rest of the country through my own confirmation bias.

Folks are angry -- very angry -- about many things, and Kari is keeping them fired up!

a reply to: IndieA

Congress controls the funding of departments, committees, subsidies to big media, and can now have civilians indicted for refusing to testify. (Thankyou Steve Bannon for your sacrifice.) In some ways, Congress is more important than the Presidency and the Supreme Court for obtaining immediate results and information.

originally posted by: Boadicea
a reply to: IndieA

You've shared so much valuable information, and I find it all very interesting, and very much appreciated.

But I also find myself pondering all that can be misused and abused. There's so much that can go wrong. So much room for abuse, but also the law of unintended and unforeseen consequences.

It's a lot to think about.

It is a lot to think about. Elections are extremely complex systems that are ripe for cheating, malfeasance, and human error, so multiple safe guards need to be in place and practiced to help secure them and keep them fair. My head has been spinning. I'll get into some of it, so your's will likely be spinning too.

Back to my reporting:

My second class involved with learning how to set-up and operate the ES&S election equipment, but "ES&S" wasn't mentioned by name, except by me asking a question, because my research told me that these were ES&S machines ahead of time. ES&S is also not mentioned in any of the documention that I received, I just checked. Instead each machine is referred to by name. It was difficult to get information about this system out side of class, although I didn't look that hard, I did find this ES&S proposal to Michigan from around 2007 if anyone is interested. There's a lot here.

www.google.com...://www.michigan.gov/documents/sos/ESSBid_549580_7.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjqjeT8kuj4AhVVTDABHaZSD98QFnoECAMQAg&usg=AOvVa w2ySJqKlAeqM3x4BiAUNLQ8

After 3-1/2 hours of training, I stepped out to use the restroom while a few people worked at clearing a ballot paper jam. (More on that soon)
When I got back to class the security person was talking about how the "secure network" wasn't connected to the internet.

Our interaction went as follows:

Me: Sorry I missed the first part of your presentation. Can you explain how the results are transferred again.
Security guy: At the end of the day the tally machines use a secure network, that doesn't touch the internet, and uses encryption to transfer the results.
Me: What's the network?
Security guy: Verizon Private Cloud. And it's totally secure, we use encryption, can monitor the network, and only I have access to it. ( I'm a little foggy on if he said all these things or not, at this point he seemed a little annoyed with me)
Me: Does the DHS help secure this network?
SG: No
Me: Do they have access to it?
SG: No. No one has access to it.
Me: Verizon has access to it.
SG: Well that's kinda a given that your provider would have access to your network. (Seemingly unhappy with me)
Me: So what involvement does the DHS play.
SG: We partner with the DHS and CISPA.
At this point I felt like I probably wasn't going to get much further.

I left something out though. At one point the security guy admitted that they were using the internet sometime up until 2017, and that it was common practice at the time.

He also explained their other safe guards in detail. One thing that they do, which I liked is that the tally machines also print out their results 3 times, and one of these printouts will be posted inside of a glass door or window for voters to see. The other copies are secured and go to two different places. He also mentioned the use of chain of custody documents and seals, ballot and electronic data retention, audit trails, and the use of internal audits.

Although, I only got a look at the election day polling location equipment, I have a general idea of the rest of the system. Our check-in devices are on Verizon Jetpack myfi hotspot networks, connected to each other, and connected to home base. I'm not sure if they are connected to the tally machines or if those use the same network, or not. The check-in devices are generally considered less of a security risk since they are not supposed to touch the election results, however having access to this check-in information in real time, would tell you who has voted and who hasn't. It just wouldn't tell you how they voted, but their party affiliation might give you a good idea.

That concludes the network and DHS involvement side of things. Sorry I couldn't learn more about what the DHS partnership looks like, but I'm pretty sure any juicy information about that is kept secret from us. As far as CISPA goes, well we all know they tried to convince us, and wanted us to blindly believe that the 2020 election was the most secure ever. Maybe there's some truth to that statement after all, especially if they were involved with manipulating or "fortifying" the results. With the development of technology, it's easy to believe that they could have had better overall intelligence and more control of the entire election system, or at least large parts of it, than even before. A power that could be considered priceless.

I'll be back to talk a little more about how my county's election system is set up to work, and some issues regarding it, including the possibility of completely lossing a person's vote. Keep in mind that all systems have their pros and cons, while also being able to be made more or less secure.

Here's an affidavit from an auditor regarding the venerabilities of the DS-200 tally machines, at least back in 2016:

[url]https://www.auditelectionsusa.org/2016/12/12/ess-ds200-wireless-vulnerabilities/" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">www.michigan.gov...&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjqjeT8kuj4AhVVTDABHaZSD98QFnoECAMQAg&usg=AOvVaw2ySJqKlAeqM3x4BiAUNLQ8[ /url]

Having issues with this link. Here's how it copied:
www.google.com...://www.michigan.gov/documents/sos/ESSBid_549580_7.pdf&sa=U&ved=2ahUKEwjqjeT8kuj4AhVVTDABHaZSD98QFnoECAMQAg&usg=AOvVa w2ySJqKlAeqM3x4BiAUNLQ8

After 3-1/2 hours of training, I stepped out to use the restroom while a few people worked at clearing a ballot paper jam. (More on that soon)
When I got back to class the security person was talking about how the "secure network" wasn't connected to the internet.

Our interaction went as follows:

Me: Sorry I missed the first part of your presentation. Can you explain how the results are transferred again.
Security guy: At the end of the day the tally machines use a secure network, that doesn't touch the internet, and uses encryption to transfer the results.
Me: What's the network?
Security guy: Verizon Private Cloud. And it's totally secure, we use encryption, can monitor the network, and only I have access to it. ( I'm a little foggy on if he said all these things or not, at this point he seemed a little annoyed with me)
Me: Does the DHS help secure this network?
SG: No
Me: Do they have access to it?
SG: No. No one has access to it.
Me: Verizon has access to it.
SG: Well that's kinda a given that your provider would have access to your network. (Seemingly unhappy with me)
Me: So what involvement does the DHS play.
SG: We partner with the DHS and CISPA.
At this point I felt like I probably wasn't going to get much further.

I left something out though. At one point the security guy admitted that they were using the internet sometime up until 2017, and that it was common practice at the time.

He also explained their other safe guards in detail. One thing that they do, which I liked is that the tally machines also print out their results 3 times, and one of these printouts will be posted inside of a glass door or window for voters to see. The other copies are secured and go to two different places. He also mentioned the use of chain of custody documents and seals, ballot and electronic data retention, audit trails, and the use of internal audits.

Although, I only got a look at the election day polling location equipment, I have a general idea of the rest of the system. Our check-in devices are on Verizon Jetpack myfi hotspot networks, connected to each other, and connected to home base. I'm not sure if they are connected to the tally machines or if those use the same network, or not. The check-in devices are generally considered less of a security risk since they are not supposed to touch the election results, however having access to this check-in information in real time, would tell you who has voted and who hasn't. It just wouldn't tell you how they voted, but their party affiliation might give you a good idea.

That concludes the network and DHS involvement side of things. Sorry I couldn't learn more about what the DHS partnership looks like, but I'm pretty sure any juicy information about that is kept secret from us. As far as CISPA goes, well we all know they tried to convince us, and wanted us to blindly believe that the 2020 election was the most secure ever. Maybe there's some truth to that statement after all, especially if they were involved with manipulating or "fortifying" the results. With the development of technology, it's easy to believe that they could have had better overall intelligence and more control of the entire election system, or at least large parts of it, than even before. A power that could be considered priceless.

I'll be back to talk a little more about how my county's election system is set up to work, and some issues regarding it, including the possibility of completely lossing a person's vote. Keep in mind that all systems have their pros and cons, while also being able to be made more or less secure.

Here's an affidavit from an auditor regarding the venerabilities of the DS-200 tally machines, at least back in 2016:

[url]https://www.auditelectionsusa.org/2016/12/12/ess-ds200-wireless-vulnerabilities/

I have been investigating many of the twenty-four Wisconsin counties that are conducting a recount of the 2016 presidential race using optical scanner voting machines instead a recount by hand.
I learned that the machines in many of these counties are vulnerable to insider or sophisticated hacking because election results are transmitted through a cellular modem that is connected to the Internet.
In particular, I confirmed that the scanning machines used in Milwaukee and Waukesha Counties contain a cellular modem to allow results to be sent over the Internet making them vulnerable to insider and sophisticated hackers.
Hand recounts are more reliable and accurate than recounting by machine.
The only way to know for certain that hacking has not compromised an election is to conduct a hand recount of all votes.

originally posted by: IndieA
[

5% of the remaining 30% is one in six.
Is it possible that one in six people who didn't vote, had votes cast for them anyway?

Also remember: the way it was set up, they could register "voters" who didn't even exist if they wanted.

All the machine is going to check for is to see if the barcode it just scanned matches a registration in its records.


The safeguard/filter for registering to vote was that your ballot would be mailed to the address you gave. If I recall right, that was the only safeguard. They weren't checking ID.


If the ballot gets printed by a third party, and therefore doesn't get mailed out at all, then the only safeguard is : .... um...well..... nothing. Nothing at all. Perfectly nothing.




The people who say they were getting like 10 or 20 ballots for names they'd never heard of mailed to them. Probably what was happening there is false names had been registered as voters (with a randomly assigned address), but then the person who was going to intercept the data before it gets sent to the printer failed to intercept it and it accidentally got sent to the printer after all.