- Report released by Michigan court today
- Dominion software said to have an incredibly high 68% error rate, "by design"
- 2020 election data illegally deleted on Nov. 4, according to the Plaintiff's forensic report
- Plaintiff's attorney claims the forensics exam proves fraud, which Dominion and Antrim County, Michigan officials deny
- Plaintiff’s attorney says the forensics explain the mysterious 6,000 vote "accident" in Antrim County, in which Biden was incorrectly declared the winner until a correction showed Trump actually won
A constitutional lawyer representing a Michigan Antrim County voter has released what he calls an "explosive" forensics exam of two Dominion voting machines.
It is the first known forensics exam of machines used in the disputed 2020 election where Republican Donald Trump claims to have had the race stolen by Democrat Joe Biden through widespread fraud.
Biden, his supporters, most of the media, and many officials say the claims of having the election "stolen" are spurious and without evidence.
Hundreds of people claim to have witnessed election day improprieties ranging from sloppiness and unintentional errors to outright fraud. Some of them have testified before hearings and filed sworn declarations.
A Michigan judge cleared the way for the release of the forensics report today.
Constitutional attorney Matthew DePerno represents resident William Bailey in the court challenge that claims Bailey's vote was not proven to have been counted in the 2020 presidential election due to improprieties or fraud.
As part of the case, the judge allowed DePerno's forensic team to examine two Antrim County Dominion Voting machines.
Among the findings, according to the report released today, somebody improperly deleted the 2020 election data, which is required by law to be maintained.
An examination of the software used in the election, according to the forensic report, shows that it was intentionally designed with vulnerabilities that open it up for potential fraud.
The error rate of the voting machines is allowed to be no more than fractional, under federal law. However, DePerno says the software in the Dominion machines showed that a 68% error rate was built into them.
That means 68 out of every 100 votes would be sent to what he calls an unsupervised process for "adjudication." That's where he say an official, unmonitored, would have the ability to change votes or assign them to the opposing candidate.
DePerno claims the report proves fraud in the election and has implications far beyond Antrim County.
Antrim County had an unusual election snafu where Biden was declared the winner until some residents in the reliably Republican county raised red flags. Ultimately, it was learned that Trump actually won the county. Conflicting explanations have been given for the mistaken results. Antrim officials first stated that a software issue had caused a glitch. Later, other officials claimed it was human error and not machine related (nor nefarious). When asked why one county election official had first blamed a software problem, a state investigator said he did not know.
DePerno says the forensic report explains the chaos in Antrim County.
Those accused in the improprieties deny having done anything wrong. Michigan Elections Director Jonathan Brater filed a statement with the court claiming the forensic report by the Plaintiffs "makes a series of unsupported conclusions, ascribes motives of fraud and obfuscation to processes that are easily explained as routine election procedures or error corrections, and suggests without explanation that elements of election software not used in Michigan are somehow responsible for tabulation or reporting errors that are either nonexistent or easily explained.”
Dominion Voting Systems has also steadfastly denied the widespread allegations of improprieties or fraud.
Dominion's position on all allegations can be found here: https://www.dominionvoting.com/election2020-setting-the-record-straight/
Dominion says the following:
All 2020 election audits and recounts using Dominion technology have validated the accuracy and reliability of results, confirming the integrity of election outcomes.
Baseless claims about the integrity of the system or the accuracy of the results have been dismissed by election authorities, subject matter experts and third-party fact-checkers.
Malicious and misleading false claims about Dominion have resulted in dangerous levels of threats and harassment against the company and its employees, as well as election officials.
In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice earlier stated that it had found no evidence of widespread voter fraud. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) stated that the 2020 election was "the most secure in American history," adding, "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”
Listen to the interview with DePerno by clicking the link below. Transcript follows.
Matthew DePerno:The gist of the lawsuit alleged that the election in Antrim County was not fair. There was a switch of votes in the county and in particular, there were several down ballot issues, including a school board election where we saw votes flipped on election night and we wanted to test the accuracy of the election and ensure that my client's vote was actually counted.
Sharyl Attkisson:And is this ultimately though to help with the presidential election?
Matthew DePerno:It's ultimately to help in any way that it can help. I don't work with the Trump campaign. I'm not part of his legal team, but certainly if this helps them, then that would be great.
Sharyl Attkisson:And so it's my understanding you accomplished quite a bit because you got the judge to agree to let you examine some of the voting machines in question, is that correct?
Matthew DePerno:Correct. He allowed us to take forensic images of the 16 SIM cards, the 16 flash drives and the main election server that is held in the county building in Antrim County.
Sharyl Attkisson:And are those Dominion voting machines?
Matthew DePerno:They are.
Sharyl Attkisson:And what did you find, or what did your expert find?
Matthew DePerno:Well, what we found is the system is set up in a way to create massive errors. It has a 68% error rate, no matter what software version you're running. If you're running the latest software version you're still going to get 68% error rate, which is higher than the federal limit of one in 125,000. So what happens is you push a ballot-
Sharyl Attkisson:So the voting machines by federal law must have an accuracy rate that's so good there's only fractional tiny errors that could be found?Matthew
DePerno:Correct. One in 125,000 ballots is the acceptable limit.Sharyl Attkisson:And instead it was what? 68 in 100?
Matthew DePerno:Yeah, 68% is what the machines actually run it.
Sharyl Attkisson:Is there any doubt about that?
Matthew DePerno:No, none at all.
Sharyl Attkisson:And so if there was an error, explain how that could be used in a way that it would worry your client. Does that send them for some sort of adjudication where they can be manipulated?
Matthew DePerno:Yes, that's exactly where they go. So 68% of the ballots go into a file where they're then sent somewhere for bulk adjudication by someone with zero oversight.
Sharyl Attkisson:And how many votes are we talking about in Antrim County?
Matthew DePerno:In Antrim County, there were 16,044 ballots cast.
Sharyl Attkisson:Does the examination that you did extrapolate to other counties and other states, or is there any way to know? Is this an anomaly there?
Matthew DePerno:It's definitely not an anomaly. It's the way the software is intended to run. So yes, it would extrapolate to all other counties in Michigan, 48 other counties in Michigan that run this software.
Sharyl Attkisson:What about other states?
Matthew DePerno:Every state that runs Dominion.
Sharyl Attkisson:So this is something that comes with a software and not something according to your forensics that somebody in the state or in a county somehow reprogrammed or changed?
Matthew DePerno:No, nothing like that. The Secretary of State right after the election, Jocelyn Benson came out and said this was human error because one precinct in Antrim County did not do an update on the software before the election.
Sharyl Attkisson:I remember that.
Matthew DePerno:Bu what we found-
Sharyl Attkisson:Wasn't that something like 6,000 votes were at issue that had done something switchy?
Matthew DePerno:Yes. Yeah. So on election night Antrim County flipped. It went from... It just flipped the exact opposite. Joe Biden won 60% to 40%, which isn't true, but the votes just flipped. They were just reversed.
Sharyl Attkisson:Well, is there a way to show that what... Is there a way to show that what you found means that Donald Trump won that county or that there was some other result? Is there any way to know?
Matthew DePerno:Well, we know that Donald Trump won the county because after the flip was recognized by residents, they called the County Clerk and said, "You need to fix this." So the County Clerk looked into it and did fix the results and they flipped right back once the County Clerk realized what happened.
Sharyl Attkisson:And was that the 6,000 votes or was that a different number?
Matthew DePerno::Yes. That was the 6,000 votes.
Sharyl Attkisson:What would they say to the fact that you have a forensics exam, but they claimed, as you said, at the time that first they said it was a software issue, but then they said it was human error. That's in conflict with what you found, right?
Matthew DePerno:Yeah. That's their story is that it was human error but what we found is it's not human error. The software is designed to create errors. That's part of the programming. That's how it works. Even if you're running the latest version of the software, it's still going to have 68% errors. Those ballots go into an adjudication file. They're bulk adjudicated by someone, somewhere with no oversight and then sent back to the machine for tabulation. That's how the software works. That's how it's designed to work.
Sharyl Attkisson:Why did the judge keep this report under seal until today, do you know?
Matthew DePerno:Well, when he initially gave us permission to conduct our forensic examination, he entered a protective order out of caution that he wanted to see our motives, I believe, and ensure that we weren't coming in for some malicious reason just to grab the Dominion code and release it to the world. And that's pretty standard in any lawsuit when you're dealing with proprietary information or software or source code. So he did nothing wrong there and once we conducted our examination, I went back to him with a motion that I filed on Friday and I asked him if we could release the findings of our report. I had to send the report to him and opposing counsel. They all reviewed it and the judge made his decision today that, but for a couple of redactions, we could release the report.
Sharyl Attkisson:Now the other side takes issue, right? Saying there's misunderstandings and misinterpretations.
Matthew DePerno:Of course they do because Secretary Benson lied to everyone when she said this is human error. And keep in mind that this is a small county in Michigan. The people who run the elections are generally elderly people in each precinct. They're just trying to help out. Secretary Benson spent $0 through the CARES Act in the last two years training people on this software. Instead, she spent millions of dollars putting Zucker boxes in Detroit.
Matthew DePerno:So when this software runs properly, what that means is it's actually generating errors for mass adjudication function.
Sharyl Attkisson:What's a Zucker box?
Matthew DePerno:That's the proper function. So, but then they have cover to blame people. That's how it's functioning. When an error occurs, it's someone else's fault. It's a human error. That's their back cover for stealing votes.
Sharyl Attkisson:What is a Zucker box?
Matthew DePerno:A Zucker box is those boxes they put all around in the big cities. The Democrat runs cities funded by Zuckerberg for ballot collection, mail-in ballot collection, absentee ballot collection, and any other ballots they wanted to collect. So keep in mind this software, even if you don't vote for anyone, if you have a blank ballot, you run it through the machine, it just generates an error which goes for mass adjudication. Doesn't reject the ballot. It sends it into the mass adjudication file.
Sharyl Attkisson:Well, there was a video online that showed an example of a blank ballot going into a machine and the adjudicator was able to fill it out and have it accepted as a legitimate vote. Is that what you're talking about?
Matthew DePerno:Right. That's the process. That's actually how the program is coded. That's the software's intent. That's Dominion's intent.
Sharyl Attkisson:What can be done with the information? What is the judge... Depending on the ruling, what happens? And when do you expect that?
Matthew DePerno:Well, he already made his ruling today. He allowed us to release the report.
Sharyl Attkisson:But is there a bigger decision that determines whether your client's vote was wasted or not? Or is this it?
Matthew DePerno:Sure. Now we'll go through discovery and we'll have a trial just like a normal case. That's exactly what would happen. Now we go through discovery and proceed, take depositions, et cetera.
Sharyl Attkisson:And through the discovery process, do you think you can get potentially at the heart of how this programming was done, how the software was designed?
Matthew DePerno:Well, I'm not sure that's much of an issue anymore, but sure. I guess we'll take that up through the discovery process. We understand how it was designed and we understand how it works.
Sharyl Attkisson:Well, the question would be if you found... My question would be, if you found the designer and you could put them under oath and ask what was the purpose for creating such a system, and were other systems like this and was there any coordination, any sort of plot or scheme, or is this just something that happened by itself?
Matthew DePerno:Sure. I think we'll be able to get into all of that stuff and try to figure all of that stuff out. I think that'll be part of the process we go through here, but I think we have a very good idea of what the intent was already. But you can fill in the blanks as we move forward through discovery, our case doesn't end and we still want to ensure that my client's ballot was counted.
Sharyl Attkisson:If the judge were to find in your favor down the road, that your client's ballot was not counted properly, what happens or what's the potential remedy?
Matthew DePerno:Well, I think his ballot has to be counted, but right now, what we know is that when we looked into the log files in the Dominion system, we found log files for the elections going back to 2018, '16, and '14. They had the election logs going back that far. For this race, all of the election logs, the tabulation logs, system files, including the files that would show us internet connections had all been removed. They were removed on November 4th.
Sharyl Attkisson:And were you able to recover them?
Matthew DePerno:We have not been able to recover them yet. We're still searching. We've only had the data for a week.
Sharyl Attkisson:Is this a potential criminal matter? In other words, that's probably not your concern, but has somebody contacted you or has anybody from the Trump campaign been in touch today?
Matthew DePerno:Well, no one has contacted me from the state of Michigan and they should have, I would have thought by now. No one from the state police. Dana Nessel's office is completely silent. She's the Attorney General here in Michigan. No word yet from Governor Whitmer, no word from the state police. I can't infer people's intent based on... Because I haven't interviewed them yet. All I can do is read statutes and statutes make it a crime to delete election records for 22 months after an election. And we know for a fact that these records were deleted on November 4th.
Sharyl Attkisson:I know you have other things to do today and I'd love to talk more, but I am going to let you go and I may have some follow-up questions to come at you with. Is there anything else you wanted to say right now?
Matthew DePerno:Nope. I think this is quite explosive. This report that we put out today and it shows that the Dominion voting system is designed to corrupt the election process.And certainly the Antrim County election results should be de-certified.
Sharyl Attkisson:How far ahead was a Joe Biden in Michigan? Do you know?
Matthew DePerno:I think he was a hundred. I'm going to guess so don't quote me on that. About 160,000. Donald Trump was ahead by about 400,000 going into 2:00 AM when they stopped counting votes at the TFC Center in Detroit and then you saw that massive injection of votes. So that's how it happened.
Sharyl Attkisson:Would what you found imply that the other elections were conducted the same way in the past or just this one?Matthew DePerno:We don't know that yet, but certainly we can say that this election was fraudulent.