On today’s BradCast: A long-awaited ruling in the federal case challenging Georgia‘s new, unverifiable, already-failed $100+ million touchscreen vote systems — which failed again on day one of early voting today in the Peach State. Also, my escape from “Twitter Jail” and the California GOP deploys fraudulent mail-in drop-boxes across the state. [Audio link to show follows below.]
We start today by avoiding, for now, the first day of the illegitimate confirmation hearings in the U.S. Senate for Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett. Instead, we offer some exclusive news that is not being reported elsewhere on two fronts, both related to Georgia’s disastrous new voting system. First up, an explanation — or, a conclusion for now — to the saga that resulted in my 4 days suspension on Twitter beginning late last week, for the crime of posting a completely accurate tweet about two weeks ago, reporting that GA’s Secretary of State informed elections officials in all 159 counties to immediately halt pre-election testing of their new touchscreen voting systems, due to an error that prevented candidates in one of Georgia’s two U.S. Senate elections this year from appearing on screen for voters. The error, as I noted in my infamous (and accurate) tweet, would eventually require all new software for the November elections. In fact, as the federal ruling we discuss today reveals, the state installed all new, uncertified software on all 34,000 of the new voting machines just days ago, in violation of state law. You can read the full saga, with links to the federal court filings proving the accuracy of the tweet, and why I eventually relented and deleted it right here.
As Georgia began its first day of early voting on Monday, sure enough, the vote system I was warning about in that tweet failed, leading to six-hour lines to vote in some places. But the long-running federal court case whose emergency filings revealed the serious problem I was tweeting, finally came to a conclusion — of sorts, at least for now — late on Sunday night. That is when U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg finally released her long-awaited ruling in the case which challenged the security, accuracy and constitutionality of the state’s use of new, unverifiable touchscreen voting systems made by Dominion Voting Systems. The Plaintiffs called for them to be replaced by a cheaper, verifiable hand-marked paper ballots system.
Last year, Totenberg found the state’s previous, 20-year old Diebold touchscreen systems to be unsecure, unverifiable and, thus, unconstitutional, ordering them banned for all future elections in the state. On Sunday night, in her long-awaited 147-page ruling [PDF] that begins by citing the plot to the movie Groundhog Day, Totenberg once again finds the state’s new touchscreen Ballot Marking Device (BMD) “presents serious system security vulnerability and operational issues that may place Plaintiffs and other voters at risk of deprivation of their fundamental right to cast an effective vote that is accurately counted.” The judge warned “these risks are neither hypothetical nor remote” and slams “the insularity” of the “stance” by the GA Sec. of State and the state’s private vendor, Canadian-based Dominion Voting Systems, “in evaluation and management of the security and vulnerability of the BMD system [which] does not benefit the public or citizen’s confident exercise of the franchise.”
After detailing lies, inaccuracies and a lack of knowledge in the testimony of the state’s “experts” in the case (no actual cybersecurity experts were presented by them, only employees of the vendors who admitted they had no actual cybsersecurity experience, nor did any penetration tests of the systems before certifying them for use in GA elections!), Judge Totenberg concludes: “The Plaintiffs’ national cybersecurity experts convincingly present evidence that this is not a question of ‘might this actually ever happen?’ – but ‘when it will happen,’ especially if further protective measures are not taken. Given the masking nature of malware and the current systems described here, if the State and Dominion simply stand by and say, ‘we have never seen it,’ the future does not bode well.”
For now, that future includes the use of the systems that Totenberg clearly finds so dangerous because, as she explains, it might cause chaos for elections officials if she ordered the use of hand-marked paper ballots at the polling places this close to Election Day.
We’re joined once again to discuss the case today by MARILYN MARKS of case plaintiff Coalition for Good Governance, which has been leading this long and important federal court battle now for several years. She has been joining us to discuss it at critical junctures, even while most of the broadcast media has studiously avoided covering it all. Marks offers her reaction to the judge’s long-awaited ruling, describes her disappointment in the ultimate order from the judge (for now), while expressing confidence that these systems — just like the state’s previous ones — will eventually be barred by this judge for use for the very same reasons that she ordered the state’s old ones to finally be trashed.
“What we see here is these systems are put together in a slipshod fashion, without security being an important priority at all to these companies,” Marks tells me. “These voting system vendors will say anything, and unfortunately many of our election officials who are purchasing these systems will repeat and parrot whatever those words are. You begin to wonder what is it that drives these elections officials, like Secretary [of State Brad] Raffensberger in Georgia, to buy the most expensive and least-auditable equipment.”
Noting that unverifiable BMD systems similar to the ones now being forced on voters for the first time at the polls in other critical battlegrounds — such as Philadelphia, the most Democratic-leaning county in North Carolina, all of South Carolina, as well as key counties in Texas and Ohio, not to mention the nation’s most populous voting jurisdiction, Los Angeles County — Marks decries the damage to democracy being done in all of those locations, while still being hopeful for the future.
“If there’s good news in the judge’s denial of relief for November, she did write a very solid yet scathing opinion, and explained in detail why these systems are not secure,” she explains. “I’m hopeful that her opinion can spread across — certainly Los Angeles, and all the counties that are using these systems in Pennsylvania and South Carolina, and even my home county of Mecklenberg, North Carolina — and shake up some of these election officials. But maybe, most importantly, some of these candidates. That is such a shame that we don’t have the parties and we don’t have the candidates demanding a fair system.”
Marks adds: “We’re confident we’ll win the case. We’ve proven our point. We’ve proven that they’re unconstitutional. We’ve proven that they’re insecure. We’ve proven that people shouldn’t be permitted to vote on them. The only piece that’s missing is, how long does it take? How long does it take for jurisdictions to be prepared to do something simple, like hand out hand-marked paper ballots? Given how important this election is, it is a real shame that we have to put up with these machines in November.”
Finally, we close with the news that Republicans in California — after Trump and his GOP have been suing to do away with mail-in drop-boxes all over the country — are actually deploying fake ones up and down the Golden State, in apparent violation of the law, according to California’s Secretary of State…
CLICK TO LISTEN OR DOWNLOAD SHOW!…
[audio:http://BradBlog.com/audio/BradCast_BradFriedman-TwitterJail_MarilynMarks-BMDRulingGA_FakeCADropBoxes_101220.mp3]
(Snail mail support to “Brad Friedman, 7095 Hollywood Blvd., #594 Los Angeles, CA 90028” always welcome too!)
|
























https://freepress.org/article/shelby-county-tn-bid-manipulation-taints-election-commission%E2%80%99s-choice-new-voting-equipment Money Laundering plain and simple, privatize the profits, socialize the losses! https://youtu.be/EDnILAFMVNM
New information reveals that the Election Administrator in Shelby County, TN, manipulated the bids for a new voting system to favor Election Systems & Software (ES&S). The administrator, Linda Phillips, increased competitors’ bids by millions of dollars. She also increased the bids for hand-marked paper ballot (HMPB) voting systems by millions of dollars to make ballot-marking device touchscreens (BMDs) look more competitive by comparison.
The Election Commission thought they were looking at the actual bid numbers presented by 3 vendors (ES&S, Hart InterCivic, and Dominion Voting Systems), but they actually only saw Phillips’ manipulated numbers.
For example, the HMPB voting system bid presented by Hart InterCivic was actually bid by Hart at $ 2.6 million but Linda Phillips’ numbers increased Hart’s bid to $5.3 million (an increase of $2.7 million). Phillips presented only her higher bid numbers to the Election Commission, which never saw the actual bids. This is just one example of Phillips’ manipulations. Based on Phillips’ misrepresentation of the bid numbers, the Election Commission recommended contracting with ES&S to serve as the voting equipment vendor for Shelby County. The vote to fund the new ES&S BMD voting system happens today, September 28, at 3 pm Central time, at County Commission meeting. The County Commission is the body that funds the voting system after receiving the recommendation from the Election Commission. The Election Commissioners and the County Commissioners are, so far, unaware of the bid manipulation by Linda Phillips, except for Election Commissioner Bennie Smith who uncovered the manipulated numbers.
Shelby Co Elections Administrator Linda Phillips manipulation of the bidding process to advantage ES&S in multiple ways. Link to Bennie Smith Summary on the 3 bids: https://bit.ly/2FXNbWd
ES&S has gained a reputation for misrepresentation, price gouging and more. U.S. Senator Ron Wyden (D-OR) has been investigating the voting machine industry. On May 6, 2020 Senator Wyden on Free Speech for People stated that ES&S “…uses every slimy trick in the book to get states to buy what Alyssa (Milano) is warning about: Overpriced, insecure voting machines. The company was investigated by prosecutors in 2009 for using bribes to get a $50 million contract with New York City. The company has a well-established record of flying state election officials to nice places, lots of wining and dining. American constitutional rights as this group knows should not depend on a group of well-connected corporations like ES&S.†https://youtu.be/IPmp9D_X108?t=432
Over the past four years, we at AUDIT Elections USA have been involved in election integrity and accountability issues throughout the country and have found a pattern. Now we, along with other election specialists, are seeking a congressional investigation into abuses by voting machine vendors. Link to https://bit.ly/AUDIT-USA_Request-Congressional-Investigation .
Furthermore, Stacey Abrams’ organization, Fair Fight, has chronicled examples of behavior to which our letter refers in a document that have posted at the following website and link: https://bit.ly/3kSY3TU
See link to an article on “Philly’s new voting-machine contract in jeopardy because vendor failed to disclose use of lobbyists, campaign contributionsâ€; August 14, 2019 – “ES&S will be liable for a $2.9 million fine, Pratt wrote in his letter to the board, adding that it has agreed to pay the fine if the contract proceeds.†https://bit.ly/2FZyylf
Contrary to what Ms. Phillips and other members of the SCEC assert, paper ballots are more secure, more economical, more voter-friendly, and with fewer and shorter lines at the polls. Purchasing BMDs is a prescription for disaster built on misleading information.
AUDIT USA other letters to Shelby County Board of Commissioners, Citizens, and Media:
· of June 1, 2020 that predicted these findings of bid-manipulation: https://bit.ly/3dJzeGY
· of April 9th about the BMD scam: https://bit.ly/2JVyr8C
Here are the links to the 3 actual bids to Shelby Co Elections RFP 20-008-09 Jan 23, 2020, made into a PDF:
1) ES&S Shelby Elections RFP 20-008-09 Jan 23, 2020: https://bit.ly/2YLDEXu
2) Hart InterCivic to Shelby Elections RFP 20-008-09 Jan 21, 2020 P 1 of 2: https://bit.ly/3hG9DBb
3A) Dominion to Shelby Elections RFP 20-008-09 Jan 23, 2020 P 1 of 2: https://bit.ly/30X71Zs
3B) Dominion Complete Quote to Shelby Elections RFP 20-008-09 Jan 23, 2020 P 2 of 2: https://bit.ly/30X71Zs
John Brakey Director Americans United for Democracy Integrity and Transparency – AUDIT-ELECTIONS-USA
JohnBrakey@gmail.com
This case provides a paradigm example of whst is wrong with the Purcell Principle, the U.S. Supreme Court doctrine that, absent compelling reasons, federal court judges should refrain from issuing decisions overturning state election laws on the cusp of an election because those 11th hour decisions create a risk of voter confusion.
Judge Totenberg already knew in 2018 that the antiquated Diebold touchscreen voting system was unverifiable and unconstitutional, but she couldn’t enjoin the use of the system until after the 2018 election. As a result, then Secretary of State Brian Kemp, who was administering that insecure system, was “elected” Governor and Brad Raffensberger became the new Secretary of State.
Setting aside issues of voter suppression, because the 2018 election was conducted on a 100% unverifiable e-voting system, there is no way anyone can know whether those two actually received a majority of the votes cast.
Perhaps the most disturbing feature is this one entails a decennial census year that will permit the “elected” state legislators to draw up (gerrymander) a new electoral map that can entrench one party in a position of power over the next decade.
So, if, as Marilyn believes, in 2021, Judge Totenberg will likely hand-down a decision banning the future use of BMDs, it will be too little, too late. For Kemp and Raffensberger, it’s Mission Accomplished.
Brad, et al,….
The election/voting issues covered in this
post/blog can be resolved by giving/granting
all voters their constitutional prior-rights
of their 32 Full Voting Rights…!
Thanks and Good Luck.