Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Release the Kraken

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • EXPLOSIVE – WE CAUGHT THEM: Audit Documents Were Created Last Week for Georgia Election Audit Completed in November Only After Our FOIA Request



    July 19, 2021


    Much of what is presented below comes from the good work of Kevin Moncla
    The Georgia audit held in November 2020 after the election that provided the corrupt Secretary of State support that the election in his state was fine was not fine itself. Some damaging information provided through a FOIA request confirms this.


    In January we determined that the firms selected by Maricopa County in Arizona to perform audits of the 2020 Election were not certified when they were selected by the county as had been claimed.

    WE CAUGHT THEM: Arizona’s Maricopa County Board of Supervisors Lied – EAC Updated Website after Gateway Pundit Report Discovered Their Auditors Were Uncertified

    One of these firms selected by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors to perform the audit there for the country was also used by corrupt Brad Raffensperger in Georgia in performing an audit there in November 2020 after the early November election. We noted therefore that the audit there was not performed by a certified auditor since Pro V&V was not certified at that time. This clean audit opinion was given after looking at no ballots from the election.

    Georgia’s Raffensperger Caught in Another Scandal – After His Claims that “Audits” of Georgia’s Voting Machines and Election Were Performed by a Certified Auditor Come into Question

    We also talked at length about Pro V&V in this post in January 2021 after they performed their audit in Georgia.

    BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: The Same Clandestine Companies Involved in the Certification of Dominion Voting Systems and the 2020 Results in Georgia Were Chosen for the Upcoming Arizona ‘Audit’

    Kevin Moncla reports:

    We attempted to review the Georgia forensic audit by Pro V&V that Secretary of State Raffensperger so proudly championed had confirmed the election results, something strange happened.

    Every Georgia audit reference or link led to the same Georgia Secretary of State page with Raffensperger’s statement summarizing the perfect results of the audit:

    Yet the actual audit report by Pro V&V could not be found anywhere. After an exhaustive search, and in disbelief that the audit report had gone unpublished, we submitted a FOIA request to the state of Georgia for records of the audit. Specifically, our request included the following:

    Under the Georgia Open Records Act 50.18.70 et seq., I am requesting an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records that detail the results, contract, scope and report of the audit that the Secretary of State contracted or directed Pro V&V to perform on the Dominion Voting equipment and machines after the 2020 general election. Please include the names of the individuals who physically performed the audit and any scope of work they were and were not permitted or allowed to perform that may be missing from the report, and the reason. “

    What was returned in response to the FOIA request by the state of Georgia is bizarre and cannot be easily explained. Three documents were attached to the email:

    1. “Memo for field audit.pdf” Presumably a memo from Pro V&V outlining the details of the work as requested by the Secretary of State.
    2. “Re Memo Audit for Review_redacted.pdf” An email from the GA Secretary of State’s office approving the work detailed in the Pro V&V memo.
    3. “Field Audit Report Final 1.1.pdf” The resulting Pro V&V audit report. When reviewing the “Memo for Field Audit”, we noticed a little problem. The date of the memo is “Friday, July 16 2021”:

    We then confirmed that this email was indeed from Jack Cobb.

    Not only was the memo created last Friday, but It was created last Friday by Pro V&V’s owner, Jack Cobb.
    This revelation leaves little possibility for any plausible explanation other than the Georgia Secretary of State’s office contacted Pro V&V who created the memo to provide in response to our FOIA request.

    The second document we received, “Re Memo Audit for Review redacted.pdf”, is purportedly an email from the Office of the Secretary of State approving the work proposed by Pro V&V in the memo above. The relevant portion approving the work:

    The third and final file, “Field Audit Report Final 1.1.pdf”, is supposedly the field audit results. Six pages in total, nearly 5 of which are standard definitions of terminology and voting system components:

    Georgia Field Audit Report Final 1.1 by Jim Hoft on Scribd

    Note that the report states components were evaluated “among six (6) counties”, but the Memo outlining the work, (which was approved as proposed) says “…components in the four locations”.
    Not only was the audit performed by an uncertified vendor at the time, but the report also states that both four and six counties were selected for review in their audit. The firm looked at no ballots.

    To think that Pro V&V looked at only a few machines and no ballots to make their decision is shameful.

    Comment


    • More Georgia 2020 Corrupt Election Acts Revealed – 770,000 Ballots Ordered Shortly Before the 2020 Election Are Missing – Where Did They Go?

      November 13, 2021 Constitutional Nobody Featured

      Source: Joe Hoft

      We’ve reported on numerous corrupt and criminal acts involved in the 2020 Election in Georgia. Today we found some more.

      Kevin Moncla at UncoverDC.com has not given up on investigating the 2020 Election fraud in Georgia. The FBI and DOJ won’t investigate the many crimes that occurred in that state so citizen journalists like Moncla are filling in where the [in] Justice Department won’t go.

      Today Moncla uncovered more highly suspicious and likely criminal actions that went on in Georgia in the 2020 Election. Moncla discovered an invoice for over a million ballots to be delivered to Georgia right before the 2020 Election. These ballots were printed in Arizona by Runbeck and some observations related to these ballots were reported previously.


      Today Moncla reports that these million ballots ordered from Runbeck were ordered with “no stubs” as shown here:

      A Georgia election worker shared the following about what ‘no stub’ means in the ballot request:







      These ballots were purposely missing tabs which are needed to keep track of the ballots.

      Moncla then uncovers:
      Mr. Sterling claimed that the ballots were ordered to serve as a backup plan in case the machines couldn’t be properly logic and accuracy tested before the election, as required by Georgia law. However, we reported that couldn’t have been the reason because the ballots were ordered after early voting had already begun. Our contention was basically that the machines were already being used at the time of the order; therefore, testing couldn’t have been the issue.

      Ironically, we have found, and reported earlier this week, that the Fulton County voting machines were not logic and accuracy tested before the start of early voting. However, Fulton County proceeded to use the untested machines anyway. This revelation only further negates Mr. Sterling’s excuse that the issue of testing precipitated the “emergency” ballot order and bolsters our reporting.








      The problem is this is questionable as well. Moncla shares:
      We know Fulton County ordered 1,058,210 “Emergency” ballots. Fulton County and Gabriel Sterling affirm the reason that the ballots were ordered, and both claim they were never needed. They are now planning to destroy those ballots, but for some reason only have 284,901 to destroy. Which begs the question:

      Where are the missing 773,309 ballots?
      Last edited by MAL; 11-13-2021, 08:46 AM.

      Comment


      • MAL On behalf of the entire Matmen Community wanted to thank you for supporting the green initiative in battling climate change! And your articles that you cut and paste would kill off the entire northwest forests. But because of your commitment to going digital and saving trees you are helping the nations that have gone to Glasgow! Thank you again
        Always support your local wrestling tournament concession stands!!!

        Comment


        • Originally posted by oldpioneer View Post
          MAL On behalf of the entire Matmen Community wanted to thank you for supporting the green initiative in battling climate change! And your articles that you cut and paste would kill off the entire northwest forests. But because of your commitment to going digital and saving trees you are helping the nations that have gone to Glasgow! Thank you again
          The best way to defeat liberalism is to just let them have it. The American people are rejecting the Democrat agenda every time they get the chance, all across the country.

          Comment


          • 532 illegal aliens that voted outed themselves by by getting out of jury duty by proving that they are not citizens of the United States

            Women Won National Voting Rights 101 Year Ago: Today All Votes Are in Peril



            It is ironic that our one-person, one-vote rule of law is in deep jeopardy.



            November 15, 2021
            By

            Jeff Davidson


            With the ratification of the 19th Amendment on August 18, 1920, all U.S. females of age became enfranchised and by decree, for the first time, enjoyed the rights and responsibilities of citizenship. Who could have foreseen that such rights are now in peril for both women and men?

            The women’s suffrage movement in the U.S. represented both a moral and legal decades-long struggle to secure the right to vote and to hold public office. 101 Years later, it is ironic that our one-person, one-vote rule of law is in deep jeopardy, and that female politicians such as Nancy Pelosi, Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, and others in prominent positions are doing all that they can to thwart the voting process.

            Voter Fraud is Rampant

            The fraudulent 2020 election was a gross continuation of fraud brewing for years. Despite the bogus claims from legions of media outlets and research centers (who all know better) that voter fraud in America is a minor issue, through investigative efforts and, as a case in point, two Washington Post reporters determined it is likely that 17,800 non-U.S. citizens, just in North Carolina alone, voted in the 2008 elections.
            • Who would you vote for if the elections were held today?

            The buried Washington Post feature also cited that 1 in 16 non-citizens in the U.S. voted in the 2008 election. Nationally, illegal immigrants now total 15.7 million people, so upwards of nearly 1,000,000 illegal votes might have been cast.

            Barack Obama carried North Carolina in 2008 by a mere 14,177 votes. With more than 80 percent of these 17,800 individuals voting Democratic – when they had no right to vote at all – one quickly sees that John McCain’s electoral votes from North Carolina may have been stolen.

            In Wake County alone, the NC Voter Integrity Project identified 532 non-citizens who were registered to vote. How were these people revealed? Jay DeLancy, the founder of the Voter Integrity Project, said, “Actually, they revealed themselves.” When called to serve on jury duty, over a three-year period, 532 people disqualified themselves by demonstrating to an officer of the court that they were not U.S. citizens.

            Only 18 of the 532 obeyed the law by obtaining a “legal presence” on the path to citizenship. Then, over time, seven of the 532, or 1.3 percent, eventually became U.S. citizens. Now, add in millions of deceased voters on the rolls nationally, double voters, mail-in vote malarky, and late ‘found’ votes, and you have the formula for utter chaos.

            Staggering Implications

            If a single illegal vote is cast for one party, that vote neutralizes a legitimate vote cast for the other party and effectively shreds the one-person, one-vote rule.

            When voter fraud and vote tampering incidences are uncovered and publicized, some people, primarily on the Left, are quick to say that such fraud represents ‘isolated incidents.’ Their reflexive response, always, is to downplay any indication that voter fraud occurs en mass across America, all the time. Let’s consider, however, the implications of The Washington Post findings.

            From a three-year snapshot, in a single county, at least 532 people are registered to vote who should not be. Considering that North Carolina has 100 counties, and recognizing that the 532 people who jumped jury duty likely represent a tiny subset of all illegal voters, the situation reveals a likely staggering contortion of democracy in all 50 states.

            Suppose we were to undertake a study in 49 other states to determine who voluntarily attempted to jump jury duty and then, in a like manner as described above, determine how many people were illegal voters. The answer would be unfathomable.

            Such findings, however, would not make the front page or, perhaps, even the back page of The New York Times, or The Washington Post, or your own city paper. The Post slipped this feature discussed above onto their website, late on a Friday; an opportune time to ensure that a distracted public will not see it. Why hide it? Continuing evidence of voter fraud does not serve the agenda of left-leaning media moguls.

            A Not so Hidden Agenda

            Media and political pundits who claim voter fraud to be a minor issue don’t wish to reveal that they are at odds with the effective functioning of our democracy. Why aren’t more people aware of outright voter fraud? Major media outlets bury any findings by staff reporters or via their own surveys which don’t support their agenda.

            What could that agenda be? The most obvious answer is to steal elections, to contort democracy, and to ensure that their side wins by any means necessary. After all, they know best, so get out of their way.

            Is there something you can do about voter fraud? Absolutely. When citizens, on both the left and right, and even in the middle, volunteer to be observers at every precinct, the incidence of voter fraud declines. The national election is within a few months. That gives you plenty of time to contact your county board of elections and let them know that you are willing to volunteer.

            You can be an observer, be involved in the final count for your precinct, or possibly be involved in safeguarding the transportation of any paper ballots. When the opportunity for fraud is diminished, democracy benefits.
            Last edited by MAL; 11-17-2021, 07:53 PM.

            Comment



            • VIDEO: Washington State Election Official Caught on Video – Says Writing a Name on a Napkin Can Count as a Ballot


              WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2021 BY STILLNESS IN THE STORM LEAVE A COMMENT
              Spread the love
              (Julian Conradson) A recent election review training in Seattle, Washington has revealed several unbelievable voter procedures – including accepting a candidate’s name that is written on a napkin as a write-in ballot – which has left many people questioning how the state could possibly conduct free and fair elections with such lax measures in place.

              Related BIG NEWS: Wisconsin Senate Committee Subpoenas Absentee Ballots and Voting Machine Records from City of Madison from 2020 Election

              SourceGateway Pundit


              by Julian Conradson, November 17th, 2021


              Video of the training session that was posted online shows King County election officials reviewing examples of ballots that were filled out incorrectly, and it turns out they will accept just about anything as a valid vote.

              In one example of a mail-in submission that was shown by the officials, a voter in Seattle’s most recent election sent in an envelope with no ballot, but included a newspaper clipping of Democratic candidate Lorena Gonzalez. Unbelievably, officials said that if the person who submitted the clipping had just circled the candidate’s name it would have been tallied in the final vote total.

              From the video:

              TRENDING: SHOCKING New England Journal of Medicine Study: Vaccine Immunity Wanes Against COVID Virus After ONLY 2 MONTHS
              “This one is for Seattle Mayor. This voter did not send in a ballot – their envelope was empty, but we did get this part of the voter pamphlet with the candidate statement along with the contest info at the top of the page – ‘City of Seattle mayor.’

              If there had been no handwriting at all, we would have just called this superfluous material and wouldn’t bring it before the board – [but] the fact they [drew] what looks like an ‘L’ and a ‘+’ or a ‘V’ and a ‘+’ made us want to bring this forward for you to look at – if they had circled Lorena’s name we would have counted it as a vote, but this is a little more ambiguous for us.

              So the question is: is this a vote for Lorena? We want to look at [the election rule titled] ‘writing in the wrong place’ – in voter intent manual page 70 – so really what you need [is] the office and the position number if that’s applicable to call it a ‘write-in in the wrong place.’

              For this instance if we thought this [scribble] was an indication that they meant to vote, then this would have everything we need to call it a ‘write-in in the wrong place.’”

              After showing the example to the trainees, one woman asks for clarification from the speaker by comparing the newspaper clipping to a voter sending in a napkin that’s been filled out with a candidate’s name and information about the race.

              Without skipping a beat the election official confirmed that yes, a napkin would be a proper replacement for a ballot, saying “that would be enough and we would count that as a vote.”

              Another trainee can’t believe what he just heard so he questions the speaker about the rule in the elections manual that she is referencing to say napkins and newspaper clippings can be substituted for an official ballot. He points out how the “write-in in the wrong place” rule specifically states that the write-in needs to be “elsewhere on the ballot” and doesn’t say anything about napkins or any other item that can be changed in place of the ballot itself.

              Watch:



              According to the Post Millennial, the state of Washington has some of the most lenient voting laws in the entire country. As other states shore up the integrity of their elections in the aftermath of the rigged 2020 election, Washington’s election officials continue to prioritize mail-in ballots while lowering their voting standards even further.

              From the Post Millennial:
              “According to former Washington Secretary of State Kim Wyman (R), Washington is a “voter intent” state by law. This means that voters are not disenfranchised if they mark a ballot differently than directed. When voter intent can be discerned, the vote will be counted.

              Biden recently appointed Wyman to work in the White House and lead the Department of Homeland Security’s efforts to “protect future elections from foreign and domestic interference.”

              Combine that ambiguous state law with mail-in ballots, and it equals a recipe for rigged elections for years to come.

              Comment


              • Breaking: Wisconsin Election ‘Tampering’ Evidence EXPLODES!

                theoneadmin

                The Gateway Pundit reported back in March that the Green Bay mayor handed over the keys to the room where the ballots were stored to the far left radical operative, Michael Spitzer-Rubenstein. Eric Genrich is also suspected of giving Rubenstein the secret access code for the hotel convention center where the votes were being counted. In any case, Rubenstein did have the secret access code and would be in a position to manipulate the vote.

                In October a group of local Wisconsin patriots who call themselves ‘Wisconsin HOT’ uncovered another major election scandal in Wisconsin. They discovered that a Racine clerk was also working with Rubenstein. They created an app that would track votes in real-time for the 2020 election.

                Rubenstein requested the ability to access ‘WisVote’:





                This scandal was reported by Christina Bobb at OAN. A formal complaint was filed last week against Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich for his mishandling of the 2020 election. Wisconsin’s MacIver Institute now says that the wall is closing in on Genrich and Rubenstein. Genrich has refused to testify on the matter, but now the state assembly has filed a joint resolution to open a formal investigation into the election. That gives them the power to subpoena witnesses and compel them to testify unless they use the 5th Amendment.

                Pleading the Fifth would be seen as an admission of guilt. That would trigger the assembly and cause them to dig deep into what the mayor did for Rubenstein. It would also cause people to doubt the results of the election. That would not end well for the mayor.

                From The Gateway Pundit




                The Gateway Pundit reported back in March that Green Bay Mayor Eric Genrich gave the keys to the arena where ballots were stored before the the 2020 election to far left radical and former Facebook employee Michael Spitzer Rubenstein.

                The Gateway Pundit then reported that disclosed emails revealed that Michael Spitzer-Rubenstein, Wisconsin state lead for the National Vote at Home Institute, was given secret internet access to the hotel convention center where ballots were counted in Green Bay.

                Information in this email was received from the City of Racine, Wisconsin in a record request made on March 20, 2021, by H.O.T. This information was posted at www.hotgoverment.com.

                Comment


                • Video of the crimes can be seen here. https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/202...ackroom-video/

                  BREAKING VIDEO: Whistleblower Releases Video of Delaware County Pennsylvania Election Officials Destroying Evidence and Ballots in Backroom (VIDEO)


                  By Jim Hoft
                  Published November 18, 2021 at 7:15am


                  A whistleblower in Delaware County, Pennsylvania released video evidence of destruction of election data and equipment by election officials in the 2020 presidential election.

                  The videos show election officials admitting their actions were illegal, even “a felony”, but decided to destroy the election evidence anyway.


                  In one video James Allen, the Director of Elections Operations, is seen in a backroom telling officials to destroy evidence knowing it was a felony.

                  in another video, Tom Gallager, a lawyer for Delaware County, is seen destroying election tapes — a felony.



                  Margot Cleveland tweeted the video.




                  Newsmax has more.
                  Delaware County was the last county in the state to fully report its ballots for the 2020 election, and several races were in the scope of being flipped by a few thousand votes.

                  The lawsuit suggests an election machine shredded thousands of absentee and mail-in ballots, with the data corroborating it deliberately erased in the lead up to the right-to-know filing.


                  Several videos were released as part of the effort to corroborate the claims.

                  In the first video shared, Tom Gallagher, an attorney for Delaware County, appears to be throwing return ballots into a trash can in anticipation of the election data audit.

                  “At this point, I don’t want anybody to pick it up, and thinking we threw stuff away,” Gallagher says in the video. “We’re going to have a little campfire going.”

                  A second video shows a conversation between the whistleblower and a man named “Ziggy.”


                  “Let’s put it this way. … Yes, there are tapes being tossed,” Ziggy says. “But they are of no audit value.”

                  A third video was released showing a conversation between two men named Jim Savage and James Allen.

                  Comment


                  • Election fraud is found everywhere we look.



                    BREAKING: FBI Raids Home of Election Integrity Whistleblower … She Has The Goods!


                    Mark Sidney

                    The corrupt FBI is at it again.

                    They raided the home of Tina Peters, who is the county clerk and a whistleblower on the 2020 election.

                    No doubt they want the copy she made of the election data that she was ordered to delete.

                    Why isn’t the FBI raiding Jena Marie Griswold’s house since wiping the election machines is a violation of federal law that states you must keep all election data for 22 months.

                    Mesa County, Colorado Clerk Tina Peters was aware that the order was illegal and that she needed to preserve the records. So she made a copy.

                    She was then targeted by the state and now by corrupt FBI director Christopher Wray.

                    When Peters traveled to Mike Lindell’s symposium, her office was raided by the corrupt Griswold.

                    It should not come as a shock that one of her financial backers is George Soros.

                    Recently, the Mesa County, Colorado data was reviewed by database and systems analyst Jeffrey O’Donnell. Numerous issues were uncovered.

                    -The accurate final vote for Mesa County cannot be determined based on the review.

                    -Persons unknown altered data from the election and at least 5,500 ballots were processed differently than the other ballots in the county making them ineligible.

                    -For some unknown reason, new adjudication and tabulation databases were created for most of the ballots processed in the county. The 5,500 ballots were not included in this activity.

                    -In the new databases, adjudicated cases decreased in half, from nearly 10% to near 5%. There was no explanation from the county for this significant decrease.

                    -There is no way of confirming that the new database included the exact same results from the original database.

                    -Log files were purged almost daily which is illegal since election files must be maintained for 22 months after the election.

                    -There is evidence the election machines can connect to the server and evidence SQL was accessible to make material changes to the data in the files.

                    -There is evidence the systems have not been backed up for years, which puts all the voting machines at risk.




                    MESA COUNTY, COLORADO, VOTING SYSTEMS
                    Forensic Analysis of Data andProcesses
                    Prepared by
                    Jeffrey O’Donnell –
                    Database and Systems Analyst
                    October 10th, 2021



                    Table of ContentsExecutive Summary ................................................................................ .................. 3Introduction ............................................... ................................................................ 4Definition of Terms .......................................................................... ......................... 5Database Topography ................................................................................ ............. 6Results of Analysis ................................................................................ ................... 7Conclusions ............................................... ................................................................ 13Reference A

                    Mesa County Batches ........................................................... ...... 14Reference B

                    Databases and Tables ............................................................... 21Reference C

                    Lead Investigators ............................................................ .......... 22


                    EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThis report documents data and process anomalies found during a
                    forensic analysis of the drive image of Mesa County, Colorado’s
                    Dominion Election Management Server. These anomalies castsignificant
                    doubt as to whether Mesa County’s 2
                    020 General Electionwas run in a fair and legal manner.This analysis was performed using the backup forensic image of theElection Management Server (EMS), which was saved before DominionVoting Systems (DVS) re-
                    imaged the County’s server.
                    The facts presented lead to the conclusions that:1)

                    The true vote count in Mesa County, Colorado cannot beaccurately calculated for the 2020 General Election. As such, the
                    county’s vote should be decertified.
                    2)

                    Persons unknown performed actions that caused the loss ofimportant data obscuring the source of over 5,500 ballots.3)

                    Processes and Practices used by the DVS Election Managementsoftware are not conducive to the running of a fair and accurateelection. As such, this software should not be used for managingelections until such time as the documented security flaws aredemonstrably fixed.Evidence supporting these findings is documented in this report.


                    INTRODUCTION
                    Use of computerized Election Management Systems is now nearlyuniversal across counties in the United States. While the use of thesesystems decreases the manpower costs as well as the time taken toproduce election results, it also reduces the transparency of theelection process. It has been argued that the right to free and fairelections is the most important right we have as Americans, as it canbe used to defend against abuses of all other rights. When votes castby humans are counted by machines, it is a fundamental necessity thatthe operations and processes of those machines are transparent,auditable, and 100% accurate.Numerous Federal and State laws exist to attempt to safeguard ourelections. Title 52 USC 20701 provides for much of the Federalguidance in this area, requiring that Voting systems:
                    a)

                    Comply with established 2002 Federal Election CommissionStandards (CRS 1-5-601.5)

                    b)

                    Preserve “any election records” for at least 22 months after an
                    election (CRS 1-7-802)

                    52 USC 20701 also prescribes penalties for destroying, removing, ordelaying delivery of election records. (Section 1-13-111)
                    The statute makes it clear that the “every officer of election” is
                    responsible for maintaining the election records and integrity. As such,it would be irresponsible for an election officer to trust the complianceto any part of this Federal statute to an outside vendor, as it opensthem up to criminal prosecution should the statute be violated by thatvendor.



                    Mesa County, Colorado, uses software and hardware provided byDominion Voting Systems (DVS), and for the 2020 General Election,
                    specifically “D
                    -
                    Suite 5.11”. The primary computer server, which
                    contains the raw vote information used to produce official reports,makes use of Microsoft SQL Server 2016 databases running on theMicrosoft Windows 2016 Server operating system. The forensic imageused for the analysis, which was created on May 23, 2021, has beenvalidated as authentic by numerous autonomous groups.
                    DEFINITION OF TERMS

                    “Batch”: Mesa County collects paper ballots in stacks of up to 100 and runs them
                    through the tabulator, which is the hardware that digitally scans the image, Each ofthese stack
                    s of ballots is called a “batch”.

                    “Adjudication”: This term means the process of determining the intent of a voter.
                    DVS software inspects the digital image of each ballot, and checks for ovals whichare properly filled in. If the software has 100% confidence in the votes marked,then the adjudication process is deemed complete.
                    “Manual
                    Adjudication

                    : Should the software not be able to determine the voterintent for any race, the ballot in question is referred to manual adjudication, aprocess in which ballot can be examined by humans, who together determine thevoter intent and make any required changes to the ballot based upon theirexamination.


                    DATABASE TOPOGRAPHY
                    The DVS Election Management System was set up in Mesa Countyusing the following databases and vote data flow structure:



                    RESULTS OF ANALYSIS1.

                    Data Integrity Violation, leading to uncertain results
                    Our analysis shows that the process of converting a ballot cast byvoters into a digital data record is obfuscated during at least one partof the counting process.To demonstrate this issue, we must give the timeline of eventsbeginning October 19
                    th
                    , 2020, when Mesa County began processingballots.
                    On October 19th, 85 “batches”, consisting of 8,256 ballots, were
                    scanned into the system. 799 of these were referred to manualadjudication (9.7%). These batches were serially numbered from 1 to85 in the database.On October 20
                    th
                    , 116 additional batches, consisting of 11,359 ballots,were processed. 1,128 of these ballots were referred to manualadjudication (9.9%).On October 21
                    st
                    , vote data and database alteration occurred. 66Batches, consisting of 6,298 ballots, were processed up until 2:14 PM,local time. 239 of these ballots were referred to manual adjudication(3.7%). At this time, the system shows that the following occurred:1.

                    New Adjudication and Tabulation databases were created. Belowshows the names and dates of the original and new databases.2.

                    Commands were executed to copy vote data from the “old”
                    adjudication and tabulation databases to the new ones. However,batches 2 through 59, which were among the 85 processed onOctober 19
                    th
                    , were excluded from the synchronization.


                    3.

                    All of the batches copied to the “new” databases were run
                    through the DVS adjudication step once again. Although this is adigital process which should have resulted in the same rate ofmanual adjudication referrals, only 965 of the 20,346 ballots inthe re-run batches, 4.7%, were referred to manual adjudicationthis time.The 5,567 votes which were contained in batches 2 through 59 (thespecific IDs of which will be included in reference section A), were leftuntouched in the main election database, meaning that they are part ofthe officially reported election totals for the county.This aberration in the processing of ballots is important because ofhow the DVS system keeps track of individual ballots. One ballotcontains numerous votes, as it contains choices for many electionraces. In the Adjudication Database, individual ballots are stored alongwith the file location of their scanned image. Only the batch and voteinformation are sent to the Main Election Database, meaning thatshould it ever be desired to track a vote back to its individual ballot,that search has to go back through a table in the Adjudicationdatabase. Because information about batches 2-59 was not copied tothe operating Adjudication database, this linkage would be impossible.Manual adjudication events for any of these ballots will likewise beunavailable.There is also no way of determining if the 25,913 ballots processedbefore the database switch contain the same information as the 25,913ballots processed afterwards.The low manual adjudication rate on October 21
                    st
                    is also a significantfinding. Although we do not have access to the scanning hardware andits software, it appears that the settings were changed on the 21
                    st
                    ,


                    which would account for the lower manual adjudication rate. However,all ballots scanned after the database switch were manuallyadjudicated at a rate of more than 11 percent. Thus, the lower manualadjudication rate on that one day of processing is unexplained.If the reasons behind these findings cannot be adequately explained,
                    then the county’s election results ar
                    e indeterminate and must bedecertified. We cannot determine, due to the purging of database logs,the exact process by which this vote alteration was performed, or theentity who performed it. However, in our opinion, the knowledgenecessary to perform these actions would not generally exist in CountyElection personnel, unless they were being guided by someone withsignificant knowledge of the system.The ne
                    t effect is that over 5% of the County’s total reported vote is
                    suspicious and cannot be validated.
                    2.

                    Intentional purging of Log Files
                    In examining the drive image, we found that nearly every critical fileused to save logs of events which occur in the server have been set to avery low size (typically 10 megabytes), meaning that only the last fewdays of events are stored. This is not the default behavior of theoperating system or database server. This left us, and anyone else whowanted to effectively audit the actions taken during the election period,unable to view any of these events.The logs which are regularly purged are:a.

                    Standard Windows Event logs, including the System, Application,and Services log, which would show all applications run anderrors encountered.


                    b.

                    Networking logs, which would show connection to the server fromother computers.c.

                    Windows Defender anti-virus and anti-malware logs, which wouldshow malware intrusion into the server. Of note, an analysis of thedeleted files on the system show that Windows Defender logswere often manually deleted.d.

                    Microsoft SQL Server logs, which would show database activityand the processed which caused that activity.All of these logs should be considered under the category
                    “all electionrecords”, as the DVS Election Management System is running on the
                    Windows operating system, uses the SQL Server database applicationto store and manipulate election data, and uses Windows Defender asits only mitigation against malware intrusion. In our opinion, theplanned purging of this log information is a breach of the Federal 22month data retention laws.
                    3.

                    Evidence of Connection to both local Intranet and ExternalInternet
                    DVS claims that its Election Servers are “air gapped”, and incapable of
                    being remotely accessed. We found direct evidence that the MesaCounty server is connected to other computers in a local intranet. Forinstance, the fact that the server retrieves information from an externalsystem to retrieve the ballot data indicates that there is a connection.If this intranet is connected via a router, then that router could provideaccess to the internet or other networks locally.The following facts should be investigated:a.

                    A network card is active on the server


                    b.

                    Microso
                    ft SQL Server is configured to “listen” on the interface,
                    meaning that someone with access and credentials could do anydatabase alteration they desired.c.

                    Microsoft Report Server reports which exist on the server, whichmatch the formatting and style of the official reports on Mesa
                    County’s websites, require an internet connection to be run.Specifically, they attempt to connect with Microsoft’s Azure
                    services, and produce an error if they are unable.It is important to recognize that system intrusions can occur just aseasily from other local computers as they can from systems on the
                    internet. Many virus and malware applications are designed to “hop”
                    from system to system via any local network to which they areconnected.
                    4.

                    Lack of Software Updates
                    Microsoft Windows Server and Microsoft SQL Server are regularlyupdated to address the latest virus and malware exploits. The serverused in Mesa County had not had a Windows Update since June 10th,2019. In the time between June 10
                    th
                    , 2019 and October 19
                    th
                    , 2020,there were dozens of critical updates addressing hundreds of issueswhich could cause everything from data exposure to remote softwareexecution to complete loss of data.This shows, in our opinion, a disregard for the integrity of the data onthe Election Management Server.
                    5.

                    Existence of SQL Server Management Studio
                    Microsoft SQL Server can be managed at a very low level by a tool
                    called “SQL Server Management Studio” (SSMS). We found that not
                    only is this tool, which can be used by anyone with access to the server



                    to change or delete any election data, installed on the server, DVS usermanuals actually instruct election personnel to utilize it to performcertain database tasks. The existence of this tool on the server opensup the system to accidental and intentional data changes which wouldleave no trail whatsoever.
                    6.

                    Lack of Referential Integrity in DVS Database Tables
                    Most modern database designs include a concept called “referentialintegrity”. For example, if you have one table of data that has
                    information about a person, and another table that has informationabout
                    colleges, you might have a field in the person’s table that can
                    contain an id, or pointer, to the college he went to. Referentially
                    integrity in this case would mean that if John Smith’s record had a
                    pointer to the University of Pittsburgh, the system should give an error
                    should you try to remove the item “University of Pittsburgh” from the
                    colleges table. It would not allow you to do this action because
                    something else “refers” to the college.
                    The DVS Election Management System data structures have no suchintegrity built into them. This is why batch records in the one databasecould be deleted without any consequence to records that point to thatbatch in another database. This lack of referential integrity means thatvote information could easily be added or removed from one part of thedatabase without any warnings or errors occurring in other parts of thedatabase.


                    CONCLUSIONS
                    1.

                    As we have found evidence that a large number of ballots havehad their source placed in serious question, none of the electionresults from Mesa County can be considered trustworthy, and the2020 General Election in that county should be decertified.2.

                    A hand audit of all physical ballots in Mesa County, and theircorresponding envelopes, should be performed. This audit shouldfocus first on the ballots reportedly contained in the 58 missingbatches.3.

                    The hard-drive data from any county using DVS to manage theirelections should forensically preserved and examined todetermine if evidence of data alteration exists.4.

                    Because of the serious security concerns outlined, DVS should notbe used to manage future elections until the issues outlinedabove are explained and remedied.


                    DATABASES AND TABLES
                    In order to assist other researchers, who may wish to examine thesefindings or perform additional analysis, here are the most importantdatabases and tables which were used in this analysis.
                    Main Election Database:
                    [2020 Mesa County General-2020-09-05-00-10-20]
                    Primary Tables:
                    ResultContainer
                    : (Batch level raw vote data)
                    ResultSplitter
                    : (Vote Data by Polling Location
                    ChoiceResult
                    : (Raw aggregated vote data)
                    Choice
                    : (All Candidates/Choices)
                    Contest
                    : (All contests in Election)
                    Tabulator
                    : (All defined tabulators)
                    Stored Procedures:

                    GetContestResults
                    : Displays current results of any or all contests
                    GetContestStatistics
                    : Displays stats for any or all contests, including undervotesand overvotes
                    Adjudication Databases
                    [AdjudicableBallotStore_2020_Mesa_County_General_2020-10-21_14:18:51](before copy)[AdjudicableBallotStore_2020_Mesa_County_General_2020-10-01_12:18:50] (aftercopy)
                    Primary Tables:
                    Batch: Raw batch informationSerializedAdjudicableBallots: Contains one data record for each ballot received.BallotStatusEvents: Every ballot with adjudication status. New records for sameballot whenever any change occurs in the status of the ballot

                    Comment


                    • "We are going to to have a little campfire" "Let them try and figure out what we did" I have an Idea lets make smores over the real 2020 election results. Videos can be seen here. https://uafreport.com/daniel/breakin...ballots-video/
                      BREAKING NEWS! Whistleblower Releases Video of Election Officials Destroying Evidence and Ballots (VIDEO)

                      Daniel

                      The 2020 election was fraudulent. We’ve seen a lot of evidence over the past year, but what you’re about to see is 100% undeniable and it proves that our election results were tampered with and that there really isn’t any real transparency or legitimate oversight in our election system.

                      The people seen in these videos not only admit to doing what they did, but actually do it while being recorded.

                      In one of the videos, James Allen who is the Director of Elections Operations in Delaware County, Pennsylvania is seen telling other officials to DESTROY EVIDENCE! In one of the other videos, we see Tom Gallager, who is an attorney for Delaware County, destroying election tapes.

                      They know that they’re committing felonies, but do they care? Nope. Why would they…they’re Democrats!


                      Comment


                      • WISCONSIN LAWMAKER MOVES TO DECERTIFY THE STATE’S 2020 ELECTION RESULT

                        President Trump congratulated State Representative Tim Ramthun, R-Wis., for putting forth a resolution to decertify the 2020 election results.

                        Trump wrote:

                        “Congratulations to Tim Ramthun, State Representative of Wisconsin, for putting forward a powerful and very popular, because it’s true, the resolution to decertify the 2020 Presidential election based on the recently found absolute proof of large-scale voter fraud that took place.”



                        Ramthun’s resolution calls for a “full forensic physical and cyber audit” to be conducted in the state of Wisconsin. The controlling body of the elections in Wisconsin, the Wisconsin Election Commission (WEC) actually ordered people to break the law and should be immediately disbanded.

                        The Legislative Audit Bureau found that over 44,000 voters did not present identification. That is required by state law. The Wisconsin Election Commission intentionally directed all 72 county clerks to break state statutes on ballot harvesting in nursing homes, generating over 70,000 votes.

                        Between the WEC’s violation of state laws and the audit report, all Republicans should join in decertifying the election and doing a statewide audit. The number of possible illicit votes involved is way above the margin separating Trump and Biden.




                        Ramthun said:

                        “I have continued to pursue truth and integrity of our 2020 general election. Recent developments have made it abundantly clear that the legislature should not have certified Wisconsin’s ten electoral ballots on December 14th 2020.”

                        “I call upon the Wisconsin Legislature to recognize its duty under Article 2 Section 1 Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, as well as the guidance provided from ss6.84(1), to decertify Wisconsin’s November 2020 election results by reclaiming its ten electoral ballots.”

                        From RSB Network

                        In December 2020, Wisconsin’s legislature certified the 2020 election despite concerns of “widespread voter fraud.” Biden won Wisconsin by a little over 20,000 votes in the 2020 presidential election. If the irregularities reportedly found in Wisconsin’s election are confirmed, Biden’s margin of victory could be completely erased in Wisconsin.

                        In recent weeks, renewed calls for additional election audits and the decertification of the 2020 election have been echoed across multiple states. Ramthun’s resolution is seen by many as a necessary “duty” of elected representatives, given the abundant evidence being presented.

                        Additionally, President Donald Trump called upon other members of the Wisconsin state Senate to cosponsor the resolution so it can be brought before the legislature for a vote.

                        Trump warned American citizens that the 2020 election would be a massive case of “voter fraud.” In the aftermath of the election, numerous states have conducted election audits and found tens of thousands of cases of voting irregularities and potential voter fraud in the 2020 election. The 45th president has continued to urge the states to decertify the election, with more details emerging as a result of election audits.

                        Comment


                        • The one thing that almost every state has in common is that they are illegally destroying 2020 election materials that are required by state and federal law to be preserved.
                          New post on U.S. Election Integrity Plan
                          COLORADO SECRETARY OF STATE JENA GRISWOLD SUED OVER DESTRUCTION OF ELECTION RECORDS, FAILURE TO PROPERLY TEST VOTING EQUIPMENT, AND OBSTRUCTION OF INDEPENDENT ELECTION AUDITS

                          Colorado citizens sue Secretary of State Jena Griswold over election violations. Case requests full forensic audit of Colorado voting systems and 2020 election to ensure free and fair elections for Colorado voters.

                          [Denver, Colorado, November 19, 2021] – Today an explosive case, Hanks et al v. Griswold was filed in Denver District Court. The most damning facts of the case claim that Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold and her employees destroyed election records from the 2020 election. Griswold and other Colorado election officials are required by state law to preserve those election records for twenty-five months, and by federal law for twenty-two months. The relief sought in this case is a full, independent forensic audit of Colorado voting systems and the 2020 election in Colorado so citizens’ trust in their elections might be restored.

                          When asked whether the deleted elections records were significant or simply inconsequential extra files on election servers, or electronic voting equipment, Col. (ret.) Shawn Smith USAF systems testing expert stated, “The Federal Election Commission’s 2002 Voting System Standards, which are a mandatory standard for Colorado voting systems, require voting systems to maintain and produce ‘all audit trail information,’ including operating system and hardware. The Department of Justice has already confirmed that digital records ARE election records. The federal and state statutes that require preservation of election records were written for the EXACT purpose of ensuring the availability of records EXACTLY like the those destroyed by the Secretary of State.”

                          A second claim in the case states that Griswold “failed to employ a federally accredited laboratory to test Colorado voting systems before the 2020 election.” When investigating whether the claim is a mere clerical oversight, the exhibits included in the case show otherwise. Griswold’s selected testing lab’s, Pro V&V’s, accredited status expired in 2017. The next time Pro V&V was officially accredited was 2021. However, in 2019, Griswold issued an official letter [exhibit 1] approving Pro V&V’s test plans, and Griswold cited that testing in her certification of Colorado voting systems used in November 2020. Within the forty-seven months Pro V&V was unaccredited, meaning the lab was not qualified to conduct proper electronic voting equipment testing, Griswold repeatedly used the testing lab and cited its testing reports.

                          Colorado voters shouldered all the risk when Griswold approved an unaccredited lab to test voting systems. Every single Colorado county used voting equipment during the 2020 election that was not properly tested, and the lapsed lab accreditation likely affected the voting systems used in the 2021 election, as well.

                          The final claim in the case against Griswold addresses what appears to be Griswold’s attempt to cover-up potential wrongdoing. In June 2021, Griswold issued emergency election rules limiting who can access electronic voting equipment; “Defendant’s [Griswold’s] employees, County Clerk’s employees, election judges, and voting system vendors. No independent consultants are allowed.” Griswold’s emergency election rules impact Colorado elections in two distinct ways.

                          First, the rules ensure that any independent forensic audits of election equipment, which is exactly what Colorado citizens are asking for, are forbidden. Secondly, none of the people or parties Griswold identifies as being allowed to access voting equipment have adequate technical expertise to verify the electronic voting equipment.

                          Comment


                          • Governor Brian Kemp of Georgia has published a 40 page report detailing the flagrant inaccuracies, double counted batches, duplicated ballots, batches of votes that were 100% for Biden and more in a small recount conducted by an independent auditor in Fulton county Georgia. https://justthenews.com/sites/defaul...t%20Report.pdf

                            Comment


                            • BREAKING: Bombshell Evidence, Throws 2020 Into Question

                              Mark Sidney

                              President Trump wrote a letter to the Wall Street Journal explaining why the paper was wrong when they tried to legitimize the election in Pennsylvania by saying there weren’t enough illegitimate votes to swing the election in Trump’s favor. Trump led Biden by a large majority on election night, but counting continued for days, many of which did not allow Republican poll watchers to observe. Other poll watchers complained of physical and mental intimidation.

                              But, what happens when you ask the voters if they think the election was free and fair? According to the Morning Consult-Politico poll, only 39% truly believe the election was fair. That is an incredible number because if we are to believe the final vote counts, not all Democrats thought the vote was honest. That is quite an indictment on the 2020 election. And remember that is a far left-leaning poll.


                              Trump’s letter:

                              In your editorial “The Election for Pennsylvania’s High Court” (Oct. 25), you state the fact that a court wrongly said mail-in ballots could be counted after Election Day. “This didn’t matter,” you add, “because Mr. Biden won the state by 80,555, but the country is lucky the election wasn’t closer. If the election had hung on a few thousand Pennsylvanians, the next President might have been picked by the U.S. Supreme Court.”…

                              …“Actually, the election was rigged, which you, unfortunately, still haven’t figured out. Here are just a few examples of how determinative the voter fraud in Pennsylvania was:

                              * 71,893 mail-in ballots were returned after Nov. 3, 2020, at 8 p.m… None of these should have been counted according to the U.S. Constitution
                              * 10,515 mail-in votes from people who do not exist on the Pennsylvania voter rolls at all.
                              * 20,000 excess voters not yet accounted for by the Pennsylvania Department of State—far more votes than voters!
                              * Hundreds of thousands of votes unlawfully counted in secret… while GOP poll watchers thrown out
                              * 39,771 people voted who registered after the Oct 19 deadline”

                              On election night, President Trump led by a commanding 785,000 votes. Imagining Biden coming back from that legitimately stretches the imagination.

                              Comment


                              • Now we can find out where the extra 200,000 mail in ballots came from...ballots that were never sent out to voters, but were somehow magically returned to be counted.

                                BREAKING HUGE: Republicans in Pennsylvania Senate Identify Group They’ll Hire to Perform Forensic Audit of 2020 Election Results


                                By Joe Hoft
                                Published November 21, 2021

                                The Republicans in the Pennsylvania Senate have identified the company it will hire to perform a forensic audit of the 2020 Election results in Pennsylvania.


                                The 2020 Election results in Pennsylvania were severely corrupt. The amount of fraudulent activity before, during and after the 2020 Election was shocking. For example, we know that 200,000 more ballots were received than were sent out during the election.




                                We know that this was all part of the hundreds of thousands of ballots created to put Biden in the lead in Pennsylvania after the 2020 Election.




                                The whole time this was going on, Republicans were prevented from participating or viewing any of the fraudulent activities involved in these results.


                                Now, some good news.

                                The GOP-led Senate committee has identified the contractor who will assist in its taxpayer-funded 2020 presidential election audit.

                                Pennlive reports:
                                The GOP-led Senate committee has identified the private contractor it will hire to assist in its taxpayer-funded review of the 2020 presidential election.

                                A document shared with Republican senators Thursday evening obtained by PennLive identifies the firm as Dubuque, Iowa-based Envoy Sage LLC. The firm bills itself on its website as “delivering ground truth” and identifies itself as specializing in research, investigation, program management and communications.

                                Advertisement - story continues below
                                The document states the firm “meets all the key needs to conduct a thorough and impartial election investigation.” It also states the firm has no political association with candidates who appeared on the 2020 or 2021 ballots in Pennsylvania.
                                Among other qualifications it lists, Envoy Sage has worked with the Department of Defense under Republican and Democratic administrations and has decades of experience in handling sensitive and classified information.
                                Senate Republican spokesman Jason Thompson declined comment about the document. It doesn’t indicate how much the firm will be paid although the costs will come out of the GOP caucus’ accounts.
                                The firm’s role will be to assist the 11-member bipartisan Senate Intergovernmental Operations Committee in its investigation into the conduct of the presidential election.
                                This is great news for the people of Pennsylvania and all of America. Pennsylvania was for President Trump and we all know it. It’s time this be confirmed once and for all.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X