ASOG Dominion Report, A Review

I’ve done some Computer Forensics work. Some of the jargon in the report may need a bit of explaining to the non-technical reader. So I’m going to go through their report, quoting some bits of it, interpreting others, in the hope that can help clarify.

Original PDF here and I’ve downloaded it. If the original disappears I can upload my saved copy. Note that cut/paste of pdf text often changes formatting in strange ways, so don’t be surprised if my text is reflowed or different fonts.

The heading of the report just says who did the forensic review, on what date, for whom.

Allied Security Operations Group
Antrim Michigan Forensics Report
REVISED PRELIMINARY SUMMARY, v2
Report Date 12/13/2020
Client: Bill Bailey
Attorney: Matthew DePerno

Then you present your credentials and bona fides to show competence and fealty to law.

A. WHO WE ARE
1. My name is Russell James Ramsland, Jr., and I am a resident of Dallas County, Texas. I hold an MBA from Harvard University, and a political science degree from Duke University. I have worked with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), among other organizations, and have run businesses all over the world, many of which are highly technical in nature. I have served on technical government panels.

2. I am part of the management team of Allied Security Operations Group, LLC, (ASOG). ASOG is a group of globally engaged professionals who come from various disciplines to include Department of Defense, Secret Service, Department of Homeland Security, and the Central Intelligence Agency. It provides a range of security services, but has a particular emphasis on cybersecurity, open source investigation and penetration testing of networks. We employ a wide variety of cyber and cyber forensic analysts. We have patents pending in a variety of applications from novel network security applications to SCADA (Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition) protection and safe browsing solutions for the dark and deep web. For this report, I have relied on these experts and resources.

So we’ve got the Management Weenie who depends on “experts” who’s reputation we are to trust based on a client list of Hot Names. OK, but not perfect. I’d rather see the credentials of the Techs who did the work, but frankly, that usually only shows up in a detailed tech report, not in the one shown to other non-techs. So this is what I’d expect and likely “good enough”. They do this for a living, and do it for a lot of big “Name names”. I’ll live with that.

B. PURPOSE AND PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS
1. The purpose of this forensic audit is to test the integrity of Dominion Voting System in how it performed in Antrim County, Michigan for the 2020 election.

So their search / testing is limited strongly in scope. Dominion Voting System only and in Antrim County only. That’s a narrow search. You will be depending on probability and projection to extend that over any other machines, process or locations. OTOH, they can do a “deep dive” in a narrow pool. So it’s an “exemplar” of what might be elsewhere, not a conclusion about all.

2. We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results. The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail. This leads to voter or election fraud. Based on our study, we conclude that The Dominion Voting System should not be used in Michigan. We further conclude that the results of Antrim County should not have been certified.

That’s the top level Executive Summary. That’s also pretty strong assertion. You don’t do that if you can’t back it up. (It’s too easy for the Tech Guy, under cross exam, to spill the beans that you oversold what he said…). They are basically saying the machine is designed for fraud, and they determine one clear method. Generating excessive failed ballots that go to a single person without oversight who can either just trash them, or assign them to any candidate they like. That’s fraud on the face of it (though phrased more gently as ‘leads to’).

Then the money quote assertion of not fit for purpose “should not have been certified”. I.e. your election was trash.

3. The following is a breakdown of the votes tabulated for the 2020 election in Antrim County, showing different dates for the tabulation of the same votes.

Tables from PDFs don’t cut/paste well, so ‘hit the link’ to see it. The key bit is

Date   Total  Biden Trump 3rd Party Total POTUS votes
Nov 3  16,047 7,769 4,509 145       12,423
Nov 5  18,059 7,289 9,783 255       17,327
Nov 21 16,044 5,960 9,748 241       15,949

So first off, the Total changes dramatically in 3 different runs on 3 different days. Total POTUS votes change by almost a range of 5k out of 12k to 17k (so around 30%) and there’s somewhere around 4k or a few hundred, or almost 1K who voted everything BUT the BIGGEST thing on the menu, POTUS. Seems strange to me, but maybe?

The “biggie” is that on election night, they have a Biden “win” by 3,000 (so win % close to total Trump vote… very unlikely and strange, but only one machine so statistically possible. At this point prior election R vs D would be helpful information). BUT the hughe thing is that on the next 2 runs, Trump wins by either 2.5k or 3.7k

That discrepancy is just crazy high as a percentage of votes. This, alone, says the machine is flaky and the software changes have dramatic effect. (By implication other machines of the same make are likely just as dodgy).

Just the “Never the same way twice” is a big red flag of corrupt hardware or software.

4. The Antrim County Clerk and Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson have stated that the election night error (detailed above by the vote “flip” from Trump to Biden, was the result of human error caused by the failure to update the Mancelona Township tabulator prior to election night for a down ballot race. We disagree and conclude that the vote flip occurred because of machine error built into the voting software designed to create error.

Or “Liar liar pants on fire”… The Tech will have said “She said WHAT? That’s just BS. Look, it’s the software in the two versions that’s doing it. Let me show you…”

5. Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson’s statement on November 6, 2020 that “[t]the correct results always were and continue to be reflected on the tabulator totals tape . . . .” was false.

Or “She really told a huge whopper of a lie.” The Tech will have said “Which tape? Run 1, 2, or 3?

6. The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots (.0008%). We observed an error rate of 68.05%. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity

Here’s our “Legal Standard” that the machine must meet. Nearly NO errors at 0.0008%. 1 in 1/4 million. You would expect zero errors in a sample of 20k out of 250k 11 out of 12 times.

7. The results of the Antrim County 2020 election are not certifiable. This is a result of machine and/or software error, not human error.

The machine is a joke, with an outrageous error rate, and the election that used it are just as trash. It’s the machines / software that’s broken and not some “human error”. Tech will have a detailed tech explanation of what they did to discover and prove it was software / hardware, and why they conclude it was “by design”.

8. The tabulation log for the forensic examination of the server for Antrim County from December 6, 2020 consists of 15,676 individual events, of which 10,667 or 68.05% of the events were recorded errors. These errors resulted in overall tabulation errors or ballots being sent to adjudication. This high error rates proves the Dominion Voting System is flawed and does not meet state or federal election laws.

They got 68% wrong instead of 0.0008%. That doesn’t even pass the stink test. It is way more wrong than right. 68% of your “ballots” were decided by someone (unknown) who could just give them to anyone. That’s nuts. (“Nuts” is a technical term ;-) Oh, and it’s illegal too. Both State and Federal laws ignored / trashed.

9. These errors occurred after The Antrim County Clerk provided a re-provisioned CF card with uploaded software for the Central Lake Precinct on November 6, 2020. This means the statement by Secretary Benson was false. The Dominion Voting System produced systemic errors and high error rates both prior to the update and after the update; meaning the update (or lack of update) is not the cause of errors.

“Re-provisioned” means it got new software on it. Dated from November 6, 2020. CF Card is Compact Flash card. This comes in several physical shapes, from nice big ones about the size of a stack of 4 to 6 credit cards. Kind of like a giant SD card.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CompactFlash

Dimensions
43×36×3.3 mm (Type I)
43×36×5 mm (Type II)
Weight 10 grams (typical)
Usage Digital cameras and other mass storage devices

So first off, this tells me that with a swap of a common card, I can change the software on the machine. That’s creepy.

Then the proof for the “Liar liar” statement. They tested before and after the update and both make errors by the bucket (but different errors).

10. In Central Lake Township there were 1,222 ballots reversed out of 1,491 total ballots cast, resulting in an 81.96% rejection rate. All reversed ballots are sent to adjudication for a decision by election personnel.

Almost ALL the ballots from one township were really determined (cast) by some anon-Poll Worker. For whomever they wanted to vote for.

11. It is critical to understand that the Dominion system classifies ballots into two categories, 1) normal ballots and 2) adjudicated ballots. Ballots sent to adjudication can be altered by administrators, and adjudication files can be moved between different Results Tally and Reporting (RTR) terminals with no audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicates (i.e. votes) the ballot batch. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity because it provides no meaningful observation of the adjudication process or audit trail of which administrator actually adjudicated the ballots.

Ballots go in two buckets, “normal” and “poll worker can diddle them or trash them”. They can also be moved around from different terminals (RTR) used by different folks, with no audit trail / information. (So the evidence of the Diddle can be easily lost / hidden / never seen).

12. A staggering number of votes required adjudication. This was a 2020 issue not seen in previous election cycles still stored on the server. This is caused by intentional errors in the system. The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency or audit trail. Our examination of the server logs indicates that this high error rate was incongruent with patterns from previous years. The statement attributing these issues to human error is not consistent with the forensic evaluation, which points more correctly to systemic machine and/or software errors. The systemic errors are intentionally designed to create errors in order to push a high volume of ballots to bulk adjudication.

Just Oh My God how many went into “Poll Worker’s Diddle Inbox”! We didn’t see this in the past, so suspicion moves to software from hardware. The prior results are still in the server, so we have the proof of that. The assertion of intent is unusual. This implies to me that the Tech said “Look at the code right here, that just has to be deliberate”. Probably in disassembly form, so not something anyone else would understand if they saw it.

Then are repeat that “human error” is just wrong and not consistent with what was found.

Then they include a link to a Twitter Video demonstrating the Diddle.

13. The linked video demonstrates how to cheat at adjudication:
https://mobile.twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1336888454538428418

14. Antrim County failed to properly update its system. A purposeful lack of providing basic computer security updates in the system software and hardware demonstrates incompetence, gross negligence, bad faith, and/or willful noncompliance in providing the fundamental system security required by federal and state law. There is no way this election management system could have passed tests or have been legally certified to conduct the 2020 elections in Michigan under the current laws. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures – Michigan requires full compliance with federal standards as determined by a federally accredited voting system laboratory.

County staff either criminals or idiots, your choice. BASIC software updates not done (i.e. wide open to bugs and hacks).

15. Significantly, the computer system shows vote adjudication logs for prior years; but all adjudication log entries for the 2020 election cycle are missing. The adjudication process is the simplest way to manually manipulate votes. The lack of records prevents any form of audit accountability, and their conspicuous absence is extremely suspicious since the files exist for previous years using the same software. Removal of these files violates state law and prevents a meaningful audit, even if the Secretary wanted to conduct an audit. We must conclude that the 2020 election cycle records have been manually removed.

Log files are critical to audits and system maintenance. Missing or corrupted logs are SOP for system hacks and fraud. I find logs missing without great explanation, I’m going full “penetrated and hacked” forensic audit on the box.

Blaring sirens and flashing red lights, spotlight on “Criminal act of sabotage against the law done here!” Pretty much hollers to me that a Vote Diddle was definitely done and this is the evidence of the cover-up.

16. Likewise, all server security logs prior to 11:03 pm on November 4, 2020 are missing. This means that all security logs for the day after the election, on election day, and prior to election day are gone. Security logs are very important to an audit trail, forensics, and for detecting advanced persistent threats and outside attacks, especially on systems with outdated system files. These logs would contain domain controls, authentication failures, error codes, times users logged on and off, network connections to file servers between file accesses, internet connections, times, and data transfers. Other server logs before November 4, 2020 are present; therefore, there is no reasonable explanation for the security logs to be missing.

That the server security logs were wiped is horrible. Pretty much shouts at you that the machine / software was corrupted. Why else cover the tracks. An “audit trail” is the normal record of what happened in an audit log. While “forensics” looks deeper. Things like do the dates and binary stamps of a claim in a log file match that elsewhere in the file meta-data? “Advanced Persistent Threats” means the backdoors left behind by the most skilled hacks. Things like modifying the firmware for a disk drive or hiding hacking / backdoor tools in the “empty” space in a file system (The blocks not used for the file system or files). Why I complain about firmware on a machine that I can’t inspect, like the Intel chips “management engine”. This kind of backdoor is down in the layers that only super-hackers work with, write tools for (other than the folks who design it at manufacturers).

Then a “dig” at outdated System Files. I.e. virus and protection stuff way out date and “Warez” in the wild can let a Script Kiddie waltz in. That is, the techniques to hack your system are already well known enough to be circulating on the Web as scripts than even an idiot can run.

The Diddlers have erased the log file information about internet connections and data changes and more. So when folks say “No evidence it was connected to the internet”, that may be factual, but useless to say, as there is also no evidence it was NOT connected.

So the wipe of log files extends even to the security logs / server.

17. On November 21, 2020, an unauthorized user unsuccessfully attempted to zero out election results. This demonstrates additional tampering with data.

“unauthorized user” is geek speak for “hacker or attempt by an idiot who has no legal right on the box”. Someone without legitimate log-in credentials for the box.

So word got out they were auditing, and on the day of their second run, they observed an attempt to scuttle their run. Definitely a Data Diddler on the loose “tampering”. Then “additional” confirms that the Tech has already found other evidence of Data Diddle.

18. The Election Event Designer Log shows that Dominion ImageCast Precinct Cards were programmed with new ballot programming on 10/23/2020 and then again after the election on 11/05/2020. These system changes affect how ballots are read and tabulated, and our examination demonstrated a significant change in voter results using the two different programs. In accordance with the Help America Vote Act, this violates the 90-day Safe Harbor Period which prohibits changes to election systems, registries, hardware/software updates without undergoing re-certification. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures – Michigan requires full compliance with federal standards as determined by a federally accredited voting system laboratory.

We’ve got the time stamps for when the software was changed to Do The Diddle, then when the cover-up update happened. 23 Oct 2020 for the Diddle version, cover-up on 5 Nov 2020. First thought for me is “Why update the software just after the counting is done?” Smells foul and clearly cover-up.

Then, the Techs had both sets of software and demonstrated that the two versions give different results. Prime evidence that the Oct update was entirely to change the results. Both updates violate the law, so not Standard Procedure at all.

Change requires re-certification, this was not done. So deliberately hiding the change. More crimes.

19. The only reason to change software after the election would be to obfuscate evidence of fraud and/or to correct program errors that would de-certify the election. Our findings show that the Central Lake Township tabulator tape totals were significantly altered by utilizing two different program versions (10/23/2020 and 11/05/2020), both of which were software changes during an election which violates election law, and not just human error associated with the Dominion Election Management System. This is clear evidence of software generated movement of votes. The claims made on the Office of the Secretary of State website are false.

Double Stating things for emphasis in this #19. It was software based fraud. It does change votes. The only reason for the double dip of update before / overwrite after election is a cover-up. It wasn’t human error and “Liar Liar” again at the SoS.

20. The Dominion ImageCast Precinct (ICP) machines have the ability to be connected to the internet (see Image 11). By connecting a network scanner to the ethernet port on the ICP machine and creating Packet Capture logs from the machines we examined show the ability to connect to the network, Application Programming Interface (API) (a data exchange between two different systems) calls and web (http) connections to the Election Management System server. Best practice is to disable the network interface card to avoid connection to the internet. This demonstrated a significant and fatal error in security and election integrity. Because certain files have been deleted, we have not yet found origin or destination; but our research continues.

The hardware can connect to the internet. They put a “scanner” on it. That’s a small computer that inspects network packets and lets the network Tech see what’s going on. Are there packets? What kind? Headed to where? What they found was an active ability to connect (just add wire or wireless modem). An API is used to connect a program to the rest of the system and let it run. The thing in the system that your program uses to tell it what to do. That inter face ought to have been turned off.

Then we again have evidence of a “Clean up on aisle Hacked” in missing tracking files. But they are continuing to dig at it.

21. Because the intentional high error rate generates large numbers of ballots to be adjudicated by election personnel, we must deduce that bulk adjudication occurred. However, because files and adjudication logs are missing, we have not yet determined where the bulk adjudication occurred or who was responsible for it. Our research continues.

22. Research is ongoing. However, based on the preliminary results, we conclude that the errors are so significant that they call into question the integrity and legitimacy of the results in the Antrim County 2020 election to the point that the results are not certifiable. Because the same machines and software are used in 48 other counties in Michigan, this casts doubt on the integrity of the entire election in the state of Michigan.

We know the software tossed ballots to the “Diddle Bucket”, so we can conclude pretty easily that they had to be handled by someone. BUT the logs are gone and with that any evidence on the machine of who did it. But 68% of the votes were really voted by some anon-Poll Worker. Given that, no way you can claim the results are accurate and certifiable.

Given that the same machines (and presumably the same software) was used all over the place, the implication is that those places are just as broken and the whole thing is bogus.

Now, IF different machines had DIFFERENT software run, then that, too, says something very wrong happened and you can’t trust the election to be correct. No matter which way you turn, the election is bogus where these machines and software were used.

Next comes a big block citing the applicable laws and Executive Orders. Basically saying “do it right or else”.

23. DNI Responsibilities: President Obama signed Executive Order on National Critical Infrastructure on 6 January 2017, stating in Section 1. Cybersecurity of Federal Networks, “The Executive Branch operates its information technology (IT) on behalf of the American people. The President will hold heads of executive departments and agencies (agency heads) accountable for managing cybersecurity risk to their enterprises. In addition, because risk management decisions made by agency heads can affect the risk to the executive branch as a whole, and to national security, it is also the policy of the United States to manage cybersecurity risk as an executive branch enterprise.” President Obama’s EO further stated, effective immediately, each agency head shall use The Framework for Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity (the Framework) developed by the National Institute of Standards and Technology.” Support to Critical Infrastructure at Greatest Risk. The Secretary of Homeland Security, in coordination with the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, the Director of National Intelligence, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the heads of appropriate sector-specific agencies, as defined in Presidential Policy Directive 21 of February 12, 2013 (Critical Infrastructure Security and Resilience) (sector-specific agencies), and all other appropriate agency heads, as identified by the Secretary of Homeland Security, shall: (i) identify authorities and capabilities that agencies could employ to support the cybersecurity efforts of critical infrastructure entities identified pursuant to section 9 of Executive Order 13636 of February 12, 2013 (Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity), to be at greatest risk of attacks that could reasonably result in catastrophic regional or national effects on public health or safety, economic security, or national security (section 9 entities);

This is a national security imperative. In July 2018, President Trump strengthened President Obama’s Executive Order to include requirements to ensure US election systems, processes, and its people were not manipulated by foreign meddling, either through electronic or systemic manipulation, social media, or physical changes made in hardware, software, or supporting systems. The 2018 Executive Order. Accordingly, I hereby order:

Section 1. (a) Not later than 45 days after the conclusion of a United States election, the Director of National Intelligence, in consultation with the heads of any other appropriate executive departments and agencies (agencies), shall conduct an assessment of any information indicating that a foreign government, or any person acting as an agent of or on behalf of a foreign government, has acted with the intent or purpose of interfering in that election. The assessment shall identify, to the maximum extent ascertainable, the nature of any foreign interference and any methods employed to execute it, the persons involved, and the foreign government or governments that authorized, directed, sponsored, or supported it. The Director of National Intelligence shall deliver this assessment and appropriate supporting information to the President, the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of Defense, the Attorney General, and the Secretary of Homeland Security.

We recommend that an independent group should be empaneled to determine the extent of the adjudication errors throughout the State of Michigan. This is a national security issue.

Their conclusion is a biggy. Calling for the cited legal process to be done, and for a full survey of all the election results in Michigan to see just how bad it really is. Citing “National Security” makes it an international question and brings in Trump’s EO on international interference.

24. Michigan resident Gustavo Delfino, a former professor of mathematics in Venezuela and alumni of University of Michigan, offered a compelling affidavit [Exhibit 2] recognizing the inherent vulnerabilities in the SmartMatic electronic voting machines (software which was since incorporated into Dominion Voting Systems) during the 2004 national referendum in Venezuela (see attached declaration). After 4 years of research and 3 years of undergoing intensive peer review, Professor Delfino’s paper was published in the highly respected “Statistical Science” journal, November 2011 issue (Volume 26, Number 4) with title “Analysis of the 2004 Venezuela Referendum: The Official Results Versus the Petition Signatures.” The intensive study used multiple mathematical approaches to ascertain the voting results found in the 2004 Venezuelan referendum. Delfino and his research partners discovered not only the algorithm used to manipulate the results, but also the precise location in the election processing sequence where vulnerability in machine processing would provide such an opportunity. According to Prof Delfino, the magnitude of the difference between the official and the true result in Venezuela estimated at 1,370,000 votes. Our investigation into the error rates and results of the Antrim County voting tally reflect the same tactics, which have also been reported in other Michigan counties as well. This demonstrates a national security issue.

Appeal to prior art. So rounded up a Professor who did a bunch of prior statistical work. (Realize that when I was in school, “Computer Science” was not a major and “computers” and programming was taught in either the Engineering College or the Math Department. Math majors often get a fair amount of computer work / theory.

He, the Math Prof., outlined the how, and the how much, and they found the same pattern he had found in Venezuela, when a study of the Antrim County (and other counties) was done.

Again, a call to “National Security”.

Breaking For Part Two

At this point, this posting is getting long enough that WordPress editor is having lag issues. So the rest of the examination will come in another posting.

I’m also in need of a refill of the coffee cup and a “bio-break”, so it might be a while…

Subscribe to feed

About E.M.Smith

A technical managerial sort interested in things from Stonehenge to computer science. My present "hot buttons' are the mythology of Climate Change and ancient metrology; but things change...
This entry was posted in Political Current Events, Tech Bits. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to ASOG Dominion Report, A Review

  1. erl happ says:

    Terrific. Can’t beat a manual count with scrutineers looking over the shoulder.

  2. Serioso says:

    It does help to read real newspapers. The manual recount showed no fraud.

  3. The True Nolan says:

    THANK YOU for a great (so far!) analysis of the report. Bev Harris has for the last 20 years (that I know of) been screaming about computerized election fraud in the US. The biggest problem is that the fraud has been a bipartisan effort with both parties using it when the chance arose. That said, will enough GOP members now want to rock their own gravy train to fix an obvious problem and ensure future honest elections? Will the GOP back overturning a fraudulent election even when it means a second term for a Republican President they don’t necessarily support?

  4. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    From Serioso’s NYT Article:

    “Mr. Trump won by a 9,759 to 5,959-vote margin.”

    From the report above:

    Date   Total  Biden Trump 3rd Party Total POTUS votes
    Nov 21 16,044 5,960 9,748 241       15,949
    

    So a hand recount matches the final final machine run with the “cover up” software. Proving the “Election Day” software was, in fact, the bogus one.

    Nice. Thanks for that. Now we absolutely know that the software update of 23 Oct 2020 was there specifically to flip the vote to Biden:

    Date   Total  Biden Trump 3rd Party Total POTUS votes
    Nov 3  16,047 7,769 4,509 145       12,423
    

    Exactly inverting the results and with a very similar margin.

    So, great, now we know we can do a machine recount IN EVERY COUNTY IN EVERY STATE that used Dominion machines using the correct valid software and find out who really won…

    We can also now find out who created the 23 October software and pushed the update, so we know who belongs in jail…

  5. philjourdan says:

    So far, the same thing I have seen in it. But I thank you for the validation.

    And be kind of sorioso. He does not read his links.

  6. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    @Phil:

    Hey, I said “Thanks for that.”… That was being kind…

    8-)

    “The /snark is strong in you, O.B.Wan” ;-)

  7. President Elect H.R. says:

    The True Nolan: “That said, will enough GOP members now want to rock their own gravy train to fix an obvious problem and ensure future honest elections? Will the GOP back overturning a fraudulent election even when it means a second term for a Republican President they don’t necessarily support?”

    H-E-E-E-E–E-E-L-L-L NO!

    Everyone in swamp Uniparty is happy with the way things are now and A-OK with fraud to the highest bidder… “shoulda raised more money so I coulda bought the seat.”

    President Trump is the Great Disrupter of the Gravy Train that is Washington D.C. The GOP is the right wing of the Uniparty bird and the DNC is the left wing of the Uniparty bird. It is all just one big fluster cluck of a turkey.

    There is President Trump and 80 million+_/- Constitution-respecting Americans against the YSM, the TLAs, and the elected swamp-critters.

    All but a small handful can’t WAIT for Trump to be gone. Has there ever been a President that has never had the Senate recess for the whole frickin’ 4 years so he can appoint his own choices? NO!
    Not not one single Senator has voted to adjourn for recess in four #$&!$-er-freepin’ years! Not ONE!

    Starting to get the picture?

  8. President Elect H.R. says:

    oopsie! Hey E.M…. when you get a round tuit, would you mind closing the italics after The True Nolan’s quote? TIA.

    Normally I wouldn’t worry about it, but it looks to be quite the mess since I went on a rant.

    [Reply: FWIW, their was a gratuitous added ‘make italics’ marker right after the proper close italics marker. This typically indicates a persistent but very sporadic bug in WordPress where a “close thingy” is immediately followed by another “open thingy” that YOU did not type. I’ve been bit by it, and I’ve seen it happen to others too. -E.M.Smith]

  9. President Elect H.R. says:

    Hunh… you’ve told me about that before, E.M. It’s happened only a couple of times over the years, but it has happened and you were kind enough to chase it down and tell me it wasn’t my fault. Happens near the end of a line, as I recall. Most of the time it’s my fault, but there are those times…

    WordPress: “We strike fear and create mayhem… and puzzlement… across the internet!*”

    *Yah, but… the puzzling random mayhem is free 😁

    Thanks, E.M. 👍👍

  10. Serioso says:

    Please pardon my stupidity, but how does the fact that the manual count matches the machine count show that there was fraud. I don’t get it!

  11. MarcusZ1967 says:

    Brad Johnson on foreign connection to the election.
    https://tinyurl.com/y7b7rxco

  12. Pingback: ASOG Dominion Report, Review Part 2 | Musings from the Chiefio

  13. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    @Serioso:

    Because the manual recount only matches the software installed AFTER the election was over not the software use to count on election day.

    Changing the software within 90 days of the election is ILLEGAL and a CRIME.

    It also means that unless you go back and change the software on EVERY OTHER MACHINE RUN ON ELECTION DAY to the valid POST ELECTION copy then all you know is all those other machines have bogus totals too.

    Basically, in the actual election, BOGUS software that handed the total to Biden was run. AFTER the election a “cover up” happened and new software was installed. THAT software matches the hand count, but NOT the “tape” that originally was created on Election Day. That post election “cover up” software hands the election to Trump. Different software, different winners.

    ALL the other Dominion machines ought to have been running the same 23 Oct software, therefore ALL of them ought to have produced bogus vote totals as well.

    There’s a reason the law says “no changing software within 90 days of the election” and “Thou Shalt VALIDATE” that was also not done on the software swaps.

    Get it now?

  14. David A says:

    Serioso should also note that even matching a ballot count ( to late as it was) does not mean those ballots were ligitimate.

    Read the thousand plus sworn statements of disparate ways the Dems cheated, Dead votes, multiple votes from one person, out of residency votes, manufactured and identical ballots filled out in mass, ballots shipped across state lines and counted after the polls were closed.

    One struggles to imagine a method of cheating the Dems did not employ.

  15. Serioso says:

    From the New York Tijmes article:

    “Antrim County has become a focus of conspiracy theories of election fraud after a human error in the local clerk’s office initially caused the vote totals to flip on election night, giving Mr. Biden the win over Mr. Trump in the Republican stronghold.

    The error was caught the day after the election and fixed before the election results were certified.

    Supporters of Mr. Trump latched onto the fact that Dominion Voting Service tabulators were used in Antrim County and claimed that the initial mistake was evidence of widespread fraud in communities that use the same systems. The mistake in Antrim was caused when some ballots had to be reprinted to add additional school board candidates and the corresponding software wasn’t updated to reflect the change.

    The hand recount and audit by county and state officials is just one of many that will be done throughout Michigan, including an audit of results in Wayne County and its biggest city of Detroit, where Mr. Trump and his allies have filed lawsuits to try and get the results thrown out. Those lawsuits have been dismissed by local, state and federal judges who have said that the Republican claims of improper behavior in the handling of absentee ballots were not credible.

    After the recount, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, said the results should put an end to specious claims of election fraud. “Now it’s time for the disinformation campaigns to end, and for all leaders to unequivocally affirm the Nov election was secure, accurate & fair,” she said on Twitter. ”

    It helps to include ALL the facts, not just selectively.

  16. Simon Derricutt says:

    Serioso – it really looks like you didn’t read the forensic analysis above. Maybe you didn’t want to waste the tijme on something you had prejudged as being wrong.

    The ability to change the vote without an audit trail, and the deletion of the audit files anyway, tells me that the system was designed to enable vote-rigging. If so, then the people who bought in the system and controlled it would be certain to say the election was “secure, accurate & fair”. Of course I would claim to have put a pea under one of the cups….

  17. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    Serioso, are you REALLY that dumb? Or just can’t read? Or what?

    All the “facts” were included, by reference. By you. I read your NYT link the first time.

    The salient bit is that THE SOFTWARE USED ON ELECTION DAY WAS BOGUS AND GAVE BIDEN A FALSE WIN. Later, after the “cover up” software update, THAT software gives a correct count and a TRUE TRUMP WIN.

    That:
    “Supporters of Mr. Trump latched onto the fact that Dominion Voting Service tabulators were used in Antrim County and claimed that the initial mistake was evidence of widespread fraud in communities that use the same systems.”
    just says that but for Trump voters banging on the door, the Diddle would have been used.

    Then “The error was caught the day after the election and fixed before the election results were certified.” when we know that the 5 November software STILL didn’t match the actual hand count, as the hand count matches the 21 November software, not the 5 November software, shows that “the day after fix” was also WRONG. Just in a different way.

    Did you even read the posting, or just the NYT? Or do you have trouble understanding time sequenced events?

    I’m really getting tired of typing the whole damn thing all over again, a little at a time, just because you don’t (or can’t) read.

    Date   Total  Biden Trump 3rd Party Total POTUS votes
    Nov 3  16,047 7,769 4,509 145       12,423   BOGUS & Biden Win
    Nov 5  18,059 7,289 9,783 255       17,327   "Fixed" but still very wrong NYT cite
    Nov 21 16,044 5,960 9,748 241       15,949   "Actually right" software & hand count.
    

    See the pattern? Wrong software and config. Still wrong. Finally right long after actual election over.

    The only interesting bit only makes sense in the context of something I uncovered this morning. A “blank” in the field name of the XML describing the ballot layout buggers the ballot and sends things to the Diddle Box. What I think they are talking about in this statement (that I’d read days ago but lacked the XML context to explain):

    The mistake in Antrim was caused when some ballots had to be reprinted to add additional school board candidates and the corresponding software wasn’t updated to reflect the change.

    Which is in fact, itself, hiding the truth. It wasn’t “software” but the ballot XML description (that I suppose could be classed as “software” but isn’t a program). They loaded a WRONG XML ballot description with a ” ” space in a field name and that caused ballot rejections. Not the “reprinting” but the configuration load by poll workers.

    This is NOT an exoneration, it is a condemnation.

    It means ANY load of a ballot description in XML can be “diddled at load” sending ballots by the bucket to the adjudication Diddle Box for a Poll Worker to vote.

    https://chiefio.wordpress.com/2020/12/18/asog-dominion-report-review-part-2/#comment-136488

    search on “XML” in the page for all the updated stuff.

    Basically you can’t put a space in the NAME of a field in the XML description of the ballot. So whoever enters that description of the ballot layout can cause voted ballots to go to The Diddle Box just by inserting a blank in a field name. Nice hack.

    So every ballot description becomes a potential Diddle The Vote lever.

    Now we do not know if it was malicious or just stupid, but we do know that the 3 November (broken SW broken XML) had poll workers moving Trump ballots to Biden from the Diddle Box (Adjudication). Looks like about 1800 of them. Then trashing about 2500 more Trump votes. This was the “adjudication” process of “rejected” ballots.

    We also know that the 5 November (still broken SW, XML looks “fixed”) gives VERY wrong total votes, but the Diddle Box votes are now going to Trump as they were voted since the close watch of the re-run made it high risk to hand them to Biden.

    Then when it comes time to hand count, the 21 November run (working software and XML) gives Trump the win and has the right count of total votes. Leaving me to ask where did the “extra” 2k votes total and 1k more for Biden of the 5 November run (that the NYT is touting) go to? (Or come from, then…)

    Three runs “Never the same way twice”, and only close to right when under intense scrutiny, a hand count done for audit, and both the software and XML configuration changed weeks after the “official” election run. You think that shows everything is FINE? Really?

    If you really think this is all just fine, I suggest staying away from power tools.

  18. Simon Derricutt says:

    EM – actually I deliberately wrote tijme. Maybe it was too subtle a dig….
    Thanks anyway. I do mess up with single-finger on touchscreen sometijmes.

  19. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    OK… I “put it baaackk”… ;-)

    Though I’m not “getting it”… (too much wine yesterday, today starting slow?)

  20. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    Kabalarian Philosophy or tijme (Tijme Gommers) · GitHub or a disease:
    https://www.headache-adviser.com/carotidynia.html

    Other cases can be mild. I should mention that most of the tijme when carotidynia occurs, it is unilateral or on one side only. Certain things put people at risk for getting carotidyna. These include: smoking resulting in carotid stenosis (plaque formation in artery)

    So many potentials…

  21. philjourdan says:

    @President Elect H.R. – Re: acceptance. Exactly right! But we have to work underground since the “state media” will not investigate the crimes of democrats. We will not accept illegitimate idiots because the state media says so and the opposition steals elections.

    Period.

  22. philjourdan says:

    @EM – WHOA! That made me feel better, but I suspect not you. Yes Sorioso is that dumb.

    After all these years, we know he does not read anything that does not agree with his bias. It is a psychological issue that has been defined in the APJ. He can see it, but just not read it.

    That being said, thank you for saying what you did. Frankly I am glad I am not blinded by hatred as others are. We know that fraud happened. Denying it is denying the facts. We know the machines used to count most votes are fraudulent. Denying that is denying the facts. What we do not know, but the evidence (yes EVIDENCE – the thing fake news is allergic to) strongly suggests is that the election was stolen. That is not proof, that is finding the perp standing over the victim with a smoking gun in his hand, while he protests that he wrestled it from the real killer.

    But sorioso will not understand that because his masters told him “nothing to see here, move along”. I can never live like that. But I guess some can.

  23. Simon Derricutt says:

    EM – see Serioso’s comment “From the New York Tijmes article:”. Yep, I know spelling is a flexible thing, but after a long time writing programs where a typo can give a strange bug if you don’t spot it, I tend to catch them. Even standard English spelling isn’t that regular (ghoti == “fish” if you take the way things are sometimes pronounced) and human comprehension can read reversed characters within a word – providing all the letters are there and the first and last letter are correct the word is normally effectively legible.

    These weird things abut human perception also imply that we don’t normally read what’s there, but only a part of it and enough for the subconscious to fill in the rest according to assumptions. That also quite often applies to conversations. My mum always used to answer the comment she expected me to make, rather than the one I’d actually said. Though she was maybe a bit more extreme in this than most people, I’ve noticed that a lot of people do much the same and things that are out of the ordinary don’t get clocked. That may indeed be a reason why the Big Lie works so well if repeated often enough, and why the evidence of electoral malfeasance seems to be going nowhere – surely there would need to be so many people involved in the conspiracy that it becomes unbelievable that such a conspiracy could work. Therefore, to most people it will seem like a conspiracy theory without foundation, given that the YSM keep on saying “unfounded” and “no evidence” with every newscast.

    Given the extent of the fraud this time, does it make sense that 2016 also had a lot of such fiddling too, but not enough to overturn the wave of votes for Trump and “something different from the politics we’re used to”? Might explain why Hillary was so sure she’d win, and why TIME magazine had their front cover already printed with the new president.

    For proofreading programs or other stuff I’d written, I found it useful to put it in a different format, such as changing the font or printing it on paper, since seeing it as something new made it easier to see the errors after maybe several times missing the typo in initial re-reads. Change the format so the error is in a different place and it becomes more obvious. Much the same sort of thing could apply to the political stuff as well – get a different angle on it and the errors show up more easily.

    Why does the socialist shiny thing maintain its attraction despite the historical (and current) failures? I’d suggest that most of us grew up in a family where that worked perfectly well – from each according to their capabilities and to each what they needed. Dad went out to earn money, Mum took care of the house, and we kids did what we were asked to do, and everyone got fed and had a roof over them. For some people that didn’t work well (or not at all), but for the most part it worked fine. Why not spread that to everyone? However, standard human nature of only doing the minimum required means that trying to extend that beyond family ties and parental authority just won’t work unless you replicate that absolute parental authority – works for kids, but not for adults in general. That’s one good reason why kids leave home as soon as they can – my dad never did admit he was wrong about anything (and no-one else was allowed the TV control). Still, the socialist thing is maybe about replicating that family life as an adult, where there’s safety and Big Brother is taking care of you.

    I find it hard to think that the election fraud could have been so widespread. The evidence available so far however shows exactly that. The evidence also indicates that this is a huge conspiracy, with judges and TLAs involved either via desire or kompromat or threats. It only needs a small percentage of the people, but in the right places of power, and where the majority of people don’t want to spend their time on politics it’s only going to be the extremists who will put the time in to getting into those positions.

    Also brings in some other human characteristics – a stout denial will work more often than not. If you remove the evidence of wrongdoing, you can argue that there is no evidence. Computer files can be removed or changed and few can really be taken as being absolute evidence anyway.

    Serioso, like other trolls, wants to take up peoples’ time answering his non-questions, and probably needs to visit a lot of other blogs in a day so won’t want to spend too much time on each post. Could be why tijme is an indicator here – no tijme to proof-read. A while back he even got his own name wrong, whereas if he was using the same one each time it would be in the system he’s using.

  24. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    @Simon:

    Ah, got it.

    I have 3 “modes” of reading.

    1) FAST. Sight reading based on shapes of conglomerates, lots of ECC applied and lots of “project the meaning” so “NewYorkTimes” shape is mapped to NYT regardless of spaces, misspelling, an added letter or one missing. Substantially never catches typos.
    ( I think “NeuYrkTims” would also parse as might “NeewYrkTime”… )

    2) Slow. Comprehension is better for very difficult things. (Currently being used on Julia parallel programming texts, pausing to figure out what various odd new constructs or local defined (sometimes undefined…) jargon means). Mostly “word for word” based on more than just outline profile of shapes. Some typos caught, but often missed and sometimes things like “there for their” missed as the “sound” matches.

    3) Proof. Deliberate checks of spelling, punctuation, diction, etc. Used when programming and for proof reading postings (often after written, occasionally after posting…). Word BY word with checker engaged.

    Serioso’s stuff gets “FAST”… (as do many comments and my posts when writing). I’d not noticed it in your reply the first pass through either. Had to rescan slower to see it.)

  25. YMMV says:

    Simon Derricutt:

    My mum always used to answer the comment she expected me to make, rather than the one I’d actually said.

    Coulda been a politician. They never answer the question that was asked. It’s a skill to develop.

    These weird things abut human perception also imply that we don’t normally read what’s there, but only a part of it and enough for the subconscious to fill in the rest according to assumptions.

    and according to their biases. absolutely. Confirmation bias too.

    Why does the socialist shiny thing maintain its attraction despite the historical (and current) failures? I’d suggest that most of us grew up in a family where that worked perfectly well – from each according to their capabilities and to each what they needed.

    Yes! The family is the stem-cell of political thinking. The basic unit, the atom.

    Utopian, why can’t we all be one big happy family? (not all families are happy) (extrapolate much? maybe size matters)

    Communist, “From each according to ability; To each according to need”. Marx said this, but he was not the first. This interesting article makes a good case for the origins in the Bible.
    https://theconversation.com/from-each-according-to-ability-to-each-according-to-need-tracing-the-biblical-roots-of-socialisms-enduring-slogan-138365

    Empires, Monarchies, and other paternalistic systems. The leader addresses his people as “my children”. Not as if they are children (that too), but using those words. Many systems, maybe even all, treat their people as children. The nanny state. “in loco parentis”. Big Brother.

    Mafia. “the family”

    The commune. This is the smallest extension of the family. Sometimes it works for a short time. Imagine a bunch of guys in a band living together in a big house. Or even just being in a band, sooner or later some members are more equal than others.

    I could go on about where women end up in the big family systems, but I will shut up now.

  26. Frank says:

    When I looked, Trump got 61% of the certified vote in Atrium County in 2020 and 62% in 2016. Nothing suspicious in the final result; it fits with the voting shifts in similar counties. Whatever problems exist with Dominion voting machines in this county in 2020, the correct final result (one that agreed with a hand recount) was certified, wasn’t it? And Atrium county was unusual in requiring a late change to their ballot.

    Nor is there any evidence of problems one a scale that could have produced Biden’s 2.8% (154,000 vote) margin of victory in Michigan. Atrium county represents only 0.2% of the ballots cast in Michigan. An improbable 10% error there would be less than 1% of the final margin in Michigan.

    Elsewhere, Georgia twice hand re-counted the ballots from every voting machine and no significant problems were reported. In every state, I presume authorities use hand recounts to audit a random subset of the output from voting machines.

    All of the states whose vote totals are being questioned have about 1000 precincts. Even in GA and AZ where the margin was 0.3%, a 10% shift produced by fraud or error in voting patterns and turnout from the larger state trend would stand out. You need to hypothesize fraud in several dozen precincts to change the final outcome in these states. Nationally, fraud needs to have flipped three states.

    The national popular vote is the least likely to have been perturbed by fraud, so let’s consider it for a second – even though we all know the Electoral College is what matters. Trump lost by 4.5% nationally, more than Romney, Ford, Nixon, Gore and Kerry. He lost the popular vote by 2.5% more than he did in 2020. In 2016, a 2.5% shift would have cost Trump FL, PA, MI, and WI and 95(!) Electoral votes. The big picture of a 4.5% national loss and a 2.5% shift from 2016 means the odds were really low that Trump could win in the Electoral College because of local shifts that didn’t follow the national trend. If you think of the national election as an elephant, Atrium county is a mere pimple on its a$$. From a statistical perspective, it is unlikely that a 2.5% shift to the Democrats would even let the election come down to three states decided by less than 1% (AZ, GA and WI, flipping would produce a tie in the Electoral College). If you were told before the election that Trump would lose by 4.5% nationally, you would certainly expect Trump to have lost in the Electoral College.

    (The national popular vote could have been perturbed by changes in the rules and security of mail in ballots. These rules, however, are the results of state law and state legal proceedings. No court has found deviations from those legal rules involved enough votes to prevent certifying state results. So the national 4.5% margin is real.).

    [Reply: Gee, just what I’d expect from a Wash. D.C. IP#. “Nothing to see, move along” and ignore things like the V.P. of Dominion having said on a phone call with his Antifa buddies that he had fixed it so Trump looses, the boxes have a proportional vote switch, the turnout was suppressed with Covid yet more total votes than evah, several places already reversed to Trump win on forensic audit, etc. But yeah, cite the places where they hand counted the phony ballots again… More perhaps when I’m not doing blog maintenance. -E.M.Smith]

  27. A C Osborn says:

    This is not the only evidence of course there is also this so called “Audit” where they were counting Blank Ballots and mutiple Ballots wiht the same signature,

    https://hereistheevidence.com/election-2020/pa-update-records/

    Then we have Arizona

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/must-see-video-voter-fraud-occurred-arizona-state-certified-fraudulent-results-video/

    and finally simple arithmetic totals

    https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/12/breaking-huge-simple-math-shows-biden-claims-13-million-votes-eligible-voters-voted-2020-election/

    Which has prompted a revised Turnout figure from 66.2% to 73%

  28. YMMV says:

    In my chemistry of the family, I forgot to add in tribes. Tribes are an extended family. In modern times, tribes can be metaphorical, a group of people with something in common which defines the group. “One of us”, versus “you people”. Race can also be a tribe. If you are a member, you owe loyalty and allegiance to the tribe.

    But more on the commune. The Commune, Paris 1871, was a very important influence on Marx’s thought. Communards. See if this does not sound familiar. (Montmarte district of Paris).

    In 1871, the end of the Prussian siege, the fall of Emperor Napoleon III and the defeat of the French army left Paris briefly ungoverned. Into the power vacuum rushed the citizens of this, the most rebellious of its districts, who gathered on Place du Tertre to declare the city a socialist enclave, the Commune. To back it up, they had a hundred cannon, purchased from their own pockets when it looked like the Prussians would invade the city rather than just besieging it.

    The Commune introduced votes for women, pensions for widows and orphans, free education, separation of church and state, the suspension of usurious debt, enlightened working conditions, and staff takeovers of failing businesses. Opera and drama were performed free and the royal art galleries opened to the public for the first time.

    Quote from “Five Nights in Paris: After Dark in the City of Light”, p.231-232, by ex-pat John Baxter
    (The title is somewhat misleading, it is more historical anecdotes about Paris)

  29. cdquarles says:

    I say it helps so see that all groups of humans are corporations, even if not organized as such legally. One -> Two -> family -> clan -> tribe -> nation; and so forth, from domestic corporations to commercial corporations to civic corporations to governments, which some are recognized as such (here, cities/towns are formal corporations, counties and the state are not so recognized as formal corporations). Some corporations can do economic calculations, some cannot; yet in the end one person has to make the decisions or convince others to agree to them.

    It also seems to me that folk forget that exchanges and division of labor don’t have to involve money. Yet when they do, don’t conflate them. Either kind do involve time, and we all live one hour at a time and decisions all involve risk/reward or some other kind of trade-off made under uncertainty (other than everyone’s body dies at some point).

  30. philjourdan says:

    @YMMV – Re: Simon’s mom, vs Politicians – Slight difference. Simon’s mom answered comments she expected to hear ,while Politicians merely answer questions they want to hear,

  31. Simon Derricutt says:

    Seems my thoughts on socialism are shared by others here, which is encouraging. I like to work out why things happen, maybe especially where people believe things that looking at the actual data and some logic show that it’s not true.

    The comment from Frank appeared somewhat further up, but wasn’t in the list on the right at any point I looked. New voice…. Maybe the real point about election fiddling is that any of the red flags should have some perfectly-normal explanation, at least if you don’t dig too deep. For example a water-leak causing evacuation of the building and stopping the counting, until you look deeper and find it was a leaking valve in a toilet and didn’t flood the floor. No evacuation necessary.

    Given the the machines were able to print out a new ballot to replace any ballot that was flagged as marginally-readable, then it’s pretty likely that using a Sharpie to mark the ballot (and the bleeding of the ink) would produce a lot of such questionable ballots, and the machine would print out a nice, neat, machine-readable replacement ready for the hand-recounts later on, with the vote marked as whatever the operator said it should have been. Nothing to see here, move on….

    The hand-recounts would thus include a lot of these machine-printed replacement ballots, and the hand-recount would agree with the machine count. I’d however expect that the machine-printed ballots would be obviously different from the hand-filled-in ballots. For one thing, they wouldn’t show the fold for postal ballots, and in any case a machine-printed tick in a box will look different from a hand-written tick. You can sort the ballots into hand-filled and machine-printed, therefore. Nice to know how many in each pile. That doesn’t tell you how many dead people voted, or how many voted multiple times, but at least it would tell you how many the machine modified.

    For me, the big thing here was that the voting machines were designed to enable a fixed vote, as in the weighting of the votes. Whether or not this was actually used (and there is a problem in proving that if the machine prints out replacement ballots), the fact that that is actually possible is enough to invalidate any election using those machines. To a large extent, if the evidence cover-up is clever enough, it becomes impossible to prove that it happened. However, it also becomes impossible to prove that it didn’t happen.

    I’d reckon that Trump’s 2016 win was a result of people thinking that the other candidates had been tried and didn’t gain anything for the people, so let’s try someone new. Much the same happened here in France with Macron, and though Macron has made some bad decisions he’s generally done a better job than the others would have done. I expect he’ll get in again. In the UK, the voters had a choice of bad, worse, and disaster, and they chose the least-worst option of Boris. I don’t doubt the intelligence of Boris, but his attention to detail is severely lacking and he relies on his minions to cover the large amount he misses. That isn’t working out that well…. Despite that, he was probably still the best choice to lead the country, which is somewhat of an indictment in itself. Looking around at European politics, it seems to me that in each country the people voted for the least-worst option, which is maybe an indication that the populace aren’t quite as thick as the politicians think they are.

    Given that, I’d also have expected Trump to have won a second term even if I hadn’t been able to compare the sizes of the political rallies that each had. My brother went to a Trump rally in Missouri, but had to watch it from outside since there were just too many people to fit in. Over the years from 2016, a lot of people would have seen their standard of living improve, and the unemployment figures drop, so I’d expect people would want that to continue.

    The ASOG report shows details of the election fiddling as regards what happened on the voting machines. The other fiddling that went on, such as multiple postal votes per person, postal votes sent to the addresses of people who’d moved, and all the other odd things, was not investigated here.

    I’ve no idea as to whether it will turn out that the investigations will be continued or whether the courts will listen to the evidence or rule on it. It was however always important who counts the votes, and if you allow that job to be done by a computer system with software that can change the votes, you’ll never have a fair election again. Voters may not have good choices, but they will choose the least-worst option if the votes are fairly counted.

  32. Frank says:

    EM replied: “Gee, just what I’d expect from a Wash. D.C. IP#. “Nothing to see, move along” and ignore things like the V.P. of Dominion having said on a phone call with his Antifa buddies that he had fixed it so Trump looses, the boxes have a proportional vote switch, the turnout was suppressed with Covid yet more total votes than evah, several places already reversed to Trump win on forensic audit, etc. But yeah, cite the places where they hand counted the phony ballots again.”

    EM: I’m not sure what my VA IP address has to do with anything; there are stupid people everywhere. Maybe this stupid climate skeptic can learn something.

    If some “Eric at Dominion” (there are probably dozens) did brag that he made sure Trump wouldn’t be re-elected, there still needs to be some method by which he accomplished this feat. A VP of sales doesn’t necessary have the technical ability to corrupt even one machine. If I understand correctly (please tell me if I’m wrong), in Atrium county, the hand count of paper ballots and machine count eventually agreed and were certified. Every voter had an opportunity to review a paper copy of their ballot. So I don’t understand how any votes were “flipped”. The number of in person ballots cast agreed with the number of people who signed as they came in. Absentee ballots are check as they arrive against the list of ballots sent out. The total number of certified votes agreed with the total number of in-person and absentee voters. I gather that Atrium county did need to revise their ballot at a late date and that caused initial problems reading the ballots. In the end, Trump got 61% of the vote here in 2020 compared to 62% in 2020, and apparently did 3% worse in Michigan overall because of a shift in suburban counties, not rural areas like Atrium County. That shift was common nationwide.

    Corrupt election officials could try to sneak in phony ballots past poll watchers and destroy an equal number of real ballots. The phony ballots would need to be intermixed with real ballots (50 consecutive votes for Biden would be suspicious) or the phony ballots would need to be a mixture of Biden and Trump votes and many more would be needed. That would be perfectly possible in one or a few precincts, but that wouldn’t come close to flipping MI (or AZ or GA or WI). Adding even 10% more Biden ballots in one precinct might arouse suspicions and that certainly didn’t happen in Atrium County this year (61% vs 62%). The possibility of local small-scale fraud is why I look whole states and especially the national popular vote. When Trump lost by 4.5% nationally, 2.5% more than the narrow election in 2016 (when 95 Electoral Votes won by less than 1.2%), the most logical outcome is the one we have. This wasn’t a close election. Five other presidential candidates since 1960 lost by less than 4.5% without all of this fuss.

    The only real difference was the pandemic and that Trump discouraged absentee voting, while Biden encouraged it. As predicted, this made the slower-to-count absentee vote (which legally could arrive after Election Day in some states and until 11/20! in CA) tend to favor Biden in some close states – but not Arizona (which some networks wrongly called on election night), where Biden’s lead shrank from 3% to 0.3%. We’ve seen the same phenomena on election nights when a state not being called with 90% of precincts reporting because the missing vote came from areas dominated by one party. In 2020, it took one or two days for enough of the missing vote to come in – and not 1 or 2 hours. The final vote in the most critical state, PA, was 1.2% – just as “close” as in 2016 (and well about mandatory recount).

    Long before any vote was counted, voter turnout was predicted to be huge despite the pandemic from the large number of requests for absentee ballots, surveys by pollsters and early voting turnout. You had no reason to be surprised by turnout. All those voters weren’t there to vote for Biden, they were there to vote for or against the most polarizing political figure since Lincoln. Unfortunately, Trump never had the approval of 50% of the people (low 40’s was typical) and re-elections are usually referenda on the incumbent.

    I’ll be happy to agree that absentee ballot security in some states should be much stronger, that a few dead people vote in every election, and that I’m really concerned that millions of non-citizens could have been registered to vote by activists or flaws in motor-voter procedures. CA did accidentally registered a huge number of non-citizens (750,000?) and had to remove their names. (No one wants to approach a Hispanic and challenge them to prove they are citizens.) However, we’ve been living with those problems for decades and paranoid Republicans don’t want a national ID card that clearly states who is and isn’t a citizen. Georgia seems to care about secure voting. They purged their rolls of people who hadn’t voted recently in 2018, and they have a system of electronic signature matching for absentee balloting. (If you leave signature validity decisions up to a person, that person’s biases and knowledge of local political preferences will influence how many signatures are rejected. Valid ballots may be rejected by such software, but it will happen without human bias.).

    I’ll confess that I know nothing about computer and software security. However, I assume that every system sold since 2000 produces paper records that can be and are audited (at least a sample). I haven’t heard differently. The manufacturers of such machines are selling both convenience and security and there is competition.

  33. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    Still have not had time for a comprehensive reply to Frank, so just a couple of points ATM.

    The Dominion guy who bragged was identified (by himself and others) as the V.P. Software Engineering stuff and very much had the skilz and authority needed to bugger the software. That updates were done just prior to the election AND just after is CLASSIC indicia of software fraud and coverup (thus it being ILLEGAL so that act alone invalidates the election certification).

    The poll machine issues the paper tape (and not all locations / States issue one, mine did not) to the voter as a receipt. It then goes to the Poll Station (where adjustments can be done) and an image of the ballot then goes to the central station (usually county) where the management station can count “proportional votes” and more votes can be hand tossed out (ie Tump Votes – as was clearly done in several cases with corroborating testimony or as in Antrim in the 3 Nov run per this forensic audit).

    I have been professionally employed in Computer Security and have over 40 years of computer skill and employment. I’m a professional at this. There are so many ways to bugger the vote in this contraption of Dominion / Softmatic that a medium-bright high school kid can steal an election and leave little trail. That log files were WIPED instead of artfully re-written says medium skill at best, or in a big hurry.

    There is a HUGE difference between “does the buggered poll tape summary match the reported numbers from the buggered machine?” and a Forensic Audit. One is asking your cashier if they counted $100 in the till when they told you there was $100 in the till. The other is checking sales receipts recorded, number of sales, average sale, total cash in, total cash out, cash in till at every transaction during the day and more and then making sure they ALL match. (Oh, and match against restocking inventory needed too…)

    So far all we’ve had are semi-useless compare 2 numbers “audits”. The one Forensic Audit found more buggerage than the British Navy of 1702…

    As per that being a pimple on a butt: Well, if you find one small pustule by looking ONLY at one cm^2, maybe you ought to look over all the skin to see if that’s perhaps not just one tiny pimple but in fact a case of POX with pustules all over the place…

    Per a DC IP: Indicates location and thus cultural alignment of the area. Not 100% but highly likely that someone in N. Va with a DC IP# either works for or in some way is dependent on a Large Government with lots of money to drop locally.

    Far less likely, but not off the table, is a TLA affiliation / relationship. As the TLAs are in the soup against Trump and have clearly acted in bad faith (so risk discovery and problems), it is highly likely that they are going to be active, or have contract actors, to sway public opinion / inhabit (& inhibit?) discussion boards, and run defense. It isn’t likely, but needs to be considered when a “new voice” shows up. (Also unlikely but possible would be a, say, Chinese Operative group located near their TLA target and doing some dis-info of their own). Yes, most likely is some guy with an ordinary job in N. Va. who just doesn’t do computer guts much. But the rest also needs consideration by the blog operator / security guy. I.e. me.

    I’d expect an entirely different cultural POV and likely employment from an IP in Wichita Or Boone Iowa.

  34. philjourdan says:

    @EM – Re: Frank – would you also expect the swamp denizen to constantly get the name of the county wrong? It is ANTRIM, not ATRIUM county. That alone shows he has no clue what he is talking about. He has decided to discuss a mythical land of Oz, not a real place.

  35. Serioso says:

    Evidence that fraud can occur is not the same as evidence that fraud did occur.

  36. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    Proof the law WAS BROKEN makes the election a fraud on the face of it. It is, and was ILLEGAL. Period. Law broke, election illegal. (Software change both before and after election inside 90 days. NO re-certification.)

    The forensic audit showing the “proportional vote” flag was set to “ON” and the tabulated several thousand higher than the actual vote (once “adjudication” was turned off via fixing the XML, and the “hand disposal” of Trump votes prevented, Run #2 of 6 November) shows FRAUD DID OCCUR. There is no other way trump had 5k less votes in Run #1.

    Forensic Audit found clear FRAUD EVIDENCE.

    Only run #3 21 November has correct totals with XML “bypass” turned off reducing “adjudicated” Diddle Box votes and preventing proportional voting uplift for Biden and vote tossing from Trump. Proof of The Diddle in the first place.

  37. V.P. Elect Smith says:

    @Phil:

    I find it quite interesting that Serioso started out in N. Virginia near a TLA HQ, and now Frank is in N. Va. with a Wash. D.C. IP address. According to the newer IPs, Serioso is now in the Boston area, but still in the Bos-Wash corridor. But his IP has changed at least twice there, so could be a VPN outlet. Or he’s just home from H.Q. for a while…

    I wonder if Frank is the new guy, or maybe a supervisor called in to try to prevent the strong story / evidence here from being left looking clean and clear? Or maybe I’m just suffering the usual Systems Admin Paranoid Fantasies. (Though we did catch a Russian Spy once bouncing off Apple exterior router and banging on a secret military internet connection in Hawaii, so it does happen. Army guys just wanted us to shut up about finding the connection they were not supposed to have and didn’t care about the Russian. FBI got back to us over a week later and wanted to fill out a paper report – to which we asked “Why? It is all over now.”…

    So yeah, I entertain those thoughts because there ARE MANY active TLA and foreign Agents active all over the place, I’ve played “capture the flag” with them before, and showed them real, and this is a Very Big Issue, so expected involvement would be higher.

    But most likely just a DNC contact or Soros Funded NGO near DC with assigned staff. Or just “Some Guy” back from shoveling papers around D.C. and bored. Any would fit.

    Oh, and yes, spelling issues (especially with patterns) can speak to general skill level and precision, and also to culture of origin.

  38. rhoda klapp says:

    Antrim to Atrium is likely an auto=correct problem/.

  39. Simon Derricutt says:

    Serioso – “Evidence that fraud can occur is not the same as evidence that fraud did occur.”

    Surely, the evidence that fraud was not only possible but designed into the voting machine as a standard menu option should be enough to disqualify the election? Maybe especially if the files that would have logged that option as being used were deleted this year but available for previous years.

  40. A C Osborn says:

    I notice that “Frank” totally agnored all three of the links that I posted.
    I have posted many links on another Forum and not one TDS sufferer can bear to actually look at them.
    They all to a man/woman look on line for some bit of Democrap propaganda to trash the link, usually they use the source of the link to do so.
    They always avoid/ignore the actual data.

    Perhaps “Frank” should educate himself to what has actually been happenning instead of ignoring it or trying to excuse it.

  41. cdquarles says:

    In my mind, this is a personality issue and a philosophical thing. I don’t sweat numbers of organizations as much as the philosophies of those nominally leading them. That is, 6 groups with 6 separate philosophies means more than 6000 groups with the same or similar enough ones.

    Faith is certain knowledge of that which you can’t get any other way. It takes as much faith to say there is no God as to say there is one. Faith requires induction and induction isn’t as mechanical-like as deduction. Both require evidence and evidence isn’t just that which is external to a person.

    Leftism, then, is just another religion in that aspect, so it will be just as hard to attack as any other; but, I note, there is one which openly states that if its axioms are vain, the whole thing is vain.

  42. Pingback: Interesting Items 12/21 – Interesting Items

  43. philjourdan says:

    @Rhoda Klapp – I have auto correct turned on, and at no time did it correct Antrim to Atrium. Had it done so once, I might have missed it. After the first half dozen times, there is no way I would have missed it.

    Sorry, that excuse does not hold water.

  44. A remarkable feature of the 4th November initial results is apparent right→left vote transfer in nine out of sixteen precincts – each candidate got the votes that belonged to the next candidate to the right (as listed in the published results). So Trump got the Libertarian votes:

    http://theriveroflife.com/2020/12/23/antrim-county-election-right-to-left-vote-transfer/

  45. The True Nolan says:

    @Andrew Chapman “So Trump got the Libertarian votes:”

    Very interesting link! Counting votes accurately SHOULD be about as simple a programmable task as conceivable. Counting them both accurately and securely is somewhat more complicated, but still pretty straightforward. When things get THIS screwed up, this is no accident, this is a coordinated attack.

  46. Pingback: The Problem with Innumeracy – Pragmatic Environmentalist of New York

Anything to say?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.