BREAKING: Same "Erroneous Code" Found In New Mexico's Dominion Machines! They Were NEVER Certified By EAC!
Before we discuss New Mexico, it is imperative that we understand what was just discovered in Tennessee!
ICYMI: our good friend and fellow patriot Brian Lupo (AKA Cannabis Conservative) broke an incredibly explosive story regarding “erroneous code” found on the Dominion Voting Systems used in Williamson County Tennessee.
Explosive EAC report SHOWING **ERRONEOUS CODE** on Dominion software!!!!
During the Williamson municipal election conducted on October 26th, 2021, a MAJOR anomaly was discovered. They noticed that after they closed the polls, 7 out of 18 tabulators did not match the number of ballots that were ACTUALLY scanned. This anomaly prompted an investigation into the matter, and the results were submitted to the EAC. Upon receiving this report, the EAC brought in its own testing laboratories “Pro V&V and SLI Compliance” to investigate further.
These test laboratories recreated and confirmed their initial findings, that while the election ran as normal for some time, eventually a ballot was fed through the machine that caused an error message. The error message read: “Ballot format or id is unrecognizable”, indicating that the ballot code was not able to be read properly. Once the misread happened, the ballot was marked as “provisional”, and every ballot that followed was marked provisional as well. These provisional ballots were NOT included in the tabulator’s “close poll totals”, hence why the numbers did not match.
United States Election Assistance Commission Report of Investigation
(Unfortunately, this report does not tell us how many ballots were affected).
Brian Lupo Explains What All of This Means in Simple Terms!
Brian writes on Telegram;
“What can you do with provisional ballots set off to the side? You can mass adjudicate them anytime down the road however you want and then tabulate them to the count using the RTR process outlined in the Dominion user manuals.”
As Brian accurately points out, Dominion’s user manual shows how this can be exploited to mass change votes.
Now according to the test laboratories and the EAC, this “anomaly” was related to “the imported D-Suite 5.5 election definition used on the D-Suite 5.5-B system.” In other words, a ton of ballots were marked as provisional, and mass adjudicated because the machines had an outdated software configuration, which caused them to misread the ballots.
They chalked this up to a simple mistake, but if this was merely an accident, why wasn’t this caught during the Logic and Accuracy testing PRIOR to the election? Isn’t that what these so called “testing laboratories” are supposed to do? Aren’t Pro V&V and SLI Compliance hired SPECIFICALLY to make sure that the machines are running the proper software before an election?!?! And they just so happened to miss something of this significance?
In my opinion, this proves that either:
A) Logic and Accuracy testing is a JOKE.
B) This was done intentionally to allow for manipulation
C) All of the above
Not to mention, I feel that something so severe SHOULD have resulted in a total STOP of the election until this issue was resolved. However, as you can clearly see, the Dominion machines allowed for the election to continue, and for the “anomaly” to go undetected.
Now, the good news is, Pro V&V and SLI Compliance came in and did a “trusted build” to properly configure the machines, and make sure that this doesn’t happen again. Still, the question remains. How many other states and counties had this very same “erroneous”, or outdated code on their machines? Reason would tell me that MANY counties had this very same problem, but missed it because they didn’t audit their machines.
If I had to guess, I’d say the likelihood that this happened elsewhere is about 100%.
Now That Brings Us to New Mexico!
New Mexico is currently conducting an audit of the 2020 election. Several auditors, along with independent researchers like Dan Sundin are working diligently to find anomalies in the Dominion Machines. These auditors have been met with great resistance from the corrupt SOS and have had difficulty obtaining all the necessary data.
(It should be noted that 31 of 47 precincts in Otero County were completely missing ALL of their Election Day results).
Despite this obstruction, and failure by the SOS to comply with US code, Dan Sundin and a team of researchers were able to obtain a significant portion of data using a recovery tool. Dan claims that hundreds of issues have already been found, (including the one that I am about to show you).
Remember what we recently learned from Tennessee; that outdated software configurations can cause a misreading of ballots, and creates opportunities for FRAUD!
The following screenshot shows an error message that occurred on the Chaves County tabulators prior to the November 3rd, 2020, election… The error reads “Wrong MBS version: “5.2.17” expecting “5.2.4”
(MBS determines the way machines behave and ballots are read)
So, the machine was running on version 5.2.17, but was WRONGLY configured for version 5.2.4… WOW! So here we have yet ANOTHER “software mismatch”!
Unlike Tennessee, the damage caused by this “erroneous code” is largely unknown. However, what we DO know is that the system reported a software mismatch, (similar to what caused the anomaly in Tennessee), and yet, the election continued. Thus, proving that Tennessee was not an isolated incident.
…I think it’s safe to say that we should ban the machines, don’t you?
But it gets worse!
Dan decided to look on the EAC website to determine which software version the EAC claimed to have certified.
(Remember that the machines were running on Version 5.2.x. during the election but configured for 5.2.4)
Check this out! NEITHER version appears ANYWHERE on their website under New Mexico!
Here’s a list of ALL of the certifications.
Did you see Version 5.2.x. anywhere? How about 5.2.4? …I didn’t either!
So, what does this mean?! Put simply, these machines were configured to an un-certified software version, ran on a DIFFERENT un-certified software version, and despite the fact that the machines gave an error during the election, the election continued anyway! WHAT A COMPLETE JOKE!
The SOS should resign, these machines should be banned, the EAC, and the test laboratories are completely unreliable!
Fascinating. The logic and accuracy test are superficial at best. They can just write a cheating program that turns on during the election and turns off after the election. Logic and accuracy test doesn't test what happened during the election and wouldn't pick up software like that.
Really makes you wonder what these unlisted extra versions of software are?
Well done, brotha. Keep em coming.
Right after digital gas pumps came out, I remember a gas station out west where people thought they were getting ripped off by paying for more gas than they actually pumped. The EPA was called and they checked his pumps, and his pumps were found to be accurate. Yet, they weren't. You see the owner knew the EPA always tested pumps by pumping 5 gallons of gas so he had set his pumps to be exact for the first 5 gallons before an algorithm kicked in and it started skimming by pumping less than an actual gallon even though his customers were paying for a full gallon. They eventually figured it out and he was criminally charged. I believe they can rig voting machines the same way. They will be accurate to pass logic and accuracy test where they run just a few ballots, but then at some point, say the 100th ballot fed into the machine, the algorithm will kick in. This is why we can never trust the machines to allocate our votes. We must go back to voting on paper ballots and hand count our votes.