All Episodes
Previous Next
June 15, 2023 - The Lindell Report - Mike Lindell
01:00:19
The Lindell Report (6-15-23)
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Visit MyPillow.com 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.
Glad you are with us, Brent House, in for Mike Lindell, who is out on business tonight
Last night in this broadcast, we were calling for, once again, the release of the Alex Halderman Report, also known as the Expert Report.
Well, the next broadcast, during Brandon House Live, right before it went on the air, we found out it was released yesterday.
We just had not been informed yet.
Mike and I and Garland Favorito talked about that for a few minutes on my broadcast, Brandon House Live, and tonight we're going to talk the whole hour about what is in this report.
It's about 95 pages, and I've been spending the better part of today and last night going through this report.
I'm going to show you where you can actually get the report yourself and print it off as a PDF or just follow along with us as we go through it.
The us is me and attorney Dan Eastman.
Dan has read about half of it or more so far himself and we discussed it on the phone today.
He joins us by phone because he's traveling tonight and was gracious enough to join us by phone which is just as well because we're going to spend a lot of time showing you the screenshots From the report, and then Dan, who is an attorney.
Professor Dan, he's also a host of his own show, the Dan Eastman Report, which you can find on my channel at www.tv.com.
But Dan is not only an economics professor, he's also an attorney.
And he has been fighting this issue of election theft since the night after the election.
Literally, folks, he's one of the most knowledgeable people that I know or that I ever interview on this topic because he has spent so much of his life since the night after the election in 2020 covering this and dealing with this.
He's extremely knowledgeable.
And I wasn't shocked when I called him that he told me he had already made his way about halfway through the report.
So, he's the perfect person to interview tonight.
Let me show you, before we go to Dan, let me show you, if you go to frankspeech.com, there you go, go to frankspeech.com, scroll down the page, and then you're going to see, until it changes, but you're going to see this right here.
Halderman Report on Voting Machine Vulnerabilities, finally released, and it validates Mike Lindell's warning.
Now, that's an article that I authored last night.
It's now on Frank Speech.
If you start reading the article, it is a synopsis of what Mike and I talked about last night during Brandon House Live.
And then, of course, it allows you to click that link and watch that segment.
What you're going to find right there in the article under the headline, Timely Revelation, is a hyperlink.
Okay?
A hyperlink.
Click on that.
That will bring you to the PDF of the Holderman Report.
You can read it online or you can click download and download it there as a PDF
and do what I've done, print it off.
If you're going to print it off, you will want to, hey guys, come get this tennis ball from Delta so she doesn't choke
on it.
If you're going to, if I don't know how she keeps getting those,
if you are going to print it off, you will want to bring up the PDF so that it will print
correctly.
So that's what you want to do.
But at least grab the URL and send it around to everyone you possibly can.
All right?
Joining me now is none other than Dan Eastman.
Attorney Eastman, welcome to the broadcast.
Thank you for joining us.
Hi, Brandon.
Thank you so much for having me on.
I really appreciate the opportunity to discuss this very, very important report that just came out.
I wanted to mention that I'm not just some random attorney from the state of Wisconsin who didn't have dinner plans tonight.
I actually have spent a lot of time looking at Mr. Haldeman and his work.
If you remember back in 2016, the election where President Trump ran against Hillary Clinton, President Trump beat Hillary Clinton in the state of Wisconsin by 22,000 votes.
First time Wisconsin had voted for a Republican president since the second term of Ronald Reagan, so it was quite an eye-opener.
As a result of that election, Jill Stein, a Green Party candidate, filed a motion with the Wisconsin Election Commission to recount all of the ballots by hand, and she was alleging that the machines had been hacked, and her principal Our expert witness was Dr. Haldeman and then also Harry Hurstie and six other very prominent American scientists, MIT scientists.
So we had been looking at this since 2016 in Wisconsin.
And I was retained by Sidney Powell in November of 2020 because the same allegations were being made.
And my job on that lawsuit on the legal team was to do the research into the Jill Stein litigation.
That went through four separate Wisconsin courts, including a federal court in the Western District of Wisconsin.
The Supreme Court of Wisconsin finally came to the conclusion in September of 2022 that the machines could be examined by these experts and their experts' opinions could be public opinions.
And Jill Stein had actually asked for the source code for Dominion and ES&S machines.
And that was the subject of three years of litigation.
Not whether to get it or not, but to limit that authority.
And of course, intervening in that case and paying for the $3.5 million in recount fees was Perkins Coy, Hillary Clinton's law firm, which was Mark Elias and attorney Josh Call, who is now the state of Wisconsin attorney general.
So I've been following this litigation and reading Dr. Haldeman's reports for a very long time.
And I'm very happy to see the report is out for the public to see, and I'm sure we'll go through this tonight step by step, but it is a shocking revelation that did not emerge from the orange man bad Donald Trump lost debunk.
This started four years before, when Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin by 22,000 votes.
Donald Trump lost Wisconsin four years later by 20,000 votes, the very same number, the same ratio.
So there's a lot of proof in the courts and in the technological literature that suggests that these systems are being controlled from beyond and this is serious stuff.
Federal Judge Totenberg was behind keeping it from coming to the public.
Why?
Why?
Well, this particular report that was submitted by Haldeman was submitted as evidence in the Seerling case in Georgia.
And it was the same type of litigation where Trump's attorneys or people, whether they were representing Donald Trump or citizens, the allegations made was that the elections were somehow manipulated.
And this report was submitted as evidence in that federal court.
in Georgia, and the judge sealed the report.
And about a year and a half ago, Dr. Haldeman was very concerned about the continuing ongoing impact in elections since 2020, and he actually filed a complaint with the Department of Homeland Security because the judge wouldn't let him give that report to the Department of Homeland Security.
So the Department of Homeland Security took independent information from Dr. Haldeman, And concluded that, yes, there are problems in the system, but nobody can prove that anybody did anything wrong, so therefore no harm to fall.
And this just happened about a year and a half ago, because we were looking at this as part of cases that I'm currently working on.
So to Dr. Haldeman's credit, he has been banging this drum for a very long time.
If you go to the report, he started out after the hanging Chad fiasco in Miami in the 2004 election, Bush v. Gore.
And when digital equipment came in to replace punch cards and hanging chads, Dr. Haldeman
has been on the cutting edge of this since.
He's probably the national expert and one of a handful of people who really understands
the systems and the vulnerabilities.
So how do you believe this helps the case of Mike Lindell being sued by all these different
companies for a total of like $8 billion?
If you're Dominion or Smartmatic or any of these companies tonight, are you concerned this report, the timing of this report?
And is Fox News kicking themselves?
They settled for $787 billion three weeks ago and now this report comes out?
Well, everyone knew that this Haldeman report had been sealed by the judge.
There were numerous attempts to get that released, and for whatever reason, I'm not familiar with the judge, I'm not familiar with the federal court in Georgia at all, but for some reason Judge Stoltenberg believed that that report should not be given to the public and was not given to the Department of Homeland Security.
So when you think about not only this report but his summary memo, because he did a summary memo which has been circulating for about a year, That it raises serious questions about the ability of any system to be used in an election process.
Because the election process is where the people have one opportunity to participate in government.
We are a representative government.
Once people are elected and sworn in, that's the government.
They're supposed to be representing us, but whether they do represent us or not is a big question.
So if you take away the people's ability to pick those representatives, and they're selected, or whatever, then you don't have a democracy.
You have an illusion.
I think this is a really big problem when you look at the type of technology that has exploded on the scene in America.
You have the technology of the voter database in each state, which is required under the Half-America Vote Act, or the HAVA Act, and every state's supposed to have one, and you start to look at who coded it, How it's coded, how it's managed.
You find out, like in Wisconsin, we just approved in our state budget four vendors of people who are contract coders.
There's nobody in-house, no state employees coding it.
They're contract voters.
They're scattered all over the world, and nobody vets them.
And when you look at who are the guys with the contracts, well, they're politically connected people in Wisconsin.
So when you think about the database side, the HAVA voter roll database side, there's some huge questions.
Then you look at the voter machine side, and it's not just a machine.
People tend to think a machine.
It's not.
There are tabulators, and then there is an aggregating system called the EMS, or the election management system, which is the software that aggregates all the tabulator votes and comes up with a countywide number or statewide number.
So you've got all these digital systems.
And then add electronic poll books.
Which I thought was amazing in Dr. Haldeman's report.
You know, they scan your driver's license and then they, you know, they check your record and give a ballot and you go vote.
But any malicious actor could have code embedded in their magnetic driver's license.
I mean, if somebody was, you know, wanted to get into the system, you know, you got three million ballots cast, what only you need is one person who's maliciously zipping code into their driver's license.
You would never find that.
Never.
And this is where we are.
We've taken a simple process of marking paper ballots, putting them in a tin box with a padlock and a police officer standing there.
And at the end of the night, you open up the box and count them all up, we've gone to complete digitalization with systems that are as wide open as can be.
I mean, if the Haldeman Report was talking about your digital banking platform, would you put your money in that bank?
No.
I wouldn't.
No.
So how does this help Mike Lindell's case?
Or cases?
Well, I think it creates a public awareness that these systems are not as advertised. They are not secure. There are
vulnerabilities that are inherent in the design.
There's supposed to be federal certification and all this stuff, but everything you look at from
the federal certifiers on down, it's kind of a weak system.
I'm not familiar with Mike's particular legal situation, but it just seems to me that this is suggesting that these systems cannot be used in elections Well, how is this defamation for Mike to say the machines are vulnerable, the machines can be hacked, foreign entities can hack these and flip votes, because that's exactly what this report says, is it not?
Well, it's very troubling, because if you think about the public deposition, I think it was in the Fox News case, One of the employees of the machine company made the, you know, I can't use the words on family television here, but he made it clear that their system is not, you know, not up to par.
I don't want to go at that.
But the point is, the Haldeman Report substantiates the posed statement of the workers in that company that are basically saying the system's got issues.
How do you put at risk the American vote?
The one thing we have in this country to participate in government and you run it through a system that, boy, you wouldn't, you wouldn't put, you know, if that was your savings alone, you wouldn't put your money in that bank.
So it's a problem.
I think it's a really difficult problem.
And, you know, the sad thing about it is when you, and we have spent a lot of time in Wisconsin looking at how, how does this happen?
And it was, it was sort of an insurgency problem where our state statutes We're enacted with all sorts of mandates.
Like, we have to use machines if the population in the municipality is over 7,500.
We have no choice.
And you can only use one of four machines that are certified by the WECC.
But the WECC will certify machines that aren't nationally certified.
And there's nobody at WECC that can certify a bubblegum dispenser.
This is the problem we have.
The law forces us to use machines.
And the question is, who did that?
Why is that in the law?
A community may use machines if they want to.
No.
You must.
It's always you must.
You must belong to Eric.
We're the only state in the union that must belong to Eric.
So the question is, when that legislation was drafted, it was smoke blown in the face of our legislature, our governor.
They didn't know what they're doing because the elected officials in this state are simply not digitally sophisticated people.
Even our 1852 municipal clerks.
They're hired by the mayor and approved by the Common Council.
But here's the thing.
Their job is to take care of the books and records of the municipality.
And twice a year, their blood runs cold.
Oh no, another election's coming.
They don't know how to turn these machines on.
They don't know how to operate them.
And we have email chains from Open Records that go right to these manufacturers.
Okay, this is how you turn it on.
This is how you do this.
The clerks don't know.
Well, what the clerks do know is it's a lot less work if you use these machines.
So they defend the use of these machines because, I hate to say it, but they're lazy.
They basically want a labor-saving device, and they don't care that everybody's been screaming from the rooftops, including our state attorney general, Josh Calls, since 2016, introducing Haldeman the first time, saying, hey, the machines are hacked.
Let me go to the actual report.
Look at the screen here, folks.
I'm going to skip over to page 9 if you're following along at home.
I've shown you how to go and get the copy of it.
So go to page 9, folks, and look at what it says here.
This is Dr. Haldeman writing. My analysis focuses on the ICX-BMD, which stands for ballot marking device.
In 2020, the ICX, this is the Dominion Machines, which by the way, I think that's all they were using in Georgia were Dominion Machines, remember?
I think it was like a $100 million contract Brian Kemp negotiated when he was Secretary of State before he became governor, correct?
Correct, Dan?
That's right, and this is a big public expenditure.
So you go to Kemp and Raffensperger, and of course, I'm not from Georgia, I don't know anything about Georgia, but it would seem to me that the Governor and the Secretary of State made a $100 million public expenditure, and now comes people saying, you spent $100 million on stuff that isn't up to par.
Well, they're not going to roll over.
Oh, sorry!
They're not going to roll over.
Well, it's an embarrassment.
So what do they do?
They dig their heels in and they defend it to the last stand.
Knowing darn well these machines, there's issues.
Now listen to this.
My analysis focuses on the ICX BMD.
In 2020, the ICX was used in parts of 16 states.
You guys ready to hear the states?
Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and Washington.
It's been two years now.
To refresh my memory, am I not right in saying that the states that had the problems that night were Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Michigan?
Were those not the five states?
Well, they were, and you forgot they had Wisconsin.
Oh, that's right.
Yeah, Wisconsin.
Well, we have paper ballots.
It's required by statute, and everybody says, good, see, we don't have that problem.
Keep in mind, in Georgia, there's a machine.
You walk in.
You touch the screen for the candidates you choose, it spits out a ballot, and you hope to mark the right ones, but nobody ever looks, and there's a QR code, then you go over to the scanner and zip, and it goes, and that's a two-step process.
We have a one-step process.
You color in your ballot with little ovals, and you run it through the scanner, and there are different ways.
And if you read Haldeman's report, and I did finish reading his report while I was being chauffeured up here, But the point is, if you read page 6, the first bullet point of summary... Right, let's go to that.
We'll go to page 6.
Let's do that.
Page 6, he starts the bullet points, and that first bullet point, the last sentence, he talks about people can walk in, I believe.
There's a risk of... People who can walk into the poll can actually do this in the polling place.
Well, where I'm going with this, it's hard to see, I can't see what the screen is, but where I'm going with this is, if you think about this MNRA vaccine stuff, essentially what happens is that's an inorganic material injected into people.
And if you know anything about nanoparticle technologies, this is a thing.
And if you can visualize, we have, you know, three million ballots cast.
And somewhere in Wisconsin, one guy puts a dot in a dog catcher.
He selects dog catcher, and it's a magnetic dot with malicious code.
And that gets mailed to the clerk, she opens the ballot, she runs it through the machine, and voila!
You've got your malicious code into the system, and you're never going to find that out of three million ballots cast in some small town in Wisconsin.
That's what he's talking about with this ability to get into those systems
It's just it's exactly what the what the Israelis did when they wanted to hack into that
Iran nuclear Yeah, you're talking about when Iran, they were doing their
nuclear program, and supposedly Israel and Silicon Valley worked together to create a
computer software virus called Substack or something similar to that.
Hang on, I'll come to you in a minute.
It was like a worm, basically a worm.
And they put it on thumb drives.
They put it on thumb drives and they spread it all over the Middle East in hopes that
someone would eventually pick one up, take it into the nuclear program in Iran and plug
it in and then they could take over.
And Stuxnet, that was the name of it, Stuxnet, I knew it would come to me, Stuxnet.
And sure enough, it did.
They were able to speed up those centrifuges, tear them all apart, and set everything back.
Let me go to page 4, if you guys are following along.
Here's what I want to do the rest of the 40 minutes.
I want to move as fast as we can.
I'll read, give me a quick answer, we'll go to the next one.
Kind of a cliff note version overview.
Here we go, page 4.
He says, I saw that the ICX suffers from critical vulnerabilities that can be exploited to subvert all of its security mechanisms including user authorization, data integrity protection, access control, privilege separation, audit logs, protective counters, hash validation, and external firmware validation.
I demonstrate that these vulnerabilities provide multiple routes by which attackers can install malicious software on Georgia's ballot marking devices, either with temporary physical access or remotely from election management systems.
I explain how such malware can alter votes, voters votes, while subverting, listen to this folks, while subverting All of the procedural protections practiced by the state,
including acceptance testing, hash validation, logic and accuracy testing, external
firmware validation, and risk limiting audits."
So Dr. Halderman is saying all the things your state basically tells you why Mike Lindell
and all these other people are wrong because we have all these procedures, Dr. Halderman
is saying none of those procedures will stop this or even catch it, correct?
These are very, very, very sophisticated actors that are doing this.
And I think that was my point in that first subset on page six, that domestic actors, domestic political actors, they got the source code from Wisconsin during the Jill Stein litigation.
All right.
They're in there.
They know this.
And the type of people who are manipulating these elections are very, very intelligent.
Cyber people, digital people.
I mean, the average person like you and I, we have no clue what's going on with this stuff.
But if you're in an intelligence situation, they don't know how to spy on people.
And this is the kind of level of interaction that we're seeing in these elections.
You get a huge, huge benefit to winning the presidency.
That's trillions of dollars of money and world power.
So, you know, there are world-class players And, you know, we the people, we have no clue what's all going on.
But I think Balderman opens that door in a very powerful way.
And he's not the only one that's doing it, either.
There are other people out there that have all been, you know, written off as kooks and deniers and this and that.
But at the end of the day, this is a growing body of, you know, of academic study that is really pointing to a very compromised election system.
Let's go to page 7.
You're following along at home.
Page 7.
The ICX vulnerabilities also make it possible for an attacker to compromise the auditability of the ballots.
Meaning, how are you going to double-check this?
By altering both the QR codes and the human-readable text.
Such cheating could not be detected by an RLA or a hand count since all records of the voter's intent would be wrong.
The only practical way to discover such an attack would be if enough voters reviewed their ballots, noticed the errors, and alerted election officials, and election officials identified the problem as a systemic hack or malfunction.
But Human factor studies show that most voters do not review their ballots carefully enough and election officials likely would consider such reports the product of voter error.
This means that in a close contest ICX malware could manipulate enough ballots to change the election outcome with low probability of detection.
In contrast, Risk-limiting audits of hand-marked paper ballots.
There's the key word.
Hand-marked paper ballots, when used with appropriate procedural precautions, provide high confidence that individual votes are counted as intended and election outcomes are correct, even if election technology is fully compromised.
Dan?
Yeah, I tell you, it really becomes difficult, because even in a hand-marked ballot situation, the Wisconsin Election Commission, we have a statute that says that 1% of the awards have to be audited.
Well, you know, that's 3,800 awards, plus or minus.
And they audit them, and amazingly, the machine totals always equal the paper ballots.
And then, in the last election, they said, we're going to go to 10%.
You know, boy, we count them all up, and they all add up.
Well, and they brag about that, you know, these risk-limiting audits, and we audited 10%.
Well, what it tells you is that 90% were not audited.
And when you ask them, what's the process for random selection?
They won't tell you.
You know, they pull a number out of a hat, or is there a random number generator?
They won't tell you, then you can figure it out.
No.
It's not possible to do a sample audit if you audit around where the fraud is.
We have four counties in the state.
Where data clearly shows there are problems.
And why I said Wisconsin's in that list, the city of Milwaukee, according to a whistleblower under oath, has testified that the city of Milwaukee cranked out 60,000 of those optical touchscreen ballots and ran them through the tabulators.
I mean, the rest of the state using paper ballots, but somehow 60,000 of these things, apparently it was some guy from Chicago that came up and spent a week and a half generating ballots.
And then they all went through on election night.
This is the kind of stuff that happens with this type of electronic equipment.
Wow.
Let's go to the next paragraph.
I'm going to pick it up right there.
Let's see here.
Using vulnerable ICX-BMBs, ballot marking devices, for all in-person voters, as Georgia does, greatly magnifies the security risk compared to jurisdictions that use hand-marked paper ballots.
But provide ballot marking devices to voter upon request.
When use of such ballot marking devices is limited to a small fraction of voters, as in most other states, they are less valuable target and less likely to be attacked at all, even if they are successfully compromised.
Attackers can change at most.
A small fraction of votes, which again creates a strong disincentive to undertake the effort at risk and risk to change such votes.
So notice he keeps going back to what Mike's talking about.
Paper marked ballots.
He goes on to say from there, the critical vulnerabilities in the ICX and the wide variety of lesser but still serious security issues indicate it was developed.
Listen now, he's talking about the Dominion machines.
It was developed without significant attention to security during design, software engineering, and testing.
The resulting system architecture is brittle.
Small mistakes can lead to complete exploitation.
Likewise, previous security testing efforts as part of federal and state certification processes appear not to have uncovered the critical problems I found.
He says, this suggests that either the ICX vulnerabilities run deep or that earlier testing was superficial.
This whole report is only about Dominion machines, right?
Well, that's right, because that's the brand that George uses.
But keep in mind, why do you need two machines?
And that's a real problem.
You double the machines, you probably quadruple the problems.
You have a machine that's a touchscreen, because apparently people can't work a little pen down there and color it an oval, so they have to push a touchscreen.
And then it spits out a ballot with a code that nobody can read, and that gets shoved into a tabulator machine, and the tabulator machine is, of course, connected to the EMS.
So, why do you need all that equipment?
I mean, why do you need two machines to cast a ballot?
And it seems very strange, but obviously, I'm sure the machine salesman had a great day when they signed that contract.
And I'm not criticizing Georgia.
I don't know.
I don't know what Georgia went through politically to make up its mind.
But we don't use those machines here because it would double or triple the cost of the system.
And you have to ask, why?
The more complex the system is, the more openings there are.
That's what Baldwin makes very clear in his report.
From the printer to the USB stick.
I mean, everything along that chain is an opportunity to manipulate elections.
And if you stop and think about that, those two elections for US Senator right after Trump lost in November of 2020, and they had that runoff, and of course it was like, you know, like a slap in the face, but the same thing happened again.
And it was, you know, the whole nation stood in awe as the United States Senate changed hands.
It was like, you couldn't believe your eyes.
And that's the same thing we see in Wisconsin.
You can't believe your eyes when you see these 3 million people cast ballots and a statewide election is won or lost by 17,000 to 25,000 votes.
But notice here he says that this suggests that the testing by the states and the federal government was superficial.
So the people that keep telling us we're all wrong We're either too stupid, complicit, compromised, lazy, poorly trained, not curious enough, not concerned enough.
I don't know.
But the people at the state and federal level telling us, oh, everything's fine, nothing to see here.
They were too dumb to even do an accurate test.
Well, you have to create an illusion for the state governments and local governments that this stuff is certified and tested and experts have looked at it.
And you create that kabuki.
And then, of course, that gives your local politicians comfort, because these are expensive systems, and they have to vote on, well, $100 million in Georgia.
I don't know what the cost is.
We have four different systems in Wisconsin, but suppose you add it all up, we're about the same size as Georgia.
It's probably $100 million.
Well, you know, you have to give the people with the public pen comfort, and then they sign your deal, and then your systems are in.
But the question is, if nobody cares about the security and intelligent actors, people who are vastly more intelligent, can get into those systems and manipulate them without anybody knowing.
Maybe the machine companies don't even know.
Then what are you buying?
It's like buying a dump truck that's prone to accidents or something.
You're buying a public good that is causing damage to the public.
And that's why these politicians don't want to hear it.
Nobody wants to hear, oh, he just blew a hundred million dollars on a broken system.
Nobody wants to be that politician because you'll lose your job.
Right.
You'll lose your state pension, you know.
Next paragraph.
Holderman says, my technical findings leave Georgia voters with great diminished grounds to be confident that the votes they cast on this Dominion system, ICX-BMD, are secured.
That their votes will be counted correctly, or that any future elections conducted using Georgia's universal BMD system will be reasonably secure from attack and produce the correct results.
No grand conspiracies would be necessary to commit large-scale fraud, but only rather moderate technical skills of the kind that attackers who are likely to target Georgia's elections already possess.
Wow.
There you go.
All right, let's go to page 6.
Page 6, which he's already made reference to.
That was page... we were just there on page 7.
How did I get page 7 before 6?
Let's see here.
All right, let's go back to page 6 because I have my pages out of order.
Let's go back to page 6.
Here we go.
The ICX BMDs are not sufficiently secured against technical compromise to withstand vote-altering attacks by bad actors who are likely to attack future elections in Georgia.
Adversaries with the necessary sophistication and resources to carry out attacks like those I've shown to be possible, including hostile foreign governments such as Russia.
Which has targeted Georgia's election system in the past.
And domestic political actors whose close associates have recently acquired access to the same Dominion equipment that Georgia uses through audits and litigation in other jurisdictions.
So I'm gonna stop right here.
Holderman is saying the same thing, is he not, that Mike Lindell was saying?
That, hey, foreign actors can hack into these machines and change votes.
Well, we know that.
If you look at the Jill Stein litigation, they made allegations from the Department of Homeland Security that Russia and Iran had hacked into state voter roll systems.
And there was a general from the Department of Defense at a conference about six weeks ago that confirmed that Iran had, in fact, hacked into the state of Illinois, just south of us.
So, when you look at this Haldeman report, it is consistent with what he was saying back in 2016, but his words fall on deaf ears because, you know, while he is screaming from the rooftops that these systems are very risky, nobody locally is taking a look.
They're just simply not buying it.
And that's because they don't want to be publicly embarrassed.
Wow.
Let's go to the next one.
uh he says the ICX BMDs can be compromised to the same extent and or more easier easily than the the ones they replaced both systems have similar weaknesses including readily bypassed user authentication and software validation and susceptibility to malware that spreads from a central point to machines throughout a jurisdiction yet with the BMDs these vulnerabilities tend to be even easier to exploit Then on the DRE system, and it goes on from there.
Another paragraph.
Despite the addition of paper trail, ICX malware can still change individual votes and most election outcomes without
detection.
I think that key word there, without detection.
Election results are determined from ballot QR codes, which malware can modify, yet voters cannot check the QR codes,
match their intent, nor does the state compare them to human-readable ballot text.
Although outcome-changing fraud conducted in this manner could be detected by a risk-limiting audit... Listen now, folks!
Georgia requires a risk-limiting audit only one contest every two years.
So the vast majority of elections and contests have no assurance.
Dan?
Well, that's the problem.
In a risk-limiting audit, if you Google the definition, it's not like an investigation or a full forensic audit.
You take a little sample, and if you find nothing wrong, you say, see, there's nothing wrong, and then everybody's an election denier.
That's what a risk-limiting audit is.
And they're not enough.
But that's the catchphrase.
You hear that in the Republican caucus.
You hear that in the Democratic press.
Oh, a risk-limiting audit is three big words.
And if you have three big words, it sounds important.
Risk-limiting audit.
But the reality is, those are not what you need.
You need to be looking for forensic malware and code in the system.
And you have to be looking at how these counties aggregate their county votes to state totals.
None of that stuff happens in a risk-limiting audit.
Look at page 9, Dan.
Page 9 of the Haldeman Report states that after looking into these machines, Texas declined to certify the Dominion system.
Based on the public test reports, it appears that none of these tests uncovered the critical security issues that I document here.
Talked about California, Pennsylvania, but Texas, they declined to certify these machines and use them.
Is that right?
Well, that's true.
They did a deeper dive, and what they concluded was that it was too risky.
And, you know, they did their homework, they did their analysis, and they refused to certify them.
And Texas is an important, big state.
So the question is, You know, why did other states approve them?
But it's, you know, it's like selling any type of software to the government.
I mean, you try real hard and you get your salespeople and you sign them up.
And the problem with most elected officials is that they are simply very naive.
And they just, you know, they don't grasp the technological risk and they don't really grasp anything other than the time-saving value of a system.
The system saves time, but it's full of risk.
They really have demonstrated that they don't care, and I think that's a really big problem.
Let's go to page 12, top of page 12, under the heading Threats to Georgia Elections.
Here's what Haldeman writes.
Georgia elections face a growing risk of attack by a range of capable adversaries including hostile foreign governments, domestic political actors, and election insiders.
Now let's skip on down here under this phrase here, threat actors, hostile foreign governments.
He writes, Georgia's election system continues to face a high risk of being targeted by hostile foreign governments, such as Russia, which mounted a complex campaign of cyber attacks against U.S.
election infrastructure, including Georgia's, during the 2020-2016 election.
Hostile governments could attempt to hack Georgia's election system to achieve a variety of goals, including causing fraudulent election outcomes.
Russia and other foreign governments continue to threaten Georgia's elections today.
Less than a year ago, the U.S.
intelligence community assessed that foreign threats to the 2020 election included, quote, ongoing and potential activity, unquote, from Russia, China, and Iran.
including that quote foreign efforts to influence our interference with our elections are a direct threat to the
fabric of our democracy in
quote again Mike Lindell has been highly criticized as you probably
know Dan for his documentary
absolute proof in which he is saying China could fool around with machines and change votes, but
here is Holderman quoting the US intelligence community and by that
I'm venturing the guess he's quoting the Director of National Intelligence in the footnote. I'd have
to look it up, but what is your comment?
Well, I think this is a very very serious problem because there's been evidence
algorithms.
Since at least 2016 of foreign interference.
Even our own Wisconsin Election Commission admitted that the Russians had wiggled the doorknob, but they weren't able to get in.
Of course, they had access to the back end.
But the point is, with the absolute proof and the South Dakota conference, the allegations were that there are packet caps, capture the P caps from China.
And if you think about Russia, Iran, And China, these countries are all hostile to the United States, and they have tremendous value in controlling who gets into the White House.
And what all of these reports indicate is that this is real.
This is real stuff.
And the evidence is piling up.
After two and a half years, or I should say six and a half years, it is quite clear that foreign actors can have the ability to control the outcome of American elections.
And it's not just the president.
Keep in mind, the senators run statewide as well.
Governors and elected statewide offices.
So at the end of the day, if our systems, our digital systems, which are designed to make the lives of our clerks easier, are basically throwing our democracy into the drain, we've lost.
Because then we don't control who runs the country.
Others control who runs the country, and we're stuck.
Look at the crazy we have right now in the last In this current administration, I mean, this is every day is another amazing revelation.
And, you know, people, a lot of people believe that Joe Biden didn't win that election.
Well, let's, let's just send orders, put them in.
Why not?
You know, and here we are.
Let's go to page 12 again.
It says here about the middle of the page, "...nation-state actors are among the most well-resourced and technically sophisticated adversaries and some of the most difficult to defend against.
They frequently discover vulnerabilities in widely used software with which they Can compromise protected systems and they capable of creating advanced malicious software tailored for individual high-value targets.
Nation-state actors likely can obtain access to election equipment with which to develop attacks via physical intrusion, theft or by purchasing it under false pretenses.
They also have developed a variety of techniques for infiltrating non-internet connected systems.
Whoa!
Non-internet connected systems, folks!
Including...
By compromising hardware and software supply chains, and by spreading malware on removable media, like thumb drives, right?
That workers use to copy files in and out of protected environments.
Such methods could be used to target the EMS systems that are used to prepare and distribute election definitions, files, For the ICX.
The attackers could then exploit vulnerabilities, I discovered, to spread vote-stealing malware to the ballot-marking devices throughout Georgia.
Then he says, how about, that's foreign threats, how about domestic threats?
In addition to the threats from foreign governments, Georgia's election system faces increasing risk from domestic political actors.
Potentially motivated hackers might seek to directly alter individual votes and thereby change the outcome of a future election through hacking.
Oh, you mean like the CIA?
You mean like the CIA might do that?
And this is why maybe Bill Posey, the U.S.
Congressman from Florida, sent a letter to the Inspector General of the CIA, which we've read and showed on the air, saying there should be an investigation between There should be an investigation about the relationship between the CIA and the voting machine companies.
Could this be the color revolution that I warned about in the summer of 2020 and that last year someone with one of these three-letter agencies at my national conference in the Ozarks Came up to me afterwards and said, uh, when you talk about a color revolution being practiced by the Intel Agency Overseas for decades, and they just carried it out here, you're so over the target you don't even know how over the target you are.
That's all I can tell you, because I've been read in on stuff, I'm pretty sure, and I don't want to go to jail.
So I can't say any more other than you're so over the target, you don't know it, keep saying it.
So I'd like to know if these domestic political actors that can flip elections through hacking might include the CIA.
That's speculation on my part, but it's an educated speculation based on what we know.
U.S.
Senator U.S.
Senator from North Carolina Jesse Helms said, I think it was May of 1984, in the Washington Times, when he accused the CIA of using a color revolution in El Salvador and installing a communist in El Salvador.
And he said the CIA helped this guy and helped him with electronic devices for registering voters to flip that election and install a communist.
Senator Jesse Helms, May 1984, and I have other reasons to say this.
So I'm a little concerned that these domestic actors may be what we know as the Deep State.
Dan?
Well, you know, it gets very complicated very quickly, but as I said, the need to control federal power is overbearing.
It is so valuable.
It's like the Lord of the Rings.
You gotta have that ring, and if you get it, then you turn ugly.
But here's the thing.
When we filed our litigation in federal court, we had, I believe, 18 exhibits that supported the conclusion of serious hacking.
And these were all sworn statements.
Well, some of them were sworn statements.
And the sworn statements that we filed, we actually had the same witness list as the Jill Stein litigation that Perkins Coie used, or at least the local council.
And we had Alex Haldeman and we had Harry Hersey, but we also have sworn affidavits from people in military intelligence who made the very broad claims that these systems are controlled by intelligence.
And those people in their former jobs with intelligence contractors were actually out there flipping elections in other countries for the American government.
But they use a private contractor because they don't want the fingerprints of the government on it.
So, I mean, this stuff, if a sworn affidavit is to be believed, and we do believe, because people are swearing to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and they're saying that there are intelligence community people that have the ability to flip elections.
And in our filings, they made those allegations, and they were consistent with the allegations made in the Jill Stein litigation four years earlier.
Then you have to wonder, as an American citizen, what the heck is going on and who is inside of these systems.
And all of this started after the hanging chads, when the digital machines came in.
Before that, you couldn't flip an election in Amarillo, Wisconsin, and you'd have to go in there.
It wouldn't happen.
But now that it's one giant system, and Eric is involved, and you've got all the states getting together in a national group.
Yeah, it's pretty, for the right people with the right intelligence levels, I'm sure they can get in there and hack all day long and decide outcomes.
It sure looks like that in Wisconsin when you think about how do we have statewide election after statewide election between 17,000, maybe 29,000 votes out of 3 million cast over and over and over again.
When you talk to the statisticians, you know, Dr. Frank and some of the others, they say that is mathematically impossible.
And it continues to this day, this very last election we had.
These numbers are just impossibly close.
Look at this, page 13, my work says, writes Dr. Halderman, my work demonstrates that discovering and exploiting vulnerabilities in the ICX requires only a moderate time investment from technical experts.
In recent months, numerous technically skilled outside parties have gained access.
Now let's go down to election insiders.
As the defendants and their expert Michael Chamas have emphasized, dishonest election insiders also pose a high risk to Georgia elections.
County technicians, vendor support personnel, and poll workers need to have access to election equipment, sometimes without supervision, in order to carry out their job functions.
I detail a wide variety of attacks that could be performed with such access, including affecting ballot marking devices with malware on a wide scale.
Also, discovering vulnerabilities and developing malware likely requires a degree of technical skill beyond that of most election workers.
Malware once developed, listen now, Can be implanted by unskilled attackers.
Dishonest insiders could be recruited or planted by the sophisticated foreign and domestic threat actors described to attack Georgia's voting system in this manner.
So they don't have to attack from overseas, Dan.
They could just have people they pay who are not skilled.
All they got to really know how to do is plug in a USB thumb drive to the right device.
That's all they got to do.
They get paid to do that.
Boom.
Done.
Correct?
Well, that is correct.
And if you look at Wisconsin and the city of Milwaukee, the deputy clerk was just charged with a crime of inventing out of thin air three fake military voters that don't exist.
And having their ballots mailed to one of our state representatives.
She was able to go in, create a fraud against three municipal clerks, not her municipality, but three other municipalities, to create fake people and mail those ballots for some unknown reason.
Well, now she's in the docket waiting for the outcome.
And we also have email from the city of Milwaukee and our Wisconsin Election Commission, who are basically in constant communication with The Zuckerberg CTCL group, the city of Clark was giving the CTCL group daily snapshots of the state voter roll, which cost everybody else $12,500 a peak, but she's giving it away.
We had Clark, the biggest city in the state, the clerk and the deputy, who's now sitting in the docket, they are actively cheating.
And it's insiders who have the ability.
So you take outside ability to flip at the aggregate and you've got insiders at the biggest cities who are working overtime to make sure the Democrats win.
You're up against an insurgency.
You've got people on the ground and you've got people unknown and they're all working together to make sure one outcome happens.
And that happened.
That's why Hillary Clinton lost Wisconsin in 2016.
So somebody did not want that woman in that White House.
And they made sure it didn't happen.
Four years later, you know, they made darn sure Donald Trump didn't get another ride.
So it's very frustrating.
And that's the whole problem is because this is all digital and automated.
If it was all back to the simple act of casting a ballot in a tin box with a police officer watching and counting them up, none of this could happen.
You couldn't stop voter rolls.
You couldn't switch votes.
You couldn't hack machines.
But we've opened the door.
We've spent hundreds of millions of dollars to digitize our right to vote, and surprise, surprise, we have lost the value of our right to vote because nobody can explain this stuff anymore.
look at this uh alderman let's go to page 13 again middle paragraph here voters
under the title voters middle of the paragraph he says non-technical
voters could be recruited by more sophisticated threat actors i
assume only that a dishonest voter has the ability to follow instructions
provided by a more technical criminal and of course there no doubt are many
among the millions in georgia who themselves possess the requisite technical skills to develop and implement one
or more of these hacks i detail here among others not yet identified
under this model i show that even typical voters could potentially
infect georgia ballot marking devices with vote stealing malware
there you go Well, that goes back to the comment that I was having a discussion with somebody else, and this idea of micro-dot technology.
It's been around, you know, if you watch James Bond movies from the 70s, there were micro-dots.
But it is so grossly advanced today with this, and then our stuff they're injecting for the virus.
That it is basically a magnetic dot that looks like somebody colored in an oval.
But there's code, malicious code, embedded in that little dot.
And when you run that ballot through the optical scanner, that code is sucked up in.
I couldn't believe it.
But they said this is known in financial crimes.
That, you know, when you get, you know, dollar bill readers and stuff, you know, that verify a hundred dollar bill, there are ways to circumvent that.
And there are smart people out there.
So if you were going to have one person in the right ward that casts the ballot,
and they're not going to mix the stuff at the polling place.
So we have mail-in ballots.
You can mail that ballot in somewhere where there's no central count, there's no marking
on the ballot that matches it to the envelope.
So once the envelope is open and your ballot's in the machine, the code is in the machine,
your ballot's in the machine, and nobody knows which envelope it came out of.
Well, look, in fact, let me...
That's how these guys can do this.
Let me wrap it up with this, because that fits with what you're saying.
He says, I will show how attackers can manipulate ICX ballots through attacks on the ballot marking device printer, or on the ICX software.
By either of these means, attackers could apply two different strategies for altering votes.
Attackers could cause the ballot marking device to print QR codes that differ from voters' selections while leaving the human-readable text of the ballot unchanged.
Since voters cannot read QR codes unaided, they would be unable to detect the alterations.
Since the QR code is the only part of the ballot that scanners count, the impact would be a change to the tabulation of those individual votes affected and potentially to take the election results.
The only known safeguard that can rule out such an attack is to compare the human readable text on every voted ballot to the QR codes, which Georgia has never done in any election and which does not appear to be required or anticipated for future elections.
And then he goes on a few pages later, and I guess we'll have to get to this another night, but he goes on a few pages later over on page 20.
If we flip on over to page 20...
We see that this changing of the votes through the paper, he says right here in the middle, I show that weaknesses in the QR code design make it possible to manipulate ballots in spite of a security mechanism intended to alternate the QR codes.
Finally, I demonstrate that attackers can automatically manipulate ballots cast on the ICX with no access to the BMD itself, but instead attacking the attached off-the-shelf laser printer.
I show how such an attack can be implemented by adding concealed malicious hardware to the printer, which could be accomplished as part of a supply chain attack.
Dominion's documentation claims that QR codes are encrypted, and at least as recently as January 2021, Secretary of State Chief Operating Officer Gabriel Sterling has repeated his claim to the media as a security feature of Georgia's voting system.
In actuality, as I testified last year, no part of the QR codes is encrypted.
While voters have no practical way to read or verify the votes encoded in the QR codes, they can be decoded by attackers and can be replaced or manipulated to steal voters' votes.
So you're telling me the chief operating officer in Georgia has not been telling the truth?
Shocker!
Closing comment, Dan?
Well, I think the answer is to get rid of the machines, and Mike Lindell is absolutely right.
The technology is spinning out of control.
Wait till AI gets involved, and it decides who's going to win the election for you.
You don't even have to go to the poll anymore.
It's time to shut these machines off, unplug them, and go back to hand-voting.
This is what we have to do in America.
There's no technological way around the fact that these machines and these systems are that are manipulated by smarter people than you and I.
Dan Eastman, the website's ProfessorEastman.com, right Dan?
Yep, that's right. ProfessorEastman.com, you can catch his daily show over on my
channel, WVWTV.com, he's got a daily 30-minute show over there, folks. Check it out, it's on demand as
well, WVWTV.com, Dan Eastman, ProfessorEastman.com is his website.
Thank you, Dan, appreciate it. Thanks for the invite.
Talk to you soon, Brandon.
Great job.
Great job.
Dan Eastman checking in, folks.
All right, that's the Lindell Report.
Brandon House in for Mike Lindell, who's out on business tonight.
If you appreciate what we're doing, folks, we need your support.
Where else are you going to see an hour like this?
Fox News going to take an hour and do what we just did?
I don't think many broadcast outlets will do what we just did.
And yet that's the public service we provide.
This is a national security issue.
If you appreciate what we're doing, we need your support.
Would you please go right now to MyPillow.com.
Sheet, towels, blankets, pet beds, slippers, sandals, mattresses, mattress toppers, and robes.
You can get them right now.
Discounted prices on those slippers, slides, and sandals.
Giza Dream Sheets.
Six-piece MyPillow Towel Set.
Use that promo code L77.
L77.
For Michael Lindell and Brandon House, thanks for watching.
Take care.
▲
Export Selection