• [stock-market-ticker symbols="AAPL;MSFT;GOOG;HPQ;^SPX;^DJI;LSE:BAG" stockExchange="NYSENasdaq" width"100%" palette="financial-light"]

    The United States Election Assistance Commission And Their “Certification” Of Election Machine Companies

    May 19, 2021
    1 Comment

    Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gab TV

    The infamous “Helping America Vote Act” (HAVA) of 2002 set America on the pathway to the current disastrous state of affairs on voting.  HAVA was meant to address the chaos of the 2000 election, and hanging chads in Florida, but it can now be cited as one of the key reasons for the beginning of the collapse of our Republic, or at least the voting chaos of 2020.  HAVA also reinforces the axiom – never trust a nice sounding piece of legislation.  

    Americans have voted for over 200 years without the Federal Government’s help.  HAVA established and codified the role of the obscure Election Assistance Commission (EAC) that set up the bureaucracy to “oversee” the election machine companies.  Oversee is a bit of a stretch.  There was one person at the EAC conducting the EAC Cybersecurity “oversight”,  Jerome Lovato who has now apparently left the EAC very recently.  The ability of one person to oversee the vast expanse of the EAC was always questionable.  There are roughly 3,142 voting districts (i.e. counties) in the United States – the number and arrangements are not mandated or directed, but the Census Bureau attempts to group these into “voting districts” which is what I use to describe the foundation of American voting.  Jerome is gone, but his ability to provide oversight and / or assistance across this broad spectrum was never realistic.

    One issue that still begs much greater research is the gross ambiguity on ownership of the  “Registered” manufacturers of Voting machines – one incredibly important aspect of these companies, that appears to be silent in HAVA, is the ownership arrangements – several, of these companies are not publicly held, meaning they have no obligation to be transparent on their ownership or explain financial activity and transactions.  Bottom line – the U.S. Government does not and is not required to know whether these companies have any foreign ownership, influence, or questionable financial activity, etc.  To me, this is shocking in light of Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi and Presidential concern over foreign influence in U.S. Elections.  These EAC listed companies have gone out of business, been bought, merged with each other, sold equity etc. in an incestuous pit of darkness.  The poster child for this confusing situation:  Dominion Voting.

    A big Ho-Hum:  Dominion received large foreign funding infusions and there’s no public reporting requirement and no trigger of the Presidential Executive Order from September 2018

    The untold and alarming exemplar of the mysterious Voting Machine companies is the receipt of foreign funds.  From my inter-action with Jerome Lovato, the EAC Chief Information Security Officer, in a November 2019 industry panel, open to the public, the situation was untenable.  I would call the situation ridiculous in regards for the ability of one person to oversee over 3,000 voting districts and the voting machine industry.  My memory was that there was a routine deference of all on the panel to the voting machine representative.  Sounds eerily similar to recent events in Maricopa County, AZ where the county election commission apparatus surrendered their lawful oversight role to the election machine company.

    Although Chris Krebs may have been the face of preposterous and infamous assertions of 2020 election integrity, it is in actuality the EAC that rides herd over the mysterious Election Machine Companies, not the Department of Homeland Security ‘s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency CISA.  Krebs has now belatedly signaled the woeful under-resourcing of CISA, which undercuts his November 2020 claims.

    Dominion has received two significant and unexplained cash infusions.  First was roughly $250 million in 2014 from Staple Street and potentially $525 million in 2020 also from Staple Street as shown in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s Securities Offerings Form Ds which are publicly available.  Now who else is in on this transaction?  None other than UBS securities, which is heavily involved with China.  

    USA Today “debunked” the China connection saying UBS Securities, USA is separate from Switzerland based UBS banking.  I would suggest that USA Today’s “debunking” as premature, simplistic, and superficial.  Their logic is like saying, Google, USA Inc. has nothing to do with Google, China Inc.  To say that there is no information sharing, financial flow, or collaboration between these entities is utterly naïve.  These international business relationships between familial corporations have an immense lack of transparency and verifiability.  Public reporting on these international corporate relationships, financial, and information sharing is in need of greater U.S. Department of Justice and Department of Treasury oversight.  They are fraught with opportunities to create a faux corporate separation for press purposes when in reality many of these personalities across this supposed divide are in the same meetings, on the same email chains, etc. etc.  I’ve personally been witness to these situations.

    Why is Dominion receiving these funds from China influenced UBS?  According to one source, it appears they are re-selling their “patents” on tailored “features” on their machines such as the controversial “fractional apportionment”.  Dominion has personalities such as Goran Obradovic, who has a prolific list of voting machine patents to his name.  Goran is possibly the Dominion Chief Technology Officer (but with no public reporting requirements, his role is unclear).  In one journal from 2016, Goran talks about the important role of Dominion’s Team from Serbia supporting the American election system.  

    Disturbing text in one of Goran’s patents (2963) states, “Establish a series of processing results defining one or more voting results for the paper ballot”.  One vote for one candidate off of a ballot should be recorded just as that, however, this creative text implies “processing results” defined by election officials.  Why are there “processing results” defined by election officials?  Sounds like a euphemism for the insidious “fractional apportionment”.

    Another interesting connection is the legal firm of DLA Piper, which through personalities such as Marina Rubini, also provides legal-council for Leonardo, and it also appears there is some corporate leadership connection between Smartmatic (founded by Antonio Mugica) and DLA Piper (Sir Nigel Knowles).  Smartmatic at times appears to have been owned by Dominion.  And DLA Piper is connected to who else?  The husband of the Vice President and the CCP.  This unbelievable morass of non-transparent connections is too complicated for the mere mortal to track without pulling a muscle or a massive infographic.  Therefore, the simple answer?  The Voting Machine industry should be declared a national security sensitive sector and the ownership of the companies listed by the EAC should have an absolute simple, transparent, and auditable ownership and financial transaction history.

    And now, HR-1 attempts to codify the secrecy and current dysfunction by Federalizing the voting process

    The fate of the Republic hinges upon bringing full light and transparency to the election process and these mysterious election machine companies.  Up until HR-1 there was nominal Federal statute language other than 18 USC 611 (must be a US Citizen to vote), retention of ballots, and HAVA 2002, on the conduct of elections.  Under the Constitution, conduct of the elections is a State matter, so absolute statements of election integrity or lack thereof by DHS, CISA, DOJ, FBI, Cyber Command, etc. officials are puzzling – they have little Federal law or charter to base these declarative and authoritative statements. If HR-1 passes in any substantive form, the current lack of transparency, secrecy, and dysfunction of our voting process will be baked in for generations.

    CDMedia is being targeted and obviously too effective! We need your support to put more reporters in the field! Help us here!



    John Mills

    Col. (Ret.) John Mills is a national security professional with service in five eras: Cold War, Peace Dividend, War on Terror, World in Chaos, and now—Great Power Competition. He is the former director of cybersecurity policy, strategy, and international affairs at the Department of Defense. ColonelRETJohn at GETTR and GAB and Daily Missive at Telegram.
  • Subscribe
    Notify of

    1 Comment
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments

    50 million registered US voters kissed off the 2020 election, quite possibly the largest 'no confidence' vote of all time. It appears they made the correct choice here.


  • Subscribe to our evening newsletter to stay informed during these challenging times!!