DHS rejected voter fraud but forgot to tell you they got it from

 M. Dowling

Dominion Voting Systems used a statement that obscured Dominion’s council membership to dispute voting systems concerns. Circular back-up!

Caveat: The Epoch Times doesn’t know if all members of the Council contributed to the statement. Dominion hasn’t responded. In any case, DHS is outsourcing election security.

The Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued a statement last week defending the integrity of the 2020 election. We have been quoting it here, apparently foolishly.

The problem is two of the main election software companies that have been called into question – Dominion Voting Systems, Smartmatic – sit on CISA.

That was not disclosed until The Epoch Times reported it!

After Dominion was accused of potential voter fraud, the DHS Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), under Chris Krebs, who Trump wants to be fired, issued a statement on Nov. 12 disputing the allegations. They famously reported, “the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.”

The joint statement on the integrity of the Nov. 3 election was issued by the Executive Committee of the Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council (GCC) (a coalition of certain state & local government officials and government agencies), and the Election Infrastructure Sector Coordinating Council (SCC) (a coalition primarily composed of voting system manufacturers including Dominion, Smartmatic, SCYTL).

The statement:

“The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history. Right now, across the country, election officials are reviewing and double-checking the entire election process prior to finalizing the result.

“When states have close elections, many will recount ballots. All of the states with close results in the 2020 presidential race have paper records of each vote, allowing the ability to go back and count each ballot if necessary. This is an added benefit for security and resilience. This process allows for the identification and correction of any mistakes or errors. There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.

“Other security measures like pre-election testing, state certification of voting equipment, and the U.S. Election Assistance Commission’s (EAC) certification of voting equipment help to build additional confidence in the voting systems used in 2020.

“While we know there are many unfounded claims and opportunities for misinformation about the process of our elections, we can assure you we have the utmost confidence in the security and integrity of our elections, and you should too. When you have questions, turn to elections officials as trusted voices as they administer elections.”

The two election software companies, and other sketchy companies, are members of the GCC’s Sector Coordinating Council:

• • Amazon Web Services (AWS)
  • Arrikan, Inc./Chaves Consulting, Inc.
  • Associated Press (AP) Elections
  • BPro, Inc.
  • Clear Ballot Group
  • Crosscheck
  • DemTech Voting Solutions
  • Democracy Live
  • Democracy Works
  • DMF Associates
  • Dominion Voting Systems
  • Election Systems & Software (ES&S)
  • Electronic Registration Information Center (ERIC)
  • Freeman, Craft, McGregor Group
  • Hart InterCivic
  • KNOWInk
  • Microsoft
  • Microvote General Corp.
  • NTS Data Services
  • PCC Technology Inc.
  • Pro V&V
  • Runbeck Election Services
  • SCYTL
  • SLI Compliance
  • Smartmatic
  • Tenex Software Solutions
  • The Canton Group
  • Unisyn Voting Solutions
  • Voatz
  • VOTEC
  • Votem
  • Voting Works
  • VR Systems

  • The Election Infrastructure Subsector Coordinating Council Charter states that the group’s goal is to “advance the physical security, cybersecurity, and emergency preparedness of the nation’s election infrastructure, in accordance with existing U.S. law.” It will “serve as the primary liaison between the election subsector and federal, state, and local agencies, including the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), concerning private election subsector security and emergency preparedness issues.”

    CISA’s goal is to work “collaboratively with those on the front lines of elections—state and local governments, election officials, federal partners, and vendors—to manage risks to the Nation’s election infrastructure

    In other words, state and local election officials decide what voting software and programs to use, and CISA – the DHS Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency — has no control over any of it. 

    CISA relies on outside vendors, and Dominion is surreptitiously using CISA to deny allegations.

    Nothing suspicious there!

    THE SKETCHY PRIMARY IN GEORGIA

  • Remember the Aug. 24 declaration from Harri Hursti, a poll watcher and acknowledged expert on electronic voting security. He observed the June 9 statewide primary in Georgia.

    Hursti summarized his findings as follows:

    1. “The scanner and tabulation software settings being employed to determine which votes to count on hand-marked paper ballots are likely causing clearly intentioned votes not to be counted.”
    2. “The voting system is being operated in Fulton County in a manner that escalates the security risk to an extreme level.”
    3. “Voters are not reviewing their BMD [Ballot Marking Devices] printed ballots, which causes BMD generated results to be un-auditable due to the untrustworthy audit trail.”

    Dominion responds to all of these allegations of faulty machines and flawed software with absolute denial.