WARNING: This will be long. And not being cyber smart, I don't understand all of it so bear with me.

First we take a trip in the wayback time machine to 2003 when there were issues in the 2002 midterms. At that time, Diebold was the focus.

Quote:

---

Feb 5, 2003: Yesterday, technicians and programmers for Diebold Election Systems, the company that supplied every single voting machine for the surprising 2002 results in the state of Georgia, the company that is preparing to convert the state of Maryland to its no-paper-trail computerized voting, admitted to a file-sharing system that amounts to a colossal security flaw.

"Technology transfer for updates!" This is among the benefits in the Diebold PowerPoint sales presentation given to the State of Georgia. Easy updating -- too easy, apparently.

In "Black Box Voting: Ballot-Tampering in the 21st Century," author Bev Harris examines the integrity of current electronic voting systems. She recently installed a Whistleblowers page at her web site ( http://www.blackboxvoting.com/whistle.html). "We've been getting about four new whistleblower reports a day," says Harris, "and some of them are quite serious."

Like this: Diebold Election Systems, which builds the AccuVote machines, both optical scan and touch-screen, was parking files on an unprotected public Internet location. Not a few files -- thousands of files; election files, hardware and software specifications, program files, voting program patches -- and sometimes, files with curious names.

Though the address is obscure, whistleblowers found the FTP site using a simple Google search. A Global Election Systems web site, located at http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/Towers/2256/ contains a list of links like "History," "Press Releases," "Staff" and -- amazingly -- "FTP."

The FTP button gave total access to anonymous users, allowing anyone to download or upload to the motherlode. The FTP site contained no copyright statement, asked for no user name, put locks on no directories. Visitors (or vote-riggers) from anywhere in the world could simply walk in the front door. (Have a look at part of the file directory: http://www.blackboxvoting.com/WalkRightIn.html)

A person interested in tampering with an election would have to wonder why in the Sam Hill anyone would hand over what amounts to an instruction manual for vote-rigging to anyone who can navigate a Google search.

"Sometimes our customers use the FTP site to transfer their own files," explains Guy Lancaster, whose web site, http://www.guylancaster.com/guylancaster.html, says that he developed and maintains the intranet web site for Global Election Systems, now called Diebold Election Systems. "It has been up quite some years. It started when it was Global."

---

Quote:

---

These files, freely shared and sometimes snagged from the FTP and e-mailed to election workers and technicians, included hardware and software specifications, election results files, the vote-counting program itself, and "replacement files" for Diebold's GEMS vote-counting system and for the Windows software underlying the system. In fact, anyone with a modem could have hunkered over a computer to download, upload or slightly change and overwrite the files on Diebold's FTP site.

Some files had simple "zip" passwords attached to them, but dozens had no protection at all. And even the passwords, Lancaster admitted in his October, 2000 e-mail, were easy to guess. "I can find no way of authenticating a PIN without revealing enough information to crack it," he says, adding that he was beginning to think it was impossible to make the system secure.

---

Quote:

---

"Black Box Voting" whistleblowers voiced concerns about many of the files. Harris can't read a lick of code, but apparently computer enthusiasts have been surreptitiously downloading the Diebold files for some time now, examining them quietly. When the "Black Box Voting" whistleblower page went live recently, geek-reports began flowing.

One whistleblower called in with a terse question: "Why would we want a utility that can duplicate memory cards in optical scan voting machines? Are the cards serialized? Are they serialized internally? Is it hard-wired into the card?" Apparently something he'd read in those FTP files had gotten him all riled up about a memory card duplication utility. So Harris asked another of her sources, a voting machine engineer, about this.

"Oh no, no, no." He said. "That wouldn't meet FEC regulations!"

---

Read the rest HERE

Also from 2003:

Quote:

---

According to election industry officials, electronic voting systems are absolutely secure, because they are protected by passwords and tamperproof audit logs. But the passwords can easily be bypassed, and in fact the audit logs can be altered. Worse, the votes can be changed without anyone knowing, even the County Election Supervisor who runs the election system.

The computer programs that tell electronic voting machines how to record and tally votes are allowed to be held as "trade secrets." Can citizen's groups examine them? No. The companies that make these machines insist that their mechanisms are a proprietary secret. Can citizen's groups, or even election officials, audit their accuracy? Not at all, with touch screens, and rarely, with optical scans, because most state laws mandate that optical scan paper ballots be run through the machine and then sealed into a box, never to be counted unless there is a court order. Even in recounts, the ballots are just run through the machine again. Nowadays, all we look at is the machine tally.

Therefore, when I found that Diebold Election Systems had been storing 40,000 of its files on an open web site, an obscure site, never revealed to public interest groups, but generally known among election industry insiders, and available to any hacker with a laptop, I looked at the files. Having a so-called security-conscious voting machine manufacturer store sensitive files on an unprotected public web site, allowing anonymous access, was bad enough, but when I saw what was in the files my hair turned gray. Really. It did.

The contents of these files amounted to a virtual handbook for vote-tampering: They contained diagrams of remote communications setups, passwords, encryption keys, source code, user manuals, testing protocols, and simulators, as well as files loaded with votes and voting machine software.
Diebold Elections Systems AccuVote systems use software called "GEMS," and this system is used in 37 states.

The voting system works like this:

Voters vote at the precinct, running their ballot through an optical scan, or entering their vote on a touch screen.

After the polls close, poll workers transmit the votes that have been accumulated to the county office. They do this by modem.

At the county office, there is a "host computer" with a program on it called GEMS. GEMS receives the incoming votes and stores them in a vote ledger. But in the files we examined, which were created by Diebold employees and/or county officials, we learned that the Diebold program used another set of books with a copy of what is in vote ledger 1. And at the same time, it made yet a third vote ledger with another copy.

Apparently, the Elections Supervisor never sees these three sets of books. All she sees is the reports she can run: Election summary (totals, county wide) or a detail report (totals for each precinct). She has no way of knowing that her GEMS program is using multiple sets of books, because the GEMS interface draws its data from an Access database, which is hidden. And here is what is quite odd: On the programs we tested, the Election summary (totals, county wide) come from the vote ledger 2 instead of vote ledger 1, and ledger 2 can be altered so it may or may not match ledger 1.

Now, think of it like this: You want the report to add up only the actual votes. But, unbeknownst to the election supervisor, votes can be added and subtracted from vote ledger 2. Official reports come from vote ledger 2, which has been disengaged from vote ledger 1. If one asks for a detailed report for some precincts, though, the report comes from vote ledger 1. Therefore, if you keep the correct votes in vote ledger 1, a spot check of detailed precincts (even if you compare voter-verified paper ballots) will always be correct.

And what is vote ledger 3 for? For now, we are calling it the "Lord Only Knows" vote ledger.

---

Quote:

---

At least a dozen full installation versions of the GEMS program were available on the Diebold ftp site. The manual, also available on the ftp site, tells that the default password in a new installation is "GEMSUSER." Anyone who downloaded and installed GEMS can bypass the passwords in elections. In this examination, we installed GEMS, clicked "new" and made a test election, then closed it and opened the same file in Microsoft Access.

One finds where they store the passwords by clicking the "Operator" table.

Anyone can copy an encrypted password from there, go to an election database, and paste it into that.
Example: Cobb County Election file

One can overwrite the "admin" password with another, copied from another GEMS installation. It will appear encrypted; no worries, just cut and paste. In this example, we saved the old "admin" password so we could replace it later and delete the evidence that we'd been there. An intruder can grant himself administrative privileges by putting zeros in the other boxes, following the example in "admin."

---

Many more technical details HERE

Quote:

---

Pennsylvania state certification requires that voting systems be evaluated by a federally recognized independent testing authority, or voting system test laboratory (VSTL), and certified by the U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) according to federal voting system standards.

"Once you add that modem, you are de-certifying it," Kevin Skoglund, senior technical advisor at the National Election Defense Coalition said. "It is no longer federally certified. And I don't know that all these jurisdictions are aware of that because ES&S is advertising otherwise. The three largest voting manufacturing companies Election Systems &Software, Dominion Voting Systems and Hart InterCivic have acknowledged they all put modems in some of their tabulators and scanners."-NBC

What you're going to find is the current Dominion and ES&S voting systems were designed over 22 years ago to allow and promote every type of voter fraud imaginable and the same two conspirators have been safeguarding and selling these broken systems the entire time.

From 1997 to 2003 Bob Urosevich and Barry Herron developed the art of electronic vote manipulation to such a degree; you didn't need to hack the system to change the election results. Below is the chain of custody for the software and source code that made this possible.

---

Quote:

---

The key takeaway is simple. Although what's described below is from Diebold Election Systems, Dominion bought Diebold and this system for use. This the backbone of Dominion Voting Systems today and it gives a clear line of sight into the otherwise opaque world of election fraud in 2020.

In 2003, a research journalist named Bev Harris opened up the world of Diebold Election Systems. When Dominion Voting Systems got off the ground and became a player it was because of the purchase of Diebold properties including systems, source code, and software.

---

Quote:

---

The Dominion software and source code was originally developed by a company called Premier Election Solutions. The founder was Bob Urosevich.

In 1997 Global Election Systems acquired Premier. The company representatives were Bob Urosevich and Barry Herron

In 2001, Diebold purchased Global. The company representatives were Bob Urosevich and Barry Herron.

In 2009, Diebold Sells U.S. Elections Systems Business to ES&S. The company representatives were Bob Urosevich and Barry Herron

In September 2009, ES&S acquired Premier, without any objections from the DOJ. But in March 2010, the DOJ forced ES&S to "sell" Premier's assets to Dominion. ES&S was also forced to license to Dominion some of its software for free.

Dominion announced the acquisition of the Diebold (formerly Premier) products on May 19, 2010

Dominion Voting Systems purchased the primary assets of Premier, including all intellectual property, software, firmware, and hardware for Premier's current and legacy optical scan, central scan, and touch screen voting systems, and all versions of the GEMS election management system from ES&S.

Barry Herron is the Southeast regional sales manager for Dominion Voting Systems as well as being their lobbyist.

Barry Herron is Director of sales for INTERNATIONAL LOTTERY AND TOTALIZATOR, INC.
Barry Herron is the sales manager for Unisyn Voting. Unisyn, an HK registered company wholly owned by UNISYN VOTING SOLUTIONS (A DIVISION OF INTERNATIONAL LOTTERY AND TOTALIZATOR, INC) a division of Berjaya Lottery Management (h.k.) Ltd, a division of Yong Hong Group Co., Ltd., referred to Wing Hung Kai Group ( English: Wing Hung Kee Holdings Limited's, HKEx except when licensing 0288.HK), founded in 1971, formerly known as Wing Hung Kai Properties Limited referred to as Wing-hong Kee Property ( English: Wing Hung Kee Investment Company, Limited ). Listed on the main board of the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 1973. In 1994, the Malaysian consortium Berjaya Group ( Berjaya Group ) acquisition, changed its name to succeed Holdings (Hong Kong) Limited.

Unisyn is a wholly-owned private corporation headquartered in Malaysia but registered in Hong Kong, China.

INTERNATIONAL LOTTERY AND TOTALIZATOR, INC is the world's largest manufacturer of voting machine equipment.

Does Unisyn manufacture Dominion Voting Solution machines? I don't have the answer to that but Unisyn's Barry Herron is Dominion's lobbyist for GA.

Along with Bob Urosevich's ES&S, Unisyn is also one of the voting systems companies certifying the 2020 US election was the safest in history.

---

Read the rest

We all know it happened, Sidney. The problem is you can't seem to figure out how to work around the stonewalls to make people pay for it.

Okay stat analysts read this and tell me if the methodology is solid. A teaser. It is 15 pages of text and then ten pages of charts.

Quote:

---

V. Conclusion The precinct level estimates for Georgia and Pennsylvania indicate that vote fraud may account for Biden's win in both states. The voter turnout rate data also indicates that there are significant excess votes in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin as well. While the problems shown here are large, there are two reasons to believe that they are underestimates: 1) the estimates using precinct level data assume that there is no fraud occurring with inperson voting and 2) the voter turnout estimates do not account for ballots for the opposing candidate that are lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate

---

By DOJ's John Lott.

LINK

Bump.

Really would love some input from Ags or other posters in the field on this.

MooreTrucker said:

---

We all know it happened, Sidney. The problem is you can't seem to figure out how to work around the stonewalls to make people pay for it.

---

Very difficult when the stonewalls are corrupt and/or cowardly justices. Equal justice under the law has never been perfect, but the pendulum has swung well toward selective injustice.

B2Ag05 said:

---

---

Holy ****, that must be an elevator to the stratosphere. Cmon Sidney, it's an elevator pitch, not a hot air balloon pitch.

BadMoonRisin said:

---

B2Ag05 said:

---

---

Holy ****, that must be an elevator to the stratosphere. Cmon Sidney, it's an elevator pitch, not a hot air balloon pitch.

---

You must not hang around lawyers often...

Hey! I know you love numbers and the like! Can you read the report I posted a few posts up and let me know if that remotely has some validity to it? Please and thank you?

aggiehawg said:

---

Okay stat analysts read this and tell me if the methodology is solid. A teaser. It is 15 pages of text and then ten pages of charts.

Quote:

---

V. Conclusion The precinct level estimates for Georgia and Pennsylvania indicate that vote fraud may account for Biden's win in both states. The voter turnout rate data also indicates that there are significant excess votes in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin as well. While the problems shown here are large, there are two reasons to believe that they are underestimates: 1) the estimates using precinct level data assume that there is no fraud occurring with inperson voting and 2) the voter turnout estimates do not account for ballots for the opposing candidate that are lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate

---

By DOJ's John Lott.

LINK

---

Howdy Ms Hawg!

This report looks very straightforward to me. The Statics make sense, but I'm not the strongest expert on the board in that area. I have had quite a few stats classes over the course of my education (2 engineering degrees + an MBA).

He focuses on Georgia and Pennsylvania mainly, but does point out issues in Arizona, New Mexico, and Wisconsin as well.

The only thing I would want him to improve on a bit, would be to make the case separately for Pennsylvania and Georgia instead of combining the numbers. If I were grading the paper, I would mark him down for that area. Statements like this:

"The total combined win margin for Biden in Georgia and Pennsylvania was 92,334"

By this measure, all of the 92,334 margin could be in Georgia and none in Pennsylvania, and it waters down the argument. If it were 40k vote margin in Georgia that needed 30k and 52k margin in Pennsylvania that needed 45k, then it would be much more solid.

If this were meant for a judge and jury, it would not be the complete case because there is not enough detail. If this were simply an abstract to get a court to review a much more detailed pleading, then it would seem to make enough points to do so. Perhaps this is something you would be better suited to answer.

aggiehawg said:

---

Okay stat analysts read this and tell me if the methodology is solid. A teaser. It is 15 pages of text and then ten pages of charts.

Quote:

---

V. Conclusion The precinct level estimates for Georgia and Pennsylvania indicate that vote fraud may account for Biden's win in both states. The voter turnout rate data also indicates that there are significant excess votes in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin as well. While the problems shown here are large, there are two reasons to believe that they are underestimates: 1) the estimates using precinct level data assume that there is no fraud occurring with inperson voting and 2) the voter turnout estimates do not account for ballots for the opposing candidate that are lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate

---

By DOJ's John Lott.

LINK

---

This one?

Yes.

FWIW, Georgia legislative hearing Live HERE

aggiehawg said:

---

FWIW, Georgia legislative hearing Live HERE

---

Can't watch it today - end of year at work. How is the hearing going?

Jovan was on point

I urge everyone to watch this hearing when it hopefully is posted to youtube or rumble later on today. Very compelling presentations.

aggiehawg said:

---

I urge everyone to watch this hearing when it hopefully is posted to youtube or rumble later on today. Very compelling presentations.

---

Yes, hopefully saved somewhere and not just live streamed then hidden/deleted.

aggiehawg said:

---

I urge everyone to watch this hearing when it hopefully is posted to youtube or rumble later on today. Very compelling presentations.

---

...sorry, I couldn't resist

Twitter thread with a round up fraud around the country.

aggiehawg said:

---

Jovan came back in and confirmed that he is inside the pollipad right now in an active polling location by wifi. Going both ways. They can communicate with it.

No bueno. Pump and dump possible. Pulling stuff out and then dumping it back into the system. He has teams out at various active polling locations checking on their connectivity.

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Jovan came back in and confirmed that he is inside the pollipad right now in an active polling location by wifi. Going both ways. They can communicate with it.

No bueno. Pump and dump possible. Pulling stuff out and then dumping it back into the system. He has teams out at various active polling locations checking on their connectivity.

---

WHAT? Is this early voting in Georgia they are monitoring? Where the hell is the media?

There was a lawyer, named Halliburton who testified earlier that he had filed a FOIA request for non-destructive testing of Fulton County Ballots to be conducted under Jovan's direction. There was an agreement that he would be allowed to to do so, this morning. His teams and equipment were assembled and pulled up to the designated place at the time specified and no ballots were at that location. They were then directed to go to another location. When they got there they were told to FO and don't come back without a court order.

I didn't follow the last name stats that well; but that guy was pissed

Tailgate88 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Jovan came back in and confirmed that he is inside the pollipad right now in an active polling location by wifi. Going both ways. They can communicate with it.

No bueno. Pump and dump possible. Pulling stuff out and then dumping it back into the system. He has teams out at various active polling locations checking on their connectivity.

---

WHAT? Is this early voting in Georgia they are monitoring? Where the hell is the media?

---

Yes, early voting until Friday.

Tailgate88 said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Jovan came back in and confirmed that he is inside the pollipad right now in an active polling location by wifi. Going both ways. They can communicate with it.

No bueno. Pump and dump possible. Pulling stuff out and then dumping it back into the system. He has teams out at various active polling locations checking on their connectivity.

---

WHAT? Is this early voting in Georgia they are monitoring? Where the hell is the media?

---

Where is Mike Pence? Where are the decision makers?

I'm referring to the fraud national election.

aggiehawg said:

---

There was a lawyer, named Halliburton who testified earlier that he had filed a FOIA request for non-destructive testing of Fulton County Ballots to be conducted under Jovan's direction. There was an agreement that he would be allowed to to do so, this morning. His teams and equipment were assembled and pulled up to the designated place at the time specified and no ballots were at that location. They were then directed to go to another location. When they got there they were told to FO and don't come back without a court order.

---

Unbelievable anyone would defend the blatant cheating occurring.