Are Voting Systems on the Internet?
The matter resurfaced this week with a viral article and the Lindell event. Updates as well from GA, TX and US Congress
You will likely hear that ‘voting machines are not connected to the internet’ from election officials. In Idaho, multiple random hand counts of ballots have yet to show any significant discrepancy with the machine count. So, I have yet to see any evidence here in Idaho that our voting machines are being compromised from any such connection, if it does exist.
However, the same cannot be said about other states. Some machines have been found with modems and wireless chips embedded and it serves as a warning that we should be vigilant to make sure our machines are free from outside access.
Tabulators vs Pollbooks
First let’s clarify what is meant by ‘voting machines’. In counties where machines are used, you will likely find two different types, tabulators and pollbooks. The tabulators are what counts the votes and those are the ones we absolutely do not want connected to the internet. The pollbooks, however, are used to check-in voters, usually by scanning a driver’s license. They are intended to be on-line in order to validate the ID and to ensure the person has not already voted.
Evidence of Connectivity
This is not a comprehensive list but here are some links to details about connectivity:
Dominion Executive Eric Coomer speaks to the various connectivity options that they support. Granted this is a dated video from an age of naivete about cyber security, but it shows the systems were originally designed for transmission of voting data.
NBC News Article from 2020 conveys research into voting systems confirming modems were deployed in tabulators in at least 10 states (Idaho was not one of them). The research identifies the top three voting system vendors - ES&S, Dominion and Hart Intercivic.
A tabulator tape report showed connectivity to an IP address (likely the central count location for the county) as part of a file transfer session. This was for an election in April of this year in Walworth County, WI.
FirstNet
While I don’t consider it as hard evidence, a recent article went viral with grassroots election groups this week that referred to the network diagram below from Dallas County TX. It shows tabulators connected to the same router as the pollbook. In other words, internet connectivity. The article puts forth the theory that a system first developed for use in emergency situations has been put to use to connect to precincts. The system is called ‘FirstNet’, which was built by AT&T after Congress passed legislation that authorized its development.
Want More Evidence? Enter Mike Lindell
In summary of the above, many tabulators were deployed that were designed to communicate election results to a central facility via an on-line connection. That method is now taboo, but some counties (like in Wisconsin) appear to still be doing so. But I fully expect and have heard several election officials say that is not the case in their county and they will stand by their statement that their machines are not on-line. How can it be proved or disproved?
MyPillow founder and election integrity activist Mike Lindell has a potential solution. He held his third election integrity summit last week and revealed a device that purports to be able to collect internet connections from machines at a given location. Dubbed the ‘Wireless Monitoring Device’ (WMD), a demo of the device capturing cell phone and other connected device information in real time was shown at the event.
While there is some debate amongst technology professionals as to whether the device can accomplish its claims, Lindell stated it would be deployed in 3 states this November to test it in preparation for the 2024 election. If successful, Lindell is planning to provide the device nationwide to individuals so that evidence of machine connectivity can be captured and reported all over the country.
US House Committee Investigating Foreign Donations - A letter from the Ways and Means Committee released last Monday is seeking information on 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) organizations that may be violating election laws by taking foreign donations. Currently, non-profits allow a degree of privacy for large contributors as well as significant funding to candidates well beyond what individuals can contribute. While both parties can engage in this type of campaign funding, the Democratic party seems much more focused on doing so. Read more here.
TX/GA: Election Laws Challenged, Mixed Results - Both Texas and Georgia recently passed legislation to provide tighter controls on elections such as voter ID and prohibition of ballot harvesting. Much of that remains but federal judges did strike down some portions dealing with absentee vote acceptance criteria. Both sides are claiming victory. Read more here.
Oh, almost forgot. Trump was indicted…again.
Thank you for helping to separate the wheat from the chaff, the hype from the tripe. Government entities and manufacturers continually reassure the previously-trusting populace about safety and efficacy in other areas; so, believing in election integrity is difficult for those who grew tin-foil hats over the past three-plus years, especially when federal judges and others work so hard to strike down common-sense election-fraud protections like those in GA and TX.
Poll workers and poll watchers must sign up in DROVES for ALL elections (local, state, national), as a first line of defense. We cannot do much about the machines until more proof and technology are available (or until machines are banned entirely -- hah!), but human intelligence can be invaluable.
Thank goodness for patriots like Mike Lindell (and you) who strive to make every US election the cleanest election of elections.