Minnesota Nice in County Election Offices and Commissioner Meetings
A Strategy of Appeasement and Adherence to Minimum Standards to Keep the Machines Which Enslave We the People
Have you ever listened faux-patiently to someone hoping that by pretending to care they would feel heard and feel good about getting something off their chest and then never speak to you about it again?
In hundreds of county commissioner meetings throughout the state going back to late 2021, the topic has been the same: questions about the integrity of the 2020 general election and a sincere desire for more transparent elections going forward. Except people are not merely trying to get something off their chest. Instead they are speaking from the heart regarding the most important civil rights issue of our time.
Since transparency from 2020 has not been forthcoming (even the cast vote records have not been shared by any Minnesota county, as documented here, here, and here, even though about 500 have been released nationwide and San Francisco County, CA even publishes theirs online without requiring a data request), many are realizing that the electronic voting system therefore cannot be trusted because its security and accuracy cannot be verified by the public nor is there any urgency to even begin to investigate the matter by any county in the state. (Less than 1% of ovals interpreted by the tabulators are checked against hand tallied votes in the postelection reviews, meaning many races are never audited.)
Do not discount plausible deniability. If a county commissioner does not hear information in a public setting, they can honestly deny whether they knew the electronic voting systems had the inherent design flaws they’ve been shown to have—while it is this writer’s conclusion that some are wilfully ignorant, the full map of Minnesota commissioners has not been determined on that point. And people can be persuaded by the truth so long as they have a conscience.
At the end of the day commissioners (and town board supervisors) are responsible for deciding whether they would like to use electronic voting equipment—they can opt out. Beyond that, these bodies are also responsible for certifying the election at the county (and township) levels, and can withhold their certification if they don’t trust the process or system used to record, tally, and report votes. It will be up to those lesser magistrates to stand in the gap against tyranny. And if not, it will be up to the greater magistrates, We the People, to daily remind them of what is expected.
Do Minnesotans Even Have a Voice?
Unless the reader has attended a county commissioner board meetings at least once, context will be missing for what follows. But quite a few are recorded and shared through open meeting laws and can be found online. For instance Sherburne and Crow Wing have public YouTube pages.
Commissioner Meetings
What is the reason for public comment or open forum to begin with?
So that county residents have the chance to speak on matters which even the commissioners have not decided is worthy of being put on an agenda. If an item is on the agenda, it may be discussed during the business of that meeting. If not, the public comment is generally not meant for discussion, per se, meaning the commissioners tend to remain very quiet whilst anyone speaking makes their arguments for usually a 2-3 minute maximum.
Each county has their own flavor of public comment, and some don’t have public comment at all, which puts the commissioners at a severe disadvantage from the vantage point of learning about the major red flags inherent in the current election process and electronic voting system, from ipads (e-pollbooks) to tabulators to election management system to the data transfers and chain of custody both physical and digital.
Hennepin County doesn’t have in-person commissioner meetings and public comments must be recorded by phone at 10:00am to possibly (no guarantees) be played during the 1:30pm meetings but only if the comments relate to an existing agenda item, at the discretion of the commissioners. So far I’ve recorded two comments but I do not believe they have been publicly played.
In nearby Anoka County despite months of attendance those speaking about election integrity have not even been given public comment nor an agenda item nor workshop. They show up about a half hour prior to the meeting to speak with commissioners and wait through the hour meeting to get a chance to briefly chat afterward. An inexplicable vote trend, 4,537 missing absentee records 5 days after the MN State Canvassing Board certified the election, a record 117,739 absentee ballots, and 93% voter turnout measured registrations as of 7am (86% including same-day registrations and registration with absentee ballot) are enough data to have had a discussion about Anoka’s election. But none has been given for 22 months.
Places like Wright County have built an election integrity task force but this task force is not focusing on the machine problem. In a conversation with one of the commissioners in favor of the task force during the logic and accuracy testing on Aug 1, 2022, I was told that my concerns about the machines should have been included earlier in the list of that task force’s concerns and my information had come too late. Translation: I won’t be looking into the machines. Since, some citizens in Wright have brought information to their sheriff to attempt in parallel an alternative avenue to the truth and change.
Carver County in Spring 2022 scheduled a meeting potentially knowing computer expert Rick Weible would have a prior conflict—Rick Weible was attending another county’s meeting that morning—and the county refused to adjust the meeting from the morning to the afternoon. It is not mere speculation to suggest commissioners from different counties speak to one another.
One commissioner in Sherburne, during her apology regarding a 1st amendment incident where a woman was removed from the Aug 2, 2022 commissioner meeting during her public comment pointing to the commissioner group’s inactivity, this commissioner had the gall to mention that during their discussions with other commissioner groups they’d learned that some counties don’t even have public comments. The implication? You should be happy you even have three minutes to speak to us.
Counties like Sherburne are inactive despite some of the most active people promoting a reasonable discussion on whether Dominion Voting Systems should be foisted upon their county. There, townships like Baldwin and Haven have considered hand tally resolutions, in Haven’s case passing a resolution that said they would both hand tally AND machine tally the August 9th, 2022 primary election, only to be interfered with by the Sherburne County Attorney and Auditor, despite the Auditor’s consistent statements regarding the flawlessness of Dominion ImageCast tabulators and their Dominion Voting System (DVS) Election Management System (EMS), the same vendor and software used by Mesa County Colorado where database manipulation was proven in not only the 2020 General Election but in the 2021 Grand Junction Municipal Eletion by analyzing the computer system images before and after a Dominion employee perforemd a “Trusted Build”.
After David Maeda, Director of Elections from the Office of the Secretary of State, was given more than 20 minutes on the agenda in a July 2022 commissioner meeting (to repeat, the people have never been given an agenda item despite multiple requests), the County Administrator was recorded saying the commissioners were aware of the dangers of Dominion Voting Systems and willing to take the risk.
Semi Closed Door Meetings
The June 7, 2022 GPP Meeting in Dakota County was moved out of the larger county commissioner board room (which seats about 60) into a side room (which seats about 30) even though there were more people arriving to attend the GPP meeting than there were for the preceding commissioner meeting. Many people sat in the commissioner room to watch a live feed that only provided one camera angle. Only because I found a way into the side room where the meeting was held was I able to capture on camera the nervousness of the county auditor when trying to explain away questions that had been raised by the people.
Carver County attempted a similar move by holding their workshop after a time delay so that it need not be livestreamed and recorded alongside their regular commissioner meeting. This writer was again in attendance to capture the meeting, where afterward the Director of Property and Finance claimed their machines did not have CVR data but did not offer to show me the communications he claimed to have on that with their vendor, ES&S, which as an interesting historical note acquired Premier Voting Systems (Diebold) for which questions were raised about a source code leak in 2003/4 by Beverley Harris revealing serious software vulnerabilities.
During the meeting itself David Frischmon was proud to report a 93.7% voter turnout, a nearly impossibly high number, but failed to mention that Carver County in 2020 had more registered voters than citizens of voting age population. (These voter turnout numbers are possible because of real-time monitoring of absentee/mail-in ballots as well as in-person votes through the ipads at polling places—then, delivery of ballots 2,000-Mules style or injection of votes electronically or by algorithm can occur after the fact.)
Closed Door Meetings
Just as Queen Elizabeth II met weekly with the Prime Minister, the contents of those conversations never to be shared with the public, closed door meetings provide a way to keep important information out of the public ear and eye and mind.
I have attended closed door meetings with election staff in Dakota, with commissioners and auditors in Morrison, and with auditors and election staff in Stearns.
In Dakota I learned that election data from the 2021 independent school district 196 could not be reconciled between the school districts, the county, and the statewide voter registration system, even after about six months.
In Morrison I learned that the commissioners and auditors were not so interested in the list of vulnerabilities provided nor the remedies Jeremy Pekula offered. (Pekula is now on the ballot to become a commissioner in Morrison County this November.)
In Stearns, I observed that the auditor and deputy knew little about the cast vote record but within 48 hours decided they would not be turning it on for the August 9th primary election despite its obvious utility in showing whether or not there was statistical evidence of mail-in/absentee ballot stuff or digital manipulation. They also admitted that only 8 of 76 tabulators were tested by their team prior to the primary election. When questioned on this, they were happy to report this was above the minimum standard.
Do Minnesotans Even Have a Voice?
Robin Sylvester was one of many to call for a forensic audit in Crow Wing County in late 2021, leading to commissioners voting 4-1 in favor of requesting the Secretary of State to conduct one (after their County Attorney suggested they not unseal their own ballots). The MNSOS declined to audit Crow Wing County, stoking concerns that he did not care about transparency after all, but more importantly leaving the people—who had found a 9% suspicious record rate during door to door canvassing—in the dark about the larger absentee mail in process and the significant electronic voting system. Forensically auditing a heavily conservative county would not have changed the outcome of any statewide race but it may have alerted the public to the severity of the electronic voting system issues.
In recent months, hundreds of cast vote record requests have been sent to election offices across the state, with only one being received (for Aug 9, 2022) but in an unusable format. None (zero) in a usable format have been received for the November 3, 2020 general election providing no transparency for what many auditors in Minnesota have claimed was a flawless election from the perspective of their electronic voting system. So far no responsible authority has been able to articulate which statute prevents this public data from being released, and all are standing on very thin legal ground in preventing public viewing of this data that the machines automatically store while recording, tallying, and reporting votes from ballots passed into tabulators.
Unifying On Transparency
Biden recently extended for one year the election emergency given that “the proliferation of digital devices and internet-based communications has created significant vulnerabilities and magnified the scope and intensity of the threat of foreign interference.”
Recent speeches by both Biden and Trump have spoken to the importance of free, fair, honest, and transparent elections. This has never been about R vs D, red vs blue. In fact if capital R Republicans in elected office had shown any strength whatsoever nationwide and in St. Paul there would be much more awareness about these issues than there is—people like Representative Eric Lucero, who has a background in cyber, should use his platform to inform the public about the dangers of the electronic voting system.
People from many political spheres have shared concerns about the electronic voting systems and a desire for a simpler, safer, and less stressful approach to voting, such as with paper pollbooks and paper ballots hand tallied without mass mail-in or absentee (except distant military and very sick).
Very few people this writer has spoken with want to continue discussing the 2020 General Election, now 22 months in the rear view mirror. But the rear-view mirror is in most vehicles only a few inches from the driver’s forehead. Those who see that Dominion Voting Systems is aptly named will never quit working to remove the enslavement devices because this is the civil rights issue of our time—everyone’s right to vote is at stake.
As Professor David Clements said in the September 7, 2022 Fulton County Commissioner meeting, “We know the election was stolen. And we know that you know the election was stolen.”
Minnesotans know the 2020 election was stolen (from the people). And the commissioners know the election was stolen (from the people). Even if the commissioners can’t bring themselves to admit it.
Maybe because when they do, they’ll have to help the people do something about it. So that future elections won’t be stolen from the people again.
This writer’s involvement so far to raise awareness in local MN govt:
county commissioner meetings in Sherburne, Carver, Crow Wing, and Dakota
township board meeting in Haven (prevented from joining a second meeting by video call when the chair who noticed my desired entry and covered it up, according to those in attendance)
workshops in Wright and Carver
spoken in commissioner meetings in Sherburne, Carver, and Crow Wing
attended closed door meetings in Morrison, Dakota, and Stearns
attended Wright County logic & accuracy testing for ES&S DS450 and DS200
dozens of side conversations with commissioners, administrators, auditors
dozens of phone calls with auditors
scores of conversations with people working actively with their local govt
hundreds of emails with county election offices, including public data requests
videos and interviews available on CommieTube and Rumble and Locals
To learn more about election fraud and other issues in Minnesota, consider buying this book, [S]elections in Minnesota: How Machines Controlled 2020 (read free) on Amazon, Barnes & Noble, or listen to the audibook on Soundcloud.
At least one county commissioner in Stearns County is already reading this book.
