Thursday, November 21, 2024

Matt Gaetz steps down as former Florida attorney general Pam Bondi (who has her own set of baggage) steps up to replace him in Trump's race to fill a cabinet

Pam Bondi and Matt Gaetz (AP)

Matt Gaetz hasn't accomplished much in his scandal-plagued time as a U.S. senator, but for one day at least, he seemed to have made just about everybody in Congress happy. He did that, according to a report at Axios, by stepping away from his nomination as Donald Trump's attorney general. Late yesterday afternoon, Trump named former Florida attorney general Pam Bondi to replace Gaetz.

As for Gaetz' ability to seemingly make everyone around him happy, Axios' Erin Doherty writes:

Matt Gaetz said Thursday that he is withdrawing his name from consideration for attorney general in President-elect Trump's second term.

Why it matters: The right-wing firebrand, who resigned from Congress after Trump nominated him, was one of the president-elect's most controversial Cabinet picks and his pathway to the confirmation appeared tenuous.

  • It's the first setback for Trump in placing his allies in key Cabinet positions. The attorney general candidate is especially important for Trump — and he has signaled plans to overhaul the Justice Department in his second term.

Driving the news: Gaetz in a post on the social media platform X on Thursday said that, "while the momentum was strong, it is clear that my confirmation was unfairly becoming a distraction to the critical work of the Trump/Vance Transition." 

The big picture: Gaetz's announcement comes one day after the House Ethics Committee — which had been investigating him over allegations of sex trafficking, corruption and drug use — voted against releasing a report of its findings.

  • Gaetz resigned after Trump announced that he would nominate him for AG, raising questions about whether the House Ethics Committee report would ever be made public.

Between the lines: Trump this week had been lobbying for the embattled lawmaker, personally calling senators to urge them to confirm Gaetz, Axios' Juliegrace Brufke and Hans Nichols scooped.

  • But the math for Gaetz was tight, with him able to lose just three votes to be confirmed.
  • Gaetz and Vice President-elect JD Vance met with Senate Republicans on Capitol Hill earlier this week to try to gin up support for the controversial nominee.

What they're saying: Trump in a post on Truth Social after the announcement said that Gaetz "was doing very well but, at the same time, did not want to be a distraction for the administration, for which he has much respect."

  •  Zoom in: Gaetz, who was also investigated by the Justice Department over sex trafficking allegations, has denied wrongdoing. The Justice Department did not bring charges against Gaetz last year. 
  • As for Bondi, her background is squeaky clean by Gaetzian standards, but she still brings baggage to the table. Axios reports:
  • President-elect Trump said Thursday he will nominate Pam Bondi for attorney general, after his previous pick, former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), withdrew his name from consideration.

    The big picture: The attorney general could be one of the most important roles in the second Trump White House. The president-elect has made clear his desire to have a loyalist in the nation's highest law-enforcement role to carry out his agenda, which could include investigating adversaries.

  • Republican lawmakers expressed aversion and disdain for Trump's initial choice of the scandal-prone Gaetz for the nation's highest law enforcement role.

Zoom in: Bondi is a former Florida attorney general and a longtime Trump ally who led the America First Policy Institute.

  • "Pam was a prosecutor for nearly 20 years, where she was very tough on Violent Criminals, and made the streets safe for Florida Families," Trump said on his Truth Social platform.
  • "Then, as Florida's first female Attorney General, she worked to stop the trafficking of deadly drugs, and reduce the tragedy of Fentanyl Overdose Deaths, which have destroyed many families across our Country. She did such an incredible job, that I asked her to serve on our Opioid and Drug Abuse Commission during my first Term — We saved many lives!" he added.
  • "For too long, the partisan Department of Justice has been weaponized against me and other Republicans - Not anymore. Pam will refocus the DOJ to its intended purpose of fighting Crime, and Making America Safe Again. I have known Pam for many years — She is smart and tough, and is an AMERICA FIRST Fighter, who will do a terrific job as Attorney General!"

What's next: Bondi will need at least 50 senators to get confirmed when the new administration takes office. The candidate can only afford to lose three Senate Republicans' votes.

Why it matters: The person confirmed by the Senate to be attorney general will help lead the implementation of Trump's agenda and steer any efforts to investigate — and prosecute — the president-elect's perceived enemies,

What about Bondi's baggage?  Well, she has ties to Alabama, and we have written a number of posts about her activities over the years. Here are a few examples:

(1) There were reports that Bondi might face federal bribery charges over a $25,000 donation Trump made to Bondi's campaign, bringing her investigation of Trump University to a close;

(2) Trump's reluctance to release his tax returns reportedly was due to possible tax fraud related to the Bondi donation

(3) Trump's contribution of more than $40,000 in "in-kind services" to Bondi's campaign might have violated Florida elections laws

(4) A complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Treasury claimed Trump should be prosecuted for tax evasion and political corruption because of the donations to Bondi and former Texas AG Gregory Abbott, now the state's governor;

(5) Bondi was named chairwoman of the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA) as the organization was under scrutiny because of news reports detailing how Washington lobbyists have sought to influence state attorneys general across the country. Among Bondi's chief defenders was longtime Alabama resident (and close ally of former state AG Luther Strange -- see here, here, here, and here.) Jessica Medeiros Garrison, who was the organization's executive director at the time. "Like all national political organizations, RAGA pays for expenses for its member attorneys general that attend meetings to help with national fundraising," Garrison told CBS News. "RAGA does this in full compliance with federal and state laws that regulate fundraising and political activity for RAGA and its member attorneys general."We've seen no reports of Garrison providing CBS with documentation to support her claims.

 (6) A New York Times article dated Oct. 31, 2014, reported that both candidates for New York AG thought the flow of money to the AG associations of  both parties needed to be curtailed: From that article: 

The political associations run by Democratic and Republican attorneys general must discontinue taking money from corporations that are targets of investigations, the two candidates for the job in New York State said at a debate Thursday night. The incumbent attorney general said he might step down from his party’s group if it did not curtail the practice.

“It is an issue that is going to come up in both of the associations,” the New York attorney general, Eric T. Schneiderman, a Democrat, said at the debate. “I think it should be cleaned up.”

John Cahill, the Republican candidate, said he agreed that law enforcement officials, or a political association that represents them, should not be taking money from targeted companies.

“I think it is a huge problem,” said Mr. Cahill, once a top aide to former Gov. George E. Pataki. “It goes to the whole issue of how I started about the politicization of the office of the attorney general.”

The question came up in response to an article in The New York Times on Wednesday that examined the surge in lobbying and campaign contributions coming from corporations that are trying to gain access to and influence these top state law enforcement officials.

Much of this money is donated — and special access provided — to get tickets to attend retreats organized at resort hotels in spots around the United States by the Republican Attorneys General Association or the Democratic Attorneys General Association. The list of sponsors for these events routinely includes companies that are targets of continuing investigations.

For example, executives at the Michigan-based company that sells 5-Hour Energy, the highly caffeinated drink, suddenly started to donate a total of more than $245,000 to both groups in early 2013, after 33 states opened an investigation into accusations that the company was making false claims in its advertising.

Jessica Medeiros Garrison had an opportunity to comment on such issues related to her profeessional field, but she was not anxious to do so. From the story:

Jessica Medeiros Garrison, executive director of the Republican group, declined to comment Thursday about the notion of placing limits on who can donate to her organization, which has collected $11.7 million just in the first nine months of this year. The Democrats have collected $7.6 million since January 2013. A spokesman for the Democratic group could not be reached for comment.

(7) A New York Times article dated Dec. 26, 2014, reported:

In state legislatures and major professional associations, a bipartisan effort is emerging to change the way state attorneys general interact with lobbyists, campaign donors and other corporate representatives.

This month, during a closed-door meeting of the National Association of Attorneys General, officials voted to stop accepting corporate sponsorships. In Missouri, a bill has been introduced that would require the attorney general, as well as certain other state officials, to disclose within 48 hours any political contribution worth more than $500. And in Washington State, legislation is being drafted to bar attorneys general who leave office from lobbying their former colleagues for a year.

Perhaps most significant, a White House ethics lawyer in the administration of George W. Bush has asked the American Bar Association to change its national code of conduct to prohibit attorneys general from discussing continuing investigations or other official matters while participating in fund-raising events at resort destinations, as they often now do. Those measures could be adopted in individual states.

The actions follow a series of articles in The New York Times that examined how lawyers and lobbyists — from major corporations, energy companies and even plaintiffs’ law firms — have increasingly tried to influence state attorneys general.

These outside players have tried to shut down investigations, enlist the attorneys general as partners in litigation, or use their clout to try to block or strengthen regulations emerging from Washington, the investigation by The Times found.

A debate has started among state attorneys general — even those who believe that the problem is more about the perception of a possible conflict of interest than about any real conflicts — over steps that could be taken to insulate them from outside influence.

“There is a heightened awareness that people need to be very careful how and where they are raising money,” said Attorney General George Jepsen of Connecticut, who is a co-chairman of the Democratic Attorneys General Association. “There is an important dialogue that has gotten started.”

The most definitive action so far was the unanimous vote by the bipartisan executive committee of the National Association of Attorneys General to stop accepting corporate donations to cover the cost of its Presidential Initiative Summit, an event, typically held annually, that focuses on emerging legal issues, such as Internet privacy. Last year, the meeting was sponsored in part by Google and Facebook — corporations that have been targeted recently in privacy investigations.

“I felt like we need to be free of the perception that was created by companies’ and corporation groups’ funding that meeting,” said Jim McPherson, the executive director of the association.

But that group is far less reliant on donations from corporations and other outside groups than the other three main associations of attorneys general: the Republican and Democratic Attorneys General Associations and the Conference of Western Attorneys General. Those groups regularly convene attorneys general at resort hotels for closed-door events with lobbyists, who make donations in exchange for greater access.

A $125,000 donation to the Republican Attorneys General Association, for example, gives a corporate representative the right to participate in a weekend retreat with the nation’s Republican attorneys general, as well as an opportunity to make special, private presentations to them. Democrats have a similar, although somewhat lower-priced, arrangement that grants big donors “a unique opportunity for focused conversation with specific A.G.s in a small setting.”

The list of companies that participated this year in closed-door events sponsored by the Republican and Democratic Attorneys General Associations, according to documents obtained by The Times, includes some that are targets of investigations or regulatory reviews. Among them are Trinity Industries, the manufacturer of guardrails that have been blamed in a series of fatal car accidents, and Comcast, which is seeking the consent of state attorneys general for a merger with Time Warner Cable.

Richard W. Painter, a University of Minnesota law professor who served as the chief White House ethics lawyer during the Bush administration, said that these events should be considered fund-raisers, and that official business should not be discussed.

Both Bondi and Garrison were among interested parties who had opportunities to comment on these issues. But both kept their lips sealed. From The Times report:

Attorney General Pam Bondi of Florida, the newly elected president of the Republican Attorneys General Association; Attorney General Scott Pruitt of Oklahoma, its most recent president; and Jessica Medeiros Garrison, the organization’s executive director, each declined to comment.

Voting integrity expert Spoonamore says a recount likely will show Kamala Harris won the 2024 election, which had signs of Elon Musk's ties to dubious acts

 

(YouTube)

Part Two 

A hand recount would "most likely show" Vice President Kamala Harris won the 2024 presidential election, according to a "duty to warn" letter to Harris from voting-integrity expert Stephen Spoonamore. Further, Spoonamore states: "In my view, a capable and skilled series of exploits, electronic tools, and hacks were used to change the Presidential vote in all seven swing states.  These activities have reversed the outcomes in at least Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin."

News of Spoonamore's missive comes on the heels of our post yesterday about a similar letter from Duncan Buell, Ph.D., chair emeritus and NCR chair of computer science and engineering at the University of South Carolina. 

Our focus today in Part Two is on Spoonamore's letter to Harris, in which he states: "I will lay out the basics of the attack, starting with unusual elements within the results.  I will then outline two processes which could have been followed to insert these false results into the system.  Finally I will outline how I would recommend investigating unusual elements within the results."

The Spoonamore letter begins below, with certain sections highlighted in yellow, with sections of particularly high interest highlighted in blue. In my view, this is one of the most important documents in modern American history, with the American democracy hanging in the balance against an authoritarian form of government, likely an attempted dictatorship, favored by President-Elect Donald Trump. Spoonamore asks this central question: Given the obvious signs of hacking, did Trump actually win the election and did Harris actually lose it? In other words, who is America's real president-elect at this moment in 2024. Spoonamore suggests no one can know without a thorough investigation of the election's vote-tabulation processes, and he urges Harris to move in that direction. Here is the "duty to warn" letter, and we urge Americans of all political stripes to read it carefully. It appears to be the closest thing we have, for now, to an analysis of how the 2024 election went off the rails -- to the benefit of Donald Trump and his allies in the Republican Party:

Duty to Warn Letter - to VP Harris - Re: Election 2024
(Revised 430PM)

Stephen Spoonamore
Nov 15, 2024
November 15, 2024

Honorable VP Kamala Harris

The White House

Office of the Vice President

1600 Pennsylvania Ave

Washington DC 20500

Dear Madam Vice President.

This is my second Duty to Warn Letter regarding hacking of the 2024 Presidential Election. The first letter on November 7 was directed to Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Officials.  Both warnings are made per DNI Clapper’s 2015 directive to all agencies and contractors associated with intelligence and financial agency technologies to warn of suspicions of hacking. (Spoonamore's first letter was to Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, and that state now is conducting a hand recount in the U.S. Senate race between Democrat Bob Casey and Republican Dave McCormick.)

Professionally I have worked as the CEO or CTO at seven high-technology firms, including two which specialized in hacking and counter-hacking operations. My clients have included numerous governments DoD, DHS, Dept. of State, F100 Financials and F500 Industrials.

I am a lifelong Republican who has long placed service and participatory democracy over party. In government, I have twice been invited to SoCom to give lectures on electronic warfare and techniques to find terrorist money laundering and gave a keynote speech of the National Counterintel Summit on this same topic. I served as an after-action reviewer of communications and data failures on 9/11 under the direction of Jim Woolsey and FDNY Commissioner Scopetta, and later co-wrote multiple hacking risk analysis of Smart Grid technologies for the Obama administration.

You should reverse your concession, call for both a full investigation of criminal activity and demand hand recounts in all seven swing states. 

In my professional view there are multiple and extremely clear indications the Presidential vote was willfully compromised.

I wholly agree with the public letter of Duncan Buell, et. al. of Nov. 13th stating they believe there is a possibility of hacking and calling for hand-recounts.

https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/letter-to-vp-harris-111324.pdf

This letter’s clear call to action  is commendable, but its cautious tone may belie the severity of what I believe has happened. In my view it is a near certainty the results have been changed at a scale which reversed the US Presidential Election. They imply there is a chance a hand-recount will show you won more votes.  I am stating a hand recount will most likely show you did win.  Both letters call on you to act.

In my view, a capable and skilled series of exploits, electronic tools and hacks were used to change the Presidential vote in all seven swing states. These activities have reversed the outcomes in at least Arizona, Michigan, North Carolina, and Wisconsin. I will lay out the basics of the attack, starting with unusual elements within the results. I will then outline two processes which could have been followed to insert these false results into the system. Finally I will outline how I would recommend investigating unusual elements within the results.

The results of the attack are improbable in the extreme and well tailored to the sole benefit of your opponent. 

Approximately 600,000 votes are for Donald Trump but with no down ballot choices. These are either inserted “bullet ballots” for the Presidential race or manipulated data fields. They are surgically added to totals in limited jurisdictions and within only the seven swing States. This historically unprecedented set of numbers found in the 2024 swing states is absent in every other state. In AZ, MI, NC and WI the effect of these drop-off votes reverses the voters' will and even more improbably always pushes the winning margin beyond the mandatory recount numbers.  It is a result too perfect for belief. It is a bespoke and programmed outcome. In other states including PA and NV, removing these strange and bespoke added votes, it appears Donald Trump may have won the cast votes but within a margin which would force recounts. The inserted votes raise his totals, to avoid any scrutiny during mandatory recount results which would have slowed his claim on the Presidency. In GA and FL the same pattern exists with unclear impact on the results.

This attack is not technically difficult. It is modest in scale. It would require:  

Modest and common computer programming skills.

Access to 10-100 tabulators or to the handful of facilities programming them in advance.

A credible database of voter IDs of non-voters around which to create false ballots.

Perhaps as few as 1, but more likely 3-5 human program managers.

Access to eBollBook Data during the election to determine who had not voted.

(Possibly) Human access to some tabulators during counting.

If I was asked to lead this hack, I would expect to have a core team of 6-10 people, and operating costs under $10M with a timeline of 3-12 months. 

The tell: A historically absurd number of Trump-only bullet ballots or undervote ballots.

There are always a handful of voters who cast a vote in one race which they care about, and do not make other selections on the ballot. These are called bullet ballots. In Presidential Races since 1980, these bullet ballots rarely account for more than 1% of the total votes including in Mr. Trump’s winning 2016 election and losing 2020 election, and when they do it warrants further investigation. In 2024 in the 43 non-swing states, bullet ballots make up a nominal >1%. In the seven swing states the numbers are so high to be unbelievable, unprecedented and demanding of further investigation. Here is analysis from totals as of late Nov. 12th.

Here are the unprecedented results of drop-offs in the two western swing states:

AZ - 123K+ 7.2%+ of Trump’s total vote.  Enough to reverse the outcome.

NV -   43K+ 5.5%+ of Trump’s total vote.  Enough to exceed recount threshold.

It is my belief these two states have illegally added votes. 

For comparison, examine Trump’s 2024 results in three states which border AZ and NV.  They have equally passionate Trump supporters, but have the normal levels of drop off or bullet ballots.

ID     <2K      0.03% of Trump’s total.

OR   <4K      0.05% of Trump’s  total

UT    <1K      0.01% of Trump’s total.

In the case of Idaho and Utah, Mr. Trump was a runaway winner and had no need to add votes. In the case of Oregon, Ms. Harris was a runaway winner and adding votes to Trump’s total would add risk without adding value.  

The same pattern of large numbers of drop-off votes or bullet ballots exists in the totals of MI, NC, PA, WI.  

North Carolina is the most extreme.  The public results indicate over 350K voters cast a ballot for Trump and no other race making up more than 11% of Trump’s voters in NC drop off votes or bullet ballots. 

Hack Part 1: Creating the pool of bullet ballot voters.

There are two possible methods to execute this attack. The simple version would only manipulate electronic totals and hand-counting the target precincts would discover this. The second involved ePollbook hacking and introducing bullet ballots.This would add the need to compare the ePollBook timestamps to find possible bad actors or other sources for these anomalous votes.

When Mr. Musk announced his $1M lottery for people to go online and sign a pledge to vote for Trump, I became personally suspicious of why such a promotion would be done. I signed up to see what information he wanted and what the pledge actually stated. He did not want to know people’s socials or to send them texts. To sign up, you had to provide your street address. That was all they cared about. Once they had the people’s names, and street addresses, this would allow for building a pool of ghost voters who could logically be marked for fake ballots, structured in a manner that matched ePollBook and precinct data. You, as a member of law enforcement, understand criminals need certain pre-conditions to act. A database of pledged supporters with street addresses is required for this hack.  Law enforcement should immediately find the team of programmers who pulled the lottery data capture. They will find those programmers immediately parsed the data into a system based on voting precincts and created macros to constantly update the pledged lists of who had cast a vote, and who had not. The programmers likely did not know they were working on a system to be used to steal the election. When confronted with that fact, law enforcement would likely gain cooperating witnesses.

Musk’s team used this system to build a list of voters pledged to vote for Trump. This list could also be used to make a ghost-ballot voter list.  ePollBook data is nearly always linked to the internet, and in many jurisdictions this link was being made in real time via Mr. Musk’s Starlink or any available wireless network. Throughout the day, Musk’s team could compare existing turnout models to likely outcomes, based on well established voter profile databases vs. the actual voter turnout coming in from the ePollBooks. They would have been able to have a very good estimation in the closing hours of polls how many votes short Trump would likely be at the tabulation level. They would also have exact lists of the pledged voters for Trump and would know who had not shown up. The pledged voters who did not vote, became the bullet ballots. With any network connection to the ePollBooks, or via other compromised connectivity, they could be marked as voted.

Hack Part 2: Matching the tabulation to the ePollBooks.

The exact number of added voters to the ePollBooks as having voted would have to match the tabulation process. This attack could have been done in at least two different ways.  

The easiest method to execute phase two, is also the easiest to discover by hand recount. In a few jurisdictions where the tabulators either had network connectivity, approved or otherwise, or where a person on the team had physical access to the tabulation machine, the Trump votes that were added to the ePollBooks, would need to be added to the tabulators. At which point the ePollBooks and the tabulation totals would match, having been digitally stuffed with demographically credible voters for Trump. But there will be no paper ballot for these votes. A hand recount will quickly discover the fraud.

As I write this letter, several hundred people are self organizing on Reddit and other forums. They include: data scientists, statisticians, and legal experts. They are examining the precinct level data of every swing state, and by Monday these teams will have lists of many  precincts where these historically unprecedented Trump bullet ballots occur. The highest likelihood is that those ballots don’t actually exist. Those votes were electronically created but have no paper. This would be easily proven with a hand recount.

A second possibility involves the same compromise as described above, but is then combined with human ballot stuffing, or ballot substitution, at tabulation to match the ePollBook numbers. This possibility is raised as it appears these historically unprecedented bullet ballots fall heavily in a few counties. Maricopa County AZ, seems to be the source of the vast majority, perhaps nearly all, of the AZ bullet-ballot voters for Trump. If these ballots were introduced it would require co-conspirators working inside the tabulation center. 

I appreciate that many people, even sophisticated people outside this field, think this hack is an impossible task. It is not. Just eight weeks ago, the world watched a vastly larger and more complicated one. Unknown hackers intercepted more than 3,000 communication devices over 24 months destined for use by Hamas across the entire Mideast. The devices all had additional software, hardware and explosives inserted. The devices were then delivered to users and functioned normally for months until the hackers triggered the inserted series of exploits and explosions. This hack, the entire world witnessed, was orders of magnitude more complicated than introducing Trump bullet ballots into - at most - 100 tabulation locations. I have personally managed full year-long operations in which hundreds of credit card point of sale devices were rebuilt with added hardware and software and inserted in order to discover fraudsters and money laundering. No one knew we were there. The users never were aware.  The devices did their normal job processing credit cards for merchants. While they also did a hacked job and helped my team and I root out criminals. The access, technical difficulty, and scale of the election hack I am describing is less than either of these. But the effect is vastly greater, and the FBI has excellent people who could address this very quickly.

Lastly, this hack methodology may or may not have some correlation with the series of Bomb Threats called in by Russian affiliated assets. The use of distraction or diversion of this kind is common. My first thought was, and my thinking remains, these bomb threats were called into tabulation centers and precincts where the hackers had already planned to conduct ghost bullet-ballot introductions. I believe they wanted a disruption in the chain of custody, so lawyers could claim after the hacking events that the chain of custody on the ballots was flawed. The creation of the false argument of a broken custody chain would be used as a pretext to prevent hand recounting, as hand recounting would not match the Trump favorable result. However, by a reverse of that logic, any jurisdiction which was subject to a bomb threat was forced to break standard operating procedure. This alone should be grounds for you to ask for a hand recount.

Lastly, I have been advised by an attorney that Arizona and Georgia have mechanisms in place for members of the public to demand a recount, but only you have the ability to demand a recount across all the jurisdictions of concern.

A final formal note. This is principally a Duty to Warn letter. It is also a fulfillment of my constitutional oath of office as possibly the lowest level sworn office of public trust in America.  I was appointed by my township to serve as a local Parks Commissioner. I am the public appointee to the Mt. Nittany Conservancy, a nature reserve. I have spent the last four years variously overseeing how public funds are spent on sports fields, kids playgrounds, hiking trails, and bike paths. To do this, I must make annual conflict and financial disclosures and I must swear nearly the same oath you did.  I am under the sworn obligation to defend our nation against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Which, I am honored to do.

I will continue to investigate with a growing group of volunteers. We are also planning to offer rewards for information. But our efforts to preserve the integrity of this election cannot take this to completion.  You, and only you, can call for a full hand-recount and engage the vast public resources at your disposal. I can’t. This is all I can do.

Let me know how I can help. 

Sincerely,

ESignature - Stephen R. Spoonamore

Stephen Spoonamore

College Township PA

Former CEO or CTO of multiple Technology Firms

https://www.linkedin.com/in/spoonamore/

CC:  Secretary. of States and Governors of AZ, FL, GA, MI, NC, NV, PA and WI.   Additional PA representative Chris Dush (PA State Sen.), Paul Takac (PA State Rep.), Dustin Best (PA College Township Supervisor), and  Robert Ziegler (PA Milhiem Township Supervisor.)

Subscribe to Stephen Spoonamore
Launched 2 days ago

Tech CxO since IPv2. Playwright and Book Author. Baseball Coach, Umpire and Fan. Bikeway and Wildlands advocate. Eat Your Yard / Earth-ship Guy. Pretty good Dad (According to Kiddo) Champion Husband (According to Bride)

Type your email...
Subscribe

701 Likes
·
341 Restacks

701

313

Get the full experience
Get app

Wednesday, November 20, 2024

In letters to Kamala Harris, voting-security experts Duncan Buell and Stephen Spoonamore point to signs the 2024 election was "willfully compromised"

Stephen Spoonamore (right) greets a voter (Mother Jones)
 

Part One of Two

A widely respected election-security expert named Stephen Spoonamore has informed Vice President Kamala Harris via a "duty to warn" letter that the 2024 presidential election has shown strong signs of being hacked, and he recommends she do the following: 

(1)You should reverse your concession, call for both a full investigation of criminal activity, and demand hand recounts in all seven swing states; 

(2) Spoonamore obviously is taking peculiar data surrounding the election seriously. Why? He explains: "In my professional view there are multiple and extremely clear indications the Presidential vote was willfully compromised."

(3) "I wholly agree with the public letter of Duncan Buell, et. al. of Nov. 13 stating they believe there is a possibility of hacking and calling for hand-recounts.

https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/letter-to-vp-harris-111324.pdf

This letter’s clear call to action  is commendable, but its cautious tone may belie the severity of what I believe has happened. In my view it is a near certainty the results have been changed at a scale which reversed the US Presidential Election. They imply there is a chance a hand recount will show you won more votes. I am stating a hand recount will most likely show you did win.  Both letters call on you to act.

The contents of the Duncan Buell letter dated Nov. 13, 2024, and referenced at the link above contains insightful information, and we will run that immediately below, highlighting key segments in parenthesis.

After that, we will begin Spoonamore's letter, highlighting the material we believe is most important for the American people to understand at this time.

----------------------------------------

November 13, 2024
The Honorable Kamala Harris
The White House
Office of the Vice President
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Vice President Harris,
We write to alert you to serious election-security breaches that have
threatened the security and integrity of the 2024 elections, and to identify ways to
ensure that the will of the voters is reflected and that voters should have confidence
in the result. (The most effective manner of doing so is through targeted recounts
requested by the candidate. In the light of the breaches, we ask that you formally
request hand recounts in at least the states of Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, and
Pennsylvania. We have no evidence that the outcomes of the elections in those
states were actually compromised as a result of the security breaches, and we are
not suggesting that they were. But binding risk-limiting audits (RLAs), or hand
recounts, should be routine for all elections, especially when the stakes are high and
the results are close. We believe that, under the current circumstances. when
massive software breaches are known and documented, recounts are necessary and
appropriate to remove all potential doubt and to set an example for security best
practices in all elections.)


(In 2022, records, video camera footage, and deposition testimony produced
in a civil case in Georgia1 disclosed that its voting system, used statewide, had
been breached over multiple days by operatives hired by attorneys for Donald
Trump.2,3 The evidence showed that the operatives made copies of the software that runs all of the equipment in Georgia, and certain other states, and shared it
with other Trump allies and operatives.4

(Subsequent court filings and public-records requests revealed that the
breaches in Georgia were part of a larger effort to take copies of voting system
software from systems in Michigan,5 Pennsylvania,6 Colorado7 and Arizona,8 and
to share the software in the operatives’ network. According to testimony9 and
declarations10 by some of the technicians who have obtained copies of the
software, they have had access for more than three years to the software for the
central servers, tabulators, and highly restricted election databases of both Election
Systems & Software (ES&S), and Dominion Voting Systems, the two largest
voting system vendors, constituting the most severe election-security breach
publicly known.


(Combined, their equipment counts nearly 70% of all votes nationwide.
Ninety-six percent of Arizona voters use Dominion and ES&S equipment; 100% of
Georgia voters vote on Dominion machines; 98% of Nevada votes on Dominion machines and the remainder uses ES&S; 69% of Michigan voters’ ballots
are counted on Dominion or ES&S equipment; 89% of Pennsylvania voters ballots are counted on Dominion or ES&S equipment; ES&S counts 92% of North
Carolina ballots; and either ES&S or Dominion counts 97% of Wisconsin votes.11


1 No. 17-cv-02989-AT (N.D. Ga. filed Aug. 8, 2017).
2 Emma Brown, Jon Swaine, Aaron C. Davis, Amy Gardner, “Trump-allied lawyers pursued voting
machine data in multiple states, records reveal,” The Washington Post, (August 15, 2022). Available
at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2022/08/15/sidney-powell-coffee-county-sullivan-
strickler/
3 Kate Brumback, “Video fills in details on alleged Ga. election system breach,” The Associated Press,
(September 6, 2022). Available at: https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-technology-
donald-trumpthat runs all of the equipment in Georgia, and certain other states, and shared it
with other Trump allies and operatives.
4 Emma Brown, Jon Swaine, “Inside the secretive efforts by Trump allies to access voting machines,”
The Washington Post, (October 28, 2022). Available at:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2022/10/28/coffee-county-georgia-voting-trump/
5 Clara Hendrickson, “Did data from Georgia voting machine breach play a role in alleged Michigan
election plot?”, The Detroit Free Press, (August 31, 2023). Available at:
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politics/2023/08/31/michigan-and-georgia-voting-machine-breach-
connection/70702597007/
6 Jeremy Duda, “Group led by ‘kraken’ lawyer Sidney Powell hired the firm recounting AZ’s election
to probe election in Fulton Co.” Pennsylvania Capital-Star, (May 24, 2021). Available at:
https://penncapital-star.com/government-politics/group-led-by-kraken-lawyer-sidney-powell-hired-
the-firm-recounting-azs-election-to-probe-a-pa-election/
7 Christina A. Cassidy, “Georgia election indictments highlights wider attempts to illegally access
voting equipment,” Associated Press, (August 15, 2023). Available at:
https://apnews.com/article/georgia-trump-indictment-voting-machines-conspiracy-theories-
bc3db57cabd25fd8e335f85ed299e79c
8 Maritsa Georgiou, “Arizona voting system data sent to Montana lab as part of the latest audit,”
NBC Montana, (June 3, 2021). Available at: https://nbcmontana.com/news/local/arizona-voting-
system-data-sent-to-montana-lab-as-part-of-latest-audit
9 See eg., Lenberg Dep. No. 17-cv-02989-AT Document 1613, page 101-102. Available at:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/t9pkebeb44dg3it/Ex%2024%20%201613%20Depo%20Jeffrey%20Lenberg.
pdf?dl=0
10 Michigan 6th Circuit Court Oakland Case No. 2023-285759-FH, MTN to Quash, Sep. 30, 2024.
Pages 188, 240-241, 295 and 298. Available at: https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-
content/uploads/2024/11/20240930_motion_fld_to_quash_indictment

(Possessing copies of the voting system software enables bad actors to install
it on electronic devices and to create their own working replicas of the voting
systems, probe them, and develop exploits. Skilled adversaries can decompile the
software to get a version of the source code, study it for vulnerabilities, and could
even develop malware designed to be installed with minimal physical access to the
voting equipment by unskilled accomplices to manipulate the vote counts. Attacks
could also be launched by compromising the vendors responsible for programming
systems before elections, enabling large scale distribution of malware.


(In December 202212 and again in 2023,13 many of us, concerned by the
security risks posed by these breaches, wrote to the Attorney General, FBI
Director, and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Director
outlining the security concerns and urging an investigation. Though there have
been limited, localized investigations,14 there is no evidence of a federal
investigation15 to determine what was done with the misappropriated voting
software.


(Other relevant parties have pointed to the serious risks posed by the
misappropriation of the voting software. Before it was known that partisan
operatives had taken the software, Dominion Voting Systems objected vehemently
to providing its software to the same partisan actors who ultimately got copies
through voting-system breaches, stating that to give its software to biased actors
would cause “irreparable damage” to the “election security interests of the
country.”
16 

(Before the breaches in Georgia had been confirmed, the Georgia Secretary
of State’s chief information officer testified that having copies of the software
would provide a “road map” to the ways the system could be accessed.17 The
Georgia Attorney General opposed providing copies of the software to lawyers for
the Trump campaign in a late 2020 election challenge, arguing that images of the
voting system software would provide “the keys to the software kingdom.”18
Notably, U.S. elections are potentially resilient because there are paper
ballots recording the voters’ intent in most states, meaning that even if the voting
system is at risk, the will of the voters can be determined reliably by recounting the
paper ballots by hand (although we are aware that not all paper ballots are verified
by the voter, and not all states take adequate care to protect the ballot chain of
custody.


(Audits will be conducted in some of the most scrutinized states, but in key
states they will not be conducted in a timely way that could reveal any concerns
with the vote count. In addition, in most states the audits are insufficiently rigorous
to ensure any potential errors in tabulation will be caught and corrected, and they
cannot be considered a safeguard against the security breaches that have occurred.
Specifically, Georgia’s audits are non-binding, and Michigan, Nevada and
Wisconsin laws do not provide that the audit be conducted before certification.
Therefore, it would be impossible to know for these critical states if the audits
uncovered errors or miscalculations before the state deadlines to seek recounts.19

(Among swing states, only Arizona’s audit laws ensure that, if enough
discrepancies are identified, the audit hand count will be expanded to correct a
potentially incorrect result. In other words, aside from Arizona, in contested states,
there is no legal mechanism for the audit to correct the outcome, no matter how
much error the audit uncovers. Given these facts, the only guarantee for rigorous,
effective audits of the vote in the swing states will be through candidate-requested
statewide hand recounts.

(The facts around the voting-system breaches are not disputed; it is well-
documented that there were severe, multiple voting security breaches before the
2024 election. To ensure that voters can have confidence that the breaches in security did not taint the results of the 2024 election, we recommend pursuing hand
recounts in, at minimum, Michigan, Nevada, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania as they
will provide insufficient safeguards against threats posed by the breaches of the
election software and will not provide important information in a timely way.)


Thank you for your time and consideration of this important matter.


17 See:. No. 17-cv-02989-AT Beaver Dep Document 1368-3 Page 157-158.
18 No.1:20-cv-04809-TCB (N.D. Ga filed Nov. 30, 2020), Document 23, page 13. Available at:
https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/xlvuqfqroogx7vg1sa4p9/Pearson-transcipt-
gov.uscourts.gand.284055.23.0-Clean.pdf?rlkey=aghdw5w34rwqxugdxhnk8ij5b&e=1&dl=0
19 See: Verified Voting Audit Law Databasesecurity.

Sincerely,
Duncan Buell Ph.D.
Chair Emeritus — NCR Chair in Computer Science and Engineering
Dept. of Computer Science and Engineering
University of South Carolina*
David Jefferson Ph.D.
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory* (retired)
Election Integrity Foundation*
Susan Greenhalgh
Senior Advisor for Election Security
Free Speech For People
Chris Klaus
Founder
Internet Security System*
William John Malik
Malik Consulting, LLC*
Peter G. Neumann Ph.D.
Chief Scientist,
SRI International Computer Science Lab*
John E. Savage
An Wang Professor Emeritus of Computer Science
Brown University*
*Affiliations are listed for identification purposes only and do not imply
institutional endorsement.

(To be continued . . . 

(Our next post will focus on Stephen Spoonamore's "duty to warn" letter to Vice President Kamala Harris. The letter provides significant detail on how the 2024 election was hacked -- It raises this question: Did Donald Trump really win, and did Kamala Harris really lose -- and if Trump did not secure a victory under honest and lawful circumstances, how could such a breach happen? 

(Spoonamore's letter suggests Donald Trump might not lawfully be America's president-elect, and he indicates there is more than enough evidence of hacking to demand, at a minimum, a through investigation of the vote-tabulation procedures. The Spoonamore letter is the most detailed analysis we have seen so far of the 2024 presidential election -- and we believe every American, regardless of political affiliation, should read it. Key points in the letter will be revealed in our next post, and we invite you to stay tuned. The future of our democracy might depend on informed and caring Americans becoming intimately familiar with the evidence spelled out in the letter.)

Tuesday, November 19, 2024

Iran insists it is not trying to kill Donald Trump over his first-term order to launch a drone strike that killed Iranian military commander Qassim Suleimani

(Sky News/YouTube)
 

Iranian officials are telling their U.S. counterparts that they are not trying to assassinate President-Elect Donald Trump, according to a report at The Evening newsletter, of The New York Times (NYT). Under the headline "Iran Told U.S. That It’s Not Trying to Kill Trump; The Biden administration had warned that the United States would consider any Iranian attempt on Mr. Trump’s life to be 'an act of war,' officials said," Reporters Julian E. Barnes and Farnaz Fassihi write:

Iran sent a message to the Biden administration in October saying that it was not trying to kill Donald J. Trump, as Tehran attempted to ease rising tensions with Washington, according to U.S. officials, as well as an Iranian official and an analyst.

The message, sent to Washington through an intermediary, came after a note from the Biden administration in September that warned that the United States would consider any Iranian attempt on the life of Mr. Trump, then the Republican candidate for president, to be “an act of war.”

Since Mr. Trump won the Nov. 5 election, many Iranian former officials, pundits and media outlets have been publicly advocating for Tehran to try to engage with the president-elect and pursue a more conciliatory approach, despite vows from Mr. Trump’s allies to renew a high-pressure campaign against Iran.

Iran's anger toward Trump can be traced to his first term as president and a drone strike that claimed the life of a prominent Iranian military figure. Barnes and Fassihi report:

U.S. officials have said that Iran sought to kill Mr. Trump in revenge for ordering the 2020 drone strike that killed Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani, the commander who directed Iran’s militias and proxy forces. The Department of Justice has issued two indictments that officials said were related to Iranian plotting against Mr. Trump.

Monday, November 18, 2024

"Private" Trumpers come out of the closet after their guy "wins," but I suggest they stay hidden because Trump is a reckless guy who already is causing messes

(Axios)

"Secret" Trump voters are "coming out of the closet" after having a major impact on the 2024 presidential election, according to a report from Axios. Are writers Mike Allen and Erica Pandey  on target with their article? I'm not sure about that. In fact, we are working on a number of posts about information that could provide an alternative explanation for some of the peculiar voting data, most of which wound up favoring Trump. I invite readers to check out the Axios piece below, and we would like to know what you think of their conclusions. We welcome your input, either in the comments section of this post or on my Facebook page.

Under the headline "Secret Trump voters have post-election coming out party," Allen and Pandey write:

They're donning MAGA hats in cafes, celebrating on social media and flying Trump flags: Supporters of President-elect Trump in deep blue cities and states are no longer keeping it to themselves, Axios' Erica Pandey writes.

Many Trump voters in those cities saw his victory as validation, and are acting accordingly. Some residents of liberal enclaves tell Axios they've seen more Trump yard signs go up after the election than before it.

  • Many supporters of Vice President Harris are grappling with the fact that their neighbors might not have voted the way they did.

The "secret" Trump vote is not new to this year's election. It has happened before, Allen and Pandey write:

Flashback: The "secret" Trump vote has been a phenomenon for the past few election cycles.

  • A study from Columbia Business School found that among those who kept their choice a secret leading up to the 2016 election, two out of three went for Trump.
  • "I think people recognize there is some kind of reputational cost of supporting Trump," says Columbia's Michael Slepian, who co-authored the study.

 Zoom in: According to Slepian's research, people primarily keep their votes secret because they're concerned about their reputation, about conflicts with family and friends, and about feeling like they don't belong in their neighborhood or city.

  • And while many people who supported Trump will continue to keep mum due to those concerns, others are seeing the rightward shift in blue cities and the broader support for Trump and deciding to go public.
  • "There's such a stigma still with being a Trump supporter ... I'm not sure it's gonna be like that anymore," says Jonathan Alpert, a Manhattan-based psychotherapist who says patients told him they were keeping their support for the former president quiet before the election.

It sounds like some of the "private" Trumpers are embarrassed about their choice of a presidential candidate. Given the reckless manner in which Trump is filling out his cabinet and staff, plus dire predictions many experts have made about a second Trump term -- and those experts include historian Allan Lichtman, who has become known as America's "Nostradamus" after correctly picking nine of 10 presidential elections, until Trump broke that streak this year -- "private" Trumpers might want to be deliberate about coming out of hiding to take credit for the president they helped create -- and the messes he already is creating.

Write Allen and Pandey:

On TikTok, Instagram and beyond, some influencers who'd kept their political preferences hidden are going full MAGA, The Cut reports.

My advice? Cool your jets  and chill a bit before going "full MAGA." My sense is that events are coming that you might not want to be associated it. Trump is known for creating chaos, and that is likely what we are going to get early in a second term.You might decide that being a "secret" Trump supporter wasn't such a bad idea after all.