Kraken Released

It was good to see the Kraken released on November 25 by Sidney Powell and her associates.


The two complaints filed for the apparent voter fraud in Michigan (74 pages) and Georgia (104 pages) and are freely available on the website of Defending the Republic (defendingtherepublic.org). Both are interesting reads and are hardly a surprise to anyone who was half paying attention. By the way, we are not associated with Sidney Powell or her colleagues. We mention this due to its importance.


It is impossible to summarize the two complaints except to say that the Democrats obviously cheated and they seemed to be too proud and flipping stupid to do it properly. Almost every method of cheating conceivable was (allegedly) resorted to; that is, every method detectable anyway. “Hey guys, you know when you steal something, it’s supposed to be by stealth, right?”


A few parts of the complaints are worth repeating here. The paragraph numbers as used in the documents are included, without implying the entire paragraph is quoted.


Re Dominion Voting Machines in Michigan


4. The fraud begins with the election software and hardware from Dominion Voting Systems Corporation (“Dominion”) used by the Michigan Board of State Canvassers. The Dominion systems derive from the software designed by Smartmatic Corporation, which became Sequoia in the United States.


5. Smartmatic and Dominion were founded by foreign oligarchs and dictators to ensure computerized ballot-stuffing and vote manipulation to whatever level was needed to make certain Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez never lost another election.


7. A core requirement of the Smartmatic software design ultimately adopted by Dominion for the Michigan’s elections was the software’s ability to hide its manipulation of votes from any audit. As the whistleblower explains:


Chavez was most insistent that Smartmatic design the system in a way that the system could change the vote of each voter without being detected. He wanted the software itself to function in such a manner that if the voter were to place their thumb print or fingerprint on a scanner, then the thumbprint would be tied to a record of the voter’s name and identity as having voted, but that voter would not tracked to the changed vote. He made it clear that the system would have to be setup to not leave any evidence of the changed vote for a specific voter and that there would be no evidence to show and nothing to contradict that the name or the fingerprint or thumb print was going with a changed vote. Smartmatic agreed to create such a system and produced the software and hardware that accomplished that result for President Chavez. Id. ¶15.


8. The design and features of the Dominion software do not permit a simple audit to reveal its misallocation, redistribution, or deletion of votes. First, the system's central accumulator does not include a protected real-time audit log that maintains the date and time stamps of all significant election events. Key components of the system utilize unprotected logs.


9. Indeed, under the professional standards within the industry in auditing and forensic analysis, when a log is unprotected, and can be altered, it can no longer serve the purpose of an audit log. There is incontrovertible physical evidence that the standards of physical security of the voting machines and the software were breached, and machines were connected to the internet in violation of professional standards, which violates federal election law on the preservation of evidence.


10. In deciding to award Dominion a $25 million, ten-year contract (to a Dominion project team led by Kelly Garrett, former Deputy Director of the Michigan Democratic Party), and then certifying Dominion software, Michigan officials disregarded all the concerns that caused Dominion software to be rejected by the Texas Board of elections in 2018 because it was deemed vulnerable to undetected and non-auditable manipulation. An industry expert, Dr. Andrew Appel, Princeton Professor of Computer Science and Election Security Expert has recently observed, with reference to Dominion Voting machines: “I figured out how to make a slightly different computer program that just before the polls were closed, it switches some votes around from one candidate to another. I wrote that computer program into a memory chip and now to hack a voting machine you just need 7 minutes alone with it and a screwdriver.”


Re Some Evidence of Fraud in Michigan


83. The most egregious example of election workers fraudulent and illegal behavior concerns two batches of new ballots brought to the TCF Center after the 8:00 PM Election Day deadline. First, at approximately 4:30 AM on November 4, 2020, poll challenger Andrew Sitto observed “tens of thousands of new ballots” being brought into the counting room, and “[u]nlike the other ballots, these boxes were brought in from the rear of the room.” Exh. 4, GLJC Complaint, Exh. C at ¶ 10. Mr. Sitto heard other Republican challengers state that “several vehicles with out-of-state license plates pulled up to the TCF Center a little before 4:30 a.m. and unloaded boxes of ballots.” Id. at ¶ 11. “All ballots sampled that I heard and observed were for Joe Biden.” Id. at ¶ 12.


84. A second set of new boxes of ballots arrived at the TCF Center around 9:00 PM on November 4, 2020. According to poll watcher Robert Cushman, contained “several thousand new ballots.” Exh. 4, GLJC Complaint, Exh. D at ¶ 5. Mr. Cushman noted that “none of the names on the new ballots were on the QVF or the Supplemental Sheets,” id. at ¶ 7, and he observed “computer operators at several counting boards manually adding the names and addresses of these thousands of ballots to the QVF system.” Id. at ¶ 8. Further, “[e]very ballot was being fraudulently and manually entered into the [QVF], as having been born on January 1, 1990.” Id. at ¶ 15. When Mr. Cushman challenged the validity of the votes and the impossibility of each ballot having the same birthday, he “was told that this was the instruction that came down from the Wayne County Clerk’s office.” Id. at ¶ 16.


85. Perhaps the most probative evidence comes from Melissa Carone, who was “contracted to do IT work at the TCF Center for the November 3, 2020 election.” Exh. 5, ¶1. On November 4, Ms. Carrone testified that there were “two vans that pulled into the garage of the counting room, one on day shift and one on night shift.” Id. ¶8. She thought that the vans were bring food, however, she “never saw any food coming out of these vans,” and noted the coincidence that “Michigan had discovered over 100,000 more ballots – not even two hours after the last van left.” Id. Ms. Carrone witnessed this of this illegal vote dump, as well as several other violations outlined below.


104. One Michigan voter stated that her deceased son has been recorded as voting twice since he passed away, most recently in the 2020 general election. Exh. 3 (Chase aff.¶3).


105. The attached report of William M. Briggs, Ph.D. (“Dr. Briggs Report”) summarizes the multi-state phone survey data of 248 Michigan Republican voters collected by Matt Braynard, which was conducted from November 15-17, 2020 and covered voters in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. See Exh. 101, Dr. Briggs Reportat 1, and Att. 1 (“Braynard Survey”). The Braynard Survey sought to identify two specific errors involving unreturned mail-in ballots that are indicative of voter fraud, namely: “Error #1: those who were recorded as receiving absentee ballots without requesting them;” and “Error #2: those who returned absentee ballots but whose votes went missing (i.e., marked as unreturned).” Id. Dr. Briggs then conducted a parameter-free predictive model to estimate, within 95% confidence or prediction intervals, the number of ballots affected by these errors out of a total of 139,190 unreturned mail-in ballots for the State of Michigan.


106. With respect to Error #1, Dr. Briggs analysis estimated that 29,611 to 36,529 ballots out of the total 139,190 unreturned ballots (21.27% - 26.24%) were recorded for voters who had not requested them. Id. With respect to Error #2, the numbers are similar with 27,928 to 34,710 ballots out of 139,190 unreturned ballots (20.06% - 24.93%) recorded for voters who did return their ballots were recorded as being unreturned. Id. Taking the average of the two types of errors together, 62,517 ballots, or 45% of the total, are “troublesome.”


112. The expert witness testimony of Russell James Ramsland, Jr. (“Ramsland Affidavit”), which is described in greater detail below, identifies an event that occurred in Michigan on November 4 that is “physically impossible” See Exh. 104 at ¶14. The “event” reflected in the data are “4 spikes totaling 384,733 ballots allegedly processed in a combined interval of 2 hour[s] and 38 minutes” for four precincts/townships in four Michigan counties (Wayne, Oakland, Macomb ne and Kent). Id. Based on Mr. Ramsland’s analysis of the voting machines available at the referenced locations, he determined that the maximum processing capability during this period was only 94,867 ballots, so that “there were 289,866 more ballots processed in the time available for processing in the four precincts/townships, than there was processing capacity.” Id. This amount is alone is nearly twice the number of ballots by which Biden purportedly leads President Trump (i.e., approximately 154,180).


129. Mr. Ramsland’s analysis of the raw data , which provides votes counts, rather than just vote shares, in decimal form provides highly probative evidence that, in his professional opinion, demonstrates that Dominion manipulated votes through the use of an “additive” or “Ranked Choice Voting” algorithm (or what Dominion’s user guide refers to as the “RCV Method”).


130. Mr. Ramsland describes how the RCV algorithm can be implemented, and the significance of the use of fractional vote counts, with decimal places, rather than whole numbers, in demonstrating that Dominion did just that to manipulate Michigan votes.


133. Mr Ramsland and his team analyzed the sudden injection of totaling 384,733 ballots by four Michigan counties (Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, and Kent) in a 2 hour 38 minute period in the early morning of November 4 (which would have included the first ballot dump described above in Paragraph 72), and concluded that “[t]his is an impossibility, given the equipment available at the 4 reference locations (precincts/townships).” Id. at ¶14.


134. Specifically, Mr. Ramslund calculated that “94,867 ballots as the maximum number of ballots that could be processed” in that time period, and thus that “[t]here were 289,866 more ballots processed in the time available for processing in four precincts/townships, than the capacity of the system allows.” Id.


Re Some Evidence of Fraud in Georgia


98. It was further reported in 2019 that the new Dominion Voting Machines in Georgia “[w]ith Georgia’s current voting system, there’s no way to guarantee that electronic ballots accurately reflect the choices of voters because there’s no paper backup to verify results, with it being reported that:


(a) Recounts are meaningless on the direct-recording electronic voting machines because they simply reproduce the same numbers they originally generated.


(b) But paper ballots alone won’t protect the sanctity of elections on the new touchscreens, called ballot-marking devices.


(c) The new election system depends on voters to verify the printed text of their choices on their ballots, a step that many voters might not take. The State Election Board hasn't yet created regulations for how recounts and audits will be conducted. And paper ballots embed selections in bar codes that are only readable by scanning machines, leaving Georgians uncertain whether the bar codes match their votes.


111. An analysis of the Dominion software system by a former US Military Intelligence expert concludes that the system and software have been accessible and were certainly compromised by rogue actors, such as Iran and China. By using servers and employees connected with rogue actors and hostile foreign influences combined with numerous easily discoverable leaked credentials, Dominion neglectfully allowed foreign adversaries to access data and intentionally provided access to their infrastructure in order to monitor and manipulate elections, including the most recent one in 2020. (See Exh. 7).


118. Plaintiffs have learned that the representation about “a water leak affecting the room where absentee ballots were counted” was not true. The only water leak that needed repairs at State Farm Arena from November 3 – November 5 was a toilet overflow that occurred earlier on November 3. It had nothing to do with a room with ballot counting, but the false water break representation led to “everyone being sent home.” Nonetheless, first six (6) people, then three (3) people stayed until 1:05 a.m. working on the computers.


130. Russell Ramsland confirms that data breaches in the Dominion software permitted rogue actors to penetrate and manipulate the software during the recent general election. He further concludes that at least 96,600 mail-in ballots were illegally counted as they were not cast by legal voters.

 

Be sure to subscribe to our mailing list so you get each new Opinyun that comes out!

 

Follow us on Farcebook, Twitterpated, Instasham, MeWe, Gab, and BooTube, as well as Parler!

122 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
Screen Shot 2021-12-09 at 4.49.31 PM.png

10% Off
Use Code: MERRYXMAS

MERCHANDISE!