Overview
On Thursday, April 10, in a televised cabinet meeting, Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard confirmed that investigators uncovered evidence that electronic voting machines were tampered with to rig the results of past U.S. elections.
The intel community has known that voting machines have been vulnerable for a long time. Gabbard said in the statement:
“I’ve got a long list of things that we’re investigating. We have the best going after this, election integrity being one of them. We have evidence of how these electronic voting systems have been vulnerable to hackers for a very long time.”
Voting Machines Hacked
According to the DNI, the evidence shows that the machines are “vulnerable to exploitation to manipulate the results of the votes being cast.”
In other words, the machines were hacked in previous elections.
Move To Paper Ballots
The DNI further urged federal officials to transition away from computerized voting machines and over to paper ballots:
“This further drives forward your mandate to bring about paper ballots across the country so that voters can have faith in the integrity of our elections.”
No Surprise To Dave’s Computer Tips Readers!
This news may come as a shock to many around the USA, but not to readers of Dave’s Computer Tips! Over a year ago, Dave’s Computer Tips ran a three-part article on the vulnerability of computerized electronic voting machines. You can read those articles here:
- Should Computers Be Used In Elections? – Part 1
- Should Computers Be Used In Elections? – Part 2
- Should Computers Be Used In Elections? – Part 3
—
No new news here, just confirmed what all of us already knew. Just more manure to shove in the democrats faces who tried to tell us this was impossible.
There is something to be said about good old pen and paper ballots.
People just don’t understand, if it has internet access …. it’s hackable
Now, will they repay fox news and mypillow guy the lawsuit money they won?
Hi Salb,
It is interesting that you brought up “The Pillow Guy”. There was a 2021 Cyber Symposium, I wanted to include data from this in the original articles but couldn’t find the actual documents.
From what I understand, Mike Lindell (the pillow guy) was given election packet data from US intelligence services that had all the internet data (computer IDs, election machines mac addresses, times, vote manipulation data, etc.) showing all the manipulation on the election equipment. He brought in the best security experts in the country to look at the data and prove it was not legitimate. They would win $5 Million. They could not prove it was illegitimate data. I.e.. there was massive manipulation (most from China and Iran) in 2020 election.
A guy (Robert Zeidman), brought the Cyber Symposium to arbitration. Not about the data (he couldn’t prove the data was illegitimate) but that he just had to say the data wasn’t legitimate, not prove it (this part was a little fuzzy to me). The arbitrators agreed and awarded him the prize. The Cyber Symposium brought the case to court, the court agreed that the arbitrator’s conclusion was faulty, but because the arbitration agreement was poorly written, he had to uphold the arbitrators. Strangely, the media was claiming that Zeidman proved the data was illegitimate when that is not what happened.
I didn’t care about the legal shenanigans, I was interested in reading the court documents on the data. I looked and looked and looked, but I could not find any of the data, just the judge’s conclusion that he would have interpreted the data differently than the arbitrator but the arbitration agreement was poorly written so the arbitrator’s finding stood.
Joe Biden – over 80 million votes in 2020 – yeah pigs can fly.
They tried again in 2024 but the vote for Trump was too big to rig. They still cheated their way into more seats than they should have had though.
“According to the DNI, the evidence shows that the machines are “vulnerable to exploitation to manipulate the results of the votes being cast.” In other words, the machines were hacked in previous elections.”
Being vulnerable to exploitation is not the same as evidence of an actual hack. Fake news! Shame on you.
Well if vulnerabilities were found then, irrespective of evidence being found to prove that cheating did take place, even more reason to go back to paper voting same day and Voter ID.
Only the Democrats are objecting to these safeguards. Funny that.
Hi Scott,
Did you read the 3-part article? Those articles were just the tip of a very, very large mountain of evidence.
Ask yourself why did they write computerized election software that can manipulate elections if they didn’t plan to use the software to manipulate elections? Also, why has this software been outlawed in many countries?
Has Tulsi Gabbard provided any visible evidence? Let’s wait for that piece. I don’t trust any politician, Trump or Biden supporters or staff.
Canada, not exactly a Trump-supporting locale, uses paper ballots in all federal elections to prevent hacking. I have no desire to live there, except possibly for Alberta, but at least our neighbor to the north gets a thumbs up for doing something right.
Hi Robert,
One thing I find interesting is that, based on the comments, it appears that conservative or Republican leaning individuals tend to be weary of computerized voting systems, while liberal or Democratic leaning individuals are not.
I would think that this would be a politically neutral issue. I would expect that everyone would want their voting system to be honest and trustworthy. Any question about the integrity or vulnerability of electronic voting machines should concern everyone, no matter what side of the political fence they are on.
But for the hackers at Symantec Security Response, Election Day results could be manipulated by an affordable device you can find online.
“I can insert it, and then it resets the card, and now I’m able to vote again,” said Brian Varner, a principle researcher at Symantec, demonstrating the device.Symantec Security Response director Kevin Haley said elections can also be hacked by breaking into the machines after the votes are collected.
“The results go from that machine into a piece of electronics that takes it to the central counting place,” Haley said. “That data is not encrypted and that’s vulnerable for manipulation.”
“How big of a hacking potential problem is this?” Villarreal asked him.
“Well, there’s a huge potential,” Haley responded. “There are so many places in the voting process once it goes electronic that’s vulnerable.”
According to a report from the Brennan Center for Justice, one reason these voting systems are so vulnerable is their age.
The only election breaches I’m aware of were after the 2020 election when Tina Peters, the Mesa County, CO election supervisor, allowed someone to copy the hard drives and other software from the voting machines and turned it over to Mike Lindell.
Closer to home, the same thing happened in Coffee County, Georgia when Misty Thompson, the county’s election supervisor, allowed people to do the same thing. That resulted in the Secretary of State’s office replacing all of the county’s voting hardware at substantial cost to the state.
I’ve voted in several election cycles in Georgia which uses the Dominion voting machines. One thing that never gets mentioned is that these machines print out a paper copy of the ballot, which is retained for two years. It is on the voter to check that the paper ballot reflects their choices before depositing it in the scanner. If there is an error, an election worker can assist in correcting it. Once the ballot is scanned then the choices are final.
Georgia went through three hand counts of the paper ballots after the 2020 election with identical results to paper tapes generated by the voting machines and memory cards.
The safeguards built into the system are designed to prevent tampering. The machines never get connected to the internet, instead a dedicated system is used. Video surveillance is used where the machines are stored (that’s how Thompson got caught). The machines undergo testing before each election cycle, with two-man rules in place. Georgia is very careful about elections.
The Dominion machines are light-years ahead of what we had before, which were Diebold touch screens machines with no means to check if what was entered was what was counted.
Hi Mark H,
“safeguards … designed to prevent tampering” “Georgia is very careful about elections… machines are light-years ahead”
—————–
Did you read the 3 part series mentioned in the article above?
Just a few highlights:
Part 1 — Massachusetts: Machines have a “weighted race” feature that allows assigning a greater or lesser value than 1 (.66 and 1.2 in the court case mentioned in article).
Part 2 — In Federal District Court of Georgia in 2024 (your state) a 96-page “Security Analysis of Georgia’s Ballot Marking Devices” report was unsealed. The report shows many exploitable vulnerabilities in the Georgia’s voting system, confirms that votes can be altered in the machines and that the software is vulnerable and can be hacked.
And a demonstration of how Georgia’s systems can be hacked with a BIC ball point pen. And reprogrammed using less than $30 worth of common items.
Part 3 — Many examples of extreme vulnerabilities mostly on Arizona’s systems. For example 12,507 non-approved executables were found on the certified system.