Mike Lindell and sealing documents

[Trunkage]

A judge sealed a report in July about the capability of people hacking into voting machine. They even used school children who were easily able to do it. This was seperate to the fact that there hasn't been provable hacking of voting machine. Which, apparently, the report says hasn't happened yet (obs, because we havent seen it yet.)

The judge sealed it because she was worried of Project Veritas, Tucker and Lindell making up what the report says. She's not wrong... but I dont think sealing it helped whatsoever

Judge’s Election Nightmare Comes True: The MyPillow Guy Has Entered the Chat

U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg was concerned that bad-faith actors would exploit a cybersecurity researcher’s report on voting machines. Mike Lindell is proving her right.

www.thedailybeast.com

Anyway, Lindell has FOI'd the report, so it coming out anyway.

I have no idea why you'd think sealing it would stop anything but now there is proof of government cover up

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

 

[CM156]

Mike Lindell is never going to shut up about this election, will he?

 

[Trunkage]

Mike Lindell is never going to shut up about this election, will he?

Well, with deformation cases, he's now back into a corner. He has to prove he's right or he will pay. He was already rabid enough without that pressure

So, no.

 

[Gordon_4]

A judge sealed a report in July about the capability of people hacking into voting machine. They even used school children who were easily able to do it. This was seperate to the fact that there hasn't been provable hacking of voting machine. Which, apparently, the report says hasn't happened yet (obs, because we havent seen it yet.)

The judge sealed it because she was worried of Project Veritas, Tucker and Lindell making up what the report says. She's not wrong... but I dont think sealing it helped whatsoever

Judge’s Election Nightmare Comes True: The MyPillow Guy Has Entered the Chat

U.S. District Judge Amy Totenberg was concerned that bad-faith actors would exploit a cybersecurity researcher’s report on voting machines. Mike Lindell is proving her right.

www.thedailybeast.com

Anyway, Lindell has FOI'd the report, so it coming out anyway.

I have no idea why you'd think sealing it would stop anything but now there is proof of government cover up

It can be argued sealing the report from public view will keep the current exploits from being used by other bad faith actors until they can be patched out and otherwise eliminated. Which in the process will create new ones but that’s the nature of the beast. I mean they’re probably well known by now in the right communities but there’s no sense leaving it out for every script kiddy and wannabe revolutionary to make use of.

Also while I have no doubt some school children are exceptional at hacking - one guy I went to high school with I’m told became a white hat in the private sector - but it’s hardly “hacking” if the exploit is some fuckwit not creating a password more complicated than ‘Password’. And shit like that truly is the source of nine out of ten issues.

 

[Eacaraxe]

A judge sealed a report in July about the capability of people hacking into voting machine. They even used school children who were easily able to do it. This was seperate to the fact that there hasn't been provable hacking of voting machine. Which, apparently, the report says hasn't happened yet (obs, because we havent seen it yet.)

...other than the fiasco in Ohio (specifically, Cuyahoga county) in 2006? That right there was the first major -- and only necessary -- dead canary to demonstrate exactly how vulnerable electronic voting is to tampering.

The notion of a third party waltzing into a precinct on Election Day and maliciously tampering with machines -- as it's always been portrayed in the media -- is utter nonsense. Now, the week or night before Election Day when the machines are updated, programmed, and calibrated, usually by subcontractors or unelected officials with unfettered access to the machines and practically zero scrutiny or accountability...that's where the problem lies.

 

[Gordon_4]

...other than the fiasco in Ohio (specifically, Cuyahoga county) in 2006? That right there was the first major -- and only necessary -- dead canary to demonstrate exactly how vulnerable electronic voting is to tampering.

The notion of a third party waltzing into a precinct on Election Day and maliciously tampering with machines -- as it's always been portrayed in the media -- is utter nonsense. Now, the week or night before Election Day when the machines are updated, programmed, and calibrated, usually by subcontractors or unelected officials with unfettered access to the machines and practically zero scrutiny or accountability...that's where the problem lies.

I’d love to think people like this are cleared to the highest level but I think we both know that’s a hilarious pipe dream. So I dunno, maybe go back to paper voting?

 

[Trunkage]

...other than the fiasco in Ohio (specifically, Cuyahoga county) in 2006? That right there was the first major -- and only necessary -- dead canary to demonstrate exactly how vulnerable electronic voting is to tampering.

The notion of a third party waltzing into a precinct on Election Day and maliciously tampering with machines -- as it's always been portrayed in the media -- is utter nonsense. Now, the week or night before Election Day when the machines are updated, programmed, and calibrated, usually by subcontractors or unelected officials with unfettered access to the machines and practically zero scrutiny or accountability...that's where the problem lies.

I don't know what the report says but I highly suspect that there are many things like this that arent right with voting machine

I would point out that the same problem applies paper voting. I don't mind saying that there are some voting security issues. I'm just not making it up like Lindell

 

[Dalisclock]

Well, with deformation cases, he's now back into a corner. He has to prove he's right or he will pay. He was already rabid enough without that pressure

So, no.

He's said he's a Recovering/Recovered Crack Addict. I'm not convinced of the "Recovering" part to be honest.

 

[Eacaraxe]

I’d love to think people like this are cleared to the highest level but I think we both know that’s a hilarious pipe dream. So I dunno, maybe go back to paper voting?

Frankly, no voting system is going to be proof against fraud. Electoral fraud comes in so many iterations and methodologies it's near-impossible to solve for all its forms, or even track. Hell, as we've seen beyond shadow of doubt between the 2016, 2018, and 2020 elections, the most effective form of electoral fraud isn't even illegal; officials and party elites can effect favorable outcomes simply by inequitably choosing precinct locations, and distributing voting machines by type and number in those precincts.

The best-possible solution is actually the opposite of what this judge did; the strongest weapon a voting populace has against fraud is transparency, such that when it occurs, it is easily discoverable and those responsible held accountable. Secrecy in electoral processes never works in citizens' favor. Counter-intuitively, that means electoral software needs to be open source and public domain, machines need to be held to a federal standard and the distribution of those machines and precincts regulated, and access to those machines need to be monitored not by "party overseers" or "private contractors" but the general public. To that I'd add, electronic voting machines' tallies need to be uploaded simultaneously and independently to a public server in addition to election boards' private servers, while paper receipts printed and held with due diligence and chain of custody.

But, bigger picture. Major instances of electoral fraud in the US are so uncommon, simply because it's cost-prohibitive to commit electoral fraud in the first place. Electoral fraud is risky and expensive; controlling who gets nominations, manufacturing consent for chosen candidates, and lobbying once they're in office is cheaper by comparison and risk-free.

Compare the shitshow in Iowa in 2020, to the Super Tuesday shitshow. The state and federal Democratic parties straight-up rigged the Iowa caucus, and not only did they lose anyways, it completely blew up in their face. That forced the federal party to resort to good old-fashioned horse trading in smoke-filled back rooms to socially engineer the Super Tuesday outcome; that was a ridiculous, transparent hack job, but it was an effective hack job in spite of its ridiculousness and transparency. Bear in mind, this was three years after Democratic party counsel admitted in federal court the party engaged in malicious behavior to influence primaries' outcome in favor of Clinton, but the party could not legally have committed harm because as a private organization, it reserves sole right to choose its nominee independent from primary outcomes.