Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes]

I find it funny that these are called Dominion.  It so happens my former 
company was Dominion (not related that I know of) and we were notorious 
for launching software that did not work and took years to finally get 
it to working, by which time our competitors had already come out with 
the next best thing.


On 12/17/2020 10:48 AM, Larry Turner via Mercedes wrote:
Are you saying your experience has been with Dominion Systems voting 
machines?


LarryT

On 12/17/2020 8:22 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:
It’s not. I’ve worked the elections both here and in two other states 
I’ve lived in for over 40 years. I’ve worked elections since I was 16 
years old and the days of the voting machines with the curtains and 
little levers. My father was a precinct committeeman and working 
elections was expected of all of us kids, and most of us have 
continued that effort since.


The “check in” station you mention is connected to a secure network 
that is used to access the voter rolls. It’s not on the “Internet”, 
it’s an end to end, encrypted, tunneled connection to the SOE which 
can be a hard wired or wifi connection. This is common practice and 
is configured and set up well in advance to maintain the security of 
that data. One of my teams is charged with testing and verification 
of these connections prior to the elections. The ballot printers are 
a part of this system.


The scanners are purely stand-alone devices and have no connectivity.

Counts are typically moved from the scanners to the polling system 
via secure memory cards that are encrypted. Some scanners also have 
the capability of printing out results on a paper tape, like an 
adding machine. The numbers, after being reconciled, are either 
transmitted to the supervisor of elections’ via the local client at 
the polling place or the data can be hand carried (in a secure, chain 
of custody strongbox) back to the SOE (which is how they get back 
there anyway, along with the paper ballots.)


Anyone who has worked the polls has been exposed to these processes 
and procedures used to guarantee the integrity of the elections. It’s 
certainly different from one state or municipality to the other, but 
the general approach is the same. It’s highly controlled and closely 
audited. Again, it’s not perfect, but the claims of widespread, 
massive voter fraud are gross misstatements.


-D


On Dec 17, 2020, at 7:46 AM, Meade Dillon via Mercedes 
 wrote:


Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting
machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite 
sure
the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been 
reported in

the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch votes in one
direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a thorough 
forensic

audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.

Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine 
where you
'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes their 
ballot
(which they can review to make sure it is correct) and feeds it into 
the

scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each polling place, the
scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, and the total 
number of
votes cast is compared to the number of voters who came into the 
polling
place.  If those two numbers don't match, then they have to try to 
resolve
that at the polling place, with the poll watchers from each party 
present

(if they bothered to show up, a great many of our polling places had no
poll watchers - not enough volunteers).  Once the count is resolved, 
then
the electronic votes and the paper ballots are taken to the county 
election

headquarters and reported out.

The first station at the polling place was voter check-in to make 
sure the
voter was registered / at the right polling place, and they (the 
laptops)

were connected to a local WiFi hot-spot that was part of the system, so
they could communicate / get updates back to the county HQ voter 
database.
I'm not sure if the ballot printer and ballot scanner were also 
connected,

but once the count was resolved, it was loaded back onto that laptop
somehow (I'm pretty sure via the local WiFi hotspot) and that laptop 
was

the way the electronic count was returned to county election HQ.

Here in Charleston, we had a lot of folks examining the totals and
comparing them to historical patterns, and although the results were
disappointing in some cases and pleasing in others, nothing was 
observed to

raise alarms in the result.

What was troubling to me was that we had three known instances of clear
violations of voting law at the polling places, where one party 
tried to
influence voters or intimidate poll watchers and so favor one party 
over
the other.  This pattern has been repeated locally for years; one 
side is
convinced that breaking the law and bending the rules in their favor 
is OK,
and at every election we have to be ready to try to counter this 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

Well stated, Scott, and I would concur.

-D

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 1:32 PM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> There are about 3000 counties in the US which generally conduct independent 
> elections under elected supervisor of election.  The main alleged problems 
> are only 6-10 counties.  Excellent election integrity in the vast number of 
> counties tells us nothing about those problem counties.   As far as I am 
> concerned, any county that stopped counting election night is suspect.  Any 
> county where vast numbers of unbalanced ballots arrived in the wee hours is 
> suspect.  Any county where observers were obstructed is suspect.  Any county 
> that counted without observers is suspect.  None of this is physical proof 
> but the "suspects" had complete control of the physical evidence since the 
> election and we KNOW at least some of that evidence was destroyed.  We have 
> sworn eyewitness statements attesting to MANY "irregularities", a euphemism 
> for crimes.
> 
> In 2000 I looked hard at our local election system in Okaloosa County, FL and 
> my conclusions there concur with Dan's.  But that tells me nothing about 
> Philadelphia, Atlanta, etc. and nothing about an election with universal 
> unsolicited mail-in ballots.
> 
> If our election system is corrupted, especially if by foreign powers, that 
> supersedes ALL partisan political considerations.
> 
> Scott
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Mercedes On Behalf Of Dan Penoff via Mercedes
> Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 8:23 AM
> To: Okie Benz 
> Cc: Dan Penoff 
> Subject: Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you 
> can’t handle it then hit delete
> 
> It’s not. I’ve worked the elections both here and in two other states I’ve 
> lived in for over 40 years. I’ve worked elections since I was 16 years old 
> and the days of the voting machines with the curtains and little levers. My 
> father was a precinct committeeman and working elections was expected of all 
> of us kids, and most of us have continued that effort since.
> 
> The “check in” station you mention is connected to a secure network that is 
> used to access the voter rolls. It’s not on the “Internet”, it’s an end to 
> end, encrypted, tunneled connection to the SOE which can be a hard wired or 
> wifi connection. This is common practice and is configured and set up well in 
> advance to maintain the security of that data. One of my teams is charged 
> with testing and verification of these connections prior to the elections. 
> The ballot printers are a part of this system.
> 
> The scanners are purely stand-alone devices and have no connectivity.
> 
> Counts are typically moved from the scanners to the polling system via secure 
> memory cards that are encrypted. Some scanners also have the capability of 
> printing out results on a paper tape, like an adding machine. The numbers, 
> after being reconciled, are either transmitted to the supervisor of 
> elections’ via the local client at the polling place or the data can be hand 
> carried (in a secure, chain of custody strongbox) back to the SOE (which is 
> how they get back there anyway, along with the paper ballots.)
> 
> Anyone who has worked the polls has been exposed to these processes and 
> procedures used to guarantee the integrity of the elections. It’s certainly 
> different from one state or municipality to the other, but the general 
> approach is the same. It’s highly controlled and closely audited. Again, it’s 
> not perfect, but the claims of widespread, massive voter fraud are gross 
> misstatements.
> 
> -D
> 
> 
>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 7:46 AM, Meade Dillon via Mercedes 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting 
>> machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite 
>> sure the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been 
>> reported in the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch 
>> votes in one direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a 
>> thorough forensic audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.
>> 
>> Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine where 
>> you 'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes 
>> their ballot (which they can review to make sure it is correct) and 
>> feeds it into the scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each 
>> polling place, the scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, 
>> and the total number of votes cast is compared to the number of voters 
>> who came into the polling place.  If those two numbers don't match, 
>> then they have to try to resolve that at the polling place, with the 
>> poll watchers from each party present (if they bothered to show up, a 
>> great many of our polling places had no poll watchers - not enough 
>> volunteers).  Once the count is resolved, then the electronic votes 
>> and the paper ballots are taken to the county election 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Karl Wittnebel via Mercedes]

Some related information:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/the-future-of-democracy/can-our-ballots-be-both-secret-and-secure

I am still looking for the article about the lady in charge of elections in
Texas who spearheaded development of machines using this technology, which
was eventually taken up by microsoft.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020, 9:06 AM Dan Penoff via Mercedes 
wrote:

> I am not at liberty to discuss operational details about our voting
> system. You can read all you want at:
>
> https://www.votehillsborough.org/ELECTIONS/Election-Security <
> https://www.votehillsborough.org/ELECTIONS/Election-Security>
>
> What I will say is that most election or vote tabulating systems have the
> ability to transmit data in a secure manner, and when this feature is used
> it’s only on and working for as long as it takes to establish an encrypted
> connection via cellular phone frequencies, transmit the encrypted data, and
> close the connection. It’s never connected to the “Internet”, the
> connection is purely end to end tunneled and encrypted. The data is the
> tabulated vote count, typically.
>
> However, before this data is ever sent, a paper copy of the tabulations
> are printed out. This is hand carried to the SOE as well as posted to the
> window or door of the polling station.
>
> Again, believe what you will, but the checks and balances that exist in
> the system prevent and have prevented for decades any manipulation on the
> scale that people have claimed. For those who choose not to accept this, I
> encourage them to sign up and work the polls in any election, local or
> national. Be a part of the process and you’l have a far greater
> appreciation for it and its integrity.
>
> -D
>
> > On Dec 17, 2020, at 11:48 AM, Larry Turner via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> > Are you saying your experience has been with Dominion Systems voting
> machines?
> >
> > LarryT
> >
> > On 12/17/2020 8:22 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:
> >> It’s not. I’ve worked the elections both here and in two other states
> I’ve lived in for over 40 years. I’ve worked elections since I was 16 years
> old and the days of the voting machines with the curtains and little
> levers. My father was a precinct committeeman and working elections was
> expected of all of us kids, and most of us have continued that effort since.
> >>
> >> The “check in” station you mention is connected to a secure network
> that is used to access the voter rolls. It’s not on the “Internet”, it’s an
> end to end, encrypted, tunneled connection to the SOE which can be a hard
> wired or wifi connection. This is common practice and is configured and set
> up well in advance to maintain the security of that data. One of my teams
> is charged with testing and verification of these connections prior to the
> elections. The ballot printers are a part of this system.
> >>
> >> The scanners are purely stand-alone devices and have no connectivity.
> >>
> >> Counts are typically moved from the scanners to the polling system via
> secure memory cards that are encrypted. Some scanners also have the
> capability of printing out results on a paper tape, like an adding machine.
> The numbers, after being reconciled, are either transmitted to the
> supervisor of elections’ via the local client at the polling place or the
> data can be hand carried (in a secure, chain of custody strongbox) back to
> the SOE (which is how they get back there anyway, along with the paper
> ballots.)
> >>
> >> Anyone who has worked the polls has been exposed to these processes and
> procedures used to guarantee the integrity of the elections. It’s certainly
> different from one state or municipality to the other, but the general
> approach is the same. It’s highly controlled and closely audited. Again,
> it’s not perfect, but the claims of widespread, massive voter fraud are
> gross misstatements.
> >>
> >> -D
> >>
> >>
> >>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 7:46 AM, Meade Dillon via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting
> >>> machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite
> sure
> >>> the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been
> reported in
> >>> the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch votes in one
> >>> direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a thorough
> forensic
> >>> audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.
> >>>
> >>> Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine where
> you
> >>> 'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes their
> ballot
> >>> (which they can review to make sure it is correct) and feeds it into
> the
> >>> scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each polling place, the
> >>> scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, and the total
> number of
> >>> votes cast is compared to the number of voters who came into the
> polling
> >>> place.  If those 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Scott Ritchey via Mercedes]

There are about 3000 counties in the US which generally conduct independent 
elections under elected supervisor of election.  The main alleged problems are 
only 6-10 counties.  Excellent election integrity in the vast number of 
counties tells us nothing about those problem counties.   As far as I am 
concerned, any county that stopped counting election night is suspect.  Any 
county where vast numbers of unbalanced ballots arrived in the wee hours is 
suspect.  Any county where observers were obstructed is suspect.  Any county 
that counted without observers is suspect.  None of this is physical proof but 
the "suspects" had complete control of the physical evidence since the election 
and we KNOW at least some of that evidence was destroyed.  We have sworn 
eyewitness statements attesting to MANY "irregularities", a euphemism for 
crimes.

In 2000 I looked hard at our local election system in Okaloosa County, FL and 
my conclusions there concur with Dan's.  But that tells me nothing about 
Philadelphia, Atlanta, etc. and nothing about an election with universal 
unsolicited mail-in ballots.

If our election system is corrupted, especially if by foreign powers, that 
supersedes ALL partisan political considerations.

Scott

-Original Message-
From: Mercedes On Behalf Of Dan Penoff via Mercedes
Sent: Thursday, December 17, 2020 8:23 AM
To: Okie Benz 
Cc: Dan Penoff 
Subject: Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t 
handle it then hit delete

It’s not. I’ve worked the elections both here and in two other states I’ve 
lived in for over 40 years. I’ve worked elections since I was 16 years old and 
the days of the voting machines with the curtains and little levers. My father 
was a precinct committeeman and working elections was expected of all of us 
kids, and most of us have continued that effort since.

The “check in” station you mention is connected to a secure network that is 
used to access the voter rolls. It’s not on the “Internet”, it’s an end to end, 
encrypted, tunneled connection to the SOE which can be a hard wired or wifi 
connection. This is common practice and is configured and set up well in 
advance to maintain the security of that data. One of my teams is charged with 
testing and verification of these connections prior to the elections. The 
ballot printers are a part of this system.

The scanners are purely stand-alone devices and have no connectivity.

Counts are typically moved from the scanners to the polling system via secure 
memory cards that are encrypted. Some scanners also have the capability of 
printing out results on a paper tape, like an adding machine. The numbers, 
after being reconciled, are either transmitted to the supervisor of elections’ 
via the local client at the polling place or the data can be hand carried (in a 
secure, chain of custody strongbox) back to the SOE (which is how they get back 
there anyway, along with the paper ballots.)

Anyone who has worked the polls has been exposed to these processes and 
procedures used to guarantee the integrity of the elections. It’s certainly 
different from one state or municipality to the other, but the general approach 
is the same. It’s highly controlled and closely audited. Again, it’s not 
perfect, but the claims of widespread, massive voter fraud are gross 
misstatements.

-D


> On Dec 17, 2020, at 7:46 AM, Meade Dillon via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting 
> machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite 
> sure the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been 
> reported in the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch 
> votes in one direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a 
> thorough forensic audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.
> 
> Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine where 
> you 'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes 
> their ballot (which they can review to make sure it is correct) and 
> feeds it into the scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each 
> polling place, the scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, 
> and the total number of votes cast is compared to the number of voters 
> who came into the polling place.  If those two numbers don't match, 
> then they have to try to resolve that at the polling place, with the 
> poll watchers from each party present (if they bothered to show up, a 
> great many of our polling places had no poll watchers - not enough 
> volunteers).  Once the count is resolved, then the electronic votes 
> and the paper ballots are taken to the county election headquarters and 
> reported out.
> 
> The first station at the polling place was voter check-in to make sure 
> the voter was registered / at the right polling place, and they (the 
> laptops) were connected to a local WiFi hot-spot that was part of the 
> system, so they 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Larry Turner via Mercedes]

The report on the Antrim Countyis damning IMO!  Yet with all the 
evidence of manipulation, there's no intention to invalidate the votes 
in that county?  I assume they just plan to count the votes as they were 
recorded and move on?


Seems like a terrible way to run an election.  We'd be better off if we 
had our fingers  marked with purple stain as in an Afghanistan election 
a few years ago.   But oh no, we're an "advanced" country!


LarryT

On 12/17/2020 9:34 AM, Rick Knoble via Mercedes wrote:

Here is a forensics report on the voting machines for one county in Michigan. I 
will read it later this evening.

https://www.scribd.com/document/488105156/Antrim-County-Forensics-Report-on-Dominion-Voting-System#fullscreen_embed

Rick

From: mercedes@okiebenz.com
Sent: December 17, 2020 8:07 AM
To: mercedes@okiebenz.com
Reply-to: mercedes@okiebenz.com
Cc: ka...@striplin.net
Subject: Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t 
handle it then hit delete

So basically it sounds like the election was not “hacked” last time and it 
wasn’t the time either. It is simply the media spun it and hyped it up as being 
hacked before, but this time is spinning it that there is no way it could be 
hacked.


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com



___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

I am not at liberty to discuss operational details about our voting system. You 
can read all you want at:

https://www.votehillsborough.org/ELECTIONS/Election-Security 


What I will say is that most election or vote tabulating systems have the 
ability to transmit data in a secure manner, and when this feature is used it’s 
only on and working for as long as it takes to establish an encrypted 
connection via cellular phone frequencies, transmit the encrypted data, and 
close the connection. It’s never connected to the “Internet”, the connection is 
purely end to end tunneled and encrypted. The data is the tabulated vote count, 
typically.

However, before this data is ever sent, a paper copy of the tabulations are 
printed out. This is hand carried to the SOE as well as posted to the window or 
door of the polling station.

Again, believe what you will, but the checks and balances that exist in the 
system prevent and have prevented for decades any manipulation on the scale 
that people have claimed. For those who choose not to accept this, I encourage 
them to sign up and work the polls in any election, local or national. Be a 
part of the process and you’l have a far greater appreciation for it and its 
integrity.

-D

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 11:48 AM, Larry Turner via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> Are you saying your experience has been with Dominion Systems voting machines?
> 
> LarryT
> 
> On 12/17/2020 8:22 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:
>> It’s not. I’ve worked the elections both here and in two other states I’ve 
>> lived in for over 40 years. I’ve worked elections since I was 16 years old 
>> and the days of the voting machines with the curtains and little levers. My 
>> father was a precinct committeeman and working elections was expected of all 
>> of us kids, and most of us have continued that effort since.
>> 
>> The “check in” station you mention is connected to a secure network that is 
>> used to access the voter rolls. It’s not on the “Internet”, it’s an end to 
>> end, encrypted, tunneled connection to the SOE which can be a hard wired or 
>> wifi connection. This is common practice and is configured and set up well 
>> in advance to maintain the security of that data. One of my teams is charged 
>> with testing and verification of these connections prior to the elections. 
>> The ballot printers are a part of this system.
>> 
>> The scanners are purely stand-alone devices and have no connectivity.
>> 
>> Counts are typically moved from the scanners to the polling system via 
>> secure memory cards that are encrypted. Some scanners also have the 
>> capability of printing out results on a paper tape, like an adding machine. 
>> The numbers, after being reconciled, are either transmitted to the 
>> supervisor of elections’ via the local client at the polling place or the 
>> data can be hand carried (in a secure, chain of custody strongbox) back to 
>> the SOE (which is how they get back there anyway, along with the paper 
>> ballots.)
>> 
>> Anyone who has worked the polls has been exposed to these processes and 
>> procedures used to guarantee the integrity of the elections. It’s certainly 
>> different from one state or municipality to the other, but the general 
>> approach is the same. It’s highly controlled and closely audited. Again, 
>> it’s not perfect, but the claims of widespread, massive voter fraud are 
>> gross misstatements.
>> 
>> -D
>> 
>> 
>>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 7:46 AM, Meade Dillon via Mercedes 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting
>>> machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite sure
>>> the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been reported in
>>> the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch votes in one
>>> direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a thorough forensic
>>> audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.
>>> 
>>> Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine where you
>>> 'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes their ballot
>>> (which they can review to make sure it is correct) and feeds it into the
>>> scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each polling place, the
>>> scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, and the total number of
>>> votes cast is compared to the number of voters who came into the polling
>>> place.  If those two numbers don't match, then they have to try to resolve
>>> that at the polling place, with the poll watchers from each party present
>>> (if they bothered to show up, a great many of our polling places had no
>>> poll watchers - not enough volunteers).  Once the count is resolved, then
>>> the electronic votes and the paper ballots are taken to the county election
>>> headquarters and reported out.
>>> 
>>> The first station at the polling place was voter check-in to make sure the

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Larry Turner via Mercedes]

Are you saying your experience has been with Dominion Systems voting 
machines?


LarryT

On 12/17/2020 8:22 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:

It’s not. I’ve worked the elections both here and in two other states I’ve 
lived in for over 40 years. I’ve worked elections since I was 16 years old and 
the days of the voting machines with the curtains and little levers. My father 
was a precinct committeeman and working elections was expected of all of us 
kids, and most of us have continued that effort since.

The “check in” station you mention is connected to a secure network that is 
used to access the voter rolls. It’s not on the “Internet”, it’s an end to end, 
encrypted, tunneled connection to the SOE which can be a hard wired or wifi 
connection. This is common practice and is configured and set up well in 
advance to maintain the security of that data. One of my teams is charged with 
testing and verification of these connections prior to the elections. The 
ballot printers are a part of this system.

The scanners are purely stand-alone devices and have no connectivity.

Counts are typically moved from the scanners to the polling system via secure 
memory cards that are encrypted. Some scanners also have the capability of 
printing out results on a paper tape, like an adding machine. The numbers, 
after being reconciled, are either transmitted to the supervisor of elections’ 
via the local client at the polling place or the data can be hand carried (in a 
secure, chain of custody strongbox) back to the SOE (which is how they get back 
there anyway, along with the paper ballots.)

Anyone who has worked the polls has been exposed to these processes and 
procedures used to guarantee the integrity of the elections. It’s certainly 
different from one state or municipality to the other, but the general approach 
is the same. It’s highly controlled and closely audited. Again, it’s not 
perfect, but the claims of widespread, massive voter fraud are gross 
misstatements.

-D



On Dec 17, 2020, at 7:46 AM, Meade Dillon via Mercedes  
wrote:

Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting
machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite sure
the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been reported in
the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch votes in one
direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a thorough forensic
audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.

Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine where you
'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes their ballot
(which they can review to make sure it is correct) and feeds it into the
scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each polling place, the
scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, and the total number of
votes cast is compared to the number of voters who came into the polling
place.  If those two numbers don't match, then they have to try to resolve
that at the polling place, with the poll watchers from each party present
(if they bothered to show up, a great many of our polling places had no
poll watchers - not enough volunteers).  Once the count is resolved, then
the electronic votes and the paper ballots are taken to the county election
headquarters and reported out.

The first station at the polling place was voter check-in to make sure the
voter was registered / at the right polling place, and they (the laptops)
were connected to a local WiFi hot-spot that was part of the system, so
they could communicate / get updates back to the county HQ voter database.
I'm not sure if the ballot printer and ballot scanner were also connected,
but once the count was resolved, it was loaded back onto that laptop
somehow (I'm pretty sure via the local WiFi hotspot) and that laptop was
the way the electronic count was returned to county election HQ.

Here in Charleston, we had a lot of folks examining the totals and
comparing them to historical patterns, and although the results were
disappointing in some cases and pleasing in others, nothing was observed to
raise alarms in the result.

What was troubling to me was that we had three known instances of clear
violations of voting law at the polling places, where one party tried to
influence voters or intimidate poll watchers and so favor one party over
the other.  This pattern has been repeated locally for years; one side is
convinced that breaking the law and bending the rules in their favor is OK,
and at every election we have to be ready to try to counter this to ensure
the fairest election possible.  It is very easy for me to believe that this
same pattern repeats across the nation, and the impact can be enough to
swing the result in a tight race.  If we had a tight race and these same
patterns of law-breaking and rule bending were present, I'd be among the
first to cry foul and seek a recount / remedy.
-
Max
Charleston SC


On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Meade Dillon via Mercedes]

Yes Andrew, and we spent about $40 million and a couple of years in an
exhaustive investigation.  Why can't we complete a similar investigation
now?  I think we as a nation must investigate this.  In a similar manner in
Bush v. Gore, Gore got his day in court including hearings at the SCOTUS.
Why is Trump denied his day in court?
-
Max
Charleston SC


On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:39 AM Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> 2016 allegations focused on Russian hacking of the DNC email accounts, and
> their propagation, and actions by Comey to highlight alleged irregularities
> just before the election.  I don't recall serious charges of electoral
> fraud due to voting issues.
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 9:50 AM Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
>
> > Pretty much, although the information that Rick just posted about the
> > county in MI that was audited points out the discrepancies that exist
> when
> > there aren’t proper controls in place and the poll workers or elections
> > officials aren’t properly trained.
> >
> > -D
> >
> > > On Dec 17, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > So basically it sounds like the election was not “hacked” last time and
> > it wasn’t the time either. It is simply the media spun it and hyped it up
> > as being hacked before, but this time is spinning it that there is no way
> > it could be hacked.
> > >
> > > Sent from my iPhone
> > >
> > >> On Dec 17, 2020, at 5:53 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Working with the SOE (supervisor of elections) here I can calm your
> > fears.
> > >>
> > >> As previously stated, a nation state, most likely the Russians, did
> > breach several state’s voter registration databases aound the 2016
> > election. While problematic for a lot of reasons, doing so had no effect
> on
> > the actual voting process.
> > >>
> > >> The actual voting systems, which vary from state to state, are always
> > “air gapped” in the sense that voting machines are never, ever connected
> to
> > the Internet or any network of any kind. As described by others, ballots
> > are typically printed out for each voter as they register or check in at
> a
> > polling place, filled out by the voter, then scanned by a completely
> > stand-alone voting machine. The votes tabulated in that machine are
> > collected on a memory card or other means of electronic storage that is
> > encrypted using state of the art encryption protocols. There is a clearly
> > defined chain of custody involving the handling of the machines, memory
> > cards, ballots and anything else involved in the process.
> > >>
> > >> When auditing the results, paper ballots marked by the voters are
> > scanned by a machine and tabulated separately to compare with the results
> > tabulated by the voting machines.
> > >>
> > >> It’s a very, very highly controlled process that has changed little
> > over the years. Most states and municipalities continue to use a paper
> > ballot of some sort in order to provide a hard copy of the votes - I’m
> not
> > aware of anyone who does it 100% electronically, although there may be
> > somewhere.
> > >>
> > >> The stories about massive numbers of votes being added/removed and
> such
> > are bogus. The process simply doesn’t have the capacity for such
> > alterations, and even if someone tried it, the audits done using the
> > physical paper ballots would quickly reveal any discrepancies. Mistakes
> do
> > happen, and they’re typically identified in short order when audits are
> > performed and corrected on the spot. It’s still a very manual process
> > everywhere I know of, and that’s one of the reasons why the integrity of
> > the process has been preserved.
> > >>
> > >> -D
> > >>
> > >>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 2:09 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes <
> > mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> My current NC county as well as my previous FL county used this
> > system.  After marking a paper ballot the voter feeds it into a reader
> > which indicates that the ballot was accepted (read OK) or rejected (spit
> > back out).  Accepted ballots are held within the machine.  This is the
> best
> > system I know: simple, cheap, secure and auditable.  Anything more
> complex
> > facilitates fraud, IMO.
> > >>>
> > >>> -Original Message-
> > >>> From:  Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes,  Wednesday, December 16, 2020
> > 11:33 PM
> > >>>
> > >>> Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the
> squares
> > to vote. Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even
> > though a machine counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be
> > hand counted later. Are other states totally electronic?
> > >>>
> > >>> Sent from my iPhone
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> ___
> > >>> http://www.okiebenz.com
> > >>>
> > >>> To search list archives 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes]

2016 allegations focused on Russian hacking of the DNC email accounts, and
their propagation, and actions by Comey to highlight alleged irregularities
just before the election.  I don't recall serious charges of electoral
fraud due to voting issues.

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 9:50 AM Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> Pretty much, although the information that Rick just posted about the
> county in MI that was audited points out the discrepancies that exist when
> there aren’t proper controls in place and the poll workers or elections
> officials aren’t properly trained.
>
> -D
>
> > On Dec 17, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >
> > So basically it sounds like the election was not “hacked” last time and
> it wasn’t the time either. It is simply the media spun it and hyped it up
> as being hacked before, but this time is spinning it that there is no way
> it could be hacked.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On Dec 17, 2020, at 5:53 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> Working with the SOE (supervisor of elections) here I can calm your
> fears.
> >>
> >> As previously stated, a nation state, most likely the Russians, did
> breach several state’s voter registration databases aound the 2016
> election. While problematic for a lot of reasons, doing so had no effect on
> the actual voting process.
> >>
> >> The actual voting systems, which vary from state to state, are always
> “air gapped” in the sense that voting machines are never, ever connected to
> the Internet or any network of any kind. As described by others, ballots
> are typically printed out for each voter as they register or check in at a
> polling place, filled out by the voter, then scanned by a completely
> stand-alone voting machine. The votes tabulated in that machine are
> collected on a memory card or other means of electronic storage that is
> encrypted using state of the art encryption protocols. There is a clearly
> defined chain of custody involving the handling of the machines, memory
> cards, ballots and anything else involved in the process.
> >>
> >> When auditing the results, paper ballots marked by the voters are
> scanned by a machine and tabulated separately to compare with the results
> tabulated by the voting machines.
> >>
> >> It’s a very, very highly controlled process that has changed little
> over the years. Most states and municipalities continue to use a paper
> ballot of some sort in order to provide a hard copy of the votes - I’m not
> aware of anyone who does it 100% electronically, although there may be
> somewhere.
> >>
> >> The stories about massive numbers of votes being added/removed and such
> are bogus. The process simply doesn’t have the capacity for such
> alterations, and even if someone tried it, the audits done using the
> physical paper ballots would quickly reveal any discrepancies. Mistakes do
> happen, and they’re typically identified in short order when audits are
> performed and corrected on the spot. It’s still a very manual process
> everywhere I know of, and that’s one of the reasons why the integrity of
> the process has been preserved.
> >>
> >> -D
> >>
> >>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 2:09 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes <
> mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> My current NC county as well as my previous FL county used this
> system.  After marking a paper ballot the voter feeds it into a reader
> which indicates that the ballot was accepted (read OK) or rejected (spit
> back out).  Accepted ballots are held within the machine.  This is the best
> system I know: simple, cheap, secure and auditable.  Anything more complex
> facilitates fraud, IMO.
> >>>
> >>> -Original Message-
> >>> From:  Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes,  Wednesday, December 16, 2020
> 11:33 PM
> >>>
> >>> Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the squares
> to vote. Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even
> though a machine counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be
> hand counted later. Are other states totally electronic?
> >>>
> >>> Sent from my iPhone
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ___
> >>> http://www.okiebenz.com
> >>>
> >>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >>>
> >>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> >>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> http://www.okiebenz.com
> >>
> >> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >>
> >> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> >> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> >>
> >
> >
> > ___
> > http://www.okiebenz.com
> >
> > To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> >
> > To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> > 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

Pretty much, although the information that Rick just posted about the county in 
MI that was audited points out the discrepancies that exist when there aren’t 
proper controls in place and the poll workers or elections officials aren’t 
properly trained.

-D

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 9:07 AM, Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> So basically it sounds like the election was not “hacked” last time and it 
> wasn’t the time either. It is simply the media spun it and hyped it up as 
> being hacked before, but this time is spinning it that there is no way it 
> could be hacked. 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 5:53 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes  
>> wrote:
>> 
>> Working with the SOE (supervisor of elections) here I can calm your fears.
>> 
>> As previously stated, a nation state, most likely the Russians, did breach 
>> several state’s voter registration databases aound the 2016 election. While 
>> problematic for a lot of reasons, doing so had no effect on the actual 
>> voting process.
>> 
>> The actual voting systems, which vary from state to state, are always “air 
>> gapped” in the sense that voting machines are never, ever connected to the 
>> Internet or any network of any kind. As described by others, ballots are 
>> typically printed out for each voter as they register or check in at a 
>> polling place, filled out by the voter, then scanned by a completely 
>> stand-alone voting machine. The votes tabulated in that machine are 
>> collected on a memory card or other means of electronic storage that is 
>> encrypted using state of the art encryption protocols. There is a clearly 
>> defined chain of custody involving the handling of the machines, memory 
>> cards, ballots and anything else involved in the process.
>> 
>> When auditing the results, paper ballots marked by the voters are scanned by 
>> a machine and tabulated separately to compare with the results tabulated by 
>> the voting machines.
>> 
>> It’s a very, very highly controlled process that has changed little over the 
>> years. Most states and municipalities continue to use a paper ballot of some 
>> sort in order to provide a hard copy of the votes - I’m not aware of anyone 
>> who does it 100% electronically, although there may be somewhere.
>> 
>> The stories about massive numbers of votes being added/removed and such are 
>> bogus. The process simply doesn’t have the capacity for such alterations, 
>> and even if someone tried it, the audits done using the physical paper 
>> ballots would quickly reveal any discrepancies. Mistakes do happen, and 
>> they’re typically identified in short order when audits are performed and 
>> corrected on the spot. It’s still a very manual process everywhere I know 
>> of, and that’s one of the reasons why the integrity of the process has been 
>> preserved.
>> 
>> -D
>> 
>>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 2:09 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
>>> My current NC county as well as my previous FL county used this system.  
>>> After marking a paper ballot the voter feeds it into a reader which 
>>> indicates that the ballot was accepted (read OK) or rejected (spit back 
>>> out).  Accepted ballots are held within the machine.  This is the best 
>>> system I know: simple, cheap, secure and auditable.  Anything more complex 
>>> facilitates fraud, IMO.
>>> 
>>> -Original Message-
>>> From:  Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes,  Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:33 PM
>>> 
>>> Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the squares to 
>>> vote. Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even though 
>>> a machine counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be hand 
>>> counted later. Are other states totally electronic?
>>> 
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ___
>>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>>> 
>>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>>> 
>>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>> 
>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>> 
>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

I skimmed it. Lots and lots of serious violations of the 90 day Safe Harbor Act 
that prescribes no changes to voting equipment prior to the election. It also 
appears that the employees working with the system were not well trained and 
proper audit controls were not in place.

In summary, it sounds like the Three Stooges were running the polls in what 
appears to be a relatively small, rural county. And that’s not to dismiss the 
issue - it’s more a point that small counties or municipalities often don’t 
have the proper training or controls in place, or they’re not well versed in 
them and when things go south, they do so in a hurry and on a major scale.

-D

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 9:34 AM, Rick Knoble via Mercedes  
> wrote:
> 
> Here is a forensics report on the voting machines for one county in Michigan. 
> I will read it later this evening.
> 
> https://www.scribd.com/document/488105156/Antrim-County-Forensics-Report-on-Dominion-Voting-System#fullscreen_embed
> 
> Rick
> 
> From: mercedes@okiebenz.com
> Sent: December 17, 2020 8:07 AM
> To: mercedes@okiebenz.com
> Reply-to: mercedes@okiebenz.com
> Cc: ka...@striplin.net
> Subject: Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you 
> can’t handle it then hit delete
> 
> So basically it sounds like the election was not “hacked” last time and it 
> wasn’t the time either. It is simply the media spun it and hyped it up as 
> being hacked before, but this time is spinning it that there is no way it 
> could be hacked.
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Rick Knoble via Mercedes]

Here is a forensics report on the voting machines for one county in Michigan. I 
will read it later this evening.

https://www.scribd.com/document/488105156/Antrim-County-Forensics-Report-on-Dominion-Voting-System#fullscreen_embed

Rick

From: mercedes@okiebenz.com
Sent: December 17, 2020 8:07 AM
To: mercedes@okiebenz.com
Reply-to: mercedes@okiebenz.com
Cc: ka...@striplin.net
Subject: Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t 
handle it then hit delete

So basically it sounds like the election was not “hacked” last time and it 
wasn’t the time either. It is simply the media spun it and hyped it up as being 
hacked before, but this time is spinning it that there is no way it could be 
hacked.


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes]

So basically it sounds like the election was not “hacked” last time and it 
wasn’t the time either. It is simply the media spun it and hyped it up as being 
hacked before, but this time is spinning it that there is no way it could be 
hacked. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 5:53 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes  
> wrote:
> 
> Working with the SOE (supervisor of elections) here I can calm your fears.
> 
> As previously stated, a nation state, most likely the Russians, did breach 
> several state’s voter registration databases aound the 2016 election. While 
> problematic for a lot of reasons, doing so had no effect on the actual voting 
> process.
> 
> The actual voting systems, which vary from state to state, are always “air 
> gapped” in the sense that voting machines are never, ever connected to the 
> Internet or any network of any kind. As described by others, ballots are 
> typically printed out for each voter as they register or check in at a 
> polling place, filled out by the voter, then scanned by a completely 
> stand-alone voting machine. The votes tabulated in that machine are collected 
> on a memory card or other means of electronic storage that is encrypted using 
> state of the art encryption protocols. There is a clearly defined chain of 
> custody involving the handling of the machines, memory cards, ballots and 
> anything else involved in the process.
> 
> When auditing the results, paper ballots marked by the voters are scanned by 
> a machine and tabulated separately to compare with the results tabulated by 
> the voting machines.
> 
> It’s a very, very highly controlled process that has changed little over the 
> years. Most states and municipalities continue to use a paper ballot of some 
> sort in order to provide a hard copy of the votes - I’m not aware of anyone 
> who does it 100% electronically, although there may be somewhere.
> 
> The stories about massive numbers of votes being added/removed and such are 
> bogus. The process simply doesn’t have the capacity for such alterations, and 
> even if someone tried it, the audits done using the physical paper ballots 
> would quickly reveal any discrepancies. Mistakes do happen, and they’re 
> typically identified in short order when audits are performed and corrected 
> on the spot. It’s still a very manual process everywhere I know of, and 
> that’s one of the reasons why the integrity of the process has been preserved.
> 
> -D
> 
>> On Dec 17, 2020, at 2:09 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> My current NC county as well as my previous FL county used this system.  
>> After marking a paper ballot the voter feeds it into a reader which 
>> indicates that the ballot was accepted (read OK) or rejected (spit back 
>> out).  Accepted ballots are held within the machine.  This is the best 
>> system I know: simple, cheap, secure and auditable.  Anything more complex 
>> facilitates fraud, IMO.
>> 
>> -Original Message-
>> From:  Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes,  Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:33 PM
>> 
>> Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the squares to 
>> vote. Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even though a 
>> machine counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be hand counted 
>> later. Are other states totally electronic?
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ___
>> http://www.okiebenz.com
>> 
>> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
>> 
>> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
>> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
>> 
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes]

Yep seems like that is the best plan to me. The ballots stay locked inside the 
machine till they are transported to the central election office where they 
remain locked up. The machine has some sort of specialized USB stick that is 
removed from the machine and uploaded at the central office. Nothing is 
transmitted over any network. We also get our results within hours of the polls 
closing instead of days or weeks later like it seems these other states do. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 1:09 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> My current NC county as well as my previous FL county used this system.  
> After marking a paper ballot the voter feeds it into a reader which indicates 
> that the ballot was accepted (read OK) or rejected (spit back out).  Accepted 
> ballots are held within the machine.  This is the best system I know: simple, 
> cheap, secure and auditable.  Anything more complex facilitates fraud, IMO.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From:  Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes,  Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:33 PM
> 
> Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the squares to 
> vote. Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even though a 
> machine counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be hand counted 
> later. Are other states totally electronic?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

It’s not. I’ve worked the elections both here and in two other states I’ve 
lived in for over 40 years. I’ve worked elections since I was 16 years old and 
the days of the voting machines with the curtains and little levers. My father 
was a precinct committeeman and working elections was expected of all of us 
kids, and most of us have continued that effort since.

The “check in” station you mention is connected to a secure network that is 
used to access the voter rolls. It’s not on the “Internet”, it’s an end to end, 
encrypted, tunneled connection to the SOE which can be a hard wired or wifi 
connection. This is common practice and is configured and set up well in 
advance to maintain the security of that data. One of my teams is charged with 
testing and verification of these connections prior to the elections. The 
ballot printers are a part of this system.

The scanners are purely stand-alone devices and have no connectivity.

Counts are typically moved from the scanners to the polling system via secure 
memory cards that are encrypted. Some scanners also have the capability of 
printing out results on a paper tape, like an adding machine. The numbers, 
after being reconciled, are either transmitted to the supervisor of elections’ 
via the local client at the polling place or the data can be hand carried (in a 
secure, chain of custody strongbox) back to the SOE (which is how they get back 
there anyway, along with the paper ballots.)

Anyone who has worked the polls has been exposed to these processes and 
procedures used to guarantee the integrity of the elections. It’s certainly 
different from one state or municipality to the other, but the general approach 
is the same. It’s highly controlled and closely audited. Again, it’s not 
perfect, but the claims of widespread, massive voter fraud are gross 
misstatements.

-D


> On Dec 17, 2020, at 7:46 AM, Meade Dillon via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting
> machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite sure
> the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been reported in
> the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch votes in one
> direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a thorough forensic
> audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.
> 
> Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine where you
> 'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes their ballot
> (which they can review to make sure it is correct) and feeds it into the
> scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each polling place, the
> scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, and the total number of
> votes cast is compared to the number of voters who came into the polling
> place.  If those two numbers don't match, then they have to try to resolve
> that at the polling place, with the poll watchers from each party present
> (if they bothered to show up, a great many of our polling places had no
> poll watchers - not enough volunteers).  Once the count is resolved, then
> the electronic votes and the paper ballots are taken to the county election
> headquarters and reported out.
> 
> The first station at the polling place was voter check-in to make sure the
> voter was registered / at the right polling place, and they (the laptops)
> were connected to a local WiFi hot-spot that was part of the system, so
> they could communicate / get updates back to the county HQ voter database.
> I'm not sure if the ballot printer and ballot scanner were also connected,
> but once the count was resolved, it was loaded back onto that laptop
> somehow (I'm pretty sure via the local WiFi hotspot) and that laptop was
> the way the electronic count was returned to county election HQ.
> 
> Here in Charleston, we had a lot of folks examining the totals and
> comparing them to historical patterns, and although the results were
> disappointing in some cases and pleasing in others, nothing was observed to
> raise alarms in the result.
> 
> What was troubling to me was that we had three known instances of clear
> violations of voting law at the polling places, where one party tried to
> influence voters or intimidate poll watchers and so favor one party over
> the other.  This pattern has been repeated locally for years; one side is
> convinced that breaking the law and bending the rules in their favor is OK,
> and at every election we have to be ready to try to counter this to ensure
> the fairest election possible.  It is very easy for me to believe that this
> same pattern repeats across the nation, and the impact can be enough to
> swing the result in a tight race.  If we had a tight race and these same
> patterns of law-breaking and rule bending were present, I'd be among the
> first to cry foul and seek a recount / remedy.
> -
> Max
> Charleston SC
> 
> 
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 6:53 AM Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
> 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Mitch Haley via Mercedes]

On 2020-12-17 06:52, Dan Penoff via Mercedes wrote:


The actual voting systems, which vary from state to state, are always
“air gapped” in the sense that voting machines are never, ever
connected to the Internet or any network of any kind.



That's the only way to do it, but it's the opposite of what has been 
alleged about last month.


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Meade Dillon via Mercedes]

Dan, I'm afraid your experience is limited.  Here in SC, the voting
machines were connected to the internet.  Drove me nuts.  I'm quite sure
the same could be true in other states, that certainly has been reported in
the press, and the "glitches" that always seemed to switch votes in one
direction (from Trump to Biden) point to the need for a thorough forensic
audit so we can be sure the right candidate really won.

Our system is similar to what many of you described: one machine where you
'vote' which creates a paper ballot, and then the voter takes their ballot
(which they can review to make sure it is correct) and feeds it into the
scanner, which counts the vote.  Locally, at each polling place, the
scanner totals are printed out after the last vote, and the total number of
votes cast is compared to the number of voters who came into the polling
place.  If those two numbers don't match, then they have to try to resolve
that at the polling place, with the poll watchers from each party present
(if they bothered to show up, a great many of our polling places had no
poll watchers - not enough volunteers).  Once the count is resolved, then
the electronic votes and the paper ballots are taken to the county election
headquarters and reported out.

The first station at the polling place was voter check-in to make sure the
voter was registered / at the right polling place, and they (the laptops)
were connected to a local WiFi hot-spot that was part of the system, so
they could communicate / get updates back to the county HQ voter database.
I'm not sure if the ballot printer and ballot scanner were also connected,
but once the count was resolved, it was loaded back onto that laptop
somehow (I'm pretty sure via the local WiFi hotspot) and that laptop was
the way the electronic count was returned to county election HQ.

Here in Charleston, we had a lot of folks examining the totals and
comparing them to historical patterns, and although the results were
disappointing in some cases and pleasing in others, nothing was observed to
raise alarms in the result.

What was troubling to me was that we had three known instances of clear
violations of voting law at the polling places, where one party tried to
influence voters or intimidate poll watchers and so favor one party over
the other.  This pattern has been repeated locally for years; one side is
convinced that breaking the law and bending the rules in their favor is OK,
and at every election we have to be ready to try to counter this to ensure
the fairest election possible.  It is very easy for me to believe that this
same pattern repeats across the nation, and the impact can be enough to
swing the result in a tight race.  If we had a tight race and these same
patterns of law-breaking and rule bending were present, I'd be among the
first to cry foul and seek a recount / remedy.
-
Max
Charleston SC


On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 6:53 AM Dan Penoff via Mercedes <
mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote:

> Working with the SOE (supervisor of elections) here I can calm your fears.
>
> As previously stated, a nation state, most likely the Russians, did breach
> several state’s voter registration databases aound the 2016 election. While
> problematic for a lot of reasons, doing so had no effect on the actual
> voting process.
>
> The actual voting systems, which vary from state to state, are always “air
> gapped” in the sense that voting machines are never, ever connected to the
> Internet or any network of any kind. As described by others, ballots are
> typically printed out for each voter as they register or check in at a
> polling place, filled out by the voter, then scanned by a completely
> stand-alone voting machine. The votes tabulated in that machine are
> collected on a memory card or other means of electronic storage that is
> encrypted using state of the art encryption protocols. There is a clearly
> defined chain of custody involving the handling of the machines, memory
> cards, ballots and anything else involved in the process.
>
> When auditing the results, paper ballots marked by the voters are scanned
> by a machine and tabulated separately to compare with the results tabulated
> by the voting machines.
>
> It’s a very, very highly controlled process that has changed little over
> the years. Most states and municipalities continue to use a paper ballot of
> some sort in order to provide a hard copy of the votes - I’m not aware of
> anyone who does it 100% electronically, although there may be somewhere.
>
> The stories about massive numbers of votes being added/removed and such
> are bogus. The process simply doesn’t have the capacity for such
> alterations, and even if someone tried it, the audits done using the
> physical paper ballots would quickly reveal any discrepancies. Mistakes do
> happen, and they’re typically identified in short order when audits are
> performed and corrected on the spot. It’s still a very manual process
> everywhere I know of, and 

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Peter Frederick via Mercedes]

Paperless machines were all the rage a few years ago, we had them here.  Never 
trusted them as there is absolutely no way to audit them.

Remember that the problematic Votamatic system that caused all the uproar in 
2000 in Florida was a vast improvement over the ancient voting machines, also 
impossible to audit and also fairly easy in most cases to "jigger" so that 
votes would not record.  The punch card was frail and it was easy to build a 
ballot system that confused the voters, but at least there was a real paper 
copy that could be read without a scanning machine.
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Dan Penoff via Mercedes]

Working with the SOE (supervisor of elections) here I can calm your fears.

As previously stated, a nation state, most likely the Russians, did breach 
several state’s voter registration databases aound the 2016 election. While 
problematic for a lot of reasons, doing so had no effect on the actual voting 
process.

The actual voting systems, which vary from state to state, are always “air 
gapped” in the sense that voting machines are never, ever connected to the 
Internet or any network of any kind. As described by others, ballots are 
typically printed out for each voter as they register or check in at a polling 
place, filled out by the voter, then scanned by a completely stand-alone voting 
machine. The votes tabulated in that machine are collected on a memory card or 
other means of electronic storage that is encrypted using state of the art 
encryption protocols. There is a clearly defined chain of custody involving the 
handling of the machines, memory cards, ballots and anything else involved in 
the process.

When auditing the results, paper ballots marked by the voters are scanned by a 
machine and tabulated separately to compare with the results tabulated by the 
voting machines.

It’s a very, very highly controlled process that has changed little over the 
years. Most states and municipalities continue to use a paper ballot of some 
sort in order to provide a hard copy of the votes - I’m not aware of anyone who 
does it 100% electronically, although there may be somewhere.

The stories about massive numbers of votes being added/removed and such are 
bogus. The process simply doesn’t have the capacity for such alterations, and 
even if someone tried it, the audits done using the physical paper ballots 
would quickly reveal any discrepancies. Mistakes do happen, and they’re 
typically identified in short order when audits are performed and corrected on 
the spot. It’s still a very manual process everywhere I know of, and that’s one 
of the reasons why the integrity of the process has been preserved.

-D

> On Dec 17, 2020, at 2:09 AM, Scott Ritchey via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> My current NC county as well as my previous FL county used this system.  
> After marking a paper ballot the voter feeds it into a reader which indicates 
> that the ballot was accepted (read OK) or rejected (spit back out).  Accepted 
> ballots are held within the machine.  This is the best system I know: simple, 
> cheap, secure and auditable.  Anything more complex facilitates fraud, IMO.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From:  Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes,  Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:33 PM
> 
> Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the squares to 
> vote. Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even though a 
> machine counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be hand counted 
> later. Are other states totally electronic?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Scott Ritchey via Mercedes]

My current NC county as well as my previous FL county used this system.  After 
marking a paper ballot the voter feeds it into a reader which indicates that 
the ballot was accepted (read OK) or rejected (spit back out).  Accepted 
ballots are held within the machine.  This is the best system I know: simple, 
cheap, secure and auditable.  Anything more complex facilitates fraud, IMO.

-Original Message-
From:  Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes,  Wednesday, December 16, 2020 11:33 PM

Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the squares to vote. 
Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even though a machine 
counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be hand counted later. Are 
other states totally electronic?

Sent from my iPhone



___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes]

Here in our state you get a paper ballot that you color in the squares to vote. 
Then feed it into a machine that scans it and counts it. Even though a machine 
counts it, you still have a physical paper that can be hand counted later. Are 
other states totally electronic?

Sent from my iPhone

> On Dec 16, 2020, at 10:14 PM, Peter Frederick via Mercedes 
>  wrote:
> 
> Last time around the Ruskies got access to some state voter databases and 
> there was some discussion about being able to hack into some voting machines 
> (Diebold ones I think) that could be hooked up and programmed remotely.  
> There was no definite evidence that any votes were interfered with, but there 
> was a very strong effort to spread mis-information and create mistrust -- the 
> Ruskies have been very, very good at that since before the October 
> Revolution.  
> 
> I don't know what was done, but I can guess -- keep all voting machines and 
> voter databases OFF the internet.  If it ain't plugged in, no one can access 
> it unless they are on one of the networked computers.  This is VERY 
> elementary data protection, but everyone drools when you say "internet" these 
> days, and the internet is about a secure as shouting your information from 
> your front porch.
> 
> I would also guess that newer voting machines can't be connected to the 
> internet and are "dumb"  -- that is to say, they just tally the marked boxes 
> and report a total, possibly keeping a record of each ballot.  If you make 
> them really dumb they are very hard to "hack".
> 
> We got new voting machines locally that just print a ballot.  That ballot is 
> then scanned, and has the selected candidates printed on it along with a QR 
> code for the scanner.  Makes it possible to do a hand re-count if necessary.  
> The old machines here were the Diebold ones that didn't print anything, just 
> recorded the votes.  I never liked them, it's FAR to easy too hide code in 
> them that changes votes with no way to check, and in fact some areas that 
> switched to those machines had a significant shift in Republican to Democrat 
> vote rartios compared to past elections.
> 
> I think this was the cleanest and fairest election we have every had, with 
> probably the most accurate vote count.  Georgia did three counts for the 
> Presidential election and they didn't vary more than a few hundred votes out 
> of several million.
> 
> 
> ___
> http://www.okiebenz.com
> 
> To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/
> 
> To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
> http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com
> 


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Rick Knoble via Mercedes]

>just looking for an actual explanation

You'll not get one, here or anywhere else.

Solarwind was so secure it was impenetrable.

Rick
___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Peter Frederick via Mercedes]

Last time around the Ruskies got access to some state voter databases and there 
was some discussion about being able to hack into some voting machines (Diebold 
ones I think) that could be hooked up and programmed remotely.  There was no 
definite evidence that any votes were interfered with, but there was a very 
strong effort to spread mis-information and create mistrust -- the Ruskies have 
been very, very good at that since before the October Revolution.  

I don't know what was done, but I can guess -- keep all voting machines and 
voter databases OFF the internet.  If it ain't plugged in, no one can access it 
unless they are on one of the networked computers.  This is VERY elementary 
data protection, but everyone drools when you say "internet" these days, and 
the internet is about a secure as shouting your information from your front 
porch.

I would also guess that newer voting machines can't be connected to the 
internet and are "dumb"  -- that is to say, they just tally the marked boxes 
and report a total, possibly keeping a record of each ballot.  If you make them 
really dumb they are very hard to "hack".

We got new voting machines locally that just print a ballot.  That ballot is 
then scanned, and has the selected candidates printed on it along with a QR 
code for the scanner.  Makes it possible to do a hand re-count if necessary.  
The old machines here were the Diebold ones that didn't print anything, just 
recorded the votes.  I never liked them, it's FAR to easy too hide code in them 
that changes votes with no way to check, and in fact some areas that switched 
to those machines had a significant shift in Republican to Democrat vote 
rartios compared to past elections.

I think this was the cleanest and fairest election we have every had, with 
probably the most accurate vote count.  Georgia did three counts for the 
Presidential election and they didn't vary more than a few hundred votes out of 
several million.


___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com

[MBZ] This is not political, but a serious question, if you can’t handle it then hit delete

[Kaleb Striplin via Mercedes]

During the last election cycle the Russians supposedly hacked it. This election 
cycle it has been said it is impossible to hack the election. Why is that? What 
changed? I am not looking for political jabs, just looking for an actual 
explanation. 

Sent from my iPhone

___
http://www.okiebenz.com

To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/

To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to:
http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/mercedes_okiebenz.com