It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: tanstaafl
My favorite fish is sockeye salmon, and wild caught is more expensive that grass fed ribeye.
originally posted by: liberalskeptic
a reply to: tanstaafl
I don't think we will every completely agree but we have common ground in wild-caught sockeye salmon. I just finished a nice fillet baked with garlic, lemon, and herbs! I'll be private messaging you a source...a family in Alaska that supports themselves fishing in the summer. Your choice whether to buy but you can't get more direct to consumer than they offer! And their prices beat Costco!
originally posted by: Threadbarer
Not even Fox wants anything to do with Lindell. It was just announced that Fox News has canceled all of Lindell's future ads.
originally posted by: Threadbarer
Not even Fox wants anything to do with Lindell. It was just announced that Fox News has canceled all of Lindell's future ads.
originally posted by: Threadbarer
Not even Fox wants anything to do with Lindell. It was just announced that Fox News has canceled all of Lindell's future ads.
The case represents a rare challenge to currently in-use voting machines that has managed to clear legal and evidentiary hurdles to get to trial. The plaintiffs, who in addition to the nonpartisan nonprofit organization include several Democrats and a conservative activist, were granted an unusual degree of access to examine voting machines for this case. They have developed what Totenberg has described as “a huge volume of significant evidence regarding the security risks and deficits in the system.”
The plaintiffs first sued then-secretary of state Brian Kemp (R) in 2017. They challenged the paperless touch-screen voting machines that Georgia used at the time. Because the digital-only systems left no paper trail, there was no way to verify whether they accurately recorded and tallied votes, they argued.
That argument was buttressed by a growing scientific consensus that paperless touch-screen voting systems were vulnerable to hacking and error. During one early hearing in the case, University of Michigan computer science professor J. Alex Halderman — an expert for the plaintiffs — demonstrated in court how a malware-infected memory card, inserted into a touch-screen machine, could change votes without detection.
Totenberg admonished Kemp’s office in 2018, writing that state officials had “buried their heads in the sand” as evidence of security problems mounted. In 2019, she ordered the state to stop using the paperless touch-screen machines, finding that continuing to operate them was a “genuine threat” to voters’ constitutionally protected rights.
State officials were already moving toward a new voting system using “ballot-marking devices” or BMDs. The touch-screen voting machines would print out voters’ choices on a piece of paper, which could then be scanned and counted — and kept as an enduring record to verify the election outcome.
In spring 2019, state lawmakers passed a bill to adopt ballot-marking devices mostly along party lines. Georgia became the only state in the nation to mandate Dominion’s BMDs for all in-person voting statewide.
As officials prepared to deploy the machines during the tempestuous 2020 cycle, the Curling plaintiffs argued in court that the new system was no more secure or reliable than the old. They argued that the machines were hackable and insecure and could not be relied upon to accurately record voters’ choices onto paper ballots.
On Oct. 11, 2020, Totenberg decided she would not block the state from using the new machines, reasoning that a last-minute change risked causing chaos in the upcoming election.
But the new machines presented “true risks,” she wrote of the potential for hacking or system breakdown. The plaintiffs’ cybersecurity experts, she continued, “convincingly present evidence that this is not a question of ‘might this actually ever happen?’ — but ‘when it will happen,’ especially if further protective measures are not taken.”
Following The Gateway Pundit’s explosive report on Saturday night, we spoke with Georgia reporter Amber Connor, who has been sitting in the courtroom during the trial for the past two weeks.
Amber confirmed what was reported earlier about Halderman’s demonstration live on how to hack a Dominion voting machine and change the totals using only a pen. In fact Halderman borrowed a pen from the defense attorneys for his demonstration.
The mainstream legacy news media has decided to ignore this historic case taking place in Georgia for some reason. Why is that?
Here is more from our discussion with Amber Connor:
Jim Hoft: Amber Connor, thank you for calling. I’m really anxious to hear what you had to say. Amber, you were in the courtroom for the Curling versus Raffensberger case that’s been going on since for over a week now. Maybe you could fill us in a little bit. Okay? And this explosive development that we just heard about tonight at The Gateway Pundit, which is that the expert, J. Halderman, was in the courtroom and was able to change vote totals on the Dominion machines. So maybe you could tell us a little bit about that.
Amber Connor: Just to give a background, Alex Halderman, he was the one who wrote the Halderman report that showed individuals how vulnerable the ballot marking devices that the machines that Dominion has its software on and show different ways where you can access through vulnerabilities within the ballot marking device. And a background of him is he works in Michigan. He has three degrees in computer science from Princeton University, he does security analysis of precinct programs in the US and in other countries. He’s been to Australia, India, Estonia to do these things. He’s been part of a team in California with the Secretary of State to help with forensics, and in Antrim County and in Louisiana.
When he analyzed the BMD (ballot marking device) in Georgia… And so what he did is they brought the ballot marking device and the printer up to the front (of the courtroom)… What he did is he began to show the first vulnerability and he borrowed the state defense counsel. So those representing the Georgia secretary, he asked the main counsel to borrow his pen that he was writing with. And then he goes over to the power button, leans down, he holds down the power button for between five to 10 seconds, probably 7 seconds, and it automatically puts the machine in safe mode.
…And this reboot happens. And he then shows the judge the display and it shows a picture of the on off button as he’s pushing it for five to 10 seconds to instigate the reboot. But before you reboot the whole thing there’ll be something that comes up to ask if he wants to go into safe mode, and then he pushes. Yes. So it doesn’t shut it down or reboot. He just goes into safe mode. And that allows him to open up files and change the content of files.
But that’s not all. Halderman also demonstrated how to fix the results and rig the count during an election.
Amber Connor: So you can actually install something that you’ve already pre-programmed, or you can program it at that point to do whatever you tell it to do. So that can be anything from, if they vote for George Washington, that it could then be recorded… or actually displayed as Benedict Arnold.
originally posted by: Disgusted123
So if Trump wins, the election will be fair, but if Biden wins, it's fraud? Correct?
a reply to: DAVID64