Are Election Deniers a Threat to Democracy and Have We Seen This Picture Before?
In the aftermath of the 2020 presidential election, Trump supporters were outraged by the way the election was conducted and with the results. Afterall, how could Trump go from having such a large lead on election night to seeing that lead evaporate this next morning after two key swing states mysteriously stopped counting votes. When they resumed, Biden was in the lead. In addition, how could states, under the guise of covid protocols, toss aside long-standing legislation that was in place to protect the integrity of elections?
In the months following the election, various experts began publishing their views on why the election was fraudulent. Some analysts put forth the case that Biden’s win was a statistical impossibility. One expert built a case that claimed a centralized computer algorithm was used in conjunction with “phantom voters” pulled from inflated voter rolls to determine the winner.
These assertions were largely ignored by the mainstream media who, on the one hand propagated the mantra “show us the evidence,” while on the other hand, didn’t show an interest in objectively looking at any evidence. After Trump’s own Attorney General, Bill Barr, stated that he saw no evidence of wide-spread fraud in the election, it was case closed as far as the media was concerned.
Those that felt the election was rigged or stolen were labeled by the mainstream media as “election deniers,” whose efforts to thwart the People’s choice were unpatriotic and a threat to the foundations of democracy itself. Consider the following excerpts from articles published before the 2022 midterm elections:
“Experts say deniers may not be able to overturn elections, but they weaken public confidence in democratic institutions. Election denialism poses a threat and the erosion of trust in the democratic process and the institutions it produces. And that, can lead to a breakdown in the rule of law. If you don’t view the government as legitimate, then do you view the laws that it creates as legitimate? And so then are you subject to follow them?”
“The 2020 election is a settled question, and a variety of courts, audits, and news reports have repeatedly disproved claims of fraud. For that reason, one goal of the election denial movement, to ‘ decertify’ or overturn the 2020 vote, won’t come to fruition. The movement could, however, influence how future elections are run- a future in which votes are cast in one day, in person, on paper, and counted by hand. Voting experts however have found that counting in that way would actually greatly increase the amount of errors in the tabulating process and sow chaos in the process.”
But let’s pause here for a moment. Did the 2020 presidential election birth the election denialism movement or have we seen this picture before? History has an interesting way of repeating itself. Let’s go back to the 2004 when George W. Bush faced John Kerry for the presidential bid. Ohio was the key battleground state, and if Kerry won in Ohio, he won the presidency.
In the book Did George W. Bush Steal America’s 2004 Election? Essential Documents published in 2005,the authors state:
“Up until 11PM Eastern time on election night, exit polls show John Kerry comfortably leading George Bush in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New Mexico giving him a clear victory in the Electoral College, and a projected national margin of some 1.5 million votes. These same exit polls had just served as the basis for overturning an election in Ukraine and were viewed worldwide as a bedrock of reliability. But after midnight the vote count mysteriously turns, and by morning Bush is declared the victor.”
This book was a massive 741-page compilation of reports by journalists, experts, and congressional leaders. The following is a sampling of its contents:
- A Corrupted Election: Despite What You May Have Heard, the Exit Polls Were Correct.
- Diebold’s Political Machine
- Presidential Election at Risk: Ohio Electoral System Riddled with Flaws.
- How the Ohio Election was Rigged for Bush.
- Why History Demands an Ohio Revote.
- The Silent Scream of Numbers. The 2004 Election was Stolen- Will Someone Please tell the Media?
In 2006 a collection of civic organizations and individuals filed a complaint in federal court against Kenneth Blackwell and various public officials, alleging that Blackwell and others had violated their civil and constitutional rights. Blackwell was Ohio Secretary of State in 2004 and in charge of elections. The plaintiffs alleged that the 2004 election was fraudulent, and Blackwell was guilty of vote dilution, vote suppression, recount fraud and other violations. The case is known as King Lincoln Bronzeville Neighborhood v. Blackwell, CASE NO. 2:06-CV-00745 and through the introduction of various motions would continue for six years until it was finally dismissed without prejudice , meaning that the plaintiff is allowed to re-file charges, alter the claim, or bring the case to another court.
While it is noteworthy to highlight a civil rights lawsuit alleging voter fraud, that was not the big story that came out of the King Lincoln v Blackwell case. What didn’t receive much media coverage at the time and has since been relegated to the dust bin of history was a sworn statement by an expert witness for the plaintiffs. Under penalty of perjury and based on the technical evidence he reviewed, he concluded that the Ohio Secretary of State’s main tabulation computer that aggregated all 88 county vote totals was hacked in the 2004 election, and it was done for the purpose of changing votes in favor of Bush.
As the King Lincoln v Blackwell case was underway, attorneys for the plaintiffs began their discovery process by taking depositions and sworn testimonies. Based on an anonymous tip, they were told to investigate how the Ohio Secretary of State’s office had set up its main tabulation computer on election night. This led to a sworn deposition of Michael Connell, in 2008. Connell was CEO of a company that provided the web service of real-time election night reporting for the state of Ohio in 2004 and who also had ties with the Bush campaign. The plaintiff’s attorneys were eager to see if his deposition could shed light on what happened on election night.
Connell’s deposition revealed that a company named SmarTech was hired by the Ohio Secretary of State’s office to set up a duplicate tabulation center offsite in Chattanooga Tennessee as a “failsafe” backup in case the primary tabulation center located in Columbus Ohio went down. It was confirmed, however, that the primary center never went down on election night. Instead, the vote totals of all 88 Ohio counties were sent to the offsite center in Tennessee where the vote totals were aggregated and then sent back to Columbus for reporting via Michel Connell’s real-time web portal.
The plaintiff’s attorney also retained an expert witness in cyber security named Stephen Spoonamoore to review the technical aspects of the case. In a sworn declaration, he stated that “the vote tabulation and reporting system as modified at the direction of Mr. Blackwell (the offsite center) allowed the introduction of a single computer in the middle of the pathway. This computer placement in the middle of the network is a defined type of attack known as a MIM (man in the Middle) attack. It is a common problem in the banking settlement space. A criminal gang will introduce a computer into the outgoing electronic systems of a major retail mall, or smaller branch office of a bank. They will capture the legitimate transactions and then add fraudulent charges to the system for their benefit. In the case of Ohio 2004, the only purpose I can conceive for sending all county vote tabulations to a GOP managed Man-in-the-Middle site in Chattanooga BEFORE sending the results onward to the Sec. of State, would be to hack the vote at the MIM.” A 2011 article that appeared in the Free Press New court filing reveals how the 2004 Ohio presidential election was hacked also came to the same conclusion.
Yes, we have seen this picture before. In the aftermath of the 2004 election, it was the Democrats who were the “election deniers” claiming that the election was fraudulent and had been stolen.
So, what do the 2020 and 2004 Presidential Elections have in common? In both, the election was claimed to have been stolen and legitimate questions were raised about how the elections were carried out. In both, there was fierce push-back against these allegations by the press and by politicians who had a vested interest in the outcome. And most important, both put a spotlight on the fragile foundation that our election system is built on- and those are the mysterious black boxes known as voting machines and the networks that connect them.
Are election deniers a threat to democracy? Not if their legitimate questions are addressed. The casual dismissal of these questions, however, is the real threat to democracy.
