Data Expert Describes How Democrats Can Fabricate Votes – Turns Out An Election Can Be Rigged

0Shares

Also Describes Critical Security Flaws That Have Not Been Addressed

Russell Ramsland, a partner in Allied Security Operations says his company’s investigations of our electronic election systems show that votes can be changed on a large scale. Votes can also be changed at the voting location, at the tabulation software level and in the actual database. Someone could even change the voting software itself.

Ramsland states that his firm initially started looking at election data logs from the Dallas elections in 2018 when there was an unexpected “blue wave.” The more Ramsland’s cyber team looked at the logs, the more discrepancies they found in security practices, flaws, and vulnerabilities.

Ramsland, importantly, provides his assessment of anomalies he and his team see with the 2020 election results. Ramsland notes the points at which the data injection in the Michigan and Pennsylvania election counts appear anomalous. The video below is queued to the end of the interview where Ramsland presents his insights into whether we are looking at voter or election fraud but clearly believes there are major problems with the integrity of the 2020 election. Ramsland says he has attempted to go to the FBI to detail his firm’s findings regarding major security flaws and vulnerabilities of the election system. He has made some inroads into DHS field level officials, but their findings were not able to be moved up the chain of command. Ramsland also attempted to get a meeting with the Cyber Intelligence Security Agency within DHS, but his team was only granted a phone call.

Ramsland says he doesn’t know whether the FBI doesn’t want to take what might be a political “hot potato” or whether they simply do not have the technical expertise to deal with these issues.

The entire video is worth listening to and Ramsland does a very good job of attempting to explain to a non-expert, but there is a lot of detail provided in the interview. Here are some of the highlights from his interview with CDMedia’s L.Todd Wood.

  • The election data for 28 U.S. states is stored on databases not on U.S. soil, but in servers in Europe.
  • Their cyber team found 1,027 times a “warning” that votes exceeded ballots in the Dallas race. Each time is not one singular vote, but rather a “tranche” of data.
  • Hard database resets that can eliminate any tools on the system which e.g. could send data elsewhere, could allow data to be uploaded, etc.
  • They found instances in Dallas where data appeared to be being uploading from outside the “election system.”
  • They learned there was already evidence collected by reputable data security firms outlining all of these vulnerabilities – this was already out there. Those vulnerabilities he says, are still out there on these election systems; they have not been closed or fixed.
  • They found that “audit logs” showed a number of discrepancies which could indicate that data from outside the election system.
  • They state that an election official can alter votes on the system.
  • A high-level view of the election system shows there are no security standards – admin passwords can be found on the open in their systems.
  • Ramsland outlines how he and his cyber team believe the 2018 Kentucky gubernatorial race voting results were possibly altered and describe that in more detail.
  • Their cyber team could get into election systems on-location with just a cellphone. More aggressive reviews or intrusions of these systems show that these systems are connected to the internet (there is no “air gap”), multiple locations (in different states) share the same SSL certificate which Ramsland describes as akin to an entire neighborhood sharing the same front door key.

Who exactly has the keys to the U.S. election systems?

Ramsland states clearly that they found there is a security flaw that allows someone to obtain all the passwords for all of these election systems and go back in and easily change voter data. Since many of these findings have been described since at least 2018 – why have they not been addressed.

Who/What is NGP VAN?

The CEO of NGP VAN is Stu Trevelyan who is a veteran of the Clinton team from the 1990’s. NGP VAN was at the center of the Hillary Clinton/Bernie Sanders dust-up in the 2016 campaign. The Sanders campaign was denied access to NGP VAN – yet the firm’s services are, as Politico put it in December 2015, the “digital plumbing of the Democratic Party.”

An article by J. Dyer in April 2020 reveals a number of issues with NGP VAN, but the main point is that NGP VAN was also selected to work with the Biden campaign for the 2020 election. Mr. Ramsland says that they have seen evidence of NGP VAN “interacting” with the election systems of different states. This is a huge problem – NGP VAN is a company that supports Democrat candidates – why would they be accessing, possibly uploading, information to a state’s election reporting system?

Ramsland and his team’s finding should not have trouble finding an audience with the highest levels of government. It is more than disconcerting that the agencies that Americans believe are protecting them have not taken up Ramsland’s concerns and findings. It is also disheartening that efforts were not made by our representatives in Congress to ensure that Americans have a voting system they can believe in.

0Shares