Release to Dominion Systems Statement on Massive Election Fraud Charged by Sidney Powell

Dominion Voting Systems has issued a statement responding to lawsuits we filed in Michigan and Georgia. Dominion is lying. This is a massive fraud that has infected the voting system across this country. Evidence continues to pour in on behalf of all the Plaintiffs. Legal votes cast nationwide created a historic landslide for Donald Trump.

Dominion contends that it is impossible for any tampering of the votes on its machines to have occurred. Our evidence proves otherwise. Prior analysis of server logs on Dominion’s machines in Georgia primary elections has shown remote access into those servers in the middle of the night when no election workers were around, possibly by Dominion employees overseas or on behalf of adverse nation-states such as Iran and China. Witnesses have observed what appeared to be Dominion technical support staff connecting remotely to election servers during tabulation of the primary and runoff elections in Georgia to resolve “technical problems” with uploading memory cards. That action violated Georgia and federal law that required certification of the machines and no manipulations.

Dominion also contends that any such tampering would have been revealed by the hand count audit conducted in Georgia. This is not true. The ballots marked by the Ballot Marking Devices (BMD) do not record the vote in a software-independent way. Instead, Dominion’s software is responsible for taking the voter’s machine input and printing it on the paper ballot in a QR code that contains the vote that is read by the scanner but cannot be read by humans, and a text summary that can be read by humans.

Robust and repeatedly confirmed behavioral research shows that only around 6.5% of voters actually bother to scrutinize the human-readable text summary. Thus, more than 93% of these allegedly “voter-verifiable ballots” are not in fact “voter-verified” at all. See Exhibit 7 to the Georgia complaint, Appel, DeMillo & Stark, Ballot Marking Devices (“BMDs) Cannot Assure the Will of the Voters (February 14, 2020), p. 11. The authors of this study are highly distinguished professors of computer science, including Richard A. DeMillo of Georgia Tech. Simply put, the BMD ballots are not “voter-verified” because 93.5% of the time voters do not actually “verify” them.

Further, it has been repeatedly established that Dominion’s BMDs are vulnerable to hacking. Substantial evidence of this vulnerability was discussed in Judge Amy Totenberg’s October 11, 2020 Order in the USDC N.D. Ga. case of Curling, et al. v. Kemp, et. al, Case No. 1:17-cv-02989 Doc. No. 964. See, p. 22-23 (“This array of experts and subject matter specialists provided a huge volume of significant evidence regarding the security risks and deficits in the system as implemented in both witness declarations and live testimony at the preliminary injunction hearing.”); p. 25 (“In particular, Dr. Halderman’s testing indicated the practical feasibility of a cyber-attack that could cause votes to be swapped or deleted and the compromise of the system through different cyber-attack strategies, including through access to and alteration or manipulation of the QR barcode.”) The full order refutes many of Dominion’s erroneous claims and talking points. As Judge Totenberg held,

Georgia’s Election Code mandates the use of the BMD system as the uniform mode of voting for all in-person voters in federal and statewide elections. O.C.G.A. § 21-2-300(a)(2). The statutory provisions mandate voting on “electronic ballot markers” that: (1) use “electronic technology to independently and privately mark a paper ballot at the direction of an elector, interpret ballot selections, communicate such interpretation for elector verification, and print an elector verifiable paper ballot;” and (2) “produce paper ballots which are marked with the elector’s choices in a format readable by the elector” O.C.G.A. § 21-2-2(7.1); O.C.G.A. § 21-2-300(a)(2).

Plaintiffs and other voters who wish to vote in-person are required to vote on a system that does none of those things. Rather, the evidence shows that the Dominion BMD system does not produce a voter-verifiable paper ballot or a paper ballot marked with the voter’s choices in a format readable by the voter because the votes are tabulated solely from the unreadable QR code. Order, pp. 81-82. (Emphasis added).

In other words, Dominion’s BMD ballots are not voter-verifiable, and they cannot be audited in a software-independent way. The credibility of a BMD ballot can be no greater than the credibility of Dominion’s systems, which copious expert analysis has shown is deeply compromised. The system has no verifiable audit trail.

Dominion’s claim that its code and systems have been verified and certified to be secure against malicious actors is comprehensively refuted by the copious expert testimony presented in Curling v. Kemp and recited in Judge Totenberg’s 147-page order analyzing that evidence. It is also refuted by the company’s own manual.

In addition, their claims to have secure systems have been refuted by the expert affidavits submitted with our complaint, the “Spider” affidavit, and the Ramsland affidavit, which found that Dominion’s networks were easily penetrated and had been penetrated by hostile foreign actors, including Iran and China. Moreover, our mathematical and statistical experts have shown anomalies and patterns in the database transaction logs and in the election results in multiple states that strain credulity well past the breaking point. In fact, this year’s vote in multiple states produced mathematical and statistical impossibilities.

In October of this year, CISA released a Joint Report with the FBI finding that Iranian cyberspies had penetrated voter registration databases in several states.

Moreover, our experts have analyzed the Edison Research database transaction logs for the election and found extreme mathematical and statistical anomalies that should concern every American.

Those who downplay the risk of foreign cyber-attack on our elections or the risk of insider manipulation of election results through the security weaknesses in the Dominion system are denying the painful reality of this evidence. We must face this hideous crime right now and take immediate and decisive action to protect and restore the integrity of our votes in this precious Republic.

Dominion also claims that the hand count audit confirmed the accuracy of their systems and makes the testimony and findings of our experts not worthy of serious consideration. This is a fallacy for the reasons stated above. Ballots voted on the BMD’s are not software-independent and as a matter of simple logic cannot validly be used to establish the accuracy of the software from which they emerge – the only evidence of voter intent that is completely independent of the software can be used to prove this. Finally, the audit report summary issued by the Secretary of State shows numerous concerning margin differences between President Trump and Vice-President Biden by county. Additional analysis at a more granular level and by ballot type has yet to be performed but will surely be revealing. Significant differences in the vote count are being revealed daily in Georgia and Michigan. Other states will follow suit.

Lastly, since the election, we have learned that one of Dominion’s top technical officers, Dr. Eric Coomer, whose name is on multiple Dominion patents, has participated in Antifa conference calls and has an intense loathing of President Trump. It is a free country, and Dr. Coomer has the right to think what he will about President Trump. However, at an Antifa conference, Dr. Coomer admitted he had made sure that President Trump would not win. Dominion appears not to have protected itself or us against hostile threats from either inside or outside the company. Neither did our government institutions into which we placed our trust. All the corruption in federal and state governments across the country must be rooted out now. These actions constitute multiple egregious federal and state crimes.

Dominion does not even address the reality that there are many ways to compromise its systems that are undetectable under the current election security regime of logic and accuracy testing, software validation, and certification. The sophistication of malicious cyber-actors is more than sufficient to overcome these measures and penetrate the Dominion system, as our evidence shows.

Dominion claims there are no “glitches” in its software. Dominion is correct—these means of cheating are features built into Dominion/Smartmatic systems to facilitate the cheating. But there is evidence in a Hursti Declaration in the Curling v. Kemp case that we filed in our case that the memory card upload process is afflicted by serious “glitches.” Election and tech support personnel struggled repeatedly with uploads that failed to complete and were attempted over and over again before they were finally uploaded. Tech support personnel in the tabulation centers applied ad hoc settings adjustments in an effort to fix the problem, and even allowed other Dominion support personnel to remote into the servers in an effort to fix these memory uploads “glitches.”

Dominion tries to distance itself from the manufacturer of the electronic poll books. These devices were included in the package Dominion sold to the State of Georgia. They are partners, and their devices and systems interact. Dominion cannot claim to be a bystander with respect to the electronic poll books or the software.

Issues with the poll books have caused an erosion of the reconciliation of the number of voters and the number of ballots—a fundamental safeguard against election fraud. We see this in the discovery of thousands of missing ballots in two Georgia counties during the hand count audit–something that should have been identified on election night with proper reconciliation. The failure of the reconciliation process was also documented in the Georgia primary and runoff in Curling v. Kemp.

Dominion also contends that its machines are run by county election officials and not Dominion employees. In fact, Dominion tech support people were present in precincts and key tabulation centers. They effectively ran the election for Georgia counties, whose employees lacked sufficient proficiency on the system to run the election by themselves. One ran the import Detroit facility throughout election night, and there was massive fraud there. Dominion dispatched employees to multiple locations to run this election, and even worse, it was also accessed by Iran and China—among many others. This is one of the greatest national security failures in the history of the country—if not THE worst.

Dominion claims there were no last-minute changes to their software. In fact, there were. In the Curling v. Kemp case, it was undisputed that a last-minute update was applied. The only issue was whether it was de minimis as Dominion and the State claimed, or more substantial. Dominion’s remote access to the machines and its allowance of “backdoor” VPN access to foreign actors invalidates the results for Biden in multiple states. Many down-ballot candidates were robbed of their seats also—and American citizens robbed of their lawful choices.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Under no circumstances will we tolerate further harassment of election officials, Dominion employees, lawyers challenging the election results, or our witnesses. Any threats or attempts to intimidate will be referred for vigorous federal and state prosecutions. Know this: Any effort to hide the truth or suppress our investigation by these means will only invigorate our efforts exponentially. The Truth will come out.

L. Lin Wood Sidney Powell


Originally published at