Pre-Electronic Voting records from 1984 Shows Evidence of Manipulation Favoring Republicans Since 2016 in Electronic Vote Counting Computers

 

Dr Beth Clarkson, a ASQ-Certified Quality Engineer with a PhD in Statistics, stated she found patterns indicative of manipulation in elections and voting machines; “not just an anomaly that occurred in one place, but a pattern that has occurred repeatedly in elections across the U.S.”

 

NSA Analyst Proves GOP Is Stealing Elections

A retired NSA analyst has applied a simple formula to election results in Arizona, and found evidence of systemic and coordinated election fraud on a large scale. However, this appears to be limited to larger precincts, as anomalies in smaller precincts are more easily detected.

Analysis of recent election data has revealed a worrying pattern of potential fraud. In states where the margin of victory is less than 10%, the same mathematical formula has been found to consistently result in votes being flipped from Democrat to Republican. The five major voting machine companies have all been found to have close financial ties to the GOP, raising questions of conflict of interest. Tagg Romney, son of the former presidential candidate, has denied any such conflict, despite his investment in Hart Intercivic and Diebold.

“Easy to Cheat”

Michael Duniho, a retired NSA analyst, has spent the past seven years investigating voting anomalies in his home state of Arizona and Pima County. His research has focused on a 2006 RTA Bond issue election, which has been subject to much discussion in the media. According to Duniho, “It is really easy to cheat using computers to count votes, since you can’t see what is going on in the machine.”

Duniho applied a mathematical model to the voting results from the largest precincts in Arizona and found that the Republican candidate in every election since 2008 had gained 8-10% in the polls, while the Democratic candidate had lost 8-10%. This swing of up to 20 points could be enough to swing an election, unless the candidate was already losing badly.

Duniho, with decades of experience in deciphering large amounts of data for the NSA, was determined to understand why this pattern was only occurring in the largest precincts.

Nose Counting

Francois Choquette and James Johnson have uncovered an intriguing phenomenon in the February Republican primary contest in South Carolina. An unusually large number of votes were cast for Mitt Romney in larger precincts, while Paul and Santorum votes trended downward. This prompted Choquette to examine the results in all 50 states, where he found a 10% switch in votes from Democrat to GOP in all states except Utah. Further investigation revealed that Romney had used the same technique against John McCain in Maricopa County in 2008, although McCain’s lead was too large to be affected.

Given the sheer scale of the task, Choquette has provided a set of instructions to enable others to replicate the analysis in their own county or state. The implications of this research could be far-reaching and Choquette’s work is certainly worthy of further examination.

Stealing Votes

Analysis of voting patterns in Arizona has revealed a significant discrepancy between the size of precincts and the results of the election. According to Professor Duniho, if the percentages of votes remained consistent between precincts, the trend line would be flat. However, the reality is that the lines slope downwards for Democrats and upwards for Republicans. This phenomenon is particularly evident in the 2012 Presidential primary, where votes for Rick Santorum and Ron Paul were systematically bled off and credited to Mitt Romney. After Duniho’s spreadsheet was completed, the actual vote totals from other Arizona election contests were compared, further confirming the discrepancy.

Analysis of the 2010 elections in Arizona has revealed evidence of manipulation. From Governor Brewer to Senator McCain and Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the trends lines all indicated that a single individual had inserted a program into the system’s central computer, flipping votes. The results were astonishing: Governor Brewer had actually lost her election and Gabby Gifford’s slim victory over Tea Party Conservative Jesse Kelly was much greater than the reported 1%.

John Duniho, a political analyst, has called for strong hand count audits to confirm the integrity of the elections. This would involve comparing hand counts to the official reports. Such measures are essential to ensure the legitimacy of the electoral process.

Ohio Precedent

For years, Republicans have been accused of vote tampering in elections. In 2004, the presidential election in Ohio and Florida brought these allegations to the forefront. In Ohio, GOP consultant Michael Connell was accused of creating a computer program with a trap door that shifted Democratic votes to the Republican Party. Connell was subpoenaed as a witness in a lawsuit against then-Secretary of State Ken Blackwell, and lawyers for the plaintiff asked the Department of Justice to provide Connell with security due to two threats made against his life by people associated with Karl Rove. Tragically, Connell was killed in a plane crash before the trial began.

In Florida, the University of California at Berkeley’s Quantitative Methods Research Team conducted a study that found anomalies between Florida counties using touch-screen voting and those using other methods that could not be explained statistically. The study showed that counties using electronic voting resulted in a disproportionate increase in votes for President Bush. Michael Hout, a Berkeley professor who conducted the study, said that the evidence was too strong to ignore, noting that the probability of such evidence occurring where the true difference is zero is less than once in a thousand chances.

Don’t Trust, Verify

The integrity of the upcoming US election is under scrutiny after an analysis by statistician Richard Duniho found evidence of vote-flipping. This could only be possible if computerized voting machines were programmed to steal votes. Calls to conduct hand counts of ballots by precinct to verify the results have been unsuccessful in Pima County, Arizona, where anomalies were first detected in 2006. With the election just 12 days away, it is unclear whether a judge will be willing to reverse past trends and permit access to ballots.

The implications of this are concerning. More than 100 million Americans will cast their ballots, believing their vote will be fairly counted. If the analysis is correct, criminals could be stealing up to 10% of votes without consequence. This could have a significant impact on the outcome of the election, which is much closer than in 2008 when President Obama won by a large margin. It is essential that the American democratic system is not undermined by another election crisis, raising questions over the last three national Presidential election results.

Don’t Take Our Word

As the US election results continue to pour in, the need for accuracy and transparency has never been greater. In the UK, paper ballots are used and the final outcome can take up to three days to be finalized. This is because every ballot is transparently hand-counted, providing citizens with the assurance that their votes are counted accurately.

The Justice Department’s insistence that results must be reported by 11 pm for the television networks is not only misguided, but irresponsible. It is time for Americans to demand hand ballot counts, and to reject the notion of being victimized by vote fraud. The news that Serbia, Belarus and Kazakhstan are sending election monitors to watch the US election is a stark reminder of the need for accuracy and transparency in this process. It is time for Americans to take control of their own destiny and ensure that their votes are counted accurately.

 

Republicans Have a Friend in the Company That Counts Their Votes

ES&S % Voting Systems: A Friend To Republicans. Raising Some Questions about the Company Behind So Many Surprise Wins This Year.

Republicans have a friend in the company that counts their votes

Per the above article: After initially focusing on the surprisingly lopsided results of the senatorial election in Kentucky, DCReport broadened our scope to look at the electronic vote-counting software and electronic voting systems that we rely on to tally our votes. This prompted us to raise questions about Electronic Systems & Software (ES&S), America’s largest voting machine company. What we found was a revolving door between government officials and ES&S.

Voting results in three states that saw surprising majorities by vulnerable incumbent Republican senators—Maine, North Carolina and South Carolina—were almost all tabulated on ES&S machines.

Trump and his inept legal team barely have mentioned ES&S, focusing almost exclusively on Dominion Voting Systems. Team Trump has been so vigorous in going after Dominion that it prompted us to look into how ES&S operates. What we have found so far is far from comforting.

• Owned by a private equity firm, ES&S has been elusive about identifying the people in its ownership.
• A number of ES&S executives and lobbyists have ties to top GOP election officials and politicians.
• The ES&S executive in charge of the security previously worked in the Trump administration as a government executive at Health and Human Services before leaving under a cloud.
• Forty of the 50 states use ES&S to cast and count some of their votes.
• Of the 25 states Trump won, all but 3 either partially or fully relied on ES&S machines. The states where Trump won that didn’t use ES&S machines were Oklahoma, Louisiana and Alaska.

Concerns about the reliability of vote-counting software are not new, dating back to the 1980s. Having the ability to audit votes, and making sure ballots are counted properly, has long been a major concern of computer scientists, politicians and election officials.

In requesting details about the ownership of ES&S, the lawmakers specifically noted, “We are particularly concerned that secretive and ‘trouble-plagued companies,’ owned by private equity firms and responsible for manufacturing and maintaining voting machines and other election administration equipment, ‘have long skimped on security in favor of convenience,’ leaving voting systems across the country ‘prone to security problems’.”

Our democracy now relies on private companies, which build proprietary electronic systems, to reliably count our votes. It seems reasonable, if not crucial, to understand who is behind these companies as a standard to ensure election integrity. Without such knowledge we run the risk that zealots, investors with financial stakes in who wins elections or those susceptible to bribery have an incentive to use subtle software programming techniques to deliberately miscount votes to guarantee an outcome. In close elections, software code that invalidates or miscounts a mere sliver of ballots can change the outcome”.

 

GOP Operative Buys Dominion, Controls 27 States’ Voting Systems

Scott Leiendecker’s acquisition of Dominion raises election integrity concerns

Per the above article: “A former Republican operative just gained control of America’s second-largest voting machine company. Scott Leiendecker’s acquisition of Dominion Voting Systems – now rebranded as Liberty Vote – puts him in charge of election equipment used across 27 states, including all of Georgia. The deal has election experts worried about the concentration of voting infrastructure under partisan control, especially given the ongoing political battles over election integrity and Dominion’s history with conspiracy theories.

The voting machine industry just got a major shakeup that has election integrity advocates scratching their heads. Scott Leiendecker, a former GOP operative from Missouri, completed his acquisition of Dominion Voting Systems last week, immediately rebranding the controversial company as Liberty Vote in what he calls “a bold and historic move to transform and improve election integrity in America.”

The deal gives Leiendecker unprecedented control over American election infrastructure. His newly acquired company operates voting systems in 27 states, while his existing firm Knowink provides electronic poll books in 29 states. The overlap is staggering – 14 states covering 20 million registered voters use both systems, giving Leiendecker’s companies end-to-end control of the voting process from voter check-in to ballot tabulation. Georgia, a critical swing state, uses both systems statewide”.

 

Hacking Voting Machines is Easier Than You Think

Senate Election Security Briefing Clip 3 – Intro

 

Senate Election Security Briefing Clip 6

This video demonstrates how easily voting machines can be programmed to rig an election. Shelby County Election Commissioner Bennie Smith demonstrates how. Audience members choose who will win the election and the malware on the voting machine declares that candidate the winner.

 

DEFCON 2025 Voting Village show Jessica Denson just how easy it is to hack a voting machine widely used in the 2024 election. Also, FSFP Senior Election Security Advisor Susan Greenhalgh debuts their new review of the weakness of post-election audits in swing states, and Election Integrity Foundation Executive Director Catherine Terranova explains why acknowledging voting machine vulnerabilities is far from conspiracy.

 

Hacking Democracy

Mar 20, 2014 – This is the hack that proved America’s elections can be stolen using a few lines of computer code. The ‘Hursti Hack’ in this video is an excerpt from the feature length Emmy nominated documentary ‘Hacking Democracy’. The hack of the Diebold voting system in Leon County, Florida, is real. It was verified by computer scientists at UC Berkeley. To watch the full movie, visit http://www.hackingdemocracy.com

The disturbingly shocking HBO documentary HACKING DEMOCRACY bravely tangles with our nation’s ills at the heart of democracy. The film the Diebold corporation doesn’t want you to see, this revelatory journey follows tenacious Seattle grandmother Bev Harris and her band of extraordinary citizen-activists as they set out to ask one simple question: How does America count its votes? From Florida and California to Ohio and Washington State, filmmakers Simon Ardizzone, Russell Michaels and Robert Cohen starkly reveal a broken system riddled with secrecy, incompetent election officials, and electronic voting machines that can be programmed to steal elections. Equipped only with a powerful sense of righteous outrage, the activists take on voting machine industry, exposing alarming security holes in America’s trusted voting machines. They even go dumpster diving at a county election official’s office in Florida, uncovering incendiary evidence of miscounted votes. But proving our votes can be stolen without a trace culminates in a duel between Diebold voting machines and a computer hacker from Finland – with America’s democracy at stake.

‘Hacking Democracy’ was nominated for an Emmy award for Outstanding Investigative Journalism.

“Disturbing stuff. . . It’s not shocked-shocked you feel watching this; it’s genuine shock.’ – The New York Times

“It is hard to imagine a documentary that is more important to the civic life of the nation — let alone one that is so compelling and ultimately moving” – Baltimore Sun

After we filmed the ‘Hursti Hack’ California’s Secretary of State ordered an investigation. The best computer scientists at UC Berkeley analysed the Diebold voting machines’ computer source code.

The UC Berkeley Report can be found here: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections…

 

Election Security Expert Susan Greenhalgh of Free Speech for People explains why rigging an election is easier than most people are aware

 

Duplicate ePollBook Checks, Hand Recount Updates, Technical Notes on CVI/CVRs

I can’t unsee the Seven Swings output is machine made, not human. Nor forget the declared winner is a felon surrounded by a bunch of folks who conduct coupes for fun. Never normalizing that.

Per the above post from Cyber Security Expert Stephen Spoonamore

“The data now being certified nationwide, in my opinion, is hacked. In the world of cyber-crime (hacking an election) is a modest effort. Forget the mostly false talking point that tabulators are not networked. They are not supposed to be network accessible WHILE they are tabulating. But they are all programmed in advance, either in person or over network access. They are updated and contacted by many persons. They have, at minimum a flashdrive access.

I think many people may not understand that tabulation machines actually are pretty sophisticated and have several core functions each with different programming, risks and functions. They Scan. Interpret the Scan. Tabulate the Interpretation., Store the Scans as CVR images. And lastly compile the various runs and races and upload the outputs.

During the first process, the scan of the ballot, they just make an image. The votes are NOT counted directly from the ballot, but from a computer analysis of the SCANNED IMAGE. This is not a trivial distinction. There are counting devices for many things including currency, standardized tests, proxy votes etc which DO NOT make an image of the paper item to be sent on for interpretation by other software, but actually do “count” the tally directly from the paper itself. One reason this is important, it is relatively hard and much more labor intensive to add or subtract paper items being scanned. By contrast, from a hacker’s perspective, it is extremely easy to add or remove electronic images into a system designed to manage electronic images.

The paper ballots, become CVIs (Cast Vote Images) which are then reviewed by software to create CVRs (Cast Vote Records) This is accomplished by the CVI having scanned images with registry marks all around the edges and the software compares these registry marks with any black dots it’s sees on a page it views as a reference grid. The computer has been programmed by a vendor, to know which “dots” correspond to a bubble next to a candidates name on that elections particular points on the image grid. A dot on that correct spot on the grid, tallies a vote for that candidate or issue.

There are a number of ways to compromise this.

Part of the pitch of companies like Dominion and ES&S is their proprietary software. But both of those companies have had their software copied by GOP activists associated with Sydney Powell and others in Trump’s orbit. Copies of the software have been taken from counties in FL, GA, AZ, MI, PA, TX and CO. You can read the legal filings, concerns and numerous news articles. Functionally, at least 85% of the tabulation systems used in the US, use software duplicated by right wing activist who actively claim they have this access. Why? Just for the Lolz of wearing DvsCorp08! firmware passcode T-Shirts and offer them on Etsy?

I don’t think so.

In the hands of sophisticated hackers this software,and this system would allow a load of possible exploits. Looking at the absurd published results, all of which appear machine manufactured, not human behavious created, I think votes were injected into the system during the hours after polls have closed. I am sure the machines worked fine in the weeks before the election, and again hours after the election, but the code is in there and dormant. Only a complete audit will find it.

Let me share two similar hacks I personally helped uncover. One had scripts which swapped credit card settlement numbers from an aggregation layer of a retailer, in effect “padding” the profits of the merchant. The second had scripts written into banking check-image deposit systems which clipped parts of account numbers from check images and replaced them with alternative numbers. An insider embezzlement scheme. The required insider access and knowledge of the code. I believe both those conditions exist here as well.

Either of these strategies could be applied to the presidential vote in part of all of the swing states. A script could be added at the software layer in which the Ballot Image (CVI) is interpreted into a vote total. The script would simply look for black dots at the grid reference for Kamala, clip the dot, and then move the dot into the grid reference for Trump. The IMAGE of the ballot once changed would then be counted. As the image is then permanently altered, you can review the CVRs forever, and the false result will be forever the outcome. Alternatively, there are 100s of Gigs of storage available inside these machines allowing them to store 50,000K+ image scans of the ballots. Clever hack would be to preload sets of ballots filled out with Trump and/or all/other other race combinations could be included. As long as Trump is leading by a designated amount, the script sits dormant. Nothing happens. If Kamala begins leading, the script can start swapping out the right proportion of Kamala ballots with the prestored stock of ballot images. It can be substituted for one of the pre-loaded Trump ballots.

These are just two of numerous methods and scripts which could accomplish an outcome reversing hack of the vote. A computer will output whatever it is programmed to output, by whoever has programmed it. In both cases the number of ballots, the epollbook numbers and the number of ballot images will match. BUT if you actually hand count the ballots, you will get a different outcome from the machine stored images.

Either of my two scripts, or several others suggested by friends would only be discovered by a human recount of the original hand-marked paper ballots”.

 

Hacking Democracy Documentary