Connect with us


Trump’s attorneys battle for ‘legitimate votes’ as concern mounts over voting systems



sidney powell flynn attorney

In 2010 and 2015 concerns grew over the use of Smartmatic voting machines in the Philippine general elections. Those concerns were well-publicized in newspapers around the world, the web, and on local cable news outlets throughout the Philippine nation.

In the United States, similar concerns and allegations of fraud have surfaced after the Nov. 3 general elections, some of these concerns suggested that the voting system’s software may have skewed the votes in the direction of former Vice President Joe Biden. The seeds of doubt — whether alleged fraud or glitches in the system – have surfaced all over the Internet. It makes it difficult to decipher what can be true, what are false claims and what needs to be investigated.

Those concerns have become more pervasive as President Donald Trump’s legal team works to prove that there was actual fraud in the 2020 general election. It won’t be easy.

There are significant and troubling questions regarding the allegations of fraud against Smartmatic and Dominion voting systems, which were used, said Trump’s legal team.

The witness affidavit, which was made public on Tuesday, states:

” I was a witness to the creation and operation of a sophisticated electronic voting system that permitted the leaders of the Venezuelan government to manipulate the tabulation of votes for national and local elections and select the winner of those elections in order to gain and maintain their power.

Importantly, I was a direct witness to the creation and operation of an electronic voting system in a conspiracy between a company known as Smartmatic and the leaders of conspiracy with the Venezuelan government. This conspiracy specifically involved President Hugo Chavez Frias, the person in charge of the National Electoral Council named Jorge Rodriguez, and principals, representatives, and personnel from Smartmatic which included purpose of this conspiracy was to create and operate a voting system that could change the votes in elections from votes against persons running the Venezuelan government to votes in their favor in order to maintain control of the government.

Affidavit obtained by Sidney Powell, Attorney for President Trump

It sounds incredible, but with what we’ve discovered over the past four years with the FBI’s malfeasance in investigating President Donald Trump and the debunked claims that his administration was tied with Russia, it doesn’t surprise me one bit that there could be malfeasance in the election. But proving it is an entirely different story.

The New York Times, Washington Post, and other mainstream media outlets are again working overtime to ensure that anyone who questions the validity of the election is deemed a conspiracy theorist. This is what they do now, instead of their job, which is, by the way, to investigate all claims and be a watchdog over the government.

The American people, as well as journalists, absolutely should question everything after what was discovered in the Russia hoax against Trump over the past four years.

It doesn’t mean that the allegations are true but it is part of the checks and balances and should be investigated.

These former government sources who I spoke with, have eyewitnesses that they say were privy to the software’s development. These eyewitnesses have given affidavits that the system is corruptible because the initial software was designed under former Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez in his effort to steal the 2006 election. They believe the same initial software designed by Smartmatic is still in place in the system, which is directly affiliated with Dominion Voting Systems.

However, Dominion Voting System, which is based in Denver, says its systems are tamperproof and its voting equipment serves about 40% of U.S. voters in across 28 states, along with Puerto Rico.

Hacking the Dominion Voting Machines

These claims of fraud these companies say are baseless. But computer experts have contested the company’s claims that the systems are hack proof and have noted that it is quite simple to do so.

Princeton Professor Andrew Appel says the hacking is as simple as replacing the computer’s memory chip with one of his own and it would only take seven minutes alone with a screwdriver.

Dominion Voting systems, however, point to a joint memo issued he members of Election Infrastructure Government Coordinating Council (GCC) Executive Committee – Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) that there was no fraud in the 2020 general election stating that the 2020 election is secured.

Dominion has absolutely denied any wrong doing and said this memo is clear evidence that there is no concern that the systems they operate were compromised.

“The November 3rd election was the most secure in American history. Right now, across the country, election officials are reviewing and double-checking the entire election process prior to finalizing the result,” the joint statement said. “When states have close elections, many will recount ballots. All of the states with close results in the 2020 presidential race have paper records of each vote, allowing the ability to go back and count each ballot if necessary. This is an added benefit for security and resilience. This process allows for the identification and correction of any mistakes or errors. There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

Affidavits Alleges A Different Story

Still, the insistence that the election was free of fraud is not proof that it was free of fraud. Why? Because the question regarding the software has not been answered, says Trump’s legal team. Moreover, it doesn’t answer the questions as to the possibility that the alleged software could be compromised and the now on the record affidavits from eyewitnesses that were given Trump’s attorney Sidney Powell, and others, that suggest something far more nefarious could allegedly plaguing the voting software that is used around the world.

Powell, who is also representing former national security advisor Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, says she has the evidence against the software companies that will prove that there was fraud in the 2020 Presidential election.

She appeared on Lou Dobbs Tuesday to discuss an affidavit delivered to her directly by sources who witnessed the creation of the underlying software.

I have seen and reviewed parts of the affidavit Powell has discussed with Dobbs. The sources, whom I have known for some time, shared the information with me and have attested that the affidavits are based on information provided by credible sources that were connected directly to Chavez regime.

The former high ranking Venezuelan military officer noted in the affidavit that Smartmatic was “designed in a way that they system could change the vote of each voter without being detected. He (Chavez) wanted the software itself to function in such a manner that if the voter were to place their thumbprint or fingerprint on a scanner, the thumbprint would be tied to the record of the voters name and identity as having voted but that it would not be tracked to the changed vote.”

“(Chavez) made it clear that the system would have to be set up but would not leave any evidence of the changed vote for a specific voter – that there would be no evidence to show and nothing to contradict that the fingerprint or thumbprint was going with a changed vote. Smartmatic agreed to create such a system and produce the software and hardware that accomplished the results for president Chavez, ” stated Powell to Dobbs, who read parts of the affidavit over her phone interview.

“After the Smartmatic electoral management system was put in place, he observed several elections where the results were manipulated using the Smartmatic software, one such election was December 2006, when Chavez was running against Rosales. Chavez won with a landslide against Rosales, with a margin of nearly 6 million votes for Chavez, versus 3.7 million for Rosales,” Powell read to Dobb’s audience from the affidavit.

The information provided in the affidavits by the witnesses is enough to raise serious questions and concerns about the Smartmatic software. The questionable nature of the software tinges the U.S. election and for that matter, any election conducted anywhere in the world that used the same systems to vote.

Smartmatic isn’t just a concern in the United States but the issue was central to the 2015 elections in the Philippines, as well.

In an interview on ANC news in the Philippines, Mark Malloch-Brown admitted that there was a licensing agreement between Smartmatic and Dominion Voting Systems. Malloch-Brown is the chairman of Smartmatic, and he is also a member of the board of George Soros’s Open Society Foundation. However, there is no indication that Soros has any investments in Smartmatic or Dominion Voting Systems.

In 2015, a journalist interviewing Malloch-Brown questioned his denial that Smartmatic was not developed in Venezuela. She noted that “allegedly Smartmatic had ties with the late” dictator Hugo Chavez.

“Well, I think the big word is ‘allegedly,'” Malloch-Brown said in 2015, and went onto say that one of the developers was then living in Florida.

“Ok, the question that people’s minds are why is Smartmatic still here in the Philippines after reports that it had violated provisions of the election automated law on number one, for example, that it was never supposed to be allowed to bid in the 2010 elections because it did not actually own the software, Dominion Voting systems actually owned the software, plus the difficulty, which Smartmatic had to put the com elect through (? 1:09) just to access the source code, those issues like that, people say we should not be subjected to Smartmatic this time around,” the reporter said.

“Well, look I think that’s competitors who say that,” said Malloch-Brown. “The fact is that part of our technology is licensed from Dominion but you tell me a large technology company which isn’t using in part, licenses from other companies.”

In a recent report in the New York Times, which is constantly trying to downplay, debunk or ridicule any questions regarding Republican concerns that the election systems could have been hacked or used for fraud, the paper noted:

Smartmatic has been used in elections around the world. In Venezuela’s election, the software was manipulated to report a skewed tally. But the company said that it was an anomaly and cited the lack of election monitors as part of the problem. In the United States, monitors from both parties are allowed to watch vote counting.

In the tweet, Mr. Giuliani appeared to backtrack on an earlier claim that Dominion Voting Systems, which makes the secure software used by voting machines, was involved in changing tallies, claiming that the company was in fact a “front” for Smartmatic, which he claimed was really doing the computing.

Why is The New York Times so quick to buy the explanation from Smartmatic that the software was manipulated but it was just an anomaly. This was not an anomaly in the Venezuelan election, said a former U.S. intelligence official who worked in Venezuela for decades and told me that “cheating, working with the Cubans and stealing elections was what Chavez and his men did. I don’t buy the anomaly explanation and I don’t think it should be brushed off.”

“Whatever happens with the election, Americans should feel confident in the system,” said the U.S. official. “I’m concerned that the stench of cheating is all over this U.S. election – we at least should find out.”

You can follow Sara A. Carter on Parler @SaraCarterOfficial or on Twitter @SaraCarterDC

You may like

Continue Reading


Meta to reinstate Trump’s Facebook, Instagram ‘in coming weeks’




Meta’s president of Global Affairs Nick Clegg announced former President Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts will be reinstated “in coming weeks” after a more than two-year suspension.

“Our determination is that the risk [to public safety] has sufficiently receded,” Meta Clegg said in a blog post. “As such, we will be reinstating Mr. Trump’s Facebook and Instagram accounts in the coming weeks. However, we are doing so with new guardrails in place to deter repeat offenses.”

Twitter restored Trump’s account in November following its takeover by billionaire Elon Musk, but the former president has not yet resumed tweeting. Therefore it is unclear if he will use any of his former social media platforms, or instead remain on his own social media platform, Truth Social.

Clegg said “We just do not want — if he is to return to our services — for him to do what he did on January 6, which is to use our services to delegitimize the 2024 election, much as he sought to discredit the 2020 election.”

New “guardrails” include new policies around restricting accounts by public figures during civil unrest. Under those policies, Meta can decide to restrict the account of a public figure that violates its community standards for a time ranging from one month to two years.

“If he now posts further violating content, that content will be removed, of course, and he could be suspended for between one month and two years, depending on the severity of the violation,” Clegg said.

Posts will also be able to be limited on distribution without removing them or temporarily restricting access to its advertising tools. “Oblique references to QAnon content, for instance … is the kind of material that — even if it’s done obliquely, and doesn’t violate our community standards — we would seek to restrict the distribution of the content and/or restrict his ability to advertise,” added Clegg.


You may like

Continue Reading

Trending Now



Proudly Made In America | © 2022 M3 Media Management, LLC