All Episodes
Previous Next
Feb. 14, 2023 - The Lindell Report - Mike Lindell
01:01:16
The Lindell Report (2-14-23)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hello, I'm Mike Lindell and I'm excited to bring you my Giza Dream bed sheets for
for the best offer ever.
We're all experiencing rising prices, but I was able to secure a limited amount of Giza cotton for a great price, and I'm passing those savings directly on to you.
You can get my Giza Dream bedsheets for as low as $29.98 with your promo code.
They're the most luxurious sheets ever, made with the world's best cotton.
It's grown only in a region between the Sahara Desert, the Mediterranean Sea, and the Nile River.
I know my sheets are perfect for you and I'm extending my 60 day money back guarantee
for Christmas until March 1st, 2023, making them the perfect gifts for your friends,
your family and everyone you know.
So go to mypillow.com or call the number on your screen.
Use your promo code to save 50% on my Giza Dream bed sheets.
That's as low as $29.98.
Quantities are extremely limited at these amazing prices.
So please order now.
Thank you.
This is the Lindell Report, bringing you news combined with hope by offering practical
and achievable action points to assist you in defending and preserving faith and freedoms.
And now, here is your host, Mike Lindell.
All right, good evening and welcome.
Glad you are with us, Brandon House from our Mid-South studios.
Mike Lindell is out pretty much most of the week on business organizing, as many of you know, the Election Theft Commission, the Election Theft A group that is going to be doing some really serious and very very important work, but we're going to hold down the fort and keep things going.
Tonight I'm going to be joined by State Representative and former Secretary of State candidate Mark Fincham.
We've got big news coming out of Arizona, and then we're going to show you tonight and bring you the full 33-minute presentation delivered yesterday by Clinton Curtis.
We interviewed him yesterday, but we're going to share with you the full A 33-minute presentation by Clinton Curtis, one of the first guys to ever, a democrat, self-described democrat, who wrote the algorithm on how to flip votes.
Thought he was doing it for Republicans to show them how you could actually, you know, Provide safe elections.
Fix the vulnerabilities.
Turns out, he says, Republicans were using it to steal elections.
Democrats started screaming and hollering, as many of you know.
We have the video of so many of them screaming and hollering about voting machines and flipping votes.
Then somewhere along the way, the Republicans and the Democrats decided to create a uniparty, and then I guess now they decide who's elected for both Democrat and Republicans.
But Clint Curtis says these machines should be thrown in the ocean and as you heard him say yesterday any and all of them can be hacked.
We'll hear his full testimony he delivered before this senate committee yesterday.
There is good news coming out of Arizona as many of you know and joining me and I'll discuss some of this in fact here's a Article right now over at the Gateway Pundit, Arizona elections committee passes resolution, listen to this folks, to ban voting machines and require source code, ballot images, chain of custody documents, and log files to be made public.
Boom!
Slam dunk!
But that's just the Senate committee.
Let's see where this goes.
Joining me now is State Representative and former Secretary of State candidate, who many of us believe won his election, State Representative Mark Fincham.
Mark, welcome back to the Lindell Report.
Thanks for joining us.
Thank you, Brandon.
Actually, I'm not a former candidate.
I am still the Republican nominee for the 2020 election.
So you're like Carrie Lake.
You're not giving up.
You're not giving up.
Oh, no.
Hell no.
Good.
They picked on the wrong guy.
I am not going away.
In fact, we filed our notice for appeal on my challenge to the contest months ago, and we heard yesterday that the Court of Appeals has actually accepted the notice of appeal.
So we're putting that together.
A couple of interesting things on that.
There's been a lot of evidence that has come out since.
Particularly, I'm excited to know that you are going to play Clint Curtis's testimony yesterday in the Senate.
I watched the thing in totality and it was a jaw dropper.
The fact that this gentleman is willing to come out and say, look, I worked for a Republican congressman to show them how to do it and they took it and used it.
So now we've got a situation where it has infected the, it's kind of like, I forget the movie, but you take a virus and you put it out there and suddenly it all over the entire world.
It's not just the United States, my friend.
It's every country out there.
Anybody who is using black box ballot tabulation equipment.
And that's one of the reasons that Kerry Lake and I filed suit back in April of 2022 to prevent the use of this stuff.
Now, Clint basically said, if you want to protect your elections, wrap all that stuff up.
This is what he told the government of Norway.
Wrap it all up, throw it in the ocean, go to paper ballots, hand counting at the precinct level, count where they're cast and do not stop.
That is, I know it's elegantly simple, but it was amazing to see the county officials representative come out and say, oh, that's just not possible.
I mean, that, we, That takes us back in time.
Well, perhaps we shouldn't have gone forward in time.
In fact, that's something that the Arizona legislature for the last two years has been promoting.
I've advocated for a watermark ballot that has a supply chain element to it so you know how many legitimate ballots are in the system before they're ever cast.
What's wrong with that?
You propose that and both Republicans and Democrats go, whoa, we can't do that.
It's cost prohibitive.
Really?
25 cents a ballot?
I mean, for crying out loud, we're paying 58 cents for a stamp at the U.S.
Postal Service.
So it's very clear to me that the establishment does not want to have a verifiable, secure, fair election.
And when I say establishment, I'm not talking about Democrats or Republicans.
I'm talking about the folks that have come together to secure power.
They want to protect the status quo.
And that's one of the things that I love Mike Lindell about.
He has said, look, if there is an issue, we got to get to the bottom of it.
No matter who wins or loses, that's not the issue.
Do we have a secure and fair system?
And that's the thing that Clint, I think, blew the lid off of yesterday.
And I'm very glad to see that Wendy Rogers, Senator Rogers and Senator Borrelli did a fabulous job of running that hearing.
Got the bills that were necessary to move this ahead out of committee.
They're going to go now to a caucus in the Senate.
They'll go to the Committee of the Whole.
The Senate will vote it out and send them over the House.
I'm concerned that we have members over in the House that might not have the political will to see to it that You know, election security is probably more important than the seat they sit in.
Because at the end of the day, it's not their seat.
It's the people's seat.
Elections belong to the people, not to the government bureaucracy.
Not to the individual who is sitting their butt in the people's seat.
It's the people's seat.
So that's exciting.
So what else do you want to ask me about?
Well, that's excellent.
That's excellent.
And I agree 100%.
What do you think, Mark, is going to happen now?
Again, here's the headline from the Gateway Pundit.
Arizona Senate Elections Committee passes resolution to ban foreign voting machines.
Almost identical.
ballot images, chain of custody documents, and log files to be made public.
What do you think is going to happen now?
I mean, just because it comes out of the Senate committee doesn't mean it's law.
So now it's got to, what, make it through the House and then back to the Senate where
they, I don't know if it's like in Washington, but in Washington, you got to have a House
bill, Senate bill.
If they're two different bills, then they go to conference, merge the two bills together,
go back to the House, back to the Senate, and then the president.
Is that the same process, but only with your state legislature and the governor?
Almost identical.
And then of course, we've got Katie Hobbs, the individual who prevented counties from
comparing the paper count to the tabulation.
Because she was Secretary of State overseeing her own election.
Yeah, bingo.
And she's now the governor, so she's going to veto any bill that would try to clean this mess up.
In your opinion, is she just a simpleton or is she corrupt?
Yes.
How do you like that for honesty?
Good answer.
So how do you feel about this topic here?
I've been doing a lot of research into the voting machine companies and the intelligence arena.
And about two weeks ago, I found a letter from US Congressman Bill Posey from Florida.
And it was dated late 2020 after the 2020 election. I think it was like December 10th, 2020.
It's back in my office now, but I need to bring it back in here.
And in that letter, he is sending this letter to the inspector general.
He is sending it to the CIA director and the director of national intelligence, John Ratcliffe at the time.
And he asked a bunch of questions, and then at one point he stops asking questions with question marks and makes a
statement.
And says, have you investigated the connection between the voting machine companies and the CIA?
And I was, and I've told the audience this, but I want you to hear the context.
I had Mike Lindell on the platform at my national and annual Ozarks worldview weekend last October.
And I said that to the audience, I feel from the research I've been doing that there's strong indication the intelligence arena is involved in stealing America's elections, practicing color revolutions overseas, putting the people into power they want overseas, and then they decided to come and bring that strategy here.
I actually, believe it or not, found an article from 1984 actually on the CIA.gov website a few weeks ago, and I showed the audience.
Where Senator Jesse Helms, in 1984, accuses the CIA of throwing the election for a real conservative man of liberty and freedom and throwing it to a communist in El Salvador.
And he says the CIA was behind it.
Well, then I find this letter from Bill Posey, Congressman Posey, saying, have you guys investigated the connection between the voting machine companies and the CIA?
I believe, well, I'll tell you what happened after that.
The next day, someone came up to me that I've known for 15 years.
Who worked in one of the three-letter agency, a big one, and said, I just want to tell you, when you made that comment about the intelligence community practicing color revolutions overseas, and now if they're practicing they brought it home and carried it out here with this election, I just want you to know you are so over the target, you don't know how over the target you are.
I can say no more because I was read into too much, and I don't want to go to jail, so I can't say any more to you than I just said.
And I just want to tell you, keep saying what you're saying, because you are over the target more than you even know.
Oh, I know.
So with all of this information, are you shocked that I find a letter from a U.S.
Congressman asking the Inspector General, CC'ing the Director of National Intelligence and the CIA Director Gina, Gina at the time, and saying, have you investigated the connections between the CIA and the voting machine companies?
Are you shocked by that statement by this Congressman?
The use of your word practice is curious.
Practice, practice, practice.
They practiced for perfection in third world countries to bring it to the United States.
Now, I don't know if you've posted the Erickson report for your viewers to watch.
People need to dig into this thing.
Because it is constantly evolving.
We do not have secure communications for law enforcement, for the military, for hospitals, for even your cell phones.
It's a matter of what's called porting.
Thank you, Barack Obama, for selling off our control of porting.
That's the port of information that comes in, information that goes out of a device.
They set us up to be taken over by other countries.
Actually, by a consortium that rules over other countries.
Ah, yeah, that would be Klaus Schwab and the Fourth Reich.
That's what he calls it, also known as the World Economic Forum.
So we now have a situation where we've got electronic tabulation equipment that can be controlled by a cell phone.
Thank you, Alex.
Holderman for testifying to that in Georgia.
This whole thing, Brandon, is breaking down, but they're at a point now where they control so much that they don't really care.
They're basically going to tell the American people, shut up, sit down.
We're going to rule over you.
We're going to make it look like you think you're electing somebody.
And what's tragic to me is you have got Republicans and Democrats that are vilifying each other when they're actually on the same side.
They are being subjugated by individuals who want them to believe that they're making a selection when indeed they are not.
And that is why Carrie Lake and I have gone after the use of these black box ballot tabulation equipment in Arizona.
And quite frankly, anybody in any legislature, let's go back to a second, in the constitution, It is the legislature that has time, place, and manner, plenary authority over elections.
And we have got legislatures all over the land that have sold their souls to the use of electronic tabulation.
They need to be thrown out of office.
Well, good luck because now they're actually dependent upon those systems to keep them in office.
But the people need, this is a populist movement.
Those machines need to take the same course as what Norway has done.
Paper ballots, hand counting, day of election, count were cast.
That is the only way that we are going to be able to secure elections because the paper ballots can't be hacked.
And if we have a supply chain with paper, That has a watermark and a control number basically on the ballot that's separated from the voter.
We know how many ballots are in the system before we start counting them.
We've never known that before.
And that's one of the things that disturbs me deeply.
Have you seen the video footage?
I mean, I don't agree with everything he was up to, but I find the video footage very fascinating.
The video of Jesse Ventura talking about how when he won the election as a third-party candidate, that a month or so after he was elected, he was invited down into the basement of the Capitol in St.
Paul, Minnesota, and there was a half-circle of chairs, and he said there were 23 Yeah.
Right.
members tied to the CIA that wanted to know how he won the election.
And the people he's talking to, and he said, probably, I guess, to prevent it from ever
happening again.
And the crowd laughed.
But he said he was being dead serious.
Yeah.
Twenty-three members of the CIA, he said, asking him as the governor of Minnesota, how
did you win this election?
We have also heard from other key people that the intelligence arena out of Washington has
penetrated every state capital in the union.
Oh, I think it's...
I think it's worse than that, Brandon.
Really?
Well, think about this for a second.
Elections don't happen at the state level.
They happen at the county level.
And if you take over six counties in six different states, you can throw an election.
Maricopa County, for example, 63.7% of the vote in Arizona.
Now let's boil that down for a minute.
Five county supervisors run the county of Maricopa and they are responsible for elections.
That means that five individuals are responsible for the election of 63.7% of the entire vote of the state.
This is worse than the Supreme Court having the authority to appoint a governor because what they're doing They're essentially entering into contracts with a private contractor who will not reveal the source code of the software that they're using to tabulate votes.
Okay, stop a second.
Last time I checked, we're not talking about, we're talking about simple addition, counting, tabulation.
We're not talking about calculation.
And that's one of the things that came up in 2020.
How is it that we have 1.03 vote or 0.097 vote?
Every vote is supposed to be a whole number, one.
Yet we have got some anomalies in the system and that's the telltale signature of an artifact that's basically telling us that there is an algorithm at work.
That is slicing off a little piece of the boat here to make it the boat count over there.
So I'm not at all surprised.
I think that, uh, this has been at work for quite a while.
I think we can go all the way back to 2016, 18, 20, 22.
And for sure, it's going to be in place for 2024, unless, um, the people tell their County supervisors enough is enough.
You're going to go to paper ballots, hand counting on the day of the election.
Count where cast.
Those are the four things that we have to have and I would add currency grade countermeasures on the paper itself so we know how many documents are legit within the universe of documents.
That's all that we, this is so elegantly simple, yet every politician has got a visceral reaction to say, oh, we can't go back to the Stone Age.
I think that was Ron DeSantis that said that.
Well, okay, wait a minute.
Why have we made this so damn complicated?
I mean, we were able to take a country literally in the Stone Age and Afghanistan and run a secure and fair election and we can't do it here?
Really?
Well, I agree.
I agree 110%.
So let me ask you in conclusion, what do you think is going to happen to this that just passed out a committee?
When it goes to the House, then goes to the Senate, what do you think will happen?
And will you have the votes to override the governor's veto?
Well, there's a couple things that are going on.
One, Uh, there are a couple of members in the Senate.
In fact, one of them that was in the committee that said, well, you know, I'm, I'm going to vote for it now, but I can't, I'm not sure I can vote for it when it gets on the floor.
Really?
So you have a problem with election security?
You have a problem with making a process better?
Um, so you got two members that were on the committee that voted for it, but I, I have very little faith that they'll vote for it on the floor.
And.
Trust me, the people who are watching that hearing, they know who they are.
I'm not going to use names right now because pressure breeds resistance.
If it goes out of the Senate, it'll go over to the House and go through the same process.
Now in the Senate, they have 16 and 14.
Over in the House is 31 and 29.
I think that we'll have enough votes out of the House, but the Democrats are invested in this.
Now, what would be interesting Is that the Democrats come to understand that perhaps they want a few seats that they aren't occupying right now.
Because this isn't a political matter.
This is a function matter.
This is a process matter.
And of course, Katie Hobbs, who is the occupant of the governor's office right now, we're virtually assured that she will veto anything that comes out of the House or Senate, the legislature.
That does anything to tighten up the election.
So I think that where we need to probably place our pressure is on the boards of supervisors.
For example, in Arizona, we have 15 counties.
Each county has a board of supervisors between three and five individuals on it.
Maximum pressure needs to be brought upon those individuals to adopt a paper ballot system and abandon the machines.
Absolutely.
Absolutely.
So you're still the candidate.
I'm glad for that.
Where can people visit your website, support what you're doing?
Well, if they want to go to votefincham.com, that's V-O-T-E-F-I-N-C-H-E-M dot com, they can make a contribution.
We're not in a campaign right now.
We're covering our legal costs.
But there's another website that folks can take a look at that, and it's called goefi.org.
It's the Election Fairness Institute.
That's one of the things that I'm doing since I have a lot of time on my hands right now.
We're looking at election process.
In a number of states, and I would urge people to take a look at that if you want to help us start asking questions, uncomfortable questions of elected officials, that you don't really feel like you're being heard at your state legislatures.
Well, we have a team of lawyers that would love to ask those questions.
Excellent.
And what's that website again?
GOEFI.org.
GOEFI.org.
And are you still a state representative?
Actually, I'm turned out and I have very little to do other than look into things.
Well, you're the right guy to do it.
Keep us posted.
They would have been further ahead to have me in that office.
Well, keep us posted and any updates you have, we want to get them here at Lindell Report.
Will do.
Thanks a lot, Brandon.
Thank you, Mark.
Mark Fincham checking in with us tonight.
Check out all he's offering on those websites and the important work he's doing.
In fact, speaking of important work, that's why Mike's been out this week.
He's busy working with this team he's putting together to get some serious things done, like what you just heard from Mark.
And get this to the grassroots, and challenge these board of supervisors, and so much more.
Vital work he's doing, and so he had meetings set up all week.
He said, can you handle it?
Can you hold down the fort while I'm gone?
Yeah, we can do that.
So again, if you appreciate all that Mike Lindell and the team of Patriots are doing across the country, and you appreciate the Lindell Report, and you appreciate this network that comes to you 24-7 for free, then we need your support.
There's only a couple ways you can do that, and here's one of them.
Go to MyPillow.com and use the promo code L77.
We have the buy one get one free brand new MyPillow 2.0.
I think the commercials for that come out tomorrow.
The commercials come out for that tomorrow, but in the meantime folks, MyPillow 2.0 You can get it by going to MyPillow.com and please use that promo code L77 to know that you're watching this broadcast and you want to support this network, this show, and the work of Mike Lindell.
MyPillow.com, the new MyPillow 2.0 promo code L77.
Buy one, get one free going on right now.
Don't forget they also have sheets, towels, blankets, pet beds, slippers, sandals, mattresses, mattress toppers, robes, and so much more.
Well, we're going to go now to, well, very, very important testimony, and you just heard Representative Mark Fincham there saying he's so glad we're going to play this because of the excellent job that Clinton Curtis did.
Clinton Curtis did a great job, and we want to bring it all to you.
Remember, he's a self-described Democrat.
But he's saying, look, this is how both sides are now stealing the elections.
And he testified yesterday.
We had him on here last night for a few minutes, but we want to bring you the full testimony from yesterday's Senate committee hearing.
Here is that testimony.
Sir, please state your name for the record.
Hi, my name's Clint Curtis, and I thought I was going to come on after video, but... That's part of your presentation as I understand it, but while that's being set up, please give us your background.
Well, now I'm a lawyer.
Prior to that, I was a computer programmer, worked at NASA, worked at ExxonMobil, DoD, DoT.
If it's got a D in front of it, I'm probably there sometime.
Switched a while back.
Back in 2000, I was the programmer that wrote the initial code for programs that could flip elections.
And testify before Congress.
Did the whole nine yards for the last 23 years and haven't had much progress.
Now Republicans are finally getting interested after all this time.
I was a Democrat.
I am a Democrat.
And maybe we can come together and get this problem solved once and for all.
And get the machines out of the elections.
And if I may ask, what are your academic credentials?
What's my BS in computer science?
Juris Doctorate.
That's about it.
You're an attorney and a computer scientist.
Yes, I'm an attorney now.
I do government corruption law but mostly I'm focusing on the Camp Lejeune law right now because there's a lot of it a lot of veterans that are having trouble and they're going through a lot of problems right now so I'm trying to like get in that niche and take care of some people on a personal level.
Understood and are you in private practice?
Yes.
Okay, so various agencies hire you as an expert?
Yes, they can but basically for the law I'm what I do is I sue the government so agencies don't hire me when a whistleblower comes forward and there's theft or there's corruption or there's something going on then they hire me and I sue the government and Kind of correct that problem Understood.
For everyone on the dais, my colleagues please, we will not ask any questions or insert any more remarks than what I've just now done.
We want to hear the entire presentation before we ask questions or insert ourselves in any way.
So sir, take it away.
Thank you.
Mr. Curtis, would you please state your full name for the record?
My name is Clinton Eugene Curtis.
And where do you reside?
Tallahassee, Florida.
And what is your profession?
I'm a computer programmer.
Would you please speak into the microphone so the audience can hear your testimony?
I'm a computer programmer.
I want everyone to be able to hear this.
This is only a three minute clip and it's important.
to secretly fix elections.
Is there a remote control device?
Let's start it again, since it's so brief.
Mr. Curtis, would you please state your full name for the record?
My name is Clinton Eugene Curtis.
And where do you reside?
Tallahassee, Florida.
And what is your profession?
I'm a computer programmer.
Would you please speak into the microphone so the audience can hear your testimony?
I'm a computer programmer.
Mr. Curtis, are there programs that can be used to secretly fix elections?
Yes.
Because in October of 2000, I wrote a prototype for President Congressman Tom Feeney at the company I worked for in Albedo, Florida, that did just that.
And when you say did just that, it would rig an election?
It would flip the vote 51-49 with whoever you wanted it to go to and whichever race you wanted to win.
And would that program that you designed be something that elections officials that might be on county boards of
elections could detect?
They'd never see it.
Mr.
Would you answer that question once again?
They would never see it.
So how would such a program, a secret program that fixes the election, how could it be detected?
You would have to view it either in the source code or you'd have to have a receipt and then count the hard paper against the actual vote total.
Other than that, you won't see it.
Mr. Curtis, if you had been asked, you or others with your professional expertise had
been asked to design a protected program that would protect the Ohio elections from against
such software to fix the election, could you have done so?
If we'd been asked to make a program that could fix the election? Sure, anybody can do it.
Could you have designed a program or a procedure or a protocol that would have protected Ohio against this kind
of rigging?
No, you have to look at the source code. You have to get probably programmers from both or all parties to look at
the source code and determine if there's anything in there that shouldn't be there.
I mean, it's a simple program.
You're adding one to a person's total.
It's a hundred lines of code tops.
Are you aware of whether there was any protective action in Ohio against this kind of vote-rigging through software?
I don't know.
You don't know?
I don't know.
You were not asked to assist in the development of any protective system, is that correct?
No, I was not.
In Europe, have you reviewed at all the election results in Ohio?
No, I haven't.
Okay.
Given the availability of such boat rigging software and the testimony that has been given under oath of substantial statistical Yes, I would say it was.
I mean, if you have exit polling data that is significantly off from the vote, then it's probably hacked.
the Ohio election, presidential election, was hacked?
Yes, sir.
Yes, I would say it was. I mean, if you're, if you have exit polling data that is significantly
off from the vote, then it's probably hacked.
And your testimony is under oath?
Yes, sir.
And the testimony you've given is true?
Yes, sir.
Thank you.
That wasn't very satisfying, was it?
Vulnerable.
Our researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that ballot recording machines... We need it louder to begin with, because having to redo it every time... Do you want to just summarize it?
Well, we'd like to see this, if it's possible.
I mean, we've tried it and dry run it before.
Is that full volume?
Can broadcast turn it up?
Other voting systems are susceptible to tampering.
Even hackers with limited prior knowledge, tools, and resources are able to breach voting machines in a matter of minutes.
In 2018, electronic voting machines in Georgia and Texas deleted votes for certain candidates or switched votes from one candidate to another.
The biggest seller of voting machines is doing something that violates cybersecurity 101.
Directing that you install remote access software which would make a machine like that, you know, a magnet for fraudsters and hackers.
These voting machines can be hacked quite easily.
You could easily hack into them.
It makes it seem like all these states are doing Different things, but in fact three companies are controlling this.
It is the individual voting machines that pose some of the greatest risk.
There are a lot of states that are dealing with antiquated machines.
Right?
Which are vulnerable to being hacked.
Workers were able to easily hack into an electronic voting machine.
It was possible to switch votes.
43% of American voters use voting machines that researchers have found have serious security flaws, including back doors.
We know how vulnerable now our systems were.
We know, I know the hackathon that took place last year, where virtually every machine was broken into fairly quickly.
I actually held a demonstration for my colleagues Here at the Capitol, where we brought in folks who, before our eyes, hacked election machines.
Those that are being used in many states.
Aging systems also frequently rely on unsupported software, like Windows XP and 2000, which may not receive regular security patches and are thus more vulnerable to the latest methods of cyber attacks.
Okay, that's it on videos.
President election they just need to hack one swing state or maybe you wanted to or maybe just a few counties in one
swing State I'm very concerned that you could have a hack that
finally went through Okay, that's it on videos mr. Curtis proceed, please
Okay, what you may not see for the first one because it wasn't very satisfying the way it presented
Back in 2000, I worked for a company in Orlando, Florida, and the Speaker of the Florida House and our Chief Lobbyist for the company was named Tom Feeney.
He was Republican.
I was at the time too, but he requested software that would be able to flip a vote, which is very easy to do.
It's hard to stop it.
It's easy to do it.
So I presented it and said, here you go.
And here's how you stop it.
First of all, don't use machines because you can never ever trust them to give you a fair election.
There are too many ways to hack them.
You can hack them.
At the level that I did when you first build them, you can hack them from the outside.
You can hack them with programs that load themselves on the side.
It's impossible to secure them.
You will never beat the programmer.
The programmer always owns the universe.
And as long as you have machines, I don't care which company, as long as you have machines, they are vulnerable to this.
And worse than all of that, even if they were perfect, is 90% of the people don't believe in our elections anymore.
They don't believe in it.
Democrats haven't been believing it for 20 years.
Now that we won, a lot of people are going, oh, they're fine.
Well, they're fine this week.
They're not going to be fine next week.
They're going to get you then because it isn't like, you know, you can control it.
And the point is to get something in our elections that everybody believes in.
Otherwise, you're going to keep getting worse.
I mean, it's already bad now, but it's going to keep getting worse.
And I'm here to address the lies and to show basically how my program works and how any other program can work.
And then I can answer any questions you want.
Madam Chair?
No interruptions.
Go ahead.
A lot of times, you get this accuracy test, right?
The accuracy test is a dog and pony show.
The program I wrote did an accuracy test.
So, if you look at the bottom, you will see the vote totals come up on the screen.
Now, you won't see this when you're actually voting.
This was for touch screens when they first came out, which we managed to get rid of most of those.
Not all of them, but most of them.
But you don't see that total.
The same thing can happen in a scanner.
The same thing happens in a tabulator.
The same thing can happen on a database in front of all of that, okay?
So if I hit cat, the Democrat, because I'm a Democrat, right?
Vote for him, okay?
And I hit submit, you will notice that it goes up one.
Okay?
Your accuracy test will never catch the hack because it's going to work like it's supposed to work until I tell it to do something different, and then it's still going to work like it's supposed to work, but because I tell it different, it's going to act different.
So if you look at the totals, you will see that they will actually switch on you.
And now, even though the Democrat was winning, he's now losing, and the Republican will win.
Not because he got more votes, but because 24 lines of code can change it and there's nothing you can do.
You can't catch it.
You can't find it.
It could be a separate module and it could erase itself right after it does it.
And there's nothing you can do to stop it.
Nothing.
It's impossible.
I don't care how honest the supervisor of election is.
Well, you guys are honest, right?
Did you see me flip it?
No, it just flips, because the magic on the screen will happen quicker than you can blink your eye.
It can happen at that level, it can happen at the hack level.
You get this, I hear this all the time.
Kind of makes me laugh, because you know I'm old, but they say, oh, these computers are not networked, therefore it's impossible to get into them.
In the olden days, if your computer had one of these, a plug that plugged into your house
wiring, we would network from that.
That's where your networking would occur.
Anything that's plugged in, that's plugged in somewhere else in the same building can
be networked.
Some people have a confused look on their face because they don't understand this because
we move past the home wiring.
I have here, if I can have this for you guys to look at later when you get a chance, actually the protocol still exists today and D-Link still makes one where you can actually plug in your house wire here and over there and you can network across your house wiring.
That's the same thing that can happen in any machine that plugs into the wall.
And you will never catch it.
Never.
Let me show you how it works here.
I don't know if you're into coding or not, but let's pretend.
Okay.
Well, shrink that a little.
Okay.
You have these proprietary programs where they're trying to protect their proprietary information.
In an election, you should be adding one to the total you have before.
That is the total code.
If it does anything else, it's wrong.
Okay?
Because the vote should be one plus whatever you had before.
It should never be anything else.
Shouldn't take a hundred lines of code to do that.
Shouldn't take a thousand.
Shouldn't case a hundred thousand.
Right there, that little thing there, actually shows the code being set and the database being adjusted.
So, you can't check it because the database is adjusted, the logs are adjusted.
Nothing happens on that machine that the programmer doesn't make happen.
Logs are not automatic.
Databases are not automatic.
Nothing's automatic.
I know you have a bill on a ballot image, which is a good idea as long as you have these machines.
It's a great idea.
But essentially, if I know you're looking at my ballot images, I'm going to change those too.
Because those don't happen automatically either.
I have to write them.
It's like a battleship.
I have to find the dots in the right location on the grid, and then I have to duplicate them onto a ballot image.
Or not, because it's just a video game.
I control the vote.
You guys don't.
Back when people said, well, I clicked one candidate and it flipped to another.
It's possible, but it didn't have to happen.
That's sloppy programming, because it doesn't matter what you click on the screen.
It only matters what I want to do behind the screen.
Because I'm the programmer.
I can do anything I want.
And so what you have to do is you have to get machines out of the system.
Machines are great.
I like computers.
But they're only great if you can validate them.
And if you're going to count them anyway, there's no point in spending the money to have them.
This is what actually flips that election.
Let me find it real quick here.
Just so you can see it.
Okay, 24 lines of code.
It's an index array.
I don't know if you know what that is, but names don't matter.
There are no names.
There are no Trumps.
There are no Bidens.
There are no anything else.
Doesn't matter.
He's an index number.
That's where I put him.
Okay?
If I select that index number and I say I want the other guy to win, it will go through this set and in 24 lines of code, it will say, okay, what's the total?
I'm going to take 51% and then I'm going to adjust it and I'll put the other total back.
I'm going to change the logs.
I'm going to change my data.
I'm going to change everything and it's going to happen so quick that you can't blink and you can't catch it.
Impossible.
Any questions?
Are you done?
I'm done.
Totally done.
Sure.
Okay, so the way this works is, sir, one of my colleagues might have a question, and he or she goes through me, the chair, and says, Madam Chair, and then I recognize him or her, and then that fellow colleague addresses his or her question to you, and then when you respond, you come back through me, and you say, Madam Chair, Senator Hernandez, or whomever, and that's how the circuitry, as it were, is conducted.
Colleagues, you are ready?
Go ahead, Senator Hernandez.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
I've been ready to ask a question.
When you mentioned 90%, the 90% stat that folks don't trust our elections, where does that stat come from?
Do we re-ask the question?
So you say, Madam Chair, Senator Hernandez, that's what you say, and then you completely answer her.
Madam Chair, the 90% comes from a recent survey of basically the general public on whether they believe in the elections or not.
And 90% do not have high confidence that our elections are valid.
For the last 20 years, Democrats have been saying that.
You saw Kamala Harris actually on there talking about it.
I worked on a recount campaign in California when she was running for Attorney General her first time out.
So, you know, people know this stuff.
Republicans were dragging their feet.
They weren't cooperative.
It hadn't bit them in the tail enough for them to pay attention.
Now, they're at the 90% level too, so no one trusts it.
That's why you have January 6th.
That's why you have all of these recounts going on.
That's why you have this, because no one trusts it.
And if you can't trust the election, that becomes the problem.
Okay, further questions?
Follow-up?
Yes, and so again, you just say, Madam Chair, Senator Hernandez, and then speak to her when you're answering her, but you come through me.
I know it's archaic, but it's the business.
Senator Hernandez.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Just to clarify, with the exception of voting accessibility machines, does Arizona use machines to vote, touchscreen machines to vote?
Madam Chair, could you repeat the question for me?
I'm having trouble understanding.
I'm 70% deaf in both ears, so you got to work with me.
Mr. Curtis, Senator Hernandez, would you repeat the question?
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Curtis, with the exception of accessibility machines, voting accessibility machines, does Arizona vote using touchscreen machines?
To that point, Madam Chair.
Go ahead, Senator Kavanaugh.
Would the type of coding, recoding that you did only apply to a touchscreen machine or would it also apply to a machine that optically recorded votes?
Madam Chair, both those guys.
It applies to anything that has a computer attached to it.
Anything.
So do they use touchscreens?
I hope not.
They still do in some places, but the tabulators are exactly the same problem.
Anything where your vote goes into an invisible bubble is susceptible.
And you've got to basically get rid of that bubble.
If you want people to believe it, let them see it counted.
Then they'll believe in the elections.
It's not that... I've been working with a lot of Republicans lately.
So, you know, I get this feel.
But it's not that...
They think that Trump won or lost is that they don't know and they think he might have won and got cheated and they're never going to be able to validate it.
It's kind of like all the previous elections.
This isn't a new election.
In 2016, when did Trump win the first time?
That election was just as screwy.
In fact, my law office filed the actual election challenge in Florida because it was so messed up.
You know, we have all kinds of weird things going on.
You had reports of foreign nations hacking in.
You had all kinds of things going on.
So, it's been going on all the way back to 2004.
This testimony that you saw today was the Conyers Commission in 2004.
Madam Chair.
Go ahead, Senator Sundarachan.
Thank you.
So, Mr. Curtis, just to be clear, following up, you don't know what kind of voting equipment Arizona uses and you're presenting to us?
To that point, it's irrelevant.
Whatever computers are involved is relevant.
Well, thank you, Madam Chair.
But it is important for us to know.
Well, absolutely important.
Senator Borrelli, per my direction, can To that point.
Yes.
Thank you, Madam Chair, Senator, Senator Haysen.
Cochise County uses a touchscreen.
ES and S. It's not just Dominion or... There's touchscreens in the state.
But the point is, it doesn't have to be a touchscreen.
Any computer device is hacked.
Hackable go ahead hackable and untrusted and that is the biggest problem and unless we get trust back in our elections it doesn't matter who wins and who loses because the loser will always think they got cheated and The winner will always stand there go.
No, this is a wonderful election, even though the one before it wasn't so good so you've got to get past this team thing and start looking at what's good for our democracy and Further questions?
Madam Chair.
Yes.
Thank you.
Senator Sundarrachan.
So, recognizing that there are machines, so we, you know, we in Arizona thankfully use paper ballots for the majority of our voting.
We do have some... To that point, we do not use paper ballots to the majority, so let's get the record straight on that.
Go ahead with your question.
Okay, interesting.
Yes, we do.
But my point being, so we use machines in the tabulation process and you're alleging that in that process we are open to hacking.
So our understanding is that in the process of these Voting these machines are air-gapped. They're not connected
to the internet at any point So at what point would the hackers be able to access these
machines to flip the software if I may in my limited sense and
correct me if I'm wrong, but Air gap is irrelevant because it can be hacked through the
electric plug as you described and
Go ahead with your answer furthermore Can you repeat it?
She wears a mask, and I'm deaf, so I can't see her lips.
So I'm kind of stuck.
Oh, I'm sorry.
Oh, thank you.
There you go, thanks.
Recognizing also I have small children, I don't want to subject the whole room to my children's messes.
Okay.
Yes, exactly.
You should be.
So we're talking about the tabulation machines.
We understand that in our state, they are air-gapped.
They're not connected to the internet.
So I'm asking, how would the hackers be able to access those machines and hack them?
And to the Chair's response that we just, you also presented about the ability for the
plugs to be able to provide Internet data.
I would, there's a significant, you know, the detail you provided requires some significant
action to be able to use those plugs to be able to transmit data as well.
So, you know, with the way that our system, election systems work, with, we have different
locations, you would have to really describe significant action to wire those properly,
Please, please describe the actions that need to be taken.
The only significant access you would need.
Oh, Madam Chair.
Sorry, messed that up.
You don't need significant access.
It's everywhere.
It's in the coding you do initially.
There's coding in the chips, all these chips we get from other countries.
You can code directly in them.
Do you know what the smallest computer is right now that IBM has?
Two nanometers.
That means 50,000 computers would fit on a human hair.
The diameter of a human hair.
It could be inside your boards, it could be everywhere.
You can hack from the system.
If you are plugged in, and I'm plugged into the wall socket outside, and I don't have to stand there, all I have to do is plug a little device in, I'm in, because I can set up a wireless between that.
If you look at the paper I gave you, you will see that it doesn't take anything to do it.
Anything that's connected will work, okay?
Now, if they're doing it the old-fashioned way, the coding's inside.
You don't need a box, okay?
I mean, everybody thinks they need to push a Wi-Fi button or they need to have a particular type of a card in there.
We used to code those by hand, guys.
So you just take it, you code it, and you make it talk.
Okay?
You'll still do that if you don't want to be caught.
Okay?
So you can get in there that way.
You can get in the other way.
You can get in through the chip level.
It's just a terrible idea to use computers in elections.
Democracy is not for the lazy.
You've got to vote.
You've got to get up.
You've got to sign your name.
You've got to fill it out.
And if you're too lazy to count them because you want to use a machine to make it easier, then you are giving up your democracy because the machine will rule the game.
And that's the way it is.
Further questions?
Mr. Curtis, do you have anything to add?
No.
Does anyone else have another question?
Yes.
Senator Borrelli.
Yes.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Curtis, just to be perfectly clear on wireless connections.
It can be done with an extension cord of some sort, you said.
It can go through a home wiring system, even a thermostat.
Anything!
Anything that connects to the circuit.
Absolutely anything.
And there's big money in elections, guys.
So it's well worth the chance to hack in.
How much is Russia going to spend on a missile when they could just as easily spend it on a programmer?
You know?
And a lot of people go, you know, with the whole Russian thing.
It's like, and we try to do this in our document that we submitted to court, is that a lot of people try and try Russia and Trump together.
That's not necessarily ever going to be the case.
The candidate doesn't have to actually be part of a big conspiracy to make something happen.
It can simply be someone is selecting him over her because him is better for them this time.
And maybe next time it won't be.
But you can't have computers in elections if you want to have confidence in them.
If you simply want to have a video game that everybody plays and goes home and then the people selected will be there, then that's what we have now and have had for 20 years.
This is not a new phenomenon.
20 years, ever since I built this beast, it's been going on.
In fact, in 2004, I hate to go back that far, but in 2004, All the elections were decided by 5149, which is the exact same code in my program.
It didn't even vary, which is crazy.
And that was kind of the giveaway.
Madam Chair?
Senator Sonderation.
Thank you.
Um, I guess my final.
Oh, right, Mr Curtis.
My final question is, um, so when you have presented this to our elections officials in Arizona, what has their response been?
Have you gotten feedback from them?
From who?
You know, our county recorders and other elections officials who could speak, you know, could respond to these.
Senator Sunderation, this is the first time, to my knowledge, that he's been invited in here to present these data points.
Yes, Madam Chair, I have not come to- And to that point- To that point- Excuse me, Mr. Curtis.
To that point, Senator Sunder- Yes, thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Sunderation, we are the election officials.
We make the law.
It's granted to us, retained in the Constitution.
But Madam Chair, what about those with actual expertise in conducting elections?
I know I'm not claiming that I have that expertise, which is why, you know, that's a great question to get their feedback.
That's a great question.
The people you're mentioning are the implementers to whom we grant the authority.
It is we The state legislature that has the plenary authority endowed to us by the United States Constitution.
And thereby, it is on our shoulders.
And it is incumbent upon us to get smart on it and guard the vote and its integrity.
Madam Chair, to that point, I have spoken with many officials and off the books, they are concerned, but they have no control.
They simply do what they're allowed to do.
There was a supervised elections in Tallahassee, Florida named Ayan Sancho.
Did a great job.
He actually tested off the books, the whole nine yards.
And he actually is in several documentaries saying, this is broken.
We can't use these.
Most of them don't want to do that because they're kind of charged with making sure it's good.
And the worst thing you can do to get reelected is to go, well, I had a really nasty election this year because I don't program the machines.
I don't know what's in them because I can't see the source code.
The company comes in right before and updates it.
I don't even know if it's valid.
And so all I can do is get my people here, follow my nose as to what I'm supposed to do, and I'm done.
And a lot of them are very uncomfortable with that.
But there's not much they can do.
Do you know that most, well, I think all that I know of, are not allowed to test the machines outside of the parameters that the company gives them to test.
Can't do it.
It's against the law.
And so they're kind of got their hands tied.
So that's what they're saying.
Talk to them off the books.
If they really are concerned and they really care, ask them how absolutely sure they are that this computer that they can't see, they don't understand, and they don't maintain is actually doing their elections.
Well, I would submit to you, sir.
Thank you for that.
That it is on us.
To untangle the mess.
Any other questions?
Thank you, sir.
God bless.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Appreciate you making the trip.
Does she not want to follow the science?
Because the science shows they don't work.
So for someone that is so interested in questioning him as though he doesn't know what he's talking about, or as somehow we've got to rely on the experts, again, I'm not sure she's even qualified to have enough common sense to be on that committee if she can't get to the science of face mask, and then, well, I can't take my face mask down because I have to go home to children.
I can't risk my children.
I mean, this is the level of Lacking in discernment we have with our elected officials overseeing our election.
They can't even understand what the basic science is when it comes to masks and this virus and how small it is.
And we're relying on them to figure out something as, well, quite complicated in some degrees as elections.
She can't figure out the simple science on masks.
▲
Export Selection