By David Robb ——Bio and Archives--March 6, 2024
American Politics, News | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us
There is an enormous and growing amount of evidence that the 2020 election was manipulated to give false results. The 2021 recall election for the governor of California had numerous improper results certified. The 2022 election also appears to have been manipulated, although not so obviously as in 2020. All these elections and more involved the use of hardware and software systems collectively known as "machines".
Election Series
When we talk of machines in elections we generally think of the tabulator systems that interpret the marks on ballots and accumulate totals for each candidate and initiative on a ballot. The machinery of elections is far more extensive and powerful than the simple tabulator. Scanners, tabulators, voter roll databases, high speed printers, network servers, routers, poll pads, a multitude of computers large and small, and many other components work together in current election systems and comprise the "machines" of elections.
As but one small example, in the 2021 attempt to remove Gavin Newsom as governor of California, one area in the state had its voter rolls inflated to where the number of registered voters was over three times the total population of the area. One could register every man, woman, child, cat, dog, and duck (and probably gerbils) in the area and the total would still fall short of the number of "voters" registered. But, you may say, gerbils don't vote! Don't be too sure, because over twice the total population of that area subsequently voted, likely including the gerbils. And that election was certified. And counted. And Newsom is still governor. And the rolls were deflated back to reasonable levels for the next election.
Why do I write of machines, and then relate an incident of inflated voter rolls? Because voter rolls are simply data in a database that exists in a computer system which is itself yet another machine.
1993 was a watershed year for our elections. That was when the National Voter Registration Act was passed. It did not specifically require machines in our elections, but many of its provisions were most easily implemented in computer hardware and software. Voter roll systems in particular were prime examples.
Prior to that Act, election officials used paper based record keeping at local centers. For large counties, the record keeping and maintenance functions were manual, cumbersome, and required considerable effort to keep them up to date.
Computers and computer databases seemed like an answer to prayer for keeping records in order and meeting the requirements of the Act. One of the provisions of the Act was for data sharing between states so voters who moved could be tracked, the rolls of each state updated, and it could be assured that people legally entitled to vote did not vote in more than one state. If the systems worked as intended, if everyone was honest and followed the rules, everything would be fine. Not!
The same systems that offered such promise for improvement of elections, also contained the seeds for massive corruption. Where doubling the number of registered voters before an election would have been nearly impossible to do unobserved under paper systems, with electronic systems it became as simple as the push of a button and as invisibly transparent as glass.
When ballots were received, each voter could be instantly credited with having cast their vote and checked to see if they had voted previously, thus preventing double voting, or graveyard votes. Unfortunately, all the added ghosts could also be credited with votes and there would be little or no way to separate the bad from the good. But the number of paper ballots wouldn't match the vote totals you cry! Simple matter. Just scan enough batches of ballots over and over until the totals matched.
With the electronic scanners and high speed computer tabulators, totals could be reconciled in a matter of a few hours. All that would happen out of sight of investigators so by the time anyone got a chance to look, everything would neatly balance.
Support Canada Free Press
The voter rolls would show the proper number of voters had voted, there would be scan records for all the votes, and by the time anyone figured something was amiss, the election would be certified and long past questioning. True, the number of paper ballots wouldn't tally, but that could always be explained by accident such as a fire, or the wrong bin shredded, but not to worry because the machine scans of ballots were all safe in databases somewhere, and those numbers matched.
Just to recap, in a dozen steps,
While this may seem complicated, actually implementing it is simple. Since most of the activities are done by machines, everything can be programmed and automated. Most of the activities don't require a physical presence and can be done from Iran, China, Tierra Del Fuego, or anywhere else in the world. At most, a few willing accomplices can be recruited for local services as needed.
The machine automation of our election systems has opened up grand new vistas for election manipulation and fraud. Most of the methods we have for detecting fraud are based on the old style election processes and are wholly inadequate for detecting fraud in machine based elections. Critical information often exists only in electronic records that can be altered or removed without trace. Think of Hillary's emails and BitBleach. (you mean wiped, like with a cloth?)
Election officials often proclaim that the systems are certified and therefore trustworthy. Certification only means that there is real hardware with genuine software installed. We can't examine the hardware nor inspect the software—we just have to trust them. The machines may operate fine during certification testing, but may operate completely differently if triggered to do so during an election.
Our legal structure is decades behind the capabilities of the technology and has few applicable laws to cover machine enabled election fraud. Criminal penalties are almost nonexistent, and most law enforcement has no experience nor training to investigate election issues.
There is a term in the computer industry: "Garbage in, gospel out". People tend to accept with few questions, the results produced by computers. If the machines produce an answer, it must be correct. Few are even able to determine how that answer was produced, let alone determine if it was correct.
We haven't even gotten to networks yet, including the internet. By linking machines together in networks, super machines can be formed. The individual components each have a role, much like the heart, lungs, liver, and other organs of the body have specialized roles. Together they form structures that can perform a multitude of tasks outside the view of human eyes. Data is shared across networks at blinding speed. Many actions can be prepared, implemented and accomplished long before people can become aware they have even happened.
Like many states, California has a law stating that no election equipment shall be connected to the internet. How many law enforcement people know how to determine if that law is violated, and what do they do if they somehow find a violation? How do they find the parties guilty of manipulating voter rolls or introducing fraudulent ballots or altering counts in the system? What if they find the culprits are in another country? Can they declare the election invalid and the results uncertifiable?
Elections are human processes with human consequences. They are the methods by which we decide issues critical to our lives and futures. They determine who shall be our human leaders and what policies we shall adopt and follow.
Elections must happen at human speeds, with human scrutiny of processes, and human checks so humans can trust in the results. In order for people to trust the outcomes, humans must be able watch every part of the process to ensure the accuracy of the results.
Machine based elections proceed at machine speeds and with no human visibility. Humans can only see what the machines tell us. Machine conducted elections violate every requirement of human observation and participation needed to ensure trust.
Machines can be of great help in elections if used properly for simple processes that can be checked and verified by human inspection. As machines are used today, though, no election with current machine involvement can be trusted to provide accurate results.
Two more articles will complete this series. One article will cover new approaches that have only been hinted at in investigations to date. Our enemies are continuing to develop new ways to cheat and to improve what has worked so well. We cannot win a purely defensive war, and a war it is, with the fate of our country at stake. The last article will present ways to fight back and win. In the words of a famous marine, "we are in a target rich environment". Let us make the most of that opportunity.
View Comments
David Robb is a practicing scientist and CTO of a small firm developing new security technologies for detection of drugs and other contraband. Dave has published extensively in TheBlueStateConservative, and occasionally in American Thinker.