Detroit: Dominion Contractor Says She Witnessed Fraudulent Actions During Ballot Counting
A forensics report claims the voting machines are “intentionally” designed to produce fraudulent results
In early December, Michigan Judge Kevin Elsenheimer ordered a forensic analysis of Dominion voting machines used in Antrim County, and the newly-released results are astounding.
The forensics report claims the voting machines are “intentionally” designed to produce fraudulent results.
“We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results,” Russell Ramsland Jr., co-founder of Allied Security Operations Group, said in a preliminary report.
“The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication,” he continued. “The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail.”
Ramsland urged that this ultimately leads to fraud.
“This leads to voter or election fraud,” he said. “Based on our study, we conclude that the Dominion Voting System should not be used in Michigan. We further conclude that the results of Antrim County should not have been certified.”
Ramsland’s team said they first did a forensic duplication of the county’s election management server before inspecting it, then duplicated compact flashcards that were used by local precincts in the Dominion ImageCast System, USB memory sticks used by Dominion Voter Assist Terminals and USB memory sticks that were utilized for the poll book, BizPacReview reports.
According to the report, the team said there were 15,676 individual events per the tabulation log and of those, more than 68 percent were recorded errors.
“This high error rate proves the Dominion Voting System is flawed and does not meet state or federal election laws,” Ramsland wrote.
“This was a 2020 issue not seen in previous election cycles still stored on the server,” he continued. “This is caused by intentional errors in the system.”
Election Staff Can Manually Adjust Ballots During Counting with Dominion Voting Software
A forensics report claims the voting machines are “intentionally” designed to produce fraudulent results
In early December, Michigan Judge Kevin Elsenheimer ordered a forensic analysis of Dominion voting machines used in Antrim County, and the newly-released results are astounding.
The forensics report claims the voting machines are “intentionally” designed to produce fraudulent results.
“We conclude that the Dominion Voting System is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results,” Russell Ramsland Jr., co-founder of Allied Security Operations Group, said in a preliminary report.
“The system intentionally generates an enormously high number of ballot errors. The electronic ballots are then transferred for adjudication,” he continued. “The intentional errors lead to bulk adjudication of ballots with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail.”
Ramsland urged that this ultimately leads to fraud.
“This leads to voter or election fraud,” he said. “Based on our study, we conclude that the Dominion Voting System should not be used in Michigan. We further conclude that the results of Antrim County should not have been certified.”
Ramsland’s team said they first did a forensic duplication of the county’s election management server before inspecting it, then duplicated compact flashcards that were used by local precincts in the Dominion ImageCast System, USB memory sticks used by Dominion Voter Assist Terminals and USB memory sticks that were utilized for the poll book, BizPacReview reports.
According to the report, the team said there were 15,676 individual events per the tabulation log and of those, more than 68 percent were recorded errors.
“This high error rate proves the Dominion Voting System is flawed and does not meet state or federal election laws,” Ramsland wrote.
“This was a 2020 issue not seen in previous election cycles still stored on the server,” he continued. “This is caused by intentional errors in the system.”