The integrity of American elections depends not only on the security of the ballots voters cast, but also on the systems responsible for counting, storing, transmitting, and reporting those votes.

Much of that infrastructure relies on technology developed and maintained by private companies, including Election Systems & Software (ES&S) and Liberty Vote, formerly Dominion Voting Systems.

Depending on the jurisdiction and its election procedures, electronic voting records and unofficial tabulations may be stored within election management systems (EMS) before being consolidated, reported, and ultimately reconciled with official election records.

These systems occupy a critical position in the election process, particularly during early voting and the period immediately preceding the public release of results.

Consider what happens when mail ballots are processed before Election Day.

In jurisdictions that permit advance tabulation, ballots may be scanned and their votes counted electronically before the results can legally be disclosed. Those totals must remain confidential until the designated reporting period.

Ordinarily, ballot scanners and tabulators can produce printed results tapes documenting the votes counted by the equipment. These tapes provide an important physical record against which electronic totals can be compared.

But early-voting procedures vary significantly by jurisdiction. Some systems suppress or restrict the printing of results before polls close to prevent premature disclosure. Others preserve records that can be printed, reviewed, or reconciled once reporting is legally permitted.

The same concerns apply to early in-person voting.

As the MIT Election Data + Science Lab explains, states differ in when and how early-voting results can be imported into election management systems and subsequently reported.

This creates an important distinction between votes that have already been electronically tabulated and results that have been independently verified.

Where electronic totals are stored before public reporting, meaningful safeguards must exist to prevent unauthorized access, detect alterations, and reconcile those totals against independently preserved records.

Without those safeguards—or without sufficient public documentation to demonstrate that they were followed—voters are being asked to trust an electronic reporting process they cannot independently examine.

That does not mean the data has necessarily been compromised. It means the public needs evidence that it has not.

And that brings us to Texas.

Texas: Official Early-Turnout Records That Are Inconsistent

Early in-person voting for the November 3, 2026, midterm elections began in Texas on October 19.

The Texas Secretary of State maintains an official Early Voting Turnout Dashboard, displaying daily and cumulative early in-person turnout alongside mail-ballot activity.

The dashboard includes an important disclaimer:

“All information displayed is provided by county election officials. The Office of the Secretary of State does not alter or modify the data provided in any way.”

In other words, the state attributes responsibility for the underlying figures to county election officials.

Beginning October 19, our research team began systematically preserving snapshots of these reports. We captured not only each day’s current figures, but also the historical reports available through the dashboard.

What we discovered raises serious questions about the reliability, consistency, and transparency of the state’s publicly reported turnout data.

The figures were not merely increasing as additional voters cast ballots.

Historical totals were being revised retroactively. Some increased. Others decreased. And in multiple instances, figures attributed to the same voting date changed substantially between snapshots.

These changes warrant an explanation.

Early In-Person Votes Appeared Before Early Voting Began

Texas’s legally authorized early in-person voting period began October 19, 2026.

Yet our examination of the Secretary of State’s reporting dashboard identified early in-person turnout attributed to October 14 through October 18—dates preceding the opening of early voting.

This snapshot captured October 27 showed 531 early in-person votes attributed to Collin County on October 14, five days before early voting officially began.

The question is straightforward: Why were early in-person votes appearing under dates when early in-person voting had not yet begun?

Were these incorrectly dated records, reporting-system artifacts, administrative adjustments, or something else?

The distinction matters.

An incorrectly assigned reporting date does not necessarily mean a ballot was cast illegally or that a vote was altered. But when official turnout data attributes votes to dates outside the authorized voting period, the public deserves an explanation supported by the underlying records.

More Than 28,000 Early In-Person Votes Disappeared From a Previously Reported Total

One of the most significant discrepancies appeared in successive snapshots of the October 19 turnout report.

On October 22, our preserved records show reported early in-person total for October 19 at 806,239.

On October 23, that total for October 19 decreased to 777,891.

A decline of 28,348.

Similarly, snapshots taken on October 22 and October 23 of the October 20 daily report show a decline of 18,915 voters and 47,216 early votes.

These were not comparisons of turnout on different election dates. They were comparisons of successive versions of the report for the same date.

To be clear, a decline in a published turnout figure does not, by itself, prove that ballots were deleted or votes were removed from an election management system. Reporting corrections, duplicate-record removal, date reassignment, or other administrative processes could potentially account for revisions.

Voting is an additive process.

What caused previously published turnout totals to decline and where is the corresponding reconciliation?

Mail-Ballot Totals Also Declined

The discrepancies were not limited to early in-person turnout.

Our examination of the October 19 report identified another retroactive decline, this time involving cumulative mail-in ballot figures.

October 24 snapshot of October 19 mail-in ballots: 129,845

October 25 snapshot of October 19 mail-in ballots: 128,621

That represents a decrease of 1,224 mail-in ballots in the reported cumulative figure.

Again, the relevant question is not whether an election office can ever correct a previously published number.

Corrections are sometimes necessary.

The question is whether those corrections are accompanied by a clear, independently verifiable accounting of what changed, why it changed, and whether the underlying ballot records remained intact.

Without that information, the public cannot distinguish legitimate administrative corrections from potentially consequential reporting errors.

Daily and Cumulative Figures Do Not Reconcile

Perhaps the most troubling discrepancies involve the mathematical relationship between daily turnout and cumulative turnout.

A cumulative total should be reconcilable against the previous cumulative total, the newly reported daily activity, and any documented corrections or adjustments.

Our snapshots of the October 24 report produced figures that could not be reconciled through a straightforward calculation.

The October 24 snapshot showed:

• Daily in-person turnout: 14

• Cumulative in-person turnout: 3,234,899

A subsequent snapshot captured October 26 showed:

• Daily in-person turnout: 468,133

• Cumulative in-person turnout: 4,008,357

If 468,133 represented the day’s newly recorded voters and 4,008,357 represented the resulting cumulative total, the implied preceding cumulative total would be:

4,008,357 − 468,133 = 3,540,224

Yet the earlier snapshot showed 3,234,899.

That leaves an unexplained difference of 305,325 under a straightforward daily-plus-cumulative reconciliation.

The discrepancy persisted in a later snapshot.

On October 28, the same historical report showed:

• Daily in-person turnout: 518,026

• Cumulative in-person turnout: 4,063,281

Subtracting the reported daily turnout yields an implied preceding total of 3,545,255.

Compared with the earlier published figure of 3,234,899, the difference had grown to 310,356.

These calculations do not establish that 310,356 additional ballots were cast, counted, or improperly introduced. They establish that the figures from different snapshots cannot be reconciled without accounting for intervening updates and the dashboard’s reporting methodology.

If those changes resulted from late county submissions, corrections, or reclassification of previously reported turnout, the state and counties should be able to provide the records demonstrating precisely how the totals were derived.

A public reporting system should not require voters to guess how hundreds of thousands of records were reconciled.

Harris County: State and County Records Tell Different Stories

The discrepancies become even more significant when state-reported figures are compared against records published directly by county election officials.

Harris County publishes its own early-voting turnout reports.

According to the county report preserved by our researchers, 78,747 early in-person ballots were recorded for October 28.

The corresponding figure captured from the state’s reporting dashboard on October 28 was 51,698.

That is a difference of 27,049.

There may be an explanation involving reporting cutoffs, submission times, subsequent corrections, or differing definitions of the figures being compared.

But that explanation must be established through the underlying records.

When the public is presented with two substantially different figures for the same county and voting date, it should not have to determine independently which one is accurate.

The state and county should be able to reconcile the difference.

Can Texas’s Voter Registration Problems Explain These Discrepancies?

Texas has experienced documented problems with its voter registration infrastructure.

Reporting by the Houston Chronicle and Spectrum News identified a backlog of approximately 500,000 voter registrations associated with the state’s Texas Election Administration Management System, commonly known as TEAMS.

State officials indicated that the backlog had been addressed before early voting began, although some voters continued reporting registration-status problems.

A separate issue reportedly affected approximately 5,200 voter registrations in Bexar, Travis, Williamson, and Hays counties, involving delays in processing address changes submitted through the state’s website.

These problems are serious in their own right.

But voter registration processing and turnout reporting are not the same function.

A voter whose registration information is incorrect may have the issue resolved at the polling location, may be required to cast a provisional ballot, or may encounter another eligibility-related obstacle.

Those scenarios do not automatically explain why previously published statewide turnout figures would decline or why the same historical report would display substantially different totals across successive snapshots.

It is possible that registration corrections, voter-record reconciliation, or county reporting procedures affected the dashboard figures indirectly.

But that connection cannot simply be assumed.

If TEAMS-related corrections caused the revisions, election officials should identify the affected records, explain the reporting mechanism, and produce an auditable reconciliation.

Otherwise, citing registration-system problems risks substituting a general explanation for a specific accounting of the discrepancies.

These Are Not Questions That Can Be Dismissed as “Glitches”

Election reporting systems are complex. Data can arrive late, counties can correct submissions, and unofficial totals can change before certification.

We recognize that.

But complexity is not an exemption from accountability.

Our investigation has documented repeated retroactive revisions to official early-voting turnout reports, including:

• Early in-person turnout attributed to dates preceding the legally authorized voting period.

• A decline of 28,348 in a previously reported early in-person turnout figure.

• A decrease of 1,224 in a previously reported cumulative mail-ballot figure.

• Daily and cumulative turnout figures that could not be reconciled through straightforward arithmetic without additional adjustments.

• A 27,049-voter difference between preserved Harris County and state-reported figures for October 28.

• A difference of 310,356 in cumulative totals.

These observations do not establish that ballots were altered or that election results were manipulated. They do, however, establish significant discrepancies that deserve documented answers.

And with Election Day approaching, those answers should not have to wait until after certification.

The Texas Secretary of State and the relevant county election officials should provide the underlying submission histories, timestamps, correction logs, reporting definitions, and reconciliation records necessary to explain these changes.

They should also clarify whether the revisions occurred at the county level, during transmission to the state, or within the public reporting system itself.

That distinction is essential to identifying where discrepancies originate.

The Larger Question: Who Is Verifying the Data?

The vulnerability of electronic election infrastructure and the inconsistencies in Texas’s public turnout reporting are related questions, but they are not interchangeable.

One concerns the security and integrity of electronic ballot tabulation.

The other concerns the accuracy, consistency, and auditability of information reported to the public.

Both matter.

A secure tabulation system cannot compensate for a public reporting process that lacks transparency. And a reliable turnout dashboard, by itself, cannot establish that the underlying votes were counted correctly.

Protecting elections requires independent records, meaningful reconciliation procedures, secure systems, and the ability to trace discrepancies to their source.

That is precisely why our team has been organizing volunteers across the country to preserve election-night reporting in real time.

We are creating a contemporaneous record that can be compared against county reports, state results, and ultimately the official canvass.

Because the question should never be whether Americans are willing to trust election officials, private vendors, or electronic databases without scrutiny.

The question should be whether those entrusted with administering our elections can demonstrate, through verifiable evidence, that every lawful vote was accurately recorded, counted, and reported.

Trust is not a substitute for verification.

We should not be expected to simply accept vote totals moving backwards and discrepancies exceeding 310,000 votes.

Transparency is not an unreasonable demand.

It is the minimum requirement of a functioning democracy.

What We Can Do

VOTE.

And volunteer.

We’re just two days away from what is arguably the most important election in our collective lifetime, and we’ve been hard at work recruiting volunteers.

We already have hundreds of volunteers signed up—but we need thousands.

We’re recruiting in counties across all 50 states for two important positions. One can be done entirely from the comfort of your couch.

The other requires a visit to your local county election office to record poll tapes. Already a poll worker? We could really use your help with recording poll tapes.

Neither position requires technical expertise, prior election experience, or specialized equipment. Just a willingness to help.

To register as a volunteer, please use this link: Sign up as an Election Night watcher and/or poll tape recorder

We cannot investigate what we haven’t preserved.

And with thousands of counties across the United States, this is not something a handful of researchers can accomplish alone.

Questions? Send an email to: ProtectTheMidterms@proton.me

Thank you for being here and supporting independent journalism. We couldn’t do this work without you.

And hold onto your hope. We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution. We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

We’re just five days away from what is arguably the most important election in our collective lifetime, and we’ve been hard at work recruiting volunteers.

We already have hundreds of volunteers signed up—but we need thousands.

We’re recruiting in counties across all 50 states for two important positions. One can be done entirely from the comfort of your couch.

The other requires a visit to your local county election office to record poll tapes. Already a poll worker? We could really use your help with recording poll tapes.

Neither position requires technical expertise, prior election experience, or specialized equipment. Just a willingness to help.

To register as a volunteer:

• Please use this link: Sign up as an Election Night watcher and/or poll tape recorder

• We’ve also added a third Zoom training session TODAY, October 29, at 2:00 pm ET, please register here: Zoom registration link

Poll Tape Recorder Position

Prefer to be hands-on? We need you.

This volunteer position involves visiting county election offices or other designated public locations to photograph or record election results tapes when they become publicly available.

The interactive precinct coverage map is live and can be accessed by clicking HERE.

These records are especially valuable because they provide another point of comparison against the results subsequently reported by counties, states, and election-night reporting services.

Volunteers will:

• Identify where and when election results tapes are publicly posted in their assigned jurisdiction.

• Visit the designated location.

• Photograph or video-record the posted tapes, ensuring the numbers are legible.

• Document the location, date, and time.

• Submit the recordings to our team for preservation and comparison.

We’ll provide instructions and guidance. Volunteers will follow local election rules to ensure our efforts are not interfering with election workers or voting operations.

Why This Matters

Election transparency requires more than simply accepting the numbers displayed on television on Election Night. It requires preserving the records that allow those numbers to be independently examined.

Our objective is to create a nationwide network of volunteers collecting two complementary sets of evidence: the results reported to the public in real time and the underlying election records made available by local officials.

By comparing these records, our team can identify discrepancies that warrant further investigation, distinguish ordinary reporting corrections from genuine irregularities, and bring documented findings to the appropriate election authorities.

We cannot investigate what we haven’t preserved.

And with thousands of counties across the United States, this is not something a handful of researchers can accomplish alone.

We need people monitoring election results from their couches.

We need people at county offices recording poll tapes.

We need people willing to give a few hours of their time to help create a reliable, independently preserved record of Election Night.

Both jobs matter. Both contribute to the same mission. And both are opportunities for Americans to take an active role in protecting the transparency and accountability of our elections.

Questions? Send an email to: ProtectTheMidterms@proton.me

Thank you for being here and supporting independent journalism. We couldn’t do this work without you.

And hold onto your hope. We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution. We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

And we need your help.

We’re recruiting volunteers in counties across all 50 states for two important positions. One can be done entirely from the comfort of your couch. The other requires a visit to your local county election office to record poll tapes.

Already a poll worker? We could really use your help with recording poll tapes.

Neither position requires technical expertise, prior election experience, or specialized equipment. Just a willingness to help.

• To register as a volunteer, please use this link: Sign up as an Election Night watcher and/or poll tape recorder

• We’re also hosting a Zoom training session on Friday, October 23, at 2:00 pm ET, please register here: Training Zoom Link

Note: it’s not mandatory to attend the training, but it helps to understand why we’re recording the results and what to be looking for.

Position 1: Election Night Recorder

Have a couch? A television or computer? A cell phone? Congratulations, you’re qualified.

This is our easiest volunteer position, and one of the most important.

On Election Night, volunteers will monitor publicly reported election results, watching for unusual changes, discrepancies, or other anomalies as votes are counted and reported.

Your job is simple:

• Choose an assigned election or candidate to monitor.

• Watch the election-night coverage or designated results feed.

• Record any unusual changes in reported vote totals.

• Capture screenshots and timestamps of anything that warrants further examination.

• Submit your recordings and observations to our team.

That’s it.

You don’t need to understand election software, cybersecurity, or statistical analysis. Our research and technical teams will handle the more complicated work.

Your job is to help us preserve what the public was shown, as it happened.

These recordings create a contemporaneous record that can later be compared with official county and state election results and underlying reporting data.

Position 2: Poll Tape Recorder

Prefer something a little more hands-on? We need you, too.

Our second volunteer position involves visiting county election offices or other designated public locations to photograph or record election results tapes when they become publicly available.

These records are especially valuable because they provide another point of comparison against the results subsequently reported by counties, states, and election-night reporting services.

Volunteers will:

• Identify where and when election results tapes are publicly posted in their assigned jurisdiction.

• Visit the designated location.

• Photograph or video-record the posted tapes, ensuring the numbers are legible.

• Document the location, date, and time.

• Submit the recordings to our team for preservation and comparison.

We’ll provide instructions and guidance. Volunteers must follow local election rules and should not interfere with election workers or voting operations.

Why This Matters

Election transparency requires more than simply accepting the numbers displayed on television on Election Night.

It requires preserving the records that allow those numbers to be independently examined.

Our objective is to create a nationwide network of volunteers collecting two complementary sets of evidence: the results reported to the public in real time and the underlying election records made available by local officials.

By comparing these records, our team can identify discrepancies that warrant further investigation, distinguish ordinary reporting corrections from genuine irregularities, and bring documented findings to the appropriate election authorities.

We cannot investigate what we haven’t preserved.

And with thousands of counties across the United States, this is not something a handful of researchers can accomplish alone.

We need people on couches.

We need people at county offices.

We need people willing to give a few hours of their time to help create a reliable, independently preserved record of Election Night.

Both jobs matter. Both contribute to the same mission. And both are opportunities for Americans to take an active role in protecting the transparency and accountability of our elections.

Questions? Send an email to: ProtectTheMidterms@proton.me

Thank you for being here and supporting independent journalism. We couldn’t do this work without you.

And hold onto your hope.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

It’s the dirty little secret we deal with on a daily basis.

“Hey, just real quick, have you got any updates on the stolen election news?” Or our personal favorite: “I wanted to ask you about this, but my friends will think I’m a conspiracy theorist.”

At work, around the water cooler. Side conversations with friends, but never in the group chat. Direct messages from people we may or may not know, wanting answers but too afraid to ask questions publicly for fear of being compared to them.

The irony is almost unbearable.

Donald Trump spent years screaming about a stolen election, without producing evidence sufficient to establish his claims. His Big Lie poisoned the well so thoroughly that Americans who now have legitimate questions about election security are afraid to ask them.

And the people who should be demanding answers?

Crickets.

But let’s be honest. This isn’t exactly new territory.

The 2000 and 2004 presidential elections were met with their own controversies, irregularities, and an all-too-familiar chorus of “Nothing to see here, folks. Move along.”

The disputed Florida recount in 2000 and the voting irregularities and challenges in Ohio in 2004 should have prompted a much more enduring national conversation about election integrity.

Instead, the controversies were largely relegated to the history books, while the underlying questions about transparency, accountability, and public trust never really went away.

Twenty-six years later, we’re still having the same conversations, with some of the same experts sounding the alarm. Only now, we’re having them in whispers.

Somewhere along the way, questioning the integrity of our elections became more controversial than the vulnerabilities within the election system itself.

And that should terrify every American, regardless of political affiliation.

The System Nobody Wants to Examine

Our election apparatus is a paint-by-numbers exercise in public trust, and an awful lot of Americans are beginning to question who’s holding the paintbrush.

And why the paint is mostly red.

We have privately owned voting technology companies, proprietary software, election management systems, third-party reporting vendors, and layers of technology that the average voter couldn’t begin to identify, much less scrutinize.

And it’s housed, for the most part, in the far-right ecosystem.

Yes, voting systems undergo testing and certification, and states conduct audits. But those safeguards vary considerably, and audits don’t necessarily examine the races raising the most questions.

It’s great that Pennsylvania audited its state treasurer race. But what does an audit of that contest tell us about the presidential race?

Nothing.

And even when an audit verifies the accuracy of a particular contest’s ballot count, it doesn’t reconstruct every step between the tabulation of those ballots and the results appearing on television.

And that’s precisely where our concerns lie.

What happens between the tabulation of votes and the reporting of those votes to the public?

Who has access? Who maintains the databases? What systems communicate with one another? What records are retained? And who independently verifies that the numbers transmitted from one system to the next are accurate?

These aren’t conspiracy theories.

They’re basic cybersecurity questions.

And the public deserves answers.

Russia, Russia, Russia

Let’s revisit something we’ve apparently decided to forget.

Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election. That isn’t speculation. American intelligence agencies documented the interference, and subsequent investigations established extensive Russian influence operations.

Then-Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid publicly challenged FBI Director James Comey’s handling of information about Russia’s involvement.

And now, with additional Epstein-related records proving that Epstein, Peter Thiel, Russian operatives, and foreign interests, colluded to rig the 2016 election, there’s more reason than ever to open investigations.

And Russia didn’t simply disappear after 2016.

In 2024, the FBI reported over two hundred bomb threats targeting polling locations in multiple states, originating from Russian email domains.

Meanwhile, American intelligence agencies warned that Russian influence operations were actively attempting to undermine confidence in our elections. And yet, somehow, we’re expected to treat foreign interference as yesterday’s news.

With a hat tip to President Zelensky and Ukraine’s annihilation of Russian data centers, it’s not.

Then Came Election Night 2024

For those of us monitoring election-night reporting, there are questions that have never been answered.

Our team documented significant changes in publicly reported vote totals, including decreases in Kamala Harris’s totals across the swing states and Florida.

By millions of votes.

And then there’s the Decision Desk HQ reporting sequence we’ve been examining.

Between 9:30 p.m. and 9:33 p.m., the figures we recorded showed Donald Trump’s reported total changing from 46,219,886 to 87,665,393.

A difference of 41,445,507 votes in three minutes.

At the same time, Elon Musk tweeted, “Game, set and match.”

We want to know what produced those wild swings in election totals, where the data originated, and whether the reporting sequence can be reconciled with official county and state records.

We’ve also been investigating what we describe as a fake county vote bank mechanism: that manipulated reporting-layer data could be presented as though it originated from legitimate county results.

We cover all of this territory in the attached article with an investigate blueprint built by cybersecurity experts:

We want the data. We want the access records. And we want independent investigators empowered to follow both.

Because asking the public to trust a system is not the same as demonstrating that the system deserves that trust.

November 3 Is Not a Magic Reset Button

Which brings us to the approaching midterms.

We’re supposed to believe we can simply vote our way out of this catastrophic mess on November 3, 2026. Show up. Cast our ballots. Cross our fingers. Hope for the best.

And then what?

Remember that old adage about what happens when we assume? You make an ass out of u and me. Are we supposed to assume there won’t be attempts at electronic manipulation or procedural obstruction?

And are we supposed to place our faith in Speaker Mike Johnson to do the right thing if Democrats win enough seats to reclaim the House? The same Mike Johnson who delayed swearing in Representative Adelita Grijalva (D-AZ) for seven weeks after her September 2025 victory?

She was finally sworn in on November 12, but the precedent should concern anyone who believes elected representatives ought to be seated promptly.

This time, the excuse will be that the election results are being contested.

And while Mike Johnson cannot unilaterally refuse to seat duly elected members of Congress, he doesn’t necessarily have to. Whatever his shortcomings as a legislator, he has demonstrated an almost supernatural ability to prevent legislation from ever reaching the House floor.

He could drag this process out for a very long time.

After all, we’re talking about a man and a party that orchestrated an insurrection to prevent the peaceful transfer of power, and spent years refusing to accept the results of a presidential election despite no evidence to the contrary.

There’s little reason to believe they’ll suddenly develop a newfound respect for the democratic process when their grip on power is at stake, particularly when losing that power could mean facing criminal prosecution and the very real possibility of prison sentences.

And therein lies the danger.

Even if the courts eventually intervene, how long would that take? Weeks? Months? And what happens to congressional representation in the meantime?

Worse still, can we reasonably assume that a Supreme Court increasingly willing to expand presidential power would ultimately rule against Trump and his allies?

The threat isn’t simply that Johnson might refuse to seat duly elected representatives.

It’s that he could manufacture a constitutional crisis by delaying the process long enough to make the will of the voters irrelevant.

And this is why simply winning elections isn’t enough. We need to be prepared to document the results, defend legitimate victories, and demand accountability when evidence warrants it.

The answer isn’t to abandon voting.

Quite the opposite.

We need overwhelming turnout, vigilant citizens, transparent reporting, and candidates prepared to challenge genuine irregularities through the appropriate legal channels.

November should be a BLUE TSUNAMI.

With Trump and Republicans underwater in the polls, Democrats running the table since 2024, and growing dissatisfaction with this administration, we should expect a Democratic rout of the GOP.

And we should accept nothing less.

If the results defy polling expectations and we have evidence of vote totals moving backward or other significant data anomalies, we need to be prepared to demand answers immediately.

Not weeks later. Not after the deadlines to challenge results have passed. We need to make damn sure every lawful vote is counted accurately.

Immediately.

So What Are We Doing About It?

We’re glad you asked.

We’re organizing volunteers across the country to monitor election-night reporting in real time.

Our goal is ambitious but straightforward and we have several opportunities:

• Two to four volunteers in each county to monitor the Election Night results.

• Two to four volunteers monitoring every race we can possibly cover.

• Volunteers to get access to the poll tapes in the states that allow it, for comparison to the election results.

We’re hosting virtual training sessions and building a nationwide network of people willing to give a few hours of their time to help create a contemporaneous record of election-night results.

No computer science degree required. No cybersecurity background necessary.

If you have a couch, a television, a cell phone, and a little determination, you can help.

We’re asking volunteers to monitor local broadcasts and reporting feeds, record results as they appear, document timestamps, and preserve screenshots or video of significant changes.

Because that’s where our investigation began in 2024.

And this time, we intend to be better organized.

If reported vote totals move backward, if unexpected changes occur, or if the numbers don’t reconcile, we’ll have a rapid-response process to preserve the evidence and bring documented concerns to the attention of candidates, election officials, and appropriate authorities.

Every significant discrepancy deserves an explanation grounded in the underlying records.

If Abdul El-Sayed loses over 900,000 votes in Michigan on Election Night like Kamala Harris did in 2024—he needs to be prepared to challenge those results.

And not just with a recount.

With a comprehensive forensic audit tracing every vote from the ballots and tabulators through the election management systems, county and state databases, and the reporting feeds of DDHQ and the Associated Press.

That’s what the investigative blueprint is for.

We need to establish exactly where any discrepancies originated, whether they affected the certified results, and who had access to the systems involved.

We want the receipts while they’re still warm.

The Only Way Through Is Accountability

This brings us to the part of the conversation that makes people uncomfortable.

The 2024 election isn’t settled in the minds of millions of Americans who still have unanswered questions—and dismissing those questions isn’t going to make them disappear.

Neither is telling people to move on.

The path forward requires state-led investigations with the legal authority to obtain records, compel testimony, examine vendor access, and reconstruct the movement of election data from ballots cast and tabulation through public reporting and certification.

Follow the data.

Follow the access.

Determine where any discrepancies originated and whether they affected official results.

States such as New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota have the authority to investigate potential violations of their election laws.

They should use that authority.

Why?

Because if Speaker Mike Johnson refuses to seat incoming Democrats, or it becomes apparent that the midterms were electronically manipulated, investigating the 2024 election would provide the evidence needed to pursue constitutional remedies, including the removal of the Trump regime from office.

A stolen election is a rebellion against the Constitution.

If those investigations establish criminal wrongdoing, the responsible parties should face the consequences.

Not a slap on the wrist.

Not another congressional hearing that produces a thousand-page report nobody reads, like the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence’s investigation into Russian election interference.

And what exactly did that accomplish?

More Russian interference.

We cannot demand constitutional remedies without first establishing the facts. And we cannot establish the facts by refusing to investigate.

We need investigations that lead to actual accountability.

We Don’t Need Permission

There’s a saying in psychology that we teach people how to treat us. And for far too long, we’ve allowed both political parties to dismiss legitimate questions about election integrity, gaslight Americans, and make us feel like conspiracy theorists simply for demanding answers.

If the Epstein files have taught us anything, it’s that conspiracies are real.

Remember Michael Connell? The Republican IT consultant and main witness in litigation surrounding Ohio’s disputed 2004 election? His plane fell out of the sky, Democrats went about business as usual, and Karl Rove and the Republicans took their massive tax cuts to the bank.

Here’s what everyone reading this should understand: you are allowed to ask questions about your elections.

Election hygiene is a democratic process.

You’re allowed to demand transparency from the companies that provide election technology. You’re allowed to expect your elected officials to protect the integrity of the vote, regardless of which political party benefits.

And you’re allowed to be angry when the institutions entrusted with protecting democracy and the American people appear more interested in protecting themselves and their wealthy (pedophile) donors.

We cannot keep whispering about election integrity in private while pretending everything is fine in public. We cannot keep accepting partisan assurances in place of independent evidence.

And we especially cannot assume that people who have demonstrated a willingness to undermine democratic norms will suddenly develop a newfound respect for them in November.

Hello? They constructed gallows on the Capitol’s lawn.

Democrats are attempting to appeal to the GOP’s better angels, which is lunacy because they clearly have none.

Our Constitution belongs to the people.

Not the Republican Party.

Not the Democratic Party.

Not the technology vendors.

And certainly not the billionaires who think the United States is their personal playground.

It belongs to us.

So here’s the ask: if you have a couch, a television, and a cell phone, and you’re willing to help monitor election-night results, please use this link: Sign up as an Election Night watcher

If you can help the organizational efforts or are interested in a poll tape recording position, please use this link: Sign up as a county leader / poll tape volunteer

Questions? Send an email to: ProtectTheMidterms@proton.me

We’re working to build a nationwide network of Americans who understand that democracy isn’t a spectator sport.

We don’t need everyone to agree about what happened in 2024.

We need people to help establish what happens in 2026.

Because whatever your political affiliation, you deserve elections that are transparent, verifiable, and worthy of your confidence.

“Action is the antidote to despair.”

Hold onto your hope.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

On October 16, 2026, The Intercept Brasil published an investigation that raises serious new questions about Elytron Security, the so-called cybersecurity company whose international operations and proposed political influence technology we previously examined through the documentation of whistleblower Vincent Reed.

According to the investigation, Brazilian presidential candidate Flávio Bolsonaro’s campaign paid R$600,000 to Elytron, while his political party, PL, reported another R$131,900 in payments to the company.

Why does that matter?

Because Elytron is the same company whose representatives, according to Reed, introduce an artificial intelligence platform to individuals connected with Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign.

And the technology described in documents obtained by The Intercept goes well beyond conventional political advertising.

An AI System Designed to Influence Political Behavior

The materials reviewed by The Intercept describe a platform combining large-scale data collection, artificial intelligence, voter segmentation, and coordinated communications operations.

According to the investigation, the proposed capabilities included creating fictitious social media accounts, disseminating misleading information, producing AI-generated content, infiltrating opposition networks, and influencing public opinion within carefully selected demographic groups.

Some of those capabilities, such as public sentiment analysis and geographic targeting, are common in modern political campaigns.

Others raise substantially more serious concerns.

The reported presentation described covert influence activities involving psychological operations, fabricated content, and efforts to discredit political opponents.

It bears an alarming resemblance to the Russian blueprint for election interference we reported on last week, except this operation has ties to the UAE.

These are not simply tools for understanding voters. They are proposed methods for shaping what voters see, hear, and believe—potentially without knowing who is behind the information.

The American Connection

Readers of our earlier reporting will recognize this reporting.

In 2024, Vincent Reed became involved with individuals representing Elytron Security and Aleria Technology, an artificial intelligence company based in the United Arab Emirates.

According to Reed, Jorge Remigio contacted him in July 2024 seeking access to Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. Remigio and his associates were explicit about the technology’s capabilities, their intention to work exclusively with one campaign, and their desire to establish a direct connection to Trump’s team.

Reed subsequently participated in efforts to introduce the technology to contacts connected with Donald Trump’s campaign.

He also described an August 2024 conversation in which Remigio referenced Elon Musk as an alternative contact if the initial campaign introductions were unsuccessful.

Reed later reported that a demonstration of the technology caused him to question its intended applications and legality, and eventually brought his concerns to federal authorities.

The new Brazilian investigation independently reports on Reed’s account and examines documents he supplied.

Follow the Money

Perhaps the most consequential new development is the documented financial relationship between Elytron and Bolsonaro’s 2026 presidential campaign.

The Intercept reports that Brazil’s electoral disclosure system lists three invoices associated with Elytron, including one canceled invoice.

The reported payments total R$600,000.

The invoices describe services involving information technology consulting, forensic support, phishing investigations, security testing, and infrastructure monitoring.

But the company’s reported marketing of covert political influence capabilities raises a separate question:

What services were actually delivered, and how can those services be independently verified?

The Bolsonaro campaign denies contracting for illegal services, and Elytron denies offering or conducting clandestine political manipulation operations.

Those denials should be evaluated alongside the contracts, invoices, technical records, and underlying communications.

Because their confidential marketing packet tells a different story.

The International Network

The communications packet lists fifteen countries in which they’ve deployed this technology, described by Dr. Andre as having a 100% success rate.

The reporting also examines connections involving Elytron representatives, Aleria executives, and business relationships extending into the United Arab Emirates.

Among the individuals identified are Jorge Remigio, Ludgero Sousa, and Eric Leandri.

Reed previously described these individuals as presenting themselves as connected to Aleria and business interests associated with Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

The significance of these relationships is not that international business activity is inherently improper.

It is that political influence technology, cross-border business relationships, and access to election campaigns create legitimate questions about transparency, data governance, and foreign involvement.

The Brazilian investigation provides an important new piece of the Elytron story.

It documents campaign payments, describes materials outlining sophisticated political influence capabilities, and identifies international relationships that overlap with Reed’s earlier account.

What this establishes is a compelling basis for further examination of the company’s contracts, representations, technical capabilities, and campaign relationships.

The Questions That Remain

The next phase of this investigation should focus on identifying the services actually provided to the Trump and Bolsonaro campaigns, determining whether the influence technology described in the presentations was deployed, establishing who controlled the relevant platforms and datasets, and examining the extent of any operational overlap between the company’s Brazilian, European, Emirati, and American relationships.

The public deserves to know whether this technology, marketed to political campaigns and capable of facilitating foreign interference in elections, remained merely a proposal or became an operational system.

And if it became operational, who authorized its use, who funded it, and what activities did it perform?

Bottom line: We want to know exactly how Elon Musk had access to real-time delta vote metrics. Where was he sourcing his data? How did he know the election results four hours in advance?

And why haven’t Democrats or state attorneys general opened investigations?

Election Integrity Requires Transparency

The significance of this story extends far beyond any one company, candidate, or country. Elytron claims to have deployed its technology in fifteen countries, boasting a 100% success rate.

Artificial intelligence is changing the mechanics of political persuasion. The ability to collect enormous amounts of personal information, identify susceptible audiences, generate persuasive content, and distribute that content through coordinated networks creates opportunities for manipulation at a scale that would have been difficult to imagine a decade ago.

Democratic societies cannot meaningfully protect electoral integrity without understanding who controls these systems and how they are being used.

For those of us examining the vulnerabilities of modern elections, the emerging Elytron story deserves continued scrutiny.

Because the documented financial relationships, proposed technological capabilities, and whistleblower testimony raise questions that can—and should—be investigated.

Follow the money. Follow the technology. Follow the access.

And hold onto your hope.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

Source: Laís Martins, Leandro Becker, and Eduardo Goulart, The Intercept Brasil, October 16, 2026. This article also draws on Vincent Reed’s previously provided statement and supporting documentation.

“I was part of a team that was directly ordered to manipulate Twitter’s systems to influence the 2024 US presidential election.”

The letter, published the following day under the name The Concerned Bird, claimed its author had worked at X on an H-1B visa and feared that revealing their identity could jeopardize their future. The writer alleged that what had once been a social-media company had become something very different after Musk’s takeover.

The Concerned Bird’s Substack

Elon Musk's and X's Role in 2024 Election Interference

1/10/2025…

Read more

2 years ago · 7785 likes · 819 comments · The Concerned Bird

The allegations were remarkably specific.

The writer claimed X’s recommendation systems had been deliberately altered to favor particular political content:

“We completely changed how the algorithm worked, pushing pro-Trump and right-wing posts to the top of people’s feeds.”

The writer alleged that artificial accounts had been deployed at enormous scale:

“One of the most disturbing things we did was create thousands of fake accounts using advanced AI systems called Grok and Eliza.”

And then came the allegation involving foreign governments:

“We also knowingly allowed foreign governments to manipulate the platform.”

The author specifically identified state-backed groups from Russia, Iran and Israel, alleging that their influence operations were permitted to continue because their objectives aligned with Musk’s agenda.

The writer claimed that teams manufactured political stories while other teams manipulated engagement to make the material appear popular:

“One team would write completely fake articles, while another team would artificially boost their engagement metrics to make them go viral.”

The author then described something even more specific:

“We specifically targeted certain groups of people, knowing exactly how to manipulate their views and emotions.”

Finally, the writer alleged that the operation had moved beyond the United States:

“What started as US election interference has now spread to other countries. We’re currently doing the same thing in Germany and other European nations.”

Note: we are attempting to independently authenticate the writer’s identity to confirm their employment at X.

But the letter becomes even more interesting when placed beside evidence that was already sitting in a federal court record months before it was published.

Let the Record Show

By September 2024, the FBI had obtained internal Russian documents describing an influence operation targeting the election, operating through social-media environments and using several strikingly similar methods: fake personas, fabricated news, artificial amplification, bots, targeted psychological messaging, AI-generated political content and coordinated manipulation of online conversations.

One of the platforms specifically identified in those Russian documents was X.

And the Russians had a name for the American component of their operation: “The Good Old USA Project.”

Forty-Nine Days

To understand why X matters in this story, however, we have to go back more than four years, to the beginning of Russia’s war against Ukraine.

Vladimir Putin launched Russia’s full-scale invasion on February 24, 2022. In the chaotic weeks that followed, Musk’s SpaceX became an important part of Ukraine’s ability to remain connected. Starlink terminals were sent into the country as Russian attacks disrupted conventional communications, and the satellite network eventually became deeply integrated into Ukrainian civilian and military communications.

Exactly 49 days after the invasion began, on April 14, Elon Musk publicly announced his unsolicited offer to purchase Twitter at $20 billion above market value.

Events unfolding simultaneously inside Russia make the chronology relevant.

According to the DOJ files, a meeting involving the Russian Presidential Administration took place on April 16, 2022—just two days after Musk publicly announced his offer to purchase Twitter.

Per the FBI affidavit, investigators eventually obtained records documenting at least 20 Russian Presidential Administration meetings between April 2022 and April 2023 involving Sergei Kiriyenko, the Russian Social Design Agency, Structura, ANO Dialog and others connected to what would become the Doppelganger influence operation.

The FBI assessed that Kiriyenko, Putin’s First Deputy Chief of Staff, was overseeing and directing the foreign influence efforts described in the investigation. The April 16 meeting discussed efforts to bolster support for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

At the time, these were seemingly unrelated developments.

Musk was pursuing one of the world’s most influential social-media platforms while officials connected to the Russian government were developing an increasingly sophisticated system for shaping public opinion abroad.

Over the next two years, those stories would increasingly occupy the same terrain.

Musk, Putin and Starlink

In October 2024, just before the U.S. presidential election, The Wall Street Journal reported that Musk had been in regular contact with Vladimir Putin since at least 2022. Citing current and former U.S., European and Russian officials, the Journal reported that the conversations involved personal matters, business and geopolitical issues and that contact continued into 2024.

The Kremlin disputed the extent of those communications, maintaining that Musk and Putin had spoken only once and discussed space and technology.

The Journal’s sources described something considerably broader.

By then Musk controlled Twitter, which he had renamed X. He also controlled a satellite communications network that had become strategically important to the war Putin had launched.

And Starlink itself was becoming part of the Russia story.

By early 2024, Ukrainian military intelligence was reporting that Russian troops were using Starlink terminals in occupied Ukrainian territory. Ukrainian officials said Russian forces had obtained terminals through intermediaries and sought SpaceX’s help preventing their use.

The extent to which SpaceX “helped” is unclear, as reports of Russian troops’ access to Starlink continued.

What the evidence established is a chronology: Musk sought to acquire Twitter immediately after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine; The Wall Street Journal subsequently reported that he was communicating with Putin and other senior Russian officials; Russian forces obtained access to technology controlled by Musk’s company; Musk blocked Ukraine’s access to Starlink to complete a strategic strike aimed at Sevastopol; and, during this same period, Russian government-linked organizations were developing increasingly sophisticated operations for manipulating Western public opinion through social media.

By the fall of 2023, according to evidence obtained by the FBI, those efforts had turned directly toward the upcoming American presidential election.

Doppleganger

On September 4, 2024, the Justice Department announced the seizure of 32 internet domains it said had been used in Doppelganger, a Russian government-directed foreign influence operation. The supporting FBI affidavit runs 277 pages and describes an ecosystem involving Russia’s Social Design Agency, Structura National Technology and ANO Dialog operating under the direction and control of the Russian Presidential Administration.

Among the documents investigators recovered was a proposal developed by the Social Design Agency beginning in the fall of 2023. Its title was the aforementioned “The Good Old U.S.A. Project.”

The objective was to move American public opinion toward the belief that the United States should concentrate on domestic problems rather than spending money supporting Ukraine and other “problem” regions.

But the proposal went beyond shaping attitudes about foreign policy. It explicitly centered the 2024 presidential campaign and described an intended electoral outcome.

The Russians then identified the Americans they wanted to reach.

Among their targets were voters in Nevada, Georgia, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, along with conservative-state voters, Hispanic Americans, American Jews and particular online communities. The project sought to increase the number of Americans who believed the United States was doing too much for Ukraine and those willing to end the war even if Ukraine were forced to surrender territory.

Then the planners identified their channels.

Facebook.

Instagram.

YouTube.

Reddit.

And X, formerly Twitter.

And this is where the Concerned Bird letter becomes difficult to read without noticing the parallels.

The whistleblower alleged:

“One team would write completely fake articles...”

The Russian Good Old USA Project called for:

“bogus stories disguised as newsworthy events.”

The whistleblower alleged:

“...another team would artificially boost their engagement metrics to make them go viral.”

The Russian project proposed mass distributions of comments and memes in Facebook and X discussion threads, while another Russian plan called for large numbers of disposable accounts specifically for manipulating social-media comments.

The whistleblower alleged:

“We specifically targeted certain groups of people, knowing exactly how to manipulate their views and emotions.”

The Russian planners called their approach:

“targeted social engineering” based on information trends and users’ emotional attitudes.

And they intended to monitor Americans’ reactions to their content in real time, using bots and a psychological-response operation to influence discussions and adjust subsequent messaging depending upon which groups responded most strongly.

The Concerned Bird alleged thousands of artificial accounts.

Russian records obtained by the FBI described another project, the “U.S. Social Media Influencers Network,” which proposed creating 200 Twitter accounts—four in every state. The active accounts would pose as fictitious Americans who supported a political party and presented themselves as members of local activist communities.

The Russians even specified how they intended to conceal where those Americans actually came from: VPN services and physical servers located inside the United States would help eliminate detection of the “Russian footprint.”

No single parallel proves that the Concerned Bird was describing Doppelganger, nor does it prove that anyone inside X cooperated with the Russian operation.

But the overlap is no longer abstract.

And both put Elon Musk and X smack in the middle of the story.

Given the parallels between Russia’s Good Old USA Project, Elon Musk’s actions, and what we’ve all watched play out on the platform he moved to acquire just 49 days after Putin invaded Ukraine, it’s hard not to come to the conclusion that Musk bought the platform to implement Russia’s agenda.

What other logical explanation could there be for announcing an unsolicited bid for the social media platform at $20 billion over market value?

A transaction that was later revealed to have been funded in part by Russian oligarchs Petr Aven and Vadim Moshkovich.

The motive?

Perhaps there was more than one:

• To help vault Trump into the White House, creating an opportunity for Musk and DOGE to dismantle federal investigations into Musk and his companies.

• To shield himself from potential criminal prosecution and the likelihood of prison time.

• To position himself to profit from Ukraine’s estimated $15 trillion in mineral resources should Putin succeed in his invasion.

Or all of the above?

We can’t be certain because investigations have not been opened.

Yet.

But what we are certain of is that on Election Night 2024, we watched millions of votes for Kamala Harris disappear in real time across the swing states and Florida, while Trump’s reported totals increased.

Then between 9:30 p.m. and 9:33 p.m., the Decision Desk HQ feed showed Trump’s reported vote total jumping from 46,219,886 to 87,665,393.

An increase of 41,445,507 votes in just three minutes.

At the same time that Elon Musk was over on Twitter posting, “Game, set and match.”

Perhaps the best way to protect the midterms is to arrest Elon Musk for election interference.

What We Can Do

We’ve been quiet these last couple of weeks, hard at work organizing a volunteer effort to monitor election results on Election Night.

We’re hosting a virtual training session on Monday, October 12, 2026.

Interested in volunteering? Please email: ProtectTheMidterms@proton.me

You’ll receive the above document outlining volunteer opportunities, along with live registration links.

The work is relatively simple. All you need is a television or phone and a notepad.

And hold onto your hope.

Donald Trump’s approval rating has fallen as low as 29%, Republicans are underwater by as many as 30 points in some areas, and the Democratic Party has been running the table since the 2024 election.

The midterms should be no different.

It’s all of us versus the Epstein class.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

In case you missed it, on Election Night 2024, the Decision Desk HQ feed showed Trump’s reported vote total jumping from 46,219,886 to 87,665,393 between 9:30 p.m. and 9:33 p.m.

At 9:32 p.m. Elon Musk tweeted, “Game, set and match.”

As the injection of 41,445,507 votes for Donald Trump appeared in the election system.

Votes were injected, removed, and reallocated for both candidates throughout the night, and Trump’s final total landed at 77,302,580.

Once again, no one at the state level was able to explain why these wild fluctuations were happening, and officials have remained quiet about the fake county vote banks we discovered last fall.

Reminder: voting is an additive process.

Which is why we began investigating.

Mainstream Media Finally Clocks In

The texts referenced in the recent NPR article are between Elon Musk and former conservative influencer and mother of one of his children, .

“Director Alex Gibney’s forthcoming documentary Musk reveals text messages between the tech mogul and his ex-girlfriend, Ashley St. Clair, a former MAGA influencer. The messages, which NPR has obtained and authenticated, are perplexing.

In them, Musk says he is feeling newly confident just before the November presidential election, writing he plans to “unleash the anomaly in the matrix.”

When pressed in the texts for clarity, Musk writes that he has 10,000 lasers in space, an apparent reference to his satellite company, SpaceX.”

But this isn’t the first time the “lasers from space” texts have hit the mainstream media. The new documentary by award-winning filmmaker has prompted renewed interest in why the world’s richest man appeared so certain about the outcome of the 2024 election before the race was called.

And what exactly did Elon Musk mean when he referenced his “lasers from space”?

It read like a riddle.

In hindsight, it reads like a confession.

The End Game

What if stealing the 2024 election began long before Musk announced his support for Donald Trump in July 2024?

What if the plan started taking shape in 2022, when Musk began communicating with Vladimir Putin and purchased Twitter just 49 days after Putin invaded Ukraine?

What if the end game was securing the presidency for Donald Trump, weakening NATO, and cutting U.S. aid to Ukraine, a country sitting on $15 trillion in mineral resources critical to the technologies behind Musk’s business ventures?

The timeline:

• April 2022 — Elon Musk offers an unsolicited bid of $44 billion to buy Twitter, $20 billion over market and 49 days after Putin invades Ukraine.

• September 2022 — Musk blocks the request to extend Starlink coverage for the Ukrainian drone attack on Sevastopol.

• October 2022 — the Twitter deal closes with help from Russian oligarchs.

• November 2022 — Musk reinstates Donald Trump’s Twitter account.

• 2022 through 2024 — Musk converts Twitter to a pro-Trump, pro-Russia dumpster fire.

• January 2024 — Musk begins fast-tracking the launch of a new low-Earth-orbit DTC constellation, a project experts said should have taken more than two years to build.

• February 2024 — Musk files paperwork for America PAC. (Meaning his support for Trump has nothing to do with the later assassination attempt as he stated.)

• February 2024 — Ukrainian media and intelligence first began detecting systematic use of Starlink by Russian forces on the front lines.

• February 11, 2024: Ukraine's Military Intelligence (HUR) officially stated it confirmed the adversary's use of Starlink, releasing intercepted audio as evidence.

• April 2024 — Musk begins hosting “billionaire brain trust” meetings that include Rupert Murdoch and Jeff Bezos, among others.

• May 2024 — Peter Thiel funds Polymarket.

• May 2024 — Eaton Corporation, with access to roughly 70% of U.S. election-equipment infrastructure, announces a “deepening relationship” with Palantir.

• July 2024 — Musk officially launches America PAC, described by critics as a voter-information harvesting platform, using Republican-linked Chain Bridge as its financial institution.

• Summer 2024 — At multiple rallies, Trump tells supporters that he doesn’t need any votes because he already has all the votes he needs. He also states that “… in four years, we’ll have it fixed so good, you’re not gonna have to vote again.” At yet another event, he says, “I’m being told I have all the votes I need.”

• July 22, 2024 — Musk announces completion of the Memphis supercomputer needed for the new DTC constellation in an astonishing 19-day timeline.

• August 2024 — Whistleblower Vincent Reed files paperwork in Minnesota to incorporate a U.S. entity for the U.A.E.’s Aleria—ElyTech USA Inc.—to give them a domestic home base for their AI technology platform.

• August 24, 2024 — U.A.E.’s Aleria representative informs Vincent Reed of their intention to deliver their AI election technology to the Trump campaign via Elon Musk.
  **This is foreign election interference

• September 2024 — Eaton Corporation partners with Elon Musk and Tesla, just two months before the election.

• October 4, 2024 — Republican-linked Chain Bridge launches its IPO. Reuters notes the considerable risks if Republican electoral fortunes change.

• October 5, 2024 — According to The New York Times, Musk texts Ashley St. Clair:

“I’m feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.”

An hour later, he adds:

“This isn’t something on the chessboard, so they’ll be quite surprised. ‘Lasers’ from space.”

• October 7, 2024 — Musk jokes during an interview with Tucker Carlson: “If Trump loses, I’m f*cked. How long do you think my prison sentence is going to be?”

• October 25, 2024 — Rupert Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal publishes reporting that Musk had been communicating with Putin and Xi Jinping for more than two years.

• October 30, 2024 — Musk’s DTC satellites launch, activating the 265-unit constellation less than a week before Election Day.

• October 30, 2024 — Chain Bridge shares surge to more than three times their average trading volume.

• October 30, 2024 — Polymarket predicts the exact outcome of the presidential election.
  **Considering the convergence of all three events on October 30, Republicans seemed certain that Trump would win once Musk’s satellites launched.

• November 4, 2024 — Trump states that he and Mike Johnson have “a little secret” that will have a great effect on the House race.

• November 5, 2024 — the Decision Desk HQ feed shows that millions of votes for Kamala Harris disappear in real time across the swing states and Florida.

• November 5, 2024 — the Decision Desk HQ feed shows Trump’s reported vote total jumping from 46,219,886 to 87,665,393 between 9:30 p.m. and 9:33 p.m.

  At 9:32 p.m., Elon Musk tweets, “Game, set and match.”

  An increase of 41,445,507 votes in a three-minute span.

• November 5, 2024 — Trump wins the election carrying every swing state just above the threshold for an automatic recount, flipping 88 counties red and none flipping blue. A combination of events that statisticians describe as having a functionally zero chance of happening without election interference.

• November 5, 2024, post-election — Trump at his rally:

  “I was sitting with Dana White and Elon Musk and I’m watching the numbers in Pennsylvania and we’re winning so easily then all of a sudden it flatlined, and I said you know, I said I think they’re cheating again look at this what’s going on I think they’re cheating again…

  And Elon looked at us and said, “No, you’re going to win they just don’t know it yet.”

• January 19, 2025 — Trump thanks Elon Musk for his knowledge of “those vote-counting computers.”

• January 2025 — Trump returns to office. Musk and DOGE begin dismantling federal agencies and programs while numerous investigations and regulatory actions involving Musk’s companies are paused or dismissed entirely.

• Jan 20, 2025 — Trump issues EO that leads to a pause in election security activities.

• February 5, 2025 — CISA employees are pushed out of their jobs by the DHS via deferred resignation.

• February 14, 2025 — CISA freezes all election security activities, Elon Musk’s DOGE fires remaining employees.

• February 2025 — Trump states that blue states will “totally disappear from the map” during the midterms and promises a “big, big surprise.”

• March 2025 — Trump issues an executive order that shifts federal election authority away from Congress, the states, and the EAC, placing key responsibilities under the Executive Branch, the DOJ, and DHS.

• March 2025 — Elon Musk’s team threatens Ashley St. Clair with “criminal charges” if she discloses any personal information about him.

• April 2025 — Ashley St. Clair takes her concerns about the election to The New York Times.

• May 12, 2025 — The DOJ begins demanding states’ election-related records and voter rolls.

• May 31, 2025 — Ashley St. Clair’s “lasers from space” story is published in The New York Times, bringing renewed attention to Musk’s statements made shortly before the election.

• June 5, 2025 — Musk publicly states that Trump would have lost the election without him, adding that Democrats would have controlled the House and that Republicans would have held only a 51–49 majority in the Senate.

If the end game was to secure the presidency for Donald Trump, weaken NATO, and cut U.S. aid to Ukraine in ways that benefited Vladimir Putin and Russia, it certainly worked.

And if Putin had a Russian asset in the White House, what would look different from Trump’s actions to reduce U.S. support for Ukraine and strain the NATO alliance?

Now Elon Musk is back on the election scene for the GOP, pledging to spend over a hundred million on the midterms and launching a fake voter-registration website similar to his 2024 America PAC platform for harvesting voter information.

The Cybersecurity Analysis

Many subscribers have asked for more details about the security vulnerabilities in our current voting system.

Key observations from the 2024 election:

• Millions of votes for VP Harris disappeared from media-reported totals, while votes for Trump were added to media-reported counts.

• New “counties” appeared in media reports that may have been used as staging areas—or “fake county vote banks”—for votes to be moved later to reconcile discrepancies in the total vote count. These counties do not exist.

• The discrepancies appear to be most significant when Decision Desk HQ data is used.

• While the discrepancies appeared in media reporting, the changes would have needed either to originate in the EMS or to have been made downstream in the ERS and then synchronized back or manually reflected in the EMS SOR totals. The latter scenario would require write (modify) access to the EMS database.

• Results distributed to other ENRs would also have needed to be reconciled with the changes.

• It appears that Decision Desk HQ, and possibly Edison, is pulling data directly from the EMS SOR. No one except authorized election administrators should have direct access or permissions to modify the EMS.

• It appears that the fake counties were created within one of the ENR environments, potentially Decision Desk HQ, and that votes staged there were subsequently modified to reconcile changes made to the actual vote totals. Establishing whether that occurred—and where—would require examination of the underlying system and access logs.

Cybersecurity experts go into more detail in this article:

What’s Next

State attorneys general need to lead the charge and open investigations into Elon Musk, his DOGE team, the voting equipment companies, and the election night reporting (ENR) companies, at a minimum.

Now. Before the midterms.

Which is why our cybersecurity experts built them a blueprint to both investigate the 2024 election and help secure the midterms:

2024 Election Investigation & Midterm Protection Blueprint State Attorneys Gener

431KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

And we need your help to deliver it to them.

Who you are contacting: your two state legislators and your state attorney general.

You can find the state attorneys general and their contact information here: National Association of Attorneys General

And your two state legislators. Find them at: openstates.org/find_your_legislator.

Note: calling and/or visiting in person is exponentially more effective than sending emails.

What you are asking for: a 15-minute meeting with the legislator, attorney general, or a member of their staff, to discuss the election system vulnerabilities and to share the 2024 Election Investigation & Midterm Protection Blueprint.

We’ve spent the last 20+ months circulating the anomalous data and investigative findings to members of Congress with little to no response. That’s why our efforts are now focused primarily on state-level action and getting this evidence in front of state attorneys general.

Our state elected officials must understand that we expect them to use the authority of their offices in the face of ongoing federal corruption and lawlessness.

Hold onto your hope.

There are 989 billionaires in the U.S. and 342.8 million of the rest of us. It’s all of us versus the Epstein class.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

The Democratic Attorneys General Association (DAGA) is hosting its Fall Policy Conference in Detroit, Michigan, from September 9–10, 2026, and we need those state attorneys general to receive the attached 2024 Election Investigation Blueprint from tens of thousands of Americans.

2024 Election Investigation Blueprint, pp. 1–10, in PDF format:

2024 Election Investigation & Midterm Protection Blueprint State Attorneys Gener

431KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

Right now, the most dangerous thing the Democrats are doing is telling Americans that elections are “free and fair” and that there’s “no evidence of widespread manipulation.”

That is simply untrue.

There is plenty of evidence of widespread manipulation, from the millions of votes for Kamala Harris disappearing in real time on Election Night to the absurdly anomalous election data to the fake county vote banks in the swing states and Florida.

All of that is considered “evidence.”

The Democrats are conflating the lack of investigations and the difficulty accessing ballots to confirm widespread manipulation with the evidence of widespread manipulation.

And they neglect to mention that confirming widespread manipulation is difficult by design.

Ballot challenges get tied up in court, often stalled until it’s time for the next election, or dismissed outright for supposedly lacking standing. The American people are smart, they’ve paid attention for the last 20 months, and they’re angry.

This is part of why Democrats’ approval rating has dropped to 18%.

Red Flags to Red Carpets

As covered by The Hollywood Reporter, award-winning producer Alex Gibney’s bold documentary on Elon Musk was an “unsettling” hit at the Venice Film Festival on Tuesday.

In the film, two election-related revelations stand out: Musk’s technological interference in the 2024 election on behalf of Donald Trump and Republicans, and his access to sensitive voter information needed to cast a ballot.

Former conservative influencer , the mother of one of Musk’s children, describes the events surrounding Trump’s election in November 2024. Musk, she says, had a “degree of certainty” about the election results before they came in that “I had never seen before.”

This isn’t the first time we’ve heard this story, either. St. Clair approached members of Congress after the 2024 election and was told they wouldn’t go near the story until the media picked it up.

So she went to The New York Times, where she was quoted anonymously in a May 2025 article. Still, the story failed to gain enough traction to prompt legislators or law enforcement to investigate the claims.

And now she’s in Gibney’s film, telling her story in an attempt to get the truth out to the general public.

A truth that Ashley St. Clair was offered $40 million not to tell.

$40 million that she courageously turned down.

There’s Always a Tweet

Whether it was Joe Rogan revealing that Elon Musk knew the election results four hours in advance, or Musk declaring, “Game, set and match,” at 9:32 p.m., at the same time that over 41 million votes were injected into the system for Donald Trump, the questions continue to pile up.

Then there’s Musk telling the world that Trump would have lost the 2024 election and that “Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate” had he not intervened.

Which might have something to do with the “little secret” Donald Trump referred to at the Madison Square Garden rally on October 28, 2024:

“We gotta get the congressmen elected and we gotta get the senators elected because we can take the Senate pretty easily, and I think with our little secret we’re going to do really well with the House, right?” Trump said while looking at Rep. Mike Johnson (R-LA). “Our little secret is having a big impact.”

“He and I have a secret,” Trump added. “We’ll tell you what it is when the race is over.”

Maybe that “little secret” has something to do with 88 counties flipping red and none flipping blue, a phenomenon that has had statisticians sounding the alarm for the last 20 months.

Even mathematically, the 2024 election makes no sense. Donald Trump couldn’t fill a stadium and had to pay people on Craigslist to attend his rallies, and we’re supposed to believe he beat Ronald Reagan’s numbers at the polls.

Bottom line: there have been far too many election-related statements and events left uninvestigated to simply accept that the 2024 election was “free and fair.”

Which is why we’re here, pushing for investigations.

The CISA Report Was Right

U.S. election infrastructure is more vulnerable than it’s ever been. We watched millions of votes for Kamala Harris disappear in real time on Election Night, found the fake county vote banks in the swing states and Florida, and saw the anomalous data where Democrats supposedly voted blue down ballot, then flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket.

And we know the EMS and ERS systems are connected on the red side of the graphic above and are completely unregulated and unmonitored.

Those millions of votes disappearing wouldn’t have shown up on broadcasts if the reporting layer hadn’t been compromised.

What We Can Do

State attorneys general have to lead the charge and open investigations. Now. Before the midterms.

Which is why our cybersecurity experts built them a blueprint to both investigate the 2024 election and secure the midterms.

Ideally, states need to use emergency powers to implement contingency voting plans using paper ballots, hand-counted results, and the phoning in of results to media networks.

And for the naysayers: no, it’s not “impossible.”

This is how election results were reported prior to the GOP’s electronic takeover of our voting process.

We’re not suggesting this as a long-term solution—just for the midterms. Afterward, states can look at longer-term solutions presented in the blueprint, or open-source voting methods.

Who you are contacting: your two state legislators and your state attorney general.

Note: calling and/or visiting in person is exponentially more effective than sending emails.

You can find the state attorneys general and their contact information here: National Association of Attorneys General

And your two state legislators. Find them at: openstates.org/find_your_legislator.

What you are asking for: a 15-minute meeting with the legislator, attorney general, or a member of their staff, to discuss the election system vulnerabilities and to share the 2024 Election Investigation & Midterm Protection Blueprint:

2024 Election Investigation & Midterm Protection Blueprint State Attorneys Gener

431KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

You do not have to be an election expert. You are a constituent asking what your elected officials intend to do in response to concerns about election security, election interference, and public confidence in the electoral process.

Explain that you saw millions of votes disappear in real time on Election Night 2024, you’ve reviewed the recent CISA report and have concerns about Elon Musk’s access to Aleria technology and real-time delta vote metrics, election interference, and vulnerabilities affecting election infrastructure, and that you are troubled that your state has not publicly addressed those concerns.

We’ve spent the last 18 months circulating the anomalous data and investigative findings to members of Congress with little to no response. That’s why our efforts are now focused primarily on state-level action and getting this evidence in front of state attorneys general.

A few of them are active on Substack: , , and . But nothing is as effective as contacting their offices directly.

We have 55 days until the midterms.

Democrats must prevail by a wide margin in November.

Our state elected officials must understand that we expect them to use the authority of their offices in the face of ongoing federal corruption and lawlessness.

Hold onto your hope.

There are 989 billionaires in the U.S. and 342.8 million of the rest of us. It’s all of us versus the Epstein class.

And we can take ‘em.

Because we don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

Do not enter your sensitive voter information into it.

Elon Musk is also currently funding an aggressive META campaign in key election states, encouraging people to “check” their registration status at VoteSafe.org.

And to supposedly “check” registration, VoteSafe.org collects the following sensitive voter information:

• First, middle, and last name

• Date of birth

• Full home address

• Email address

• Cell phone number

• IP address and location

• Browser, operating system, device information, and language

• The website that referred you to VoteSafe.org

• Links you click and pages you visit

• Voter-registration information

• Political information, including party affiliation, voting method, and political interests

Back to VoteSafe.org

Similar to the 2024 America PAC scam, this non-governmental website harvests Americans’ sensitive voter information. Only this time, there’s no $1 million giveaway. Musk is simply attempting to trick Americans into giving him their voter information to supposedly check if they’re registered.

Except, after 20 months of investigating, we know it’s to recreate the fake county vote banks he built to rig the 2024 election, as covered in several of our articles:

How About Those Blue States

In February of 2025, Trump said blue states would “totally disappear off the map,” he had a “big, big surprise.”

Think about it:

• Trump’s attempts to force blue states to hand over voter rolls weren’t successful.

• Trump’s EO to control mail-in ballots in exchange for voter rolls in blue states has so far been unsuccessful.

• The USPS’s attempt to adhere to Trump’s EO was struck down by Judge Talwani in Massachusetts and was therefore unsuccessful.

• Trump’s attempt to get the Supreme Court to rule in his favor on mail-in ballots in exchange for voter rolls has so far been unsuccessful.

• DHS raided Fulton County to obtain hundreds of thousands of ballots.

• Sheriff Bianco raided Riverside County, CA, to provide over 650,000 ballots to Trump’s DHS.

• DHS’s attempts to build a national voter database don’t appear to have been successful.

• ICE is now paying $5 million in an attempt to build a national voter database.

• And now Elon Musk is running a scam on VoteSafe.org to obtain sensitive voter information.

They are attempting to build vote banks for the midterms, and this time, we plan to catch them.

It’s not a “big, big surprise” because we saw millions of votes disappear for Kamala Harris across the swing states and Florida on Election Night 2024, and we dug until we found their fake county vote banks.

Elon Musk, Donald Trump, his entire regime, and the billionaires in the Epstein files are facing real accountability once Democrats take back power.

They are desperate.

And considering the release of the Epstein files, the stakes are even higher than they were in the 2024 election.

Considering the voter-roll purges and other nefarious acts of election interference we’re currently experiencing, it’s a great idea to check your registration.

Just make sure you’re not accidentally handing over your sensitive voter information to Elon Musk so he can rig the midterms.

You can navigate to your state’s official election website or use Vote.org to check your registration and keep your information safe.

And hold onto your hope.

We’ve taken down the corrupt and powerful before, and we will do it again. Only this time, we’ll hold them accountable and build something better.

Something that works for all the people.

Because we don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

Join us as Henry, one of our cybersecurity experts with more than 30 years of experience, breaks down the 2024 attack vector, explains the vulnerabilities in U.S. election infrastructure, and walks through what we need to be watching for as we head into the midterms.

*If you want to get to the cybersecurity nitty gritty, Henry begins speaking at 11:47.

Please watch, share widely, and help us get this information into as many hands as possible, including state attorneys general and state-level legislators.

Millions of votes for Kamala Harris disappeared in real time on Election Night in the swing states and Florida. We need state attorneys general to open investigations to determine why, so we’re building them a blueprint as discussed in this article:

Election Hygiene is a Democratic Process

You don’t have to accept every allegation about every election to recognize the pattern: when serious questions arise about voter access, election technology, foreign interference, conflicts of interest, or anomalous results, those questions should be investigated—not dismissed because proving election manipulation after the fact is difficult.

In a healthy democracy, over 200 Russian bomb threats would have been enough to prompt immediate hand counts of the ballots in the affected areas.

Democrats met the moment with silence.

It is well past time to stop treating election security as an abstract concern. Investigate the evidence. Preserve the records. Audit the systems. Follow the money.

And when wrongdoing is proven, hold the people responsible accountable.

There are 989 billionaires in the U.S. and 342.8 million of the rest of us. That’s one billionaire for every 347,000 Americans.

It’s all of us versus the Epstein class. The people have taken on the corrupt and powerful before and won.

We can and will do it again.

Because we don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

As covered by The Daily Beast and The Hollywood Reporter, two election-related revelations in Alex Gibney’s film Musk stand out: Musk’s technological interference in the 2024 election on behalf of Donald Trump and Republicans, and his access to sensitive voter information needed to cast a ballot.

In one, former conservative influencer Ashley St. Clair, the mother of one of Musk’s children, describes the events surrounding Trump’s election in November 2024. Musk, she says, had a “degree of certainty” about the election results before they came in that “I had never seen before.”

From the documentary: “He had told me [before the election] he was going to unleash the ‘anomaly in the matrix,’” she recounts, as a text between them appears onscreen to back up the claim. The audience sees Musk telling her, “I have ten thousand lasers in space.”

Gibney then asks off camera, “So you think he was referring to Starlink?” St. Clair replies, “I mean, I don’t know where else he has space lasers.”

Elon Musk knew the 2024 election results four hours before the polls closed because he CREATED them.

We’ve spoken with Ashley St. Clair on multiple occasions. She told us that her first attempt to get this information in front of the public came after the 2024 election, when she approached members of Congress and was told the media would need to cover the story first.

So she went to The New York Times, where she was quoted anonymously in a May 2025 article. Still, the story failed to gain enough traction to prompt legislators or law enforcement to investigate the claims.

Then, in May of this year, St. Clair stopped waiting for someone else to tell the story and took it directly to the public, using her own social media accounts to detail what she knew about Musk’s involvement in the 2024 election:

“And then on election night itself, Elon, you know, left Mar-a-Lago early. I was at Mar-a-Lago and he told me, he told me over text, he’s like, ‘Yeah, I knew hours ago that Trump won. My team has the best real-time data anywhere,’” said St. Clair.

“First of all, how the f*ck do you have real-time data on elections?” she continued. “How do you have real-time data? I could not understand that. I don’t know that I ever will. I just, I saw some shit, guys. Like, I saw some shit and I’m fighting really hard to keep my voice because I saw shit that impacts everyone. And if I was self-interested, I have been offered the self-interested deal to shut up and not talk about anything. But what I can tell you is I’ve not been offered certain deals just because I know that he’s weird.”

“Okay. I saw some shit,” she concluded.

Ashley St. Clair, a single mom of two living in New York, was offered $40 million in exchange for her silence.

She turned the offer down.

The film’s other revelation involving potential electoral manipulation concerns Musk’s four-month tenure in Washington, the unfettered access he had to government systems, and the data his team potentially collected on tens of millions of Americans.

Similar to Musk’s America PAC, which was created in 2024 and did not register voters but instead served as a voter-information-harvesting platform, Musk was able to harvest that same type of data directly from the government systems to which he and his DOGE team had access.

This is where the whistleblower complaint filed by Social Security Administration Chief Data Officer Chuck Borges comes into play.

Gibney explains further: “We don’t know what DOGE/Musk did with the data to which they had access. What we do know — via my own source who ran IT at a major federal agency and via the whistleblowers and public accounts — is that the DOGE Boys had Super Admin status to federal IT systems. That means they could just slide a copy of the data on all of us to SpaceX as easily as dropping a file into a folder.”

Also from the documentary, Wired editor-in-chief Katie Drummond: “How much data exists in the federal government about every single person living in this country, their voting records, everything that they had ever done?… Imagine what an AI could do if it can be trained on all that information.”

Geoffrey Hinton, the Nobel-prize-winning godfather of AI, expounds further with a specific use case: leveraging sensitive voter data into an unfair and illegal campaign tool.

“It’s fairly clear to me that Trump is hell-bent on corrupting the midterm elections… If you wanted to corrupt those midterm elections and you wanted to use AI, all you needed to do was get detailed information on U.S. citizens. And what DOGE did looked like just what you would do.”

What the film is missing: Musk was already able to leverage this sensitive voter data through his America PAC, which became an illegal campaign tool through a $1 million-a-day giveaway that encouraged swing-state voters to enter their sensitive voter information directly into Musk’s America PAC website.

How They Rigged It

The red side of the graphic above represents private infrastructure that is untested, uncertified, and not subject to government monitoring or oversight.

Therein lies the reporting layer—the system of record that exists downstream from the precinct level and beyond tabulation itself. This is the layer where we identified five fake county vote banks operating across the swing states and Florida, used to remove millions of votes and replace them with the totals reported as the “winning” results in those states.

And this is why millions of votes for Kamala Harris disappeared on Election Night in the swing states and Florida: the attack vector was post-tabulation, downstream from the precincts, in the reporting layer.

Fake county vote banks were created in the swing states and Florida using curated datasets of real voter information, but with the votes tailored to “win” the election just above the threshold for an automatic recount in each state.

The curated datasets were built using real voter information collected through Elon Musk’s America PAC.

The real votes were removed from the system of record and replaced with the curated datasets.

The people are real. Their votes are not.

When viewed through this lens, the Trump regime’s demand for access to state voter rolls should make more sense.

The objective is to build a centralized voter database similar to the data operation associated with Musk’s America PAC in 2024, one that could be used to recreate the vote-bank infrastructure we identified while analyzing the 2024 election.

Pause for a moment to ask why ICE is planning to pay $5 million to create a national voting database, as reported by Wired.

They need the data from Democratic states to build the 2026 vote bank. So much so that they’re weaponizing the USPS to block mail-in ballots in states that refuse to relinquish their voter rolls.

We break down the findings with our cybersecurity experts in this article:

On the Record

Donald Trump, November 4, 2024:

“Actually, Elon built a big plant in Texas, okay? We like it. All right? Elon built a very big plant in Texas. And we gotta give credit. We love Elon. He gave me — he gave me the greatest — he — and you know where he is right now? He’s in another part of your state.”

But I said to him, uh ‘What do you think about —’ Because he really is watching this whole voting process. And he said, ‘You know, computers are the greatest.’

He looked at some that were just shipped in, some of these uh vote-counting computers. He knew it before it even came in the door. He looked like at the back of it. ‘Oh, I know that one.’ I mean, he knows that’s how — I mean, he knows this stuff better than any. And he actually said — ‘and this is for the good of everybody, it’s the good of mankind, essentially.’

Donald Trump, November 5, 2024, post-election:

“I was sitting with Dana White and Elon Musk and I’m watching the numbers in Pennsylvania and we’re winning so easily then all of a sudden it flatlined, and I said you know, I said I think they’re cheating again look at this what’s going on I think they’re cheating again…

And Elon looked at us and said “No, you’re going to win they just don’t know it yet.”

Please just take a moment to digest Musk’s response:

“No, you’re going to win they just don’t know it yet.”

Donald Trump, January 19, 2025:

“And he knows those computers better than anybody. All those computers. Those vote-counting computers… And we ended up winning Pennsylvania like in a landslide… So thank you to Elon.”

And we can’t leave out Musk’s prediction that he’ll eventually find himself in the gulag. Yes, stealing the 2024 election would likely make lawmakers and the entire country “pretty grumpy.”

These are just a handful of the shady, deeply troubling election-related comments that no one seems to be investigating besides us.

It’s time to change that.

We are all well aware that Donald Trump was facing 44 felony indictments and was heading to prison if he didn’t “win” the 2024 election. We also know that, before Inauguration Day on January 20, 2025, federal agencies had at least 32 open investigations into Elon Musk’s companies.

And we know that, on October 25, 2024, The Wall Street Journal published a bombshell report that Musk had been in regular communication with Vladimir Putin for roughly two years, while earlier reporting revealed that Starlink access had been provided to Russian forces.

They had the means, motive, and opportunity, including access to the technology necessary to steal the 2024 election, just as they do heading into the midterms.

We would be naive, if not derelict, to believe they won’t attempt a similar operation to prevent Democrats from taking back Congress.

The evidence warrants investigations into what happened in 2024 and, critically, whether the vulnerabilities we’ve already exposed remain intact heading into the midterms.

Because the stakes haven’t gone away.

If anything, they’re even higher. A Democratic victory in November would bring congressional investigations, subpoenas, oversight, and scrutiny of conduct that has, until now, escaped accountability.

And the billionaires named in the Epstein files are equally invested in a Republican victory this fall.

What We Can Do

This is why state attorneys general have to lead the charge and open investigations. Now. Before the midterms.

States need to use emergency powers to implement contingency voting plans using paper ballots, hand-counted results, and the phoning in of results to media networks. And for the naysayers: no, it’s not “impossible.”

This is how election results were reported prior to the GOP’s electronic takeover of our voting process.

And we’re not suggesting this as a long-term solution—just for the midterms. Afterward, states can look at longer-term solutions, such as open-source voting methods.

We have constitutional avenues to remove this entire illegitimate regime, but those avenues begin with state-led investigations and winning the midterms by a wide margin.

Who you are contacting: your two state legislators and your state attorney general.

Note: calling and/or visiting in person is exponentially more effective than sending emails.

You can find the state attorneys general and their contact information here: National Association of Attorneys General

And your two state legislators. Find them at: openstates.org/find_your_legislator.

Every office has a scheduler, and you can request a meeting through the contact form or by calling the office directly.

What you are asking for: a 15-minute meeting with the legislator, attorney general, or a member of their staff. A virtual meeting is perfectly acceptable.

You do not have to be an election expert. You are a constituent asking what your elected officials intend to do in response to concerns about election security, election interference, and public confidence in the electoral process.

Explain that you saw millions of votes disappear in real time on Election Night 2024, you’ve reviewed the recent CISA report and have concerns about Elon Musk, election interference, and vulnerabilities affecting election infrastructure, and that you are troubled that your state has not publicly addressed those concerns.

Ask your legislators and state attorneys general to support paper-ballot, hand-count contingency voting procedures while investigations are conducted, with the goal of improving transparency, strengthening election security, and restoring public confidence.

Your script:

“Hello, my name is [Name], and I live in [City]. I’d like to schedule a 15-minute meeting regarding election security and the state’s response to concerns about election interference and the recent CISA report.

I am specifically for an investigation into: Aleria Technology and its ties to the Trump campaign; Elon Musk, DOGE, and communications between Musk and his engineers; any real-time voting data shared with private individuals; election equipment vendors, reporting systems including DDHQ, AP Votecast, Edison Research, Pro V&V engineering change orders; and any foreign interference connected to the 2024 election.

We are asking for subpoenas, preservation of records, vendor communications, software records, reporting-system data, and any communications involving campaigns, private technology companies, and foreign actors.

I have an article I’d like to share in advance, and I’d appreciate the opportunity to discuss whether there are plans to review the issues raised, whether the office intends to investigate any potential violations of election laws, and what steps can be taken to strengthen election integrity and restore public confidence.

A virtual meeting works perfectly if that’s easier. What does your scheduling process look like?”

Confirm the appointment and thank them for their time.

We have 61 days until the midterms.

We’ve spent the last 18 months circulating the anomalous data and investigative findings to members of Congress with little to no response. That’s why our efforts are now focused primarily on state-level action and getting this evidence in front of state attorneys general.

That said, if you believe your representatives are willing to take this seriously, contact them as well. Congressman , , and , would be a great start.

Democrats must prevail by a wide margin in November.

Our state elected officials must understand that we expect them to use the authority of their offices in the face of ongoing federal corruption and lawlessness.

We’re still holding onto hope. You should too.

Remember, these times are not unprecedented—the people have taken on the corrupt and powerful before and won.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

Following our August 23 Zoom call, many subscribers asked for more details about the security vulnerabilities in our current voting system. This article expands on that discussion, taking a closer look at the risks associated with the current system architecture and the vendors operating within it.

We’ve also included a more detailed diagram of the election environment, highlighting where the most significant risks and vulnerabilities exist. As discussed during the call, the systems we’ve identified as presenting the greatest potential security risks are shown in red, while those presenting comparatively less risk—at least based on our analysis of the 2024 election—are shown in green.

Let’s start by looking at the key systems:

Tabulators

Tabulators can be vulnerable to both software-based and manual methods of compromise. Because many systems rely on smart cards or removable flash memory rather than continuous network connectivity, the opportunity for a remote network attack may be reduced.

However, if a tabulator is connected to any network—even temporarily, whether through the internet, a modem, satellite service such as Starlink, or another networked device—the potential attack surface increases considerably.

Ideally, tabulators should operate in a fully isolated environment, with no pathway for access through other internal or external systems. Any authorized access should require unique, single-purpose user accounts that are never shared, protected by multi-factor authentication (MFA).

All system activity should also be comprehensively logged.

Those logs, along with relevant audit data, should be continuously or securely transferred to a separate read-only audit database so that an attacker who gains access to the tabulator cannot simply alter or erase the evidence of that activity.

Election Management System (EMS)

The Election Management System (EMS) is one of the most critical components of the election infrastructure because it serves as the system of record (SOR) for election data. Given its importance, the EMS should operate within its own isolated network, with no direct pathway for access from other internal or external systems.

All authorized access should require unique, single-purpose user accounts that are never shared and are protected by multi-factor authentication (MFA). All system activity should be comprehensively logged, with relevant data and logs transferred to a separate read-only audit database to preserve an independent record of activity.

Communication between the EMS and the Election Reporting Service (ERS) should be one-way and outbound from the EMS, using a controlled push mechanism such as secure file transfer, a message queue (MQ), or a tightly restricted API.

Network access should also be whitelisted, allowing the EMS to communicate only with specifically authorized ERS destinations. The ERS should never be able to initiate a connection back to the EMS. This architecture helps prevent a compromise of the reporting environment from becoming a pathway back into the election’s system of record.

Election Reporting Services (ERS)

Election Reporting Services take real-time voting results, aggregate them, and stage them for media outlets to use for Election Night coverage. Larger services, such as Decision Desk HQ and Edison Research/NEP, can connect directly to the EMS, likely using an API to pull data and, in some cases, a private circuit. Because this type of connection involves direct access to the election system of record (SOR), and the primary safeguards preventing modification of the data are proper authentication and authorization controls (permissions), this architecture creates a significant potential security risk.

It’s worth noting that Scott Tranter, who served as the Director of Data Science and Analytics for Marco Rubio's 2016 presidential campaign, is the majority owner and the Director of Data Science at Decision Desk HQ (DDHQ).

Pay attention to the small lightning-bolt icons, which indicate the key vulnerabilities discussed below:

1. While there is a risk of compromise at the tabulator level, it does not appear that the compromise we are examining occurred there.

2. The EMS should be isolated within its own network zone and should not be accessible through any other internal or external system. All communication from the EMS to ERSs should be conducted via a push mechanism—using file transfer, MQ, or an API—and with a staging system that they connect to. Access should be whitelisted to allow only outbound communication to the ERS staging server, leaving the SOR untouched.

   Unfortunately, in this case, it appears that Decision Desk HQ and Edison Research/NEP have direct connections to the SOR using private connections.

   If so, this could create the possibility of compromise through either a simple permission escalation that gives unauthorized personnel the ability to make changes—or a man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack at the network level. (Elon Musk)

3. If an ERS—or another actor—had direct access to the relevant system and obtained write access through the type of permission escalation described in No. 2, changes could potentially have been made there.

   Based on the way the results appeared in media reporting—where millions of votes for VP Kamala Harris disappeared in real time—this is where the changes appear to have surfaced first.

   Corresponding changes would then have needed to occur within the EMS (SOR) as well to reconcile the official data with what had already been reported to the media.

4. It appears that the EMS was subsequently modified after the changes appeared in the ERS.

5. Another possibility is that rogue personnel at one or more vendors—Dominion, ES&S, Decision Desk HQ, Edison Research, or NEP—may have been provided access and elevated permissions to the necessary systems (EMS).

6. A man-in-the-middle (MITM) attack targeting network streams carrying data to the EMS or ERS is another possibility. (Elon Musk)

Key observations from the 2024 election:

• Millions of votes for VP Harris disappeared from media-reported totals, while votes for Trump were added to media-reported counts.

• New “counties” appeared in media reports that may have been used as staging areas—or “fake county vote banks”—for votes to be moved later to reconcile discrepancies in the total vote count. These counties do not exist.

• The discrepancies appear to be most significant when Decision Desk HQ data is used.

• While the discrepancies appeared in media reporting, the changes would have needed either to originate in the EMS or to have been made downstream in the ERS and then synchronized back or manually reflected in the EMS SOR totals. The latter scenario would require write (modify) access to the EMS database.

• Results distributed to other ENRs would also have needed to be reconciled with the changes.

• It appears that Decision Desk HQ, and possibly Edison, is pulling data directly from the EMS SOR. No one except authorized election administrators should have direct access or permissions to modify the EMS.

• It appears that the fake counties were created within one of the ENR environments, potentially Decision Desk HQ, and that votes staged there were subsequently modified to reconcile changes made to the actual vote totals. Establishing whether that occurred—and where—would require examination of the underlying system and access logs.

Again, the fake county vote banks were discovered in the swing states and Florida—which helps explain why the 2024 election data appears to show Democrats voting blue down-ballot, then flipping to Trump at the top of the ticket in the states that “matter.”

Data Doesn’t Lie, People Do

It’s important to remember that, in a functioning democracy, more than 200 Russian bomb threats on Election Day should have been enough to trigger recounts in every state affected.

We shouldn’t have had to spend nearly two years examining election data and scouring Election Night footage ourselves.

Our government, legislators, and elected officials—the people entrusted with protecting the American people and our votes—should have immediately demanded recounts and investigations anywhere Russian bomb threats, malfunctioning election equipment, or breaks in ballot chain of custody raised legitimate questions about the integrity of the process.

We are here because our elected officials allowed us to be.

They allowed a stolen election.

They allowed this fascist takeover of our government and our country. They allowed Trump’s ICE militia to dismantle due process, throwing immigrants—and even some American citizens—into taxpayer-funded concentration camps.

And they helped enable it by passing the Laken Riley Act.

We are here because elections have been rigged for decades, and waiting for someone else to fix this is no longer an option.

We have to be the ones who stop it.

Call to Action

Contact your elected officials to demand investigations and the implementation of state emergency powers to protect the midterms.

Note: The Trump regime is demanding access to state voter rolls, which contain sensitive voter information. The objective is to build a centralized voter database similar to the data operation associated with Musk’s America PAC in 2024—one that could be used to recreate the vote-bank infrastructure we identified while analyzing the 2024 election.

America PAC was not a voter-registration operation, it did not register Amaericans to vote.

It functioned as a voter-information-harvesting platform, collecting sensitive voter data to build and populate the fake county vote banks we identified in the 2024 election.

The USPS is now helping the Trump administration by refusing to mail ballots to states that refuse to turn over their voter rolls to Trump’s regime, and the corrupt Supreme Court just ruled to allow Trump to proceed with his executive order, effectively saying that the states sued too early and hadn’t been affected yet.

So states have to wait until after they rig the election to sue.

States need to use emergency powers to implement contingency voting plans using paper ballots, hand-counted results, and the phoning in of results to media networks. And for the naysayers: no, it’s not “impossible.”

This is how election results were reported prior to the GOP’s electronic takeover of our voting process.

And we’re not suggesting this as a long-term solution—just for the midterms. Afterward, states can look at longer-term solutions, such as open-source voting methods.

We have constitutional avenues to remove this entire illegitimate regime, but those avenues begin with state-led investigations and winning the midterms by a wide margin.

Who you are contacting: your two state legislators and your state attorney general.

You can find the state attorneys general and their contact information here: National Association of Attorneys General

And your two state legislators. Find them at: openstates.org/find_your_legislator.

• Our state attorneys general investigative packets are almost ready and will be made public shortly.

• We need phone banks with thousands of people calling their state-level elected officials and attorneys general demanding investigations.

• We need volunteers across the country helping us protect the midterms on Election Night.

We need you.

Thank you for being here and circulating our articles. Your support makes this all-volunteer work possible.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

Join us for today’s Zoom, where cybersecurity experts will explain how the ballot travels through the election system, break down the 2024 post-tabulation attack vector, and show how we can catch them… again.

To register for free general admission tickets, please sign up at this link: https://events.humanitix.com/protecting-the-midterms

Date: Sunday, August 23, 2026.
Time: 3:00 PM CDT.
Where: Zoom link will be provided 24 hours before the event.

We also offer $5 and $10 tickets for those who wish to contribute to this ongoing volunteer work. Again, the event is free, but we certainly appreciate your willingness to chip in. Thank you!

Stolen Election Synopsis

In 2000, we should have been in the streets.

Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris—who simultaneously served as co-chair of George W. Bush’s Florida campaign—oversaw the voter-roll purge that removed 173,000 eligible voters from the rolls. Harris also rejected requests to extend the deadline for counties conducting manual recounts and moved to certify the results while recount litigation was still unfolding.

The recount battle ultimately reached the partisan Supreme Court, which halted the recount in Bush v. Gore, leaving Bush ahead by just 537 votes.

In 2001, researchers at Caltech and MIT estimated that millions of votes were lost in the 2000 election because of voting technology issues, registration problems, polling-place operations, and other failures.

Then Dan Rather exposed the GOP and Sequoia for deliberately manufacturing the hanging-chad debacle in Florida to accelerate the nationwide transition toward electronic voting equipment.

And Bush rewarded the election equipment companies handsomely with the implementation of the Help America Vote Act (HAVA), handing billions to the states to make electronic voting the go-to method of casting a ballot.

Then came 2004.

The Bush campaign ran the same play as they did in Florida, tapping Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell to serve as honorary co-chair of Bush’s reelection campaign. Blackwell then issued a directive preventing voters who had requested absentee ballots from casting provisional ballots unless they surrendered their absentee ballots at the polls.

Meaning that thousands of voters who never received or lost their absentee ballots were prevented from voting.

At the same time, Walden O’Dell, CEO of voting-machine manufacturer Diebold and a major Bush fundraiser, had publicly declared that he was “committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral votes” to Bush.

The subsequent King Lincoln Bronzeville v. Blackwell litigation included the deposition of Michael Connell, the Republican IT guru for the Bush family and Karl Rove. Connell ran the private IT firm GovTech, which created the controversial system that transferred Ohio’s vote count late on Election Night 2004 to a partisan Republican server site in Chattanooga, Tennessee, owned by SmarTech.

That is when Ohio’s vote shift happened—one not predicted by the exit polls—that led to Bush’s unexpected victory.

Connell died in a suspicious small-plane crash a month after giving his deposition, admitting to setting up the mirror site in Tennessee, but before he could testify in court against Karl Rove and Kenneth Blackwell.

In 2016, the Mueller Report, read alongside the Epstein files, reveals that Jeffrey Epstein, Peter Thiel, Trump’s campaign operatives, and Russia colluded to rig the election for Donald Trump. Russian interference was proven by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and Donald Trump blatantly invited Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s servers, which they did within hours of his request.

Clinton won the popular vote by nearly three million votes, yet Trump’s combined margin of victory in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin—the three states that effectively decided the Electoral College—was fewer than 78,000 votes.

Election experts approached Clinton with evidence of manipulation in those swing states and urged further examination and recounts. Yet Clinton declined to challenge the election outcome on the advice of her general counsel, Marc Elias.

Which brings us to 2024: over 300 documented Russian bomb threats; Elon Musk’s access to “vote counting computers”; unprecedented access to sensitive voter data through his America PAC, which served as a voter-information harvesting platform; his knowledge of the results four hours in advance of the official results; and multiple experts issuing Duty to Warn letters asking Kamala Harris to conduct a recount, which Marc Elias once again advised against, stating that he saw nothing actionable and the odds of overturning election results were low.

Again, the election was certified without the comprehensive forensic investigation that the circumstances warranted.

And that is the point.

Election hygiene is a democratic process.

You don’t have to accept every allegation about every election to recognize the pattern: when serious questions arise about voter access, election technology, foreign interference, conflicts of interest, or anomalous results, those questions should be investigated—not dismissed because proving election manipulation after the fact is difficult.

Bottom line: It is well past time to start doing something about stolen elections and to stop treating election security as an abstract concern. Investigate the evidence. Preserve the records. Audit the systems. Follow the money.

And when wrongdoing is proven, hold the people responsible accountable.

We look forward to seeing everyone on this afternoon’s Zoom call. Link to register: https://events.humanitix.com/protecting-the-midterms

Hold onto your hope. These times are not unprecedented—the people have taken on the corrupt and powerful before and won.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

Mark your calendars! This Sunday, we’re hosting another nationwide Zoom to walk folks through how the ballot travels through the election system, explain the post-tabulation 2024 attack vector, and show how we can catch them… again.

To register for free general admission tickets, please sign up at this link: https://events.humanitix.com/protecting-the-midterms

Date: Sunday, August 23, 2026.
Time: 3:00 PM CDT.
Where: Zoom link will be provided 24 hours before the event.

We also offer $5 and $10 tickets for those who wish to contribute to this ongoing volunteer work. Again, the event is free, but we certainly appreciate your willingness to chip in. Thank you!

How Your Vote Travels

This graph provides a visual representation of how your vote travels through the election infrastructure—and highlights where the vulnerabilities exist.

The black side represents infrastructure that is supposed to be tested and certified to ensure there are no gaps or vulnerabilities in the system.

We’ve written extensively about the problematic relationships between private testing vendors—such as CIBER, which was shut down after accepting under-the-table payments and failing to properly test or certify election equipment before later reemerging as Pro V&V—and private election equipment companies such as ES&S and Dominion, which operate within a far-right ecosystem and utilize proprietary software that is not available for independent analysis.

We’ve also documented court cases describing the current under-the-table payments between these companies, shared office space containing unsecured election equipment, and the failures in oversight by the EAC, including two commissioners who were sued over their ties to the Heritage Foundation.

Also as noted in Lovell v. Raffensperger:

“11. The fact that the voting machine manufacturers are the ones that pay the third party Voting System Testing Labs (“VSTL”) for certifying that their voting machines meet the standards required by the EAC is an egregious conflict of interest.

12. The recent advisory issued by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (“CISA”) (Ex. J) lists a multitude of vulnerabilities that cannot be addressed with any assurances. This list of vulnerabilities proves that not only is it quite simple to install malware with a variety of avenues, but that these voting systems indeed have illegal internet access capability.”

So although the black side of the graph is technically monitored and subject to oversight, it’s not necessarily secure.

The red side represents something entirely different: private infrastructure that is untested, uncertified, and not subject to government monitoring or oversight.

Yes, you read that right.

In nearly every state in America, when the polls close, county election officials transmit their precinct-level results not directly to the public, but through a private company. That company—not the county, not the state, and not any court—determines how, when, and in what form those numbers first reach the public, the press, and the candidates.

This category is called Election Night Reporting, ENR, or Election Reporting Services, ERS. It has no federal certification requirement, and in most states, no state certification requirement either. ENR/ERS sits outside the legal definition of a “voting system,” even though it produces the numbers the world will initially understand to be the election results.

And a handful of private vendors now perform this function for the majority of the country.

With no monitoring or oversight.

For State Attorneys General & the Public

The Architecture

Tabulators
There are vulnerabilities that can be compromised at the tabulator using software and manual exploits. Because most systems use smart cards with flash memory, a network attack is somewhat minimized but if there is any connection to a network even for a short while (internet, Starlink, modem), this risk grows considerably.

It should be isolated and should not be accessible via any other system, internal or external. All access to this system should only use unique single purpose identity accounts that are not shared and multi-factor authentication (MFA). All activity should be logged, and the data and logs shipped to a separate write only audit database (DB).

Election Management System (EMS)
The EMS is one of the most critical systems as it acts as the system of record (SOR) for the election. It should be isolated in its own network zone and should not be accessible via any other system, internal or external. All access to this system should only use unique single purpose identity accounts that are not shared and MFA.

All activity should be logged, and the data and logs shipped to a separate write only audit DB. All communication from the EMS to the Election Reporting Services (ERS) should be via a push, using file transfer, MQ, or API. EMS access should be whitelisted to allow only outbound access to the ERS.

Election Reporting Services (ERS)
The Election Reporting Services take real time voting results and aggregate them and stage them for media to pick up for election night coverage. Larger ones like Decision Desk HQ and Edison/NEP can connect directly to the EMS, likely using an API to pull data in some cases using a private circuit.

Being that this type of connection does involve access directly to the election SOR and the only thing that would prevent them from modifying data is proper access authentication and authorization (permissions), this architecture provides an exceptional degree of risk for a potential compromise.

Observations

• Millions of votes for Harris disappeared across the swing states and Florida in media reported counts, and votes for Trump were added in media reported counts.

• New “counties” showed up in polls and media reports that may have been used as staging areas or “vote banks” for votes to be flipped later (to cover the discrepancy in the total vote count). These counties do not exist.

• The discrepancies seem most significant when data from Decision Desk HQ is used.

• While they showed up in media reporting they would have needed to be initiated in the EMS, or made initially downstream in the ERS and then either synched back or manually changed in the EMS SOR totals. This would require write (modify) access to the EMS DB.

• It would have also required modifying the results for other ENREs as well to cover the changes.

• It appears that Decision Desk HQ and possibly Edison both are pulling data directly from the EMS and not the ERS where they should have been pulled. No one except state elections administrators should have access or permissions directly to the EMS.

• *Primary vendors for election management systems are Dominion and ES&S.

• Decision Desk HQ may have direct private connections to both Dominion and ESS.

Vulnerabilities and Possible Compromises

1. While there is risk of compromise at the tabulator level, it is not likely that the 2024 compromise happened there.

2. The EMS should be isolated in its own network zone and should not be accessible via any other system, internal or external. All communication from the EMS to the ERS’s should be via a push using file transfer, MQ, or API. Access should be whitelisted to allow only outbound access to a staging server for the ERSs leaving the SOR untouched.

3. If the ERSs (or another actor) did have direct access to the ERS and had Write access, they could have made the changes there. This is where they appear to have been made first due to the way the results showed up in the media. These changes would then need to be changed in the EMS (SOR) as well to cover for what was reported to the media.

4. It appears that the EMS system may have then been modified after the ERS.

5. Rogue personnel at the vendors (Dominion, ESS, DDHQ, Edison, NEP) may have had the access to the necessary systems.

6. A “Man in the Middle” (MIM) attack on the network streams moving data to the EMS and ERS is another possibility. (Elon Musk)

This is the framework for the investigative packet we’re building for state attorneys general.

DEF CON 2026

We have a love/hate relationship with DEF CON. Truly.

It’s refreshing to be surrounded by people who understand just how vulnerable U.S. election infrastructure really is. And in the same breath, it’s infuriating to hear those same people insist our elections are “free and fair” because election theft has never been “proven.”

All good! Nothing to see here! It’s never been “proven.”

That’s an easy standard to hide behind when you’ve never suffered the consequences of GOP rule. Black women and women of color don’t have the luxury of treating election security as an academic exercise. The stakes are real. We face disparities in everything from healthcare and career opportunities to access to education for our children.

And here’s what these cybersecurity folks consistently leave out: election rigging is extraordinarily difficult to prove by design.

The political parties have helped create a system in which challenging an election can become a procedural nightmare. By the time a party fights for access to ballots and election records, files suit, and makes its way through the slow-moving court system, we’re approaching another election—using the same equipment and confronting many of the same vulnerabilities.

You cannot simultaneously acknowledge that critical election infrastructure contains serious vulnerabilities and then treat the absence of proven exploitation as proof that exploitation has never occurred.

It’s ludicrous.

From DEF CON:

“In the twenty plus years I have spent in cybersecurity, data as compelling as what these efforts have presented would have won audits 100% of the time. And the data anomalies might not have even been necessary, as the more than 100 bomb threats called in on election night should have been enough to prompt thorough audits of all states impacted.

But the election world is different. It is political and it lacks clear lines of accountability.

Since the anomalous data was getting me nowhere, I also attended the Voting Village at DEF CON in both 2025 and 2026. I was looking for a technical reason I could use to raise alarm with those state secretary of states and attorney generals – some new evidence that could not be ignored.

What I found there has shocked me. Mixed in with thorough understanding of how deeply flawed and vulnerable our elections systems are at this time, there’s a pride in how far we have advanced the cause in the past two decades and a mysterious belief that, despite the flaws, there’s no evidence any election has been compromised.

I wrote a Substack on my surreal Voting Village experience:

Miles from Nowhere

America's Elections Are Kayfabe

Joan Didion opened her book of essays The White Album with the famous line, “We tell ourselves stories in order to live.” This elegant, evocative eight word sentence reverberated across the work that followed, serving many meanings. It was so resonant when a collection of her non-fiction classics were assembled in 2006, late in Didion’s career, these gr…

Read more

a year ago · 17 likes · 6 comments · Miles Destin

Still, I maintain hope. We have no other choice, of course.

We must find a way.

The latest Voting Village included one of the most insightful summaries I’ve seen, presented by Dr. Richard DeMillo, a Cybersecurity professor from Georgia Tech. He offered clear thinking on why our election system representatives are failing to see the urgency of better securing their mission.

They are burdened by a common plague of paralysis that infects large scale efforts, a tension between program management and engineering complexity. Dr. DeMillo illustrates the issue with comparison to past Space Shuttle disasters, and then uses the Curling v. Raffensperger case from Georgia to show how the same dynamic has us mired down in the election world.

Dr. Richard DeMillo’s presentation:

This presentation went against the grain of the entire event, standing out by insisting anomalies are not normal.

The prevailing Village vibe is aligned with the notion that free and fair elections are the norm. If you’ve spent much time in IT, you will recognize this problematic dynamic.

The program management side of the Village dominates, and they’re biased toward seeing success. The engineering side of the village sees extreme risk, and they’re frustrated that management doesn’t really listen, but, whatever, they’re used to it.

What’s still needed is a breakthrough.”

That’s why we’re here. To be that breakthrough.

And with over 20 million views on social media and this Substack, we’re not slowing down any time soon.

These Times Are Not Unprecedented

Although it may be tempting to believe they are.

There’s a saying in the psychology lane, “The worst pain is the pain you’re in. Because it’s yours.”

The same could be said of the times we’re currently living through. Between the first and now second Trump regimes and COVID, we’ve experienced collective trauma on a worldwide scale, and it certainly feels like this is the worst it’s ever been.

But that’s partly because we’re the ones enduring it—and Steve Bannon’s 24/7 firehose of orchestrated depravity is so overwhelming that it’s tempting to look away or go numb.

But we can’t.

And it’s important to understand that these times are not unprecedented.

The United States has faced periods of extraordinary political corruption, disputed elections, captured institutions, billionaire/industrial influence, patronage, political violence, and constitutional crisis before—and has responded with major structural reform.

Why is it important to understand this?

So we don’t lose hope.

The 1870s–1900s are surprisingly relevant.

The Gilded Age featured widespread corruption at both the state and federal levels, powerful political machines, legislators heavily influenced by industrial interests, patronage networks, and extremely close elections. Historians describe politicians as catering to business interests in exchange for political and financial support.

To the Vanderbilts, Rockefellers, and Carnegies, the world was their oyster—and they were keeping all the pearls.

And then there was 1876.

Samuel Tilden won the popular vote, but returns from several states were disputed. The Constitution provided no clear mechanism for resolving the dispute, so Congress created a special Electoral Commission consisting of senators, representatives, and Supreme Court justices.

Rutherford B. Hayes ultimately became president following the political settlement known as the Compromise of 1877.

This is important because Americans discovered a catastrophic hole in the constitutional machinery and invented a mechanism to deal with a situation the Constitution hadn’t adequately anticipated.

Like we’re having to do now.

Unfortunately, the resulting political bargain was disastrous for Black Americans: federal protection of Reconstruction collapsed and white supremacist governments regained control across much of the South.

Then came an enormous corruption backlash.

The corruption didn’t disappear when Hayes became president. The patronage system remained deeply embedded in government.

But the public reaction produced structural reform.

The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883 established merit-based federal employment, competitive examinations, protections against politically motivated firing and mandatory political contributions, and a Civil Service Commission.

Initially it covered only about 10% of federal employees, but its reach eventually expanded dramatically.

Teapot Dome provides another relevant example.

In the 1920s, the Teapot Dome investigation uncovered corruption reaching high levels of the Harding administration.

Congress didn’t merely hold hearings.

The Senate subpoenaed testimony and documents, published investigative findings, demanded removal of officials, confirmed independent special counsel, and referred matters for criminal prosecution.

The scandal became one of the landmark demonstrations of congressional investigative power.

And then there’s Watergate.

Watergate is probably the most familiar example, although we don’t think it’s the closest comparison.

The important lesson isn’t simply that Nixon resigned.

It’s that the country subsequently tried to construct guardrails around vulnerabilities Watergate had exposed: campaign-finance rules, congressional oversight, inspectors general, intelligence oversight, ethics requirements, transparency mechanisms and constraints on executive power.

The same guardrails that the Trump regime has systematically dismantled.

And the Church Committee performed another function that’s especially relevant to our current situation: Congress investigated its own national-security apparatus.

The underlying premise was extraordinary: democratic institutions sometimes have to investigate institutions that are themselves supposed to protect democracy.

We can already hear the pushback: “Congress and the DOJ aren’t going to do sh*t!”

Correct. Congress and our federal government are captured.

Thank goodness for states’ rights.

And if you’d told us in 2014, pre-Trump (PT), that those words would ever leave our mouths, you’d have gotten side-eye and a sarcastic remark.

Yet here we are.

The Blueprint

Building the Case

State Attorneys General: Investigate, Establish the Evidence, and Prosecute

Before we can talk about removing an illegitimate administration, reversing its actions, reconsidering judicial appointments, or repairing the constitutional damage that followed, we have to establish the underlying facts through lawful investigations.

And that begins with the states.

As we all know, presidential elections are not administered through one national election system. They are conducted by the states under a combination of state and federal law, with counties and local jurisdictions administering much of the election infrastructure.

Investigators have to reconstruct the election from the ballots forward.

State attorneys general need to determine precisely where the divergence occurred, when it occurred, which systems were involved, and who had access to those systems.

Our working hypothesis is that investigators should look beyond the voting machines themselves and examine the entire election-data chain—particularly aggregation and reporting systems operating after ballots have already been tabulated.

That hypothesis must be tested against the evidence.

At every stage, investigators should establish what the authentic result was, where that result was stored, how it moved to the next system, where it changed during that process, and who or what had the ability to alter it.

This is why simply conducting risk-limiting audits is not enough.

When manipulation occurs post-tabulation, it will not be detected by an audit conducted at the precinct level.

State attorneys general have the power, it’s time they use it.

The Zoom Call

Please join us this Sunday.

We have a blueprint for how to get out of this fascist hellscape, including an investigative roadmap for state attorneys general.

We need to build phone banks for volunteers to call their state-level legislators and attorneys general to demand action and to help protect the midterms.

Thousands and thousands of volunteers.

Again, that’s why we’re hosting the Zoom: to walk folks through how the ballot travels through the election system, explain the post-tabulation attack vector, and demonstrate how we can catch them on Election Night.

And this time, if they try to steal the election, Democrats at every level of government need to understand that we will be in the streets and at their offices demanding investigations and action.

That means legislators, governors, secretaries of state, state attorneys general, election officials, and party leadership.

We don’t elect public officials to protect institutions, political elites, or wealthy pedophile donors at the expense of the voters they serve.

Rolling over in the face of blatant election thuggery is not an acceptable response. Neither is ignoring the evidence or telling voters to move on without investigating it.

We’re tired of corruption on both sides of the political aisle.

To register for free general admission tickets, please sign up at this link: https://events.humanitix.com/protecting-the-midterms

Date: Sunday, August 23, 2026
Time: 3:00 PM CDT
Where: Zoom link will be provided 24 hours before the event.

We have less than 80 days.

Democrats must prevail by a wide margin in November.

Our state-elected officials must understand that we expect them to use the authority of their offices in the face of ongoing federal corruption and lawlessness.

Thank you for being here. Your contributions and subscriptions make this work possible.

And hold onto your hope. These times are not unprecedented—the people have taken on the corrupt and powerful before and won.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

Mark your calendars! Next Sunday, we’ll be hosting another nationwide Zoom.

Date: Next Sunday, August 23, 2026.
Time: 3:00 PM CDT.
Where: Zoom link will be provided 24 hours before the event.

We have an article in the queue and are trying to stick to Sunday releases so we don’t overwhelm everyone with more and more articles on the same subject.

This one is different: a blueprint for how we get out of this fascist hellscape, including an investigative roadmap for state attorneys general.

**I’m meeting with our cybersecurity team today to finalize a few components and will hopefully hit send tomorrow morning.

We also need volunteers to help protect the midterms.

Thousands and thousands of volunteers.

That’s part of why we’re doing the Zoom: to walk folks through how the ballot travels through the election system, explain the post-tabulation attack vector, and show how we can catch them… again.

And this time, if they try to steal the election, Democrats at every level of government need to understand that we will be in the streets and at their offices demanding investigations and action.

That means legislators, governors, secretaries of state, state attorneys general, election officials, and party leadership.

We don’t elect public officials to protect institutions, political elites, or wealthy pedophile donors at the expense of the voters they serve.

Rolling over in the face of blatant election thuggery is not an acceptable response. Neither is ignoring the evidence or telling voters to move on without investigating it.

We’re tired of corruption on both sides of the political aisle.

Thank you for being here. Your contributions and subscriptions make this work possible.

Onward. ✊🏽

We haven’t written about 2016 in a while because we’ve been focused on the election we can still do something about. But that doesn’t mean we can’t rewind the clock and reverse some of the actions taken during Trump’s first illegitimate stint in the Oval Office.

If that sounds revolutionary, it is.

And it’s time we start thinking in these terms.

Once again, the Trump regime dumped a batch of files, seemingly thinking they’ll make him look like the victim of a convoluted “deep state” conspiracy against him, when in fact they do the opposite.

Or perhaps the goal is to desensitize the public to Trump’s blatant criminality and collusion with Russia to the point that it no longer registers as illegal activity.

It’s just “Trump being Trump.”

From the released memos:

(Redacted) On or about 07/31/2016, the FBI opened a full investigation, CROSSFIRE HURRICANE (Redacted-HQ-2063661), based on information provided by Legat London, to determine whether individual(s) associated with the Trump campaign were witting of and/or coordinating activities with the Government of Russia.

(U/Redacted) On or about May 16, 2017, using predetermined criteria established by the CROSSFIRE HURRICANE investigative team, the FBI opened a full investigation based on an articulable factual basis that reasonably indicated that President Donald J. Trump may be or had been, wittingly or unwittingly, involved in activities for or on behalf of the Government of the Russian Federation which may have constituted violations of federal criminal law or threats to the national security of the United States.

(U/, Redacted) The investigation also sought to determine whether President Trump and others yet to be named obstructed and/or conspired to obstruct any associated FBI investigation into Russian efforts to influence the 2016 Presidential election.

On 05/17/2017, the Acting Attorney General appointed the Special Counsel and authorized him to conduct the investigation confirmed by then-FBI Director James Comey in testimony on 03/20/2017 regarding Russian Government efforts to interfere with the 2016 US Presidential election, including any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and the Trump campaign, any matters that arose or may arise directly from the investigation, and any other matters within the scope of 28 CFR 600.4 (a).

Except the Mueller probe led to 34 indictments, and eight members of Trump’s inner circle were convicted of crimes uncovered during the investigation:

• Paul Manafort: Campaign chairman convicted of bank fraud, tax fraud, and conspiracy against the United States.

• Michael Cohen: Personal attorney and fixer who pleaded guilty to false statements, campaign finance violations, tax evasion, and bank fraud.

• Michael Flynn: National Security Advisor who pleaded guilty to lying to the FBI about his contacts with the Russian ambassador.

• Roger Stone: Longtime advisor convicted of obstruction, witness tampering in special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into collusion between Russia and the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election, and lying to Congress regarding Wikileaks.

• Rick Gates: Campaign deputy chairman who pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States and making false statements.

• George Papadopoulos: Foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump, secretly arrested for lying to FBI investigators about his correspondence with foreign nationals with close ties to senior Russian government officials.

• Alex van der Zwaan: Attorney who pleaded guilty to lying to federal investigators about communications with Rick Gates.

• Richard Pinedo: California man who pleaded guilty to identity fraud related to Russian election interference operations. He played an instrumental role in a Russian troll factory's online influence campaign during the 2016 election by unwittingly selling bank accounts to Russians. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

For context, Army Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn acknowledged that his false statements and omissions in FBI interviews a few days after Trump was sworn in "impeded and otherwise had a material impact on the FBI’s ongoing investigation into the existence of any links or coordination between individuals associated with the campaign and Russian efforts to interfere with the 2016 presidential election.”

The Mueller Report

Robert Mueller went out of his way to explain that his office was operating under a longstanding Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) opinion concluding that a sitting president could not be indicted or criminally prosecuted while in office.

Importantly, that prohibition does not appear in the Constitution, nor was it enacted by Congress. It is a legal opinion developed within the Department of Justice—which places this entire situation firmly in “if they wanted to, they would” territory.

Mueller further explained that because a sitting president could not be formally charged—and therefore would not have the opportunity to defend himself in court—it would be unfair to formally accuse him of committing a crime.

He also went out of his way to state that Trump was not exonerated:

“The evidence we obtained about the President’s actions and intent presents difficult issues that would need to be resolved if we were making a traditional prosecutorial judgment. At the same time, if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the president clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards however we are unable to reach that judgment. Accordingly while this report does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him.”

The Mueller report also detailed eleven instances of obstruction of justice and documented extensive contacts between Trump campaign associates and individuals linked to Russia.

You may remember the names Konstantin Kilimnik, whom the U.S. government has identified as a Russian intelligence officer, and Paul Manafort, a member of Trump’s inner circle.

You may also remember Manafort’s sharing of internal Trump campaign polling data with Kilimnik during the 2016 election.

Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation detailed the close operational ties between Manafort and Kilimnik, but noted limitations in establishing the final destination or ultimate utility of the shared polling information after it left Manafort's hands.

Neither the Mueller report nor the bipartisan Senate committee formally established a criminal conspiracy or direct coordination between the Trump campaign and the Russian government's broader election interference operations.

This is yet another example of the “nothing to see here” MO of the elite protecting the elite. What did they think the Russians were planning to do with this sensitive internal polling data?

Use it for kindling?

Trump Didn’t Win In 2016, Russia Did

Yes, we’ve covered this ground before and are relitigating the sequence of events that led up to the 2016 election.

Because the Epstein files prove collusion between Russia, Jeffrey Epstein, Peter Thiel, and members of Donald Trump’s inner circle to rig the election in Trump’s favor.

And hopefully, this time around, people will understand what a big deal this is.

The timeline:

Despite denying any communication with Epstein, according to the FBI, in the spring of 2015, “President Trump had just been to Epstein’s property for lunch.” In June of 2015, shortly after meeting with Epstein, Donald Trump announced his candidacy.

June 30, 2015
Epstein floated the idea of introducing Peter Thiel to his Kremlin handler, former FSB operative Sergey Belyakov, describing him as “My very good friend that I’d organizing innovation conference in Moscow - w=II be in Palo Alto. Any interest ??”

July 1-6, 2015
On July 1 the email introduction was made—on July 6 Belyakov had his assistant reach out to Thiel to line up the meeting for July 8.

July 10, 2015
Epstein emailed Thiel to follow up:

“how did it go ?”
“fine... they wanted me to come to Moscow, not sure if I can do that”

July 10, 2015
James Comey, Director of the FBI, opened a criminal investigation code named “Midyear Exam” into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information while secretary of state.

July 25, 2015
Russian hacking group “Cozy Bear” launched a “sophisticated cyberattack” against the Pentagon’s Joint Staff unclassified email system. The officials also report the suspected Russian hackers coordinated the sophisticated cyberassault via encrypted accounts on social media.

August 2, 2015
Three weeks after Thiel met Belyakov and seven days after Russia hacked the Pentagon, Reid Hoffman hosted a private dinner in Palo Alto—the guest list:
Jeffrey Epstein, Peter Thiel, Mark Zuckerberg, Elon Musk, Ed Boyden, Desiree Dudley, Michelle Yee, Priscilla Chan, Navaid Farooq and Joi Ito.

Epstein emailed the picture to himself. Leverage.

It’s important to note:

• Peter Thiel was Facebook’s first outside investor and sat on the board from 2005-2022.

• Palantir was deeply embedded in the illegal Cambridge Analytica operation.

• Over 80 million Facebook profiles were harvested in a major data breach that Trump adviser Steve Bannon compiled through Cambridge Analytica to both micro-target American voters and push Brexit.

Cambridge Analytica was an organization whose sole mission was to illegally acquire data and illegally interfere in elections using an algorithm devised by the Kremlin.

According to whistleblower Aleksandr Kogan, Zuckerberg allowed Russian trolls to buy U.S. election ads, hate groups to spread fake news and, because Facebook shirked privacy concerns, allowed Steve Bannon and Cambridge Analytica to surreptitiously gain access to personal data mined from as many as 87 million Facebook users.

In yet another glaring example of a two-tiered justice system, no criminal charges were filed in connection with the Cambridge Analytica-Facebook heist.

The elite protect the elite.

December 10, 2015
Michael Flynn, who was cultivating Russian connections and later seeking to profit from them, was paid $45,000 to speak at a 2015 gala for the Russian state-funded television network RT. He was seated to the right of Vladimir Putin during the event.

Jill Stein was also in attendance and seated at Putin’s table.

2015–2016
Epstein invested $40 million in Thiel’s Valar Ventures, which Ehud Barak later described as “co-owned” by Thiel and Epstein as they acquired a stake in the Israeli surveillance technology firm Carbyne, formerly Reporty.

Their shared ideology became a financial partnership with an agenda.

2016: Escalation

February 3, 2016
Sergey Belyakov asked for an introduction to Vincenzo Iozzo, later identified by the FBI as Epstein’s “personal hacker.”

April 8, 2016
Epstein had a two hour meeting at Thiel Capital run by Jeff Giesela who wrote a paper on “memetic warfare” and ran Thiel’s PAC MAGA3X which ran psyops against Hillary Clinton including Pizzagate.

April 2016
Russian government hackers “Fancy Bear” gained access to the DCCC network and began exfiltrating data.

June 2016
Donald Trump Jr. met with three Kremlin agents at Trump Tower to receive illegal election aid—and contacted a known Kremlin operative for the release of stolen DNC and Clinton emails on WikiLeaks.

June 15, 2016
Epstein’s “personal hacker,” Vincenzo Iozzo sent Epstein the link to Guccifer2:

Epstein: “fun, but the only important ones would be hillarys secret”
Iozzo: “Think you need to wait for Wikileaks for those :)”

Thirty-seven days later, the emails were released on Wikileaks.

June 26, 2016
Epstein emailed Thiel celebrating Brexit:

“return to tribalism. counter to globalization, amazing new alliances. you and I both agreed zero interest rates were too high, and as i said in your office, finding things on their way to collapse, was much easier than finding the next bargain”

“Finding things on their way to collapse”? As evidenced in these files it was more along the lines of causing things to collapse.

July 2016
Roger Stone informed then-candidate Donald Trump in that WikiLeaks would publicly release Russian-hacked documents in the months leading up to the election, as Rick Gates testified in D.C. federal court in 2019.

Meaning that Donald Trump knew full well that Russia was interfering in the election on his behalf.

July 5, 2016
James Comey issued a statement on Hillary Clinton’s email server investigation recommending no charges and effectively clearing her.

July 21, 2016
Peter Thiel broke with Silicon Valley and headlined the Republican National Convention in support of Trump.

Note: Knowing that for two years, Epstein and Thiel had been coordinating the downfall of U.S. democracy with Russian operatives adds context here.

July 22, 2016
WikiLeaks released 19,252 DNC emails stolen by Russian hackers.

July 25, 2016
Jeffrey Epstein received an email from Richard Kahn noting Trump’s favorable polling data.

July 27, 2016
Trump invited foreign election interference at a news conference: “Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

On that same day, Russian hackers targeted Clinton’s accounts.

GOP operative Peter Smith reached out to the Russian hacker known as “Guccifer 2.0” and to alt-right activists in his effort to obtain the supposed emails that had been stolen from Hillary Clinton’s private server. Smith’s effort emerged as a topic of intense interest as investigators probed the ties between the Trump campaign and Russia.

August 2016
Paul Manafort handed off proprietary polling data to Kremlin operatives Konstantin Kilimnik and Oleg Deripaska.

August 29, 2016
In an email between Epstein and Tom Pritzger, referencing Ehud Barak, Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin, and Tom Barrack:

Epstein: “Questions you would like posed in your absence?”
Pritzger: “How close will race need go be for Russians to give us an October surprise? Which of Hillary’s emails was most entertaining?”

Tom Barrack was later exposed by a whistleblower for orchestrating a nuclear deal with Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Mike Flynn.

Last month, Donald Trump solidified that nuclear deal with Saudi, a 30-year civilian nuclear framework meant to give U.S. companies primary access to building Saudi nuclear infrastructure.

There are so many tentacles to this octopus.

September 14, 2016
Jeffrey Epstein received another email from Richard Kahn with election polling data.

October 3, 2016
NBC was in possession of the Access Hollywood tape and waiting on legal approval, then an internal source passed it along to the Washington Post on October 7.

October 7, 2016
Epstein put his “girlfriend” Karyna Shuliak in charge of an “important lunch” meeting to introduce Peter Thiel and Ken Starr to Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin—the same Vitaly Churkin that facilitated Trump’s first trip to Moscow in 1987—likely to discuss the Access Hollywood tape coming out that day.

Thiel had MAGA3X—the alt-right neo-Nazi group funded by Thiel’s right hand Jeff Giesea, and directed by Russian asset, psychological warfare expert, Mike Flynn.

The Russians had Podesta’s emails.

Within 30 minutes of the Access Hollywood tape release, WikiLeaks began publishing the hacked Clinton-Podesta emails.

Meaning Peter Thiel and Jeffrey Epstein were aware of the Access Hollywood tape and were trying to save Trump’s campaign by enlisting the help of Russian intelligence and Ken Starr—the man who had spent much of his career pursuing the Clintons.

October 9, 2016
Donald Trump held an impromptu press conference featuring Ken Starr’s key witnesses, Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey.

Three of these women had previously given accounts or testimony connected to the 1990s investigations into Bill Clinton.

October 11, 2016
Ken Starr’s key Clinton witnesses attended the presidential debate as ticketed guests after a planned seating stunt in the VIP family box was blocked by debate organizers.

They had planned the stunt with Starr as part of a strategy to counteract an event that had yet to happen when Epstein first emailed Starr on the morning of October 7.

Alt-right online trolls—funded by Thiel and Giesea’s MAGA3X—reframed the Podesta emails to push the false claim that Hillary Clinton was Satanic and leading a cabal of pedophiles.

Mike Flynn and Erik Prince amplified the narrative.

The operation largely spread through Breitbart, then run by Steve Bannon and financially backed by Rebekah Mercer.

Additional support for these online psychological operations was provided by Wagner chief Yvgeny Prigozhin’s Internet Research Agency through Facebook, which was later investigated and indicted by Robert Mueller.

October 13, 2016
Epstein received an update on the program they were running on Twitter giving Clinton a 72% chance of winning the election.

October 28, 2016
FBI Director James Comey reopened the email case against Hillary Clinton. A move that Senator Harry Reid later called for James Comey to resign over.

October 30, 2016
Psyop Pizzagate began—run by Thiel and Giesea’s MAGA3X, it alleged that Hillary Clinton was a pedophile and trafficking children.

November 4, 2016
Erik Prince gave an interview on Breitbart radio—he falsely accused Hillary Clinton of visiting Epstein’s island at least six times:

“They [NYPD] found State Department emails. They found a lot of other really damning criminal information, including money laundering, including the fact that Hillary went to this sex island with convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Bill Clinton went there more than 20 times. Hillary Clinton went there at least six times.”

Erik Prince became a subject of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election due to a clandestine January 2017 meeting with the aforementioned Kirill Dmitriev, the Russian banker who reports “directly” to President Vladimir Putin.

According to Mueller, the purpose of the meeting was to establish a backchannel between the Russian government and incoming administration officials.

November 5, 2016
Epstein sent an email to cancel a trip to Doha, “unfortunatlely , too much work around th= election.”

November 6, 2016
FBI Director James Comey cleared Hillary Clinton (again) in a second letter to Congress just two days before the election.

November 8, 2016
The world watched in shock as Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by close to three million votes—yet somehow “lost” the electoral college by just 77K votes across three swing states.

November 9, 2016
The morning after the election, at 6:05 a.m., Epstein sends an email to Peter Thiel with one word: “Wow.”

Behind the Iron Curtain

In August 2016, the late Senator Harry Reid warned that if Russia concentrated on “less than six” swing states, it could alter results and undermine confidence in the electoral system. That would pose challenges, given that most states have paper backups, but he noted that hackers could keep people from voting by tampering with the rolls of eligible voters.

VR Systems, a vendor operating in multiple swing states, was hit with Russian spear-phishing attacks. It was later revealed that Russian military intelligence successfully installed malware on the eve of the election.

This came on the heels of Election Systems & Software admitting that for years it had installed and used remote access software on election-management systems it sold to states, after initially denying it.

**Which blasts the whole “election equipment isn’t connected to the internet” argument out of the water.

Then the 2016 election data went off the rails.

Historically, undervote percentages—ballots where voters skipped the presidential line—hovered around 0.5%. But in 2016, that number suddenly spiked to around 1.9%—more than tripling the norm.

75,000 votes were left on the table in Michigan due to malfunctioning voting equipment in 59% of the precincts in Detroit.

Dr. Walter Mebane, Jr. flagged statistically significant irregularities in both Michigan and Wisconsin.

In November 2016, a group of computer scientists and election attorneys—including J. Alex Halderman and John Bonifaz—urged Hillary Clinton to challenge election outcomes in swing states like Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania over hacking concerns. Campaign general counsel Marc Elias addressed the findings, noting the data was circumstantial and the odds of overturning the results were extremely low, leading the campaign to ultimately stand down from mounting an independent challenge. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6]

As previously reported and now verified by , the Epstein files reveal that Trump met with Jeffrey Epstein at Trump Tower, just days after the election as he was putting together the cabinet:

September 25, 2016
A correspondent whose name was redacted asks Epstein if he’ll have a cabinet position.

On November 13, 2016, the correspondent asks Epstein if he’s still in Paris.

Epstein’s response: “trump tower.”

On November 13, Donald Trump was at Trump Tower assembling his cabinet. So what was Jeffrey Epstein doing there?

Then in December 2016, the late Senator Reid called for James Comey to resign for covering up Russian influence on Trump’s behalf—and withholding information revealed in a CIA report that Russian operatives gave hacked emails to WikiLeaks.

And in 2017, the Senate Intelligence Committee report on Russian interference found that the Russian government had engaged in an “extensive campaign” to sabotage the election in favor of Donald Trump, which included assistance from some of Trump’s own advisers.

The committee described “an unprecedented level of activity against state election infrastructure” by Russian intelligence that targeted “all 50 states.”

Ranking Member of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Jim Himes on the Brian Tyler Cohen show:

“…the Trump administration is completely opposed to that notion because they’re so allergic to the fact that Russia intervened twice to try to elect Donald Trump. Uh, three times actually—twice successfully…”

So they know—and are openly acknowledging—that Russia successfully infiltrated our elections to interfere on behalf of Donald Trump.

And they’re doing nothing to remove this illegitimate regime.

If just a portion of the undervotes in MI, WI, and PA had gone to Hillary Clinton—say, 70–80%, which aligns with down-ballot Democratic Party trends—she would have won the presidency.

• Michigan: Just ~15,000

• Wisconsin: ~23,000

• Pennsylvania: ~45,000
  → Clinton gains 46 electoral votes—more than enough to change the outcome.

What caused the election equipment in Detroit to malfunction? Or the sudden spike in undervotes?

We don’t know because it was never investigated.

But we know.

Building the Case for State Attorneys General

For months, we’ve been writing about the Epstein files and the powerful men who couldn’t allow a Kamala Harris DOJ to take shape—powerful men on both sides of the political aisle whose secrets needed to remain just that: secret.

We previously exposed Peter Thiel and his 2015 alliance with Epstein and Russian operatives to undermine U.S. democracy—something that should be front-page news but continues to slide under the radar, thanks to a captured mainstream media ecosystem.

So why are we relitigating 2016?

Because the erosion of our freedoms didn’t happen overnight.

It has been a decades-long series of injustices that our party allowed to fall by the wayside out of misplaced loyalty to institutions and the oligarchs they protect.

Donald Trump—a man with extensively documented ties to Jeffrey Epstein and Russia—should never have been able to run for office. Yet five DOJs and more than a thousand Epstein survivors later, here we are.

And Trump didn’t legitimately win the 2016 or 2024 elections. Meaning the Supreme Court justices he appointed are the judicial byproduct of a stolen election.

It’s time to put our Revolution pants on and do things we haven’t done since this country was founded.

We are building a team to hand state attorneys general the timelines, evidence, and technical analysis they need to investigate the elections, and several cybersecurity experts have already volunteered to help.

Why are independent journalists, statisticians, and cybersecurity experts building the cases to hold these people accountable?

Because no one else seems to be doing it.

Our cybersecurity experts believe the states simply don’t have the technology-oriented talent needed to explain what happened in the 2024 election or identify the election-adjacent organizations state attorneys general should be investigating.

Most importantly, we want to help prevent the same thing from happening again—because nothing has been done to stop it.

And on the same day Elon Musk received a $1.6 billion SpaceX contract, he announced his intention to make a massive push for the GOP in the midterms.

We are less than 90 days from the midterms and are hyper-focused on doing everything we can to help prevent manipulation of election data.

We are looking for like-minded people to join the team.

For those asking how to support our work, paid subscriptions help keep the lights on and the ink flowing. Thank you for being here and for sharing our articles.

We couldn’t have built this effort without your support.

Our latest article ties together many of the pieces that other “news” organizations refuse to cover:

The midterms are the most urgent priority, and every available resource is focused on protecting the integrity of the election and ensuring we don’t repeat the mistakes of 2024.

How Do We Fix This?

In the short term, governors should use their emergency powers to implement contingency voting procedures using paper ballots scanned locally while bypassing electronic reporting systems. Report precinct results by telephone, as was done before electronic reporting systems became widespread.

Long term, there are multiple approaches. Some experts advocate paper ballots with manual counts, while others support open-source election systems. In either case, the goal is the same: keep the vote private, but make the counting of votes public.

We have options.

And states have the power to deliver justice but not if they refuse to use it. This is where the people can make all the difference.

Call to Action

Contact your elected officials to demand investigations and the implementation of emergency powers to protect the midterms.

We have constitutional avenues to remove this entire illegitimate regime, but those avenues begin with state-led investigations and winning the midterms.

Who you are contacting: your two state legislators and your state attorney general.

You can find the state attorneys general and their contact information here: National Association of Attorneys General

And your two state legislators. Find them at: openstates.org/find_your_legislator.

Every office has a scheduler, and you can request a meeting through the contact form or by calling the office directly.

What you are asking for: a 15-minute meeting with the legislator, attorney general, or a member of their staff. A virtual meeting is perfectly acceptable.

You do not have to be an election expert. You are a constituent asking what your elected officials intend to do in response to concerns about election security, election interference, and public confidence in the electoral process.

Explain that you saw millions of votes disappear in real time on Election Night 2024, you’ve reviewed the recent CISA report and have concerns about Elon Musk, election interference, and vulnerabilities affecting election infrastructure, and that you are troubled that your state has not publicly addressed those concerns.

Ask your legislator and attorney general to support contingency voting procedures while investigations are conducted, with the goal of improving transparency, strengthening election security, and restoring public confidence.

Your script:

“Hello, my name is [Name], and I live in [City]. I’d like to schedule a 15-minute meeting regarding election security and the state’s response to concerns about election interference and the recent CISA report.

I am specifically for an investigation into: Aleria Technology and its ties to the Trump campaign; Elon Musk, DOGE, and communications between Musk and his engineers; any real-time voting data shared with private individuals; election equipment vendors, reporting systems including DDHQ, Pro V&V engineering change orders; and any foreign interference connected to the 2024 election.

We are asking for subpoenas, preservation of records, vendor communications, software records, reporting-system data, and any communications involving campaigns, private technology companies, and foreign actors.

I have an article I’d like to share in advance, and I’d appreciate the opportunity to discuss whether there are plans to review the issues raised, whether the office intends to investigate any potential violations of election laws, and what steps can be taken to strengthen election integrity and restore public confidence.

A virtual meeting works perfectly if that’s easier. What does your scheduling process look like?”

We have less than 90 days.

Democrats must prevail by a wide margin in November.

Our state elected officials must understand that we expect them to use the authority of their offices in the face of ongoing federal corruption and lawlessness.

And hold onto your hope. These times are not unprecedented—the people have taken on the corrupt and powerful before and won.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

The Gutting of U.S. Election Security Guardrails

For those who may be unaware, since Donald Trump's return to office in January 2025, the following federal entities with responsibilities related to election administration, election security, voting rights enforcement, foreign interference, and interagency coordination have been eliminated, substantially reduced, reorganized, or had their missions significantly curtailed:

• CISA Election Security Program – Election security staff were placed on leave, election security activities were frozen, and many specialized election personnel were ultimately fired, transferred, or reassigned.

• Election Infrastructure Information Sharing and Analysis Center (EI-ISAC) – Federal funding supporting this information-sharing network was eliminated.

• Multi-State Information Sharing and Analysis Center (MS-ISAC) – Funding was reduced, affecting cybersecurity support available to state and local governments, including election officials.

• National Security Council Election Security Group – The White House coordinating body for election security across federal agencies was eliminated.

• FBI Foreign Influence Task Force – The unit focused on detecting and countering foreign influence operations in U.S. politics was disbanded.

• FBI Public Corruption Team’s Election-Day Role – The public corruption team that historically helped monitor election-related criminal activity was dismantled.

• DOJ Civil Rights Division – Voting Section – Most career attorneys reportedly resigned, were reassigned, or were replaced, fundamentally changing the section’s work.

• Office of the Director of National Intelligence – Foreign Malign Influence Center (FMIC) – The center, including its Election Threats Executive function, was eliminated during a broader restructuring.

• State Department Counter Foreign Information Manipulation and Interference Office – The office responsible for countering foreign information operations was closed.

• U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC) Leadership – In July 2026, all remaining commissioners were removed, leaving the commission without active leadership. The EAC oversees voting system certification, testing laboratory accreditation, election security grants, and the national voter registration form.

• Critical Infrastructure Partnership Advisory Council (CIPAC) – DHS ended this public-private forum used for cybersecurity coordination, including matters affecting election infrastructure.

• Broader CISA Workforce Reductions – Beyond election specialists, CISA itself lost roughly one-third of its workforce through layoffs, buyouts, resignations, and program cuts, reducing the agency’s overall capacity to support election cybersecurity.

We are seeking individuals who previously worked in these departments, as well as those with cybersecurity expertise, to join our team for several important projects:

• To help protect the midterm elections.

• To help build the case for state attorneys general to open investigations into the 2024 election.

• To help build the case for states that allow grand jury petitions to convene grand juries to investigate the 2024 election.

Why are independent journalists, statisticians, and cybersecurity experts building the cases to hold these people accountable?

That’s a good question.

Because no one else seems to be doing it, and our cybersecurity experts believe the states simply don’t have the technology-oriented talent needed to explain how the 2024 election was rigged or identify the election-adjacent organizations state attorneys general should be investigating.

Most importantly, we want to help prevent the same outcome from repeating because nothing has been done to stop it.

Elon Musk and his “lasers from space” have entered the chat.

We are 90 days away from the midterms and are laser-focused on doing everything we can to help prevent manipulation of election data. We are looking for like-minded people to join the team.

For those asking how to support our work, paid subscriptions help keep the lights on and the ink flowing. Thank you for being here and for sharing our articles. We couldn’t have built this effort without your support.

Our latest article ties together many of the pieces that other “news” organizations refuse to cover:

We’ve also been hard at work building a people-powered news platform, but we’ve temporarily sidelined that project for triage reasons.

The midterms are the most urgent priority, and every available resource is focused on protecting the integrity of the election and ensuring we don’t repeat the mistakes of 2024.

There will be plenty of news to report after November 3, 2026.

Hold onto your hope. These times are not unprecedented—the people have taken on the corrupt and powerful before and won.

We don’t need permission to uphold the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

References:

https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-midterm-elections-takeover

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/trump-administrations-campaign-undermine-next-election

https://www.axios.com/2026/01/27/cisa-trump-administration-cuts-congress

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/how-federal-government-undermining-election-security

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-election-security-cisa-justice-department-fbi-federal-worker-cuts

https://www.propublica.org/article/trump-midterm-elections-takeover-takeaways

https://apnews.com/article/trump-fires-election-commission-members-0dc1f37c3990398b3085f22a14ea239a

Then last week, six House Democrats crossed party lines to approve the Fiscal Year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA). The $1.15 trillion defense policy bill outlines sweeping military funding, includes Section 219 directing the Pentagon to expand and accelerate joint military research, development, and industrial co-production with Israel, and incorporates the SAVE Act.

If it feels like nothing the Democrats are doing makes sense, welcome to the club.

Despite the overwhelming unpopularity of the war with Iran, continued funding for Israel, and the SAVE Act, six Democrats helped ensure that the NDAA passed by a vote of 216–212.

Seven Republicans voted against the legislation, meaning that if Hakeem Jeffries had whipped his caucus, the bill would have failed.

Those Democrats need to answer for their votes.

And then we have the third whistleblower, who implicated Israel in the manipulation of the 2024 election:

“Safra Catz, Larry Ellison, Eran Feiganbaum, and Lindsey Graham are NSO senior leadership.”

NSO is the Israeli surveillance technology company whose Pegasus spyware has drawn international scrutiny over its use against journalists, activists, lawyers, and political figures.

And now Larry Ellison, whose son David appears in the Epstein files, has parlayed Trump’s second presidency into an unprecedented consolidation of major media companies and social media platforms, including Paramount, CBS, and TikTok, and is now wielding that influence to halt the free press.

From the 2024 transcript:

TWH: “Intricacies such as…?”

WB: “Why Gelsinger’s exit happened when it did; the CBS sale; why JP Morgan funded Epstein; Lindsey Graham’s October 2024 visit with Oracle in Israel; the NSO Group activity that led to the WhatsApp case; and the subsequent series of rulings not involving Meta or OpenAI.”

TWH: “All of which is tied to the 2024 election?”

WB: “Yes. And the Epstein files. It’s not just ‘the Epstein list’—it’s a decades-long effort with multiple layers. Check out his [Epstein’s] travel, October through early-November 2016. And again, note Sen. Graham’s early-October 2024 visit to Israel.”

TWH: “That date looks off… Was it the following week? If the Epstein files and breach logs were released, wouldn’t that clean the system out?”

WB: “You’re probably right on the date. Clean? How much of the world economy is managed by very few people? ‘Cataclysm’ comes to mind.”

TWH: “So much of what they’re doing is unconstitutional. Crimes against humanity are on the rise across the globe. Who has proof of the NSA-authorized audit, and why are they sitting on it?”

WB: “Constiwhat? Think about the players involved and ask yourself that question again. Multiple individuals have the data. I’ll be traveling; I need to be where the banks aren’t controlled by JPM.”

TWH: “Would the data shore up the November numbers?”

WB: “Yes. It’s 100% Pentagon-certified that she won.”

According to the whistleblower, Israel is neck-deep in the manipulation of U.S. elections, and it’s been a “decades-long effort.” We also now know that Epstein was believed to be an intelligence asset working with Israel and Russia, collecting kompromat on billionaires and some of the world’s most influential political leaders.

Which makes this a really difficult follow-up to write.

Last week, we participated in an insightful Zoom in which people who were on the ground in Ohio in 2004 described the chaos surrounding that election.

They also described how John Kerry’s response to being told the election had been stolen from him was to go windsurfing.

The media barely covered it.

The Democrats wouldn’t talk about it.

Twenty-two years later, nothing has changed.

At some point, we have to acknowledge that Republicans haven’t won a legitimate presidency since Eisenhower and ask Democrats why they continue to roll over in the face of blatant corruption and election theft.

Ask Marc Elias why he advised John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, and Kamala Harris not to challenge their election results.

Sure, he’s the DNC’s go-to lawyer and has more than sixty lawsuits in the queue, but he wouldn’t be nearly this busy if Republicans weren’t repeatedly given the green light to steal elections.

Experts were presenting data that showed evidence of manipulation in all three elections, so why did he advise them to stand down?

We also need to ask Democrats why they continue to cross party lines to support legislation that most Americans oppose.

Some of these Democrats campaigning on the “abolish ICE” platform are the same ones who voted to pass the Laken Riley Act—which they knew would eliminate due process for immigrants.

46 Democrats in the House and 12 in the Senate.

They also need to answer for that vote.

In 2014, researchers Martin Gilens of Princeton University and Benjamin Page of Northwestern University published a landmark study analyzing 1,779 U.S. policy decisions made between 1981 and 2002.

Their findings should have woken up the country if we had a functioning media.

The researchers found that the policy preferences of American citizens had statistically near-zero independent impact on whether legislation was adopted.

Instead, the preferences of economic elites and corporate business interests were most strongly associated with policy outcomes.

The American people benefited when their interests happened to coincide with those of the wealthy.

Considering the impact Citizens United has had on the political landscape, if those researchers were to repeat their analysis using data from 2003 to the present, one might expect the influence of wealthy individuals and corporate interests to be even more pronounced than in the original study.

And yet we still call ourselves a “representative” democracy.

The Biggest Political Coverup In History

Which brings us to Jeffrey Epstein.

The Epstein files expose a decades-long network of powerful individuals whose relationships spanned politics, finance, intelligence, and international business, which we covered in The Octopus.

They also raise profound questions about institutions—including the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies—and why they failed to fully investigate or prosecute influential figures, allowing those with wealth and power to evade accountability.

As heartbreaking as it is to hear the survivors' harrowing stories, the broader implications are equally disturbing.

Vulnerable girls and young women were systematically exploited to gather compromising information on influential people—and their abuse became a means of exerting influence over governments, economies, and the balance of global power.

These survivors were not only victims of sexual exploitation; they were also victims of a system that weaponized human trafficking for political and financial leverage.

“In December 2024, I was personally involved in an NSA‑authorized forensic audit of the 2024 election. Kamala Harris and Tim Walz won—by a wide margin. Trump lost dramatically. There are multiple layers of complexity to this cover‑up, including transnational organized crime syndicates that extend far beyond the United States and our elections. To that point, I work in the human trafficking sector, which intersects with the stolen election(s) and has ties to Trump and Epstein—not to President Biden, Vice President Harris, or Governor Walz, but to the Democrats and other allied interests responsible for burying the audit.”— Adam Zarnowski, former CIA agent and author of Jörmungandr

Naturally, the NSA cannot confirm or deny that the audit exists.

We asked.

But we’ve seen the names released in the three million Epstein files: top political donors from both sides of the aisle, world leaders, and men who, to put it simply, run the world, as the third whistleblower said.

Leon Black and Jes Staley would much rather write enormous checks to survivors and retreat from public view for a while than stand trial and face the consequences of their actions.

So far, there are twenty-six other powerful men who likely feel the same way.

Donald Trump didn’t win the election in 2016 or 2024.

He was put in office by billionaires and foreign interests seeking to capitalize on his willingness to destroy the country for their mutual benefit while avoiding Epstein-related investigations and potential prison sentences.

The Epstein Node

By February 1988, Jeffrey Epstein was managing Lex Wexner’s finances. That same month, the Wexner Heritage Foundation hosted a national fundraising retreat in Palm Beach titled Models of Ethical Leadership. The keynote speaker: Benjamin Netanyahu.

In 1991, Wexner and Charles Bronfman helped establish a private “Study Group,” later known as the MEGA Group—a network of wealthy businessmen focused on philanthropic and strategic initiatives related to Israel, including Hillel International, as well as institutions shaping U.S. foreign policy discourse such as the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

In July 1991, Wexner granted Epstein power of attorney over his entire estate. Epstein also served as a trustee of the Wexner Foundation from 1991 to 2007. To outside observers, he appeared to have parlayed his time at Bear Stearns into one of the most powerful financial positions imaginable.

But the structure of that access raises questions.

This is where concepts like “honey traps” and kompromat become relevant.

Epstein had no formal financial credentials and lacked the pedigree typical of elite finance circles, yet was granted extraordinary control over wealth and access to influential networks. To most observers, that trajectory is difficult to explain.

Unless something else was at work. Something more sinister than anyone could have known at the time.

An intelligence operation—designed to elevate Zionism as a priority within the U.S. government, to sustain funding and access for Israel’s nuclear program, and to do so by cultivating influence over powerful decision-makers by luring them into Epstein’s depraved circle.

And it has paid off in spades.

Since 1948, the United States has given Israel over $300 billion in total economic and military assistance adjusted for inflation, making Israel the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid since World War II. Non-inflation-adjusted totals sit at roughly $174 to $210+ billion in assistance.

And since the October 7, 2023 attacks, the United States has provided Israel with at least $21.7 billion in direct military aid. When including related U.S. military operations in the Middle East (such as operations in the Red Sea and counter-actions against Iran and the Houthis), total U.S. spending connected to the conflict rises to between $31.35 billion and $33.77 billion, according to the Costs of War Project at Brown University.

To be clear: Israel has the right to defend itself.

But considering the intelligence given to Netanyahu before the October 7 attack, the decision to move IDF troops away from the area beforehand, the subsequent devastation of Gaza, the deaths of seventy thousand Palestinians, and the Netanyahu-Trump-Kushner plans to develop “waterfront” property there, it’s difficult to view this as anything other than a genocidal real estate deal.

Which brings us back to Section 219 in last week’s NDAA vote in the House, and the six Democrats who crossed party lines to ensure it passed by a vote of 216-212.

According to Rep. Massie (R-KY):

“This goes well beyond our pre-existing military relationships, such as with Five Eyes nations, or our more conventional defense partnerships with foreign militaries that are typically limited to information sharing, joint exercises, or bilateral development of specific weapons contracts.”

He called the provision an “unprecedented escalation of foreign involvement” and said its enactment would amount to Congress “fully capitulating our nation’s autonomy to foreign influence.”

The deepening military alignment between the United States and Israel. Continued U.S. support for Netanyahu’s genocide in Gaza that most Americans oppose. And a long-sought war with Iran over nuclear capabilities that experts say do not exist—a war that four U.S. presidents declined to initiate with Netanyahu.

These are not policies with public support.

Yet six House Democrats voted for them.

Why?

Foreign Interference

’s Red Sea Conspiracy is alive and well.

The countries involved are benefiting from this corrupt regime, with the exception of the United States, which is being gutted and sold for parts at the expense of the American people.

Israel is the most obvious beneficiary as the United States continues to fund Netanyahu’s genocide in Gaza and co-sign the war with Iran.

Need further proof? On July 22, 2026, the United States and Saudi Arabia signed a “123” civilian nuclear cooperation agreement, paving the way for American firms to build reactors in the kingdom.

The UAE has gained expanded access to coveted U.S. artificial intelligence chips after aiding in the Iran war, and U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) recently announced an agreement to establish the first bilateral task force focused on accelerating the development of military artificial intelligence applications.

We covered the UAE and its collusion with Elon Musk to interfere in the 2024 election in this article:

The company established U.S. roots in Minnesota, meaning the state’s attorney general, , has standing to open an investigation into foreign election interference.

In fact, given that Musk was targeting the swing states, one could argue that every affected state has a stake in the matter.

So why is no one investigating the Aleria platform or Musk’s access to real-time delta vote metrics?

And then there’s Putin, getting exactly what he wants from Trump: eased sanctions and the withdrawal of U.S. support for Ukraine.

That should come as no surprise, given Trump’s decades-long documented ties to Russian oligarchs and longstanding reporting by and others that his real estate projects are being used as Russian financial laundromats.

Donald Trump wasn’t elected by the people.

He was put in the White House because of his corruption, and, as Jeffrey Epstein’s closest friend, he could be controlled.

The July 2026 CISA Report

And now for the technology.

Yes, Trump has gutted CISA and the EAC. But before terminating personnel in those agencies, they were doing important work. In a July 2026 CISA report summarizing a five-year study conducted from 2019 to 2024, these were some of the key findings:

“The following technical risks predictably arise from this complex environment:

• Vendors often cannot ship security fixes outside narrow certification cycles without jeopardizing eligibility for upcoming elections.

• Third-party components embedded in election systems (operating systems [OS], device drivers, middleware, cryptographic libraries) cannot be patched at normal modern software cadence.

• Legacy OS baselines and unsupported runtime components accumulate unpatched vulnerabilities.

• The absence of secure auto-update mechanisms prevents rapid response to zero-day threats.

In practice, these constraints produce environments where known, documented vulnerabilities persist for months or years on production election systems, increasing exposure to opportunistic and targeted threats. The election vendors’ reluctance to publicly disclose vulnerabilities in certified products further limits state, local, tribal, and territorial (SLTT) operators’ ability to make informed risk decisions, perform compensating control analysis, or adjust architectural segmentation.”

This ties directly to what we’ve uncovered about election equipment companies operating within a far-right ecosystem and deliberately using equipment that is vulnerable to manipulation.

But CISA took it even further:

“Segmentation Failures Against Vendor Threat Models

Election vendor threat models typically assume that there is strong network segmentation between election systems-such as voter registration databases, electronic pollbooks, election management systems/tabulation systems, and central scanning infrastructure-from general enterprise IT environments. However, CISA assessments from 2019-2024 repeatedly showed:

• Election systems were reachable from enterprise hosts due to shared authentication domains, legacy VLAN configurations, or “temporary” exceptions that become permanent;

• Inadequate firewall rule hygiene, with over-broad allow rules and insufficient egress controls;

• Election infrastructure that is co-located on general purpose virtualization clusters that also host public facing workloads; and

• Overreliance on “airgap” assumptions that do not reflect actual connectivity (e.g., vendor support tunnels, unmonitored remote management tools, or indirect network paths).

These misalignments between theoretical and actual deployment models create exploitable pathways for adversaries capable of moving from commodity phishing based initial access to high value election assets.”

Election systems were reachable from enterprise hosts due to shared authentication domains... vendor support tunnels... indirect network paths.

These specific vulnerabilities could have provided the access point for the post-tabulation database intrusion and the fake county vote banks that we identified in the swing states and Florida, addressed in this article:

This is how millions of legitimate votes for Kamala Harris were removed and replaced with illegitimate votes for Donald Trump.

The millions of votes we watched disappear in real time across the swing states and Florida on Election Night—and why the data appears to show Democrats voting blue down ballot while flipping to Trump at the top of the ticket.

Again, this anomaly occurred only in the swing states.

The WhatsApp Bridge Capture

According to the whistleblower, following the NSA-authorized audit, the DoD/DISA dismantled a WhatsApp bridge on December 11—not merely severing a connection, but capturing an unprecedented cache of data containing proof of commands, uplinks, and real-time manipulation signals from Election Day.

The cache contained:

• Commands from Oracle-Israel / NSO Group directing vote manipulations

• Timestamps matching PolyMarket betting spikes

• Starlink uplink logs, showing when and where satellites transmitted data to voting infrastructure

• Financial transaction metadata, connecting the voting outcomes to immediate hedging and profit-taking

And as the CISA report highlights, despite claims of security, U.S. election infrastructure is deeply fragmented and inconsistently regulated across thousands of counties—making it more vulnerable, not less.

The unprecedented and illegal breach of voting equipment in 2020–2021 by individuals aligned with Trump compromised election integrity across multiple states. That breach, paired with the rollout of Starlink’s direct-to-cell (DTC) satellite capabilities, created the perfect conditions for undetectable interference.

And there have been no ground-level whistleblowers.
Starlink’s low-Earth orbit DTC system removed the human risk factor, replacing local intrusions with a single, centralized exploit.

“I’m feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.”

“This isn’t something on the chessboard, so they’ll be quite surprised. ‘Lasers’ from space.” – Elon Musk, October 5, 2024

Now Elon Musk is announcing plans for a massive GOP push in the midterms, resurrecting his America PAC. We already know it didn’t register any voters; instead, it served as a voter-information harvesting platform.

The narrative around Trump’s efforts to gain access to ballots is that it’s about voter purges. We think it’s something else entirely: harvesting voter information to replicate the 2024 vote banks.

And the consolidation of .gov websites containing voters’ personally identifiable information (PII) under the Executive Branch serves the same purpose.

At this point, it’s hard not to ask: Who isn’t hacking U.S. elections?

In 2016, Russia was flagrantly infiltrating our election systems, yet the party that benefited faced no consequences. In fact, the Epstein Files prove collusion between Epstein, Peter Thiel, and Russia to rig the election for Donald Trump.

And the Democrats continue to remain silent.

Signs of manipulation were again evident in the 2020 election, but the surge in Democratic mail-in ballots made that election an outlier. Which helps explain Trump’s push for the SAVE Act and his war on mail-in voting.

And as covered, 2024 saw manipulation involving Israel, Russia, the UAE, and Elon Musk.

Elon Musk’s conversation with Tucker Carlson:

Carlson: “So you’re not going to the gulag, it turns out.”

Musk: “Well, not immediately. I mean, maybe in five years. I don’t know. They might be pretty grumpy about this one. Um, but, uh, I think I’ve got at least several years before I go to the gulag.”

Yes, a stolen election is indeed a reason to be “pretty grumpy.”

At this point, it’s difficult to use the word “democracy” when our elections no longer reflect the will of the people.

And they haven’t for decades.

The GOP has had a lock on election equipment companies housed within its far-right ecosystem since the 1970s. The corrupt relationships among equipment vendors, the companies tasked with certifying the equipment, and the EAC have been well documented in court.

Election and cybersecurity experts have been analyzing the data and warning Congress about election equipment vulnerabilities since the 2000 election—yet they stop just short of saying the elections have been manipulated, arguing that we don’t have definitive “proof.”

As if the Caltech and MIT study revealing the disappearance of close to six million votes in the 2000 election wasn’t enough?

And what continues to go unmentioned is that the system is designed to make obtaining that “proof” extraordinarily difficult.

States have made it increasingly challenging to access ballots for meaningful recounts and full audits of contested races, and by the time litigation works its way through the courts, it’s time for another election using the same voting equipment.

Who benefits?

The wealthy elites. The military-industrial complex pushing their forever wars. Foreign nations looking to capitalize on corruption and chaos.

How Do We Fix It?

In the short term, governors should use their emergency powers to implement contingency voting procedures using paper ballots scanned locally while bypassing electronic reporting systems. Report precinct results by telephone, as was done before electronic reporting systems became widespread.

Long term, there are multiple approaches. Some experts advocate paper ballots with manual counts, while others support open-source election systems. In either case, the goal is the same: keep the vote private, but make the counting of votes public.

We have options.

And states have the power to deliver justice but not if they refuse to use it. This is where the people can make all the difference.

Call to Action

Contact your elected officials to demand investigations and the implementation of emergency powers to protect the midterms.

We have constitutional avenues to remove this entire illegitimate regime, but those avenues begin with state-led investigations and winning the midterms.

Who you are contacting: one of your two state legislators and your state attorney general.

You can find the state attorneys general and their contact information here: National Association of Attorneys General

And one of your two state legislators. Find them at: openstates.org/find_your_legislator.

Every office has a scheduler, and you can request a meeting through the contact form or by calling the office directly.

What you are asking for: a 15-minute meeting with the legislator, attorney general, or a member of their staff. A virtual meeting is perfectly acceptable.

You do not have to be an election expert. You are a constituent asking what your elected officials intend to do in response to concerns about election security, election interference, and public confidence in the electoral process.

Explain that you saw millions of votes disappear in real time on Election Night 2024, you’ve reviewed the recent CISA report and have concerns about Elon Musk, election interference, and vulnerabilities affecting election infrastructure, and that you are troubled that your state has not publicly addressed those concerns.

Ask your legislator and attorney general to support contingency voting procedures while investigations are conducted, with the goal of improving transparency, strengthening election security, and restoring public confidence.

Share this article before the meeting and ask that they review it in advance.

How: Reach out to offer a few dates and times that work for you.

During the meeting:

• Explain why election integrity is important to you as a constituent.

• Ask whether your state plans to review the findings discussed in the recent CISA report.

• Ask what oversight, investigations, audits, or legislative actions they support to strengthen election security and restore public confidence.

• Ask whether they believe additional transparency measures are warranted and, if so, what those measures should be.

• Ask what specific actions they intend to take and on what timeline.

If you call the State Attorney General’s Office:

“Hello, my name is [Name], and I live in [City]. I’d like to schedule a 15-minute meeting with the Attorney General or a member of their staff regarding election security and the state’s response to concerns about election interference and the recent CISA report.

This is not a partisan issue. States have a duty to protect their own elections, their voters, and the integrity of the results. If foreign actors, private technology companies, political campaigns, or third-party vendors interfered with election systems, reporting systems, voter data, or vote totals, the public deserves a full investigation.

I am specifically asking the Attorney General to investigate: Aleria Technology and its ties to the Trump campaign; Elon Musk, DOGE, and communications between Musk and his engineers; any real-time voting data shared with private individuals; election equipment vendors, reporting systems including DDHQ, Pro V&V engineering change orders; and any foreign interference connected to the 2024 election.

We are asking for subpoenas, preservation of records, vendor communications, software records, reporting-system data, and any communications involving campaigns, private technology companies, and foreign actors.

I have an article I’d like to share in advance, and I’d appreciate the opportunity to discuss whether the Attorney General plans to review the issues raised, whether the office intends to investigate any potential violations of election laws, and what steps can be taken to strengthen election integrity and restore public confidence.

A virtual meeting works perfectly if that’s easier. What does your scheduling process look like?”

If you call to schedule with legislators:

“Hello, my name is [Name], and I live in [City] in the [Representative’s/Senator’s] district. I’d like to schedule a 15-minute meeting with the legislator or a member of their staff regarding election security and the state’s response to concerns about election interference and the recent CISA report.

This is not a partisan issue. States have a duty to protect their own elections, their voters, and the integrity of the results. If foreign actors, private technology companies, political campaigns, or third-party vendors interfered with election systems, reporting systems, voter data, or vote totals, the public deserves a full investigation.

I am specifically asking the [Representative’s/Senator] to investigate: Aleria Technology and its ties to the Trump campaign; Elon Musk, DOGE, and communications between Musk and his engineers; any real-time voting data shared with private individuals; election equipment vendors, reporting systems including DDHQ, Pro V&V engineering change orders; and any foreign interference connected to the 2024 election.

We are asking for subpoenas, preservation of records, vendor communications, software records, reporting-system data, and any communications involving campaigns, private technology companies, and foreign actors.

I have an article I’d like to share in advance, and I’d appreciate the opportunity to discuss what actions the [Representative/Senator] supports to strengthen election integrity and restore public confidence. A virtual meeting works perfectly if that’s easier.

What does your scheduling process look like?”

We have less than 100 days.

Democrats must prevail by a wide margin in November.

Our state elected officials must understand that we expect them to use the authority of their offices in the face of ongoing federal corruption and lawlessness.

We’re still holding onto hope. You should too.

Again, we don’t need permission to enforce the Constitution.

We just need courage.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

"Socialists to blame?"

No, Robby.

Last June, more than 41% of the Democratic Party's base believed the 2024 election was stolen, and waved it off as though it didn't matter.

Since then, whistleblowers revealed that an NSA-authorized audit was conducted, that Kamala Harris won in a landslide, and that the audit was buried to protect wealthy donors named in the Epstein files.

Then the Epstein files were released in December, and they read like a who’s who of elite billionaires and political contributors:

Epstein’s billionaire roll call:

• Donald Trump (Trump Organization)

• Peter Thiel (Palantir, Founders Fund, billionaire)

• Elon Musk (Tesla, SpaceX, X, billionaire)

• Mark Zuckerberg (Meta/Facebook, billionaire)

• Les Wexner (L Brands, billionaire)

• Mortimer Zuckerman (U.S. News & World Report, billionaire)

• Leon Black (Apollo Global Management, billionaire)

• Josh Harris (Apollo Global Management, billionaire)

• Jes Staley (Barclays, JPMorgan)

• David Ellison (Skydance, Oracle family, billionaire)

• Timothy Mellon (BNY Mellon, billionaire)

• Paul Mellon (BNY Mellon, billionaire)

• Sergey Brin (Google, billionaire)

• Glen Dubin (Highbridge Capital, billionaire)

• Gordon Getty (Getty Oil, billionaire)

• Reid Hoffman (LinkedIn, billionaire)

• Bill Gates (Microsoft, billionaire)

• Nathan Myhrvold (Microsoft, Intellectual Ventures)

• Boris Nikolic (Gates Foundation)

• Ronald Lauder (Estée Lauder, billionaire)

• Dean Kamen (Segway, DEKA)

• Steve Tisch (Loews Corporation, NY Giants, billionaire)

• Todd Boehly (Eldridge Industries, LA Lakers, billionaire)

• Brad Karp (Paul Weiss)

• Brock Pierce (Tether, crypto ventures, billionaire)

• Thomas Pritzker (Hyatt Hotels, billionaire)

• Adam Back (Blockstream, billionaire)

• David Rockefeller (Chase Manhattan Bank, billionaire)

Jes Staley made Maria Farmer wear a Snow White costume when he raped her.

It doesn’t take a member of Mensa to understand why these powerful men were not about to allow a Harris DOJ to take its rightful place.

Elon Musk himself said in June of last year that Trump wouldn't have won without his help, that Democrats would have controlled the House, and that the Senate would have been split 51–49.

Awfully specific details, don’t you think?

And he's out here on Beyoncé's internet explaining why it'll take a minute to send him to the gulag—but we're going to be pretty “grumpy” about this one:

Yes, stealing elections does tend to make democracy-aligned Americans pretty “grumpy.”

In May 2025, Ashley St. Clair, Musk’s former partner and the mother of one of his children told The New York Times about his “lasers from space" and his access to real-time delta vote metrics.

When that didn't gain enough traction, she went public herself.

Last November, we identified five fake county vote banks that were used to swap legitimate votes for Harris with illegitimate votes for Trump in Florida, Michigan, Georgia, and Nevada.

Elon Musk built them with his voter information harvesting “America” PAC. He wasn’t registering voters in the swing states, he was storing their voter data.

That’s why millions of Harris votes disappeared in real time on Election Night.

It was a post-tabulation data swap.

Throughout 2024, Trump repeatedly told rally attendees that he didn’t need their votes because he already had all the votes he needed.

He then supposedly won every swing state just above the automatic recount threshold, while Democrats supposedly voted blue down ballot but then flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket, only in the swing states.

Personal question: how many Democrats do you know who did that?

We don’t know any.

Zero. Zilch. Nada. A big fat goose egg.

Multiple experts sent Duty to Warn letters raising concerns about the potential for manipulation in the 2024 election, and every one of those warnings went uninvestigated.

Then Trump said they "allowed" James Talarico to win his primary because they had dirt on him and believed he'd be easier to beat. He also said Senator Lindsey Graham was "scheduled" to win his primary "by a lot” before his untimely death.

Interesting language for elections we're constantly told are “free and fair,” wouldn't you say?

Despite an approval rating of roughly 37%, Trump's endorsed primary candidates went 118–118 through May 2026.

Then another whistleblower came forward, explaining how Elon Musk had access to real-time delta vote metrics through the UAE’s Aleria platform—which would constitute foreign interference in a U.S. election.

Which means Democrats should be demanding investigations, and yet we hear absolutely nothing except how much of our hard-earned money they need to win their midterm seats, and how, if we just vote harder this time, we’ll get ‘em.

So, to answer your question: No, "socialists" are not the reason Democrats are flailing in the midterm polls.

The Democratic Party's cowardice, corruption, incompetence, and refusal to confront concerns about the 2024 election are the reasons Democrats are flailing in the midterm polls.

They stole the 2024 election so child rapists could stay out of prison—and the Democrats let them.

Hope this helps.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now

On Thursday night, Donald Trump told the country that U.S. election systems are vulnerable to electronic manipulation and that Americans have been lied to for years.

Election security experts have been testifying to Congress about this for decades, and we’ve been investigating and writing about it for the last 18 months.

Which means a portion of Trump’s unhinged Thursday night speech contained a kernel of truth.

Please watch this two-minute video to understand how he gave away the game:

“This reporting included precise details about methods the regime developed to digitally alter vote totals in ways that could not be detected, even with an audit, no matter how deep they went…”

For context, Trump was talking about Venezuela and the method of manipulation supposedly used to put Maduro in power in 2020.

But this post-tabulation attack vector is what we discovered in November 2025 and have been reporting on ever since: the existence and use of fake-county vote banks to remove millions of legitimate votes for Kamala Harris and replace them with illegitimate votes for Donald Trump.

It was a post-tabulation data swap.

Trump is weaponizing the DHS and DOJ to conduct ballot raids while consolidating Americans’ data to replicate Elon Musk’s America PAC, which served as a voter information harvesting platform used to create the vote banks needed to rig the 2024 election.

Burke County, Florida, does not exist. Neither do Oklahoma County, Michigan; Stafford County, Pennsylvania; Allen County, North Carolina; or Hamilton County, Georgia.

And then there was Elon Musk’s conversation with Tucker Carlson:

Carlson: “So you’re not going to the gulag, it turns out.”

Musk: “Well, not immediately. I mean, maybe in five years. I don’t know. They might be pretty grumpy about this one. Um, but, uh, I think I’ve got at least several years before I go to the gulag.”

Yes, a stolen election is indeed a reason to be “grumpy.”

We have no doubt that Trump is laying the foundation to steal the 2026 midterms. Just as losing the 2024 election would have led to prison sentences for Trump, Musk, and the billionaires named in the Epstein files, losing the midterms will result in the same outcome.

Trump will declare a state of emergency to federalize the election, and we would be idiots to think we could count on the corrupt Supreme Court to side with We the People.

Now is the time for state attorneys general and governors to act. They must open investigations into the interference in the 2024 election and declare states of emergency to implement manual voting procedures for the 2026 midterms.

Capitalize on what Trump just told the entire country.

U.S. elections are vulnerable to electronic manipulation, and the only way to secure them within such a short time frame is for governors to declare states of emergency and revert to manual contingency voting procedures.

Remove the electronic components entirely:

• Hand-marked paper ballots

• Manual hand counts

• Manual call-in reporting of the results

Will it take longer to learn the outcome of the election? Yes.
Will the election actually be free and fair? Also yes.

We have less than four months before the midterms to make this shift. The time to act is now.

What We Can Do Together

• Circulate this article and video across all social media platforms.

• Send them to five family members and friends.

• Post them in five social media groups.

Contact your elected officials and demand investigations and the implementation of emergency powers to protect the midterms.

We have constitutional avenues to remove this entire illegitimate regime, but those avenues begin with state-led investigations and winning the midterms.

Democrats must prevail by a wide margin in November. It’s the only way to end this illegitimate reign of terror.

You can find the state attorneys general and their contact information here: National Association of Attorneys General

Emails are too easy to ignore and delete.

Call. Call. Call.

Relentlessly.

Use this script if needed:

Hi, my name is [Name], and I’m calling as a concerned citizen to request that the Attorney General open an investigation into foreign interference in the 2024 election.

This is not a partisan request. States have a duty to protect their own elections, their voters, and the integrity of the results. If foreign actors, private technology companies, political campaigns, or third-party vendors interfered with election systems, reporting systems, voter data, or vote totals, the public deserves a full investigation.

I am specifically asking the Attorney General to investigate: Aleria Technology and its ties to the Trump campaign; Elon Musk, DOGE, and communications between Musk and his engineers; any real-time voting data shared with private individuals; election equipment vendors, reporting systems including DDHQ, Pro V&V engineering change orders; and any foreign interference connected to the 2024 election.

We are asking for subpoenas, preservation of records, vendor communications, software records, reporting-system data, and any communications involving campaigns, private technology companies, and foreign actors.

The people have a right to know whether the 2024 election was compromised. Please open an investigation immediately.

And please tell me the best way to submit supporting documentation to the Attorney General’s office.

Thank you for your time.

In solidarity,

[NAME]

Request meetings. Go to their offices. Organize gatherings. Show up consistently and make your voices impossible to ignore.

This is your right as a citizen. Exercise it.

And according to Christopher Armitage in his latest article, six states do not require a prosecutor’s permission to initiate a criminal investigation.

“Kansas, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Oklahoma allow citizens to convene a criminal grand jury by petition. No district attorney has to agree. No attorney general has to agree. No governor has to agree.”

Nevada and New Mexico could very well be our way forward.

We’re still holding onto hope. You should too.

Again, we don’t need permission to enforce the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence.

We just need courage.

Onward.

Want the truth they’re not telling you? For fearless reporting and expert-backed research, read The Common Coalition Report. And if you believe in funding real, independent work—please subscribe to our Substack or support our all-volunteer team here.

Subscribe now