New Evidence Suggests That There Was Never a Voting Machine Election Audit Performed in Georgia

This article originally appeared on The Gateway Pundit and was republished with permission.

Guest post by Brian Lupo

This article was based on research done by the Election Oversight Group and a private Georgia citizen.  If you would like to support the Elections Oversight Group, you can do so here.  There is little-to-no funding for backend election investigations but hundreds of millions of dollars “donated” to register every person with a pulse.

The “Claim”

On November 17, 2020, Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger made an announcement that an audit “using forensic techniques” was completed with “no sign of foul play” in the 2020 election. The statement previously appeared on the Secretary of State’s webpage and is still available via the Wayback Machine here.

From the statement:

“Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger last week ordered Pro V&V, a U.S. Election Assistance Commission certified testing laboratory, to do an audit of a random sample of machines to confirm no hack or tamper: “Pro V&V found no evidence of the machines being tampered.”

“Pro V&V conducted an audit of a random sample of Dominion Voting Systems voting machines throughout the state using forensic techniques, including equipment from Cobb, Douglas, Floyd, Morgan, Paulding, and Spalding Counties. ICP, ICX, and ICC components were all subject to the audit. In conducting the audit, Pro V&V extracted the software or firmware from the components to check that the only software or firmware on the components was certified for use by the Secretary of State’s office. The testing was conducted on a Pro V&V laptop independent of the system.”

The problem is that besides a watered-down audit “report”, there is little to no evidence that this audit actually took place.  The following was from the public comment of yesterday’s State Election Board meeting in Georgia:

🚨BREAKING:🚨

The @GaSecofState and @GabrielSterling told us on Nov. 17, 2020:

"Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger last week ordered Pro V&V, a U.S. EAC certified testing laboratory, to do an audit of a random sample of machines to confirm no hack or tamper: “Pro V&V found… pic.twitter.com/5FITjcdhyD

— CannCon (@CannConActual) December 19, 2023

The “Memo”

In July 2021, an Open Records Request was sent to the state of Georgia requesting “an opportunity to inspect or obtain copies of public records that detail the results, contract, scope, and report of the audit that the Secretary of State contracted or directed Pro V&V to perform on the Dominion Voting equipment and machines after the 2020 general election.”

Three documents were returned:

1. “Memo for field audit.pdf”
2. “Re Memo Audit for Review_redacted.pdf”
3. “Field Audit Report Final 1.1.pdf”

The last document, the “Field Audit Report Final 1.1.pdf” from Pro V&V was strange.  For starters, the “Date” in the heading of the memo was “7/16/2021”.  This was eight full months after the audit was allegedly performed in November 2020.

The Gateway Pundit wrote about this bizarre occurrence in July 2021.  I personally inspected the metadata from the pdf and had several experts confirm my findings.  The metadata from the memo shows it was created on July 16, 2021.  And the metadata shows that it was created by Jack Cobb, the President of Pro V&V.

This isn’t the first time that Pro V&V has been associated with questionable documents.  In September 2022, The Gateway Pundit reported on their Letter of Agreement to the Elections Assistance Commission (EAC) regarding their certification to test voting systems.  At the time of the 2020 Election, the EAC website showed that Pro V&V’s accreditation expired in February 2017.  The EAC would later use COVID-19 as an excuse for not updating their website, even though COVID-19 didn’t exist in 2017 and the 2018 mid-term election had been run in the elapsed time.  In their “Letter of Agreement” to the EAC, they used a completely different header from other documents that was actually two images, one being their logo, pieced together.  They also misspelled their own address.  They also listed the old address for the EAC, which had moved years prior to the Letter of Agreement in question.  You can read that article here.

The “Records”

Kevin Moncla of the Election Oversight Group, and another individual began to send Open Records Requests from the counties that were allegedly “audited”.  While Raffensperger’s statement says there were six counties “audited”, the Pro V&V memo only listed four:  Floyd County (Rome, GA), Douglas County (Douglasville, GA), Paulding County (Dallas, GA), and Cobb County (Marietta, GA).  The record requests asked for communications between the Secretary of State, the State Board of Elections, and Pro V&V, among other things.  The results were surprising.

Not one county had records affirming, or even suggesting, that Pro V&V did an audit of their equipment.

The “Report”

In Georgia, on December 2, 2020, there was a report allegedly created by Pro V&V titled “Field Audit Report”.  This “report” was a 6-page document with 5 pages of simply definitions for the types of equipment.  Then, there is a little over a page under the heading “Audit Process and Results“.  Under that heading, there are 4 subsections:  General Information, Audit Configuration, Summary Findings and Conclusions.  Of the four subsections, two are only one sentence long.  The third is two sentences long and the Audit Configuration section is three short paragraphs.  Notably missing from the report are serial numbers of the specific machines that they “audited”.

By comparison, Pro V&V also released a report on their “findings” in Maricopa County that was conducted, coincidentally, or conveniently, just before the independent firm Cyber Ninjas conducted an audit of the largest county in Arizona under contract with the Arizona Senate.  The “Field Audit Report” from Maricopa was almost a cookie-cutter template of the Georgia report (which can be viewed in this article here) for the first three pages.  Then, it varies greatly:

• The Maricopa report lists the ICP2 Serial Number and Front and Back Seal Number for the 35 ICP2 tabulators they claimed to have “audited”.  In the Georgia report, they simply tell you that “a total of eighteen components located among six counties were evaluated…”.  No Serial Numbers.  No Seal Numbers.  No chart with identifying each component.  Nothing.
• In the Maricopa report, the “Summary Findings” included two tables titled “EMS and ICC Workstations/Servers Verification Details” that displayed the Scanner Information, Computer Model and Serial Numbers.  It then gave a six sentence explanation.  The Georgia report contained one single sentence, no tables, no equipment descriptions, nothing of the sort in the “Summary Findings”.
• The Maricopa report also included the headings titled “EMS and ICC Workstation/Servers Verification“, “ICP2 Hardware Verification“, “ICP2 Software Verification“, “Network Analysis“, “Accuracy Test“.  The Georgia report did not contain a single heading similar to those found in the Maricopa report.

The “Claim” Part 2

In his November 2020 statement, Secretary Raffensperger also stated the following:

“According to the Pro V&V audit, all of the software and firmware on the sampled machines was verified to be the software and firmware certified for use by the Office of the Secretary of State. Coupled with the risk-limiting audit of all paper ballots relying solely on the printed text of the ballots, these steps confirm the assessment of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency that there are no signs of cyber attacks or election hacking.”

The “risk-limiting audit of all paper ballots” being any sort of confirmation should be an immediate “red flag”.  It is flat out disinformation (the Mockingbird Media’s favorite word).  To be fair: there is little reason to believe that Secretary Raffensperger, at that time, knew that the risk-limiting audit in Fulton County, Georgia’s largest county, was off by thousands of votes.  Yes, thousands.  But wouldn’t Raffensperger have seen the thousands of votes that it was off by in the results?  No.  Because ballots were double and triple scanned by the batch-load in order to make the risk-limiting audit “match”.  So Raffensperger was seeing congruent numbers but they were fabricated, as acknowledged by an investigative team and report from the governor’s office.

This discrepancy in the risk-limiting audit resulted in a Consent Agreement between the State Election Board and the Fulton County Board of Registration and Elections.  The Gateway Pundit has previously covered this issue and numerous other ones in this 4-part series (links to Parts 1-3 in the article).

The “Questions”

With the additional supporting evidence disclosed above, there are several questions that must be answered.  Investigations must be conducted.  Legislators must address how apparent manipulations like this can occur in our elections.

• Why is a Voting Systems Testing Laboratory (VSTL), which certifies the machines before an election, allowed to perform an “audit” following an election?  The certification itself makes them a party to the validity of the system and therefore creates a glaring conflict of interest in allowing them to audit the machines afterwards.  The next time you are being audited by the IRS, ask them if your personal accountant can perform the audit.
• Why are Voting Systems Testing Laboratories contracted by and paid by the companies that make/sell/distribute the voting equipment and not the state, county, or individual municipality?   Pro V&V makes it clear on their website that they “will always be dedicated to verifying your products to your satisfaction.”  “Your products” and “your satisfaction” is likely not referring to the government entities that run our elections but don’t contract with the testing labs.  It’s referring to the companies that make the equipment and contract directly with the VSTL, such as Pro V&V.
• When will there be a thorough and transparent investigation into a company directly involved in critical infrastructure that seemingly acts at the behest of the government bodies they work with?  This evidence suggests a coordination with the Secretary of State’s office and Pro V&V to mislead the people of Georgia and it’s elected legislators with erroneous documents and an unverifiable “audit”.
• How much did then-Inspector General Scott McAfee know and to what extent did he go to investigate claims brought with evidence that there was no audit done as alleged by the Secretary of State?  If the name “Scott McAfee” sounds familiar, it’s because he is the judge currently presiding over the Donald Trump RICO case in Fulton County, Georgia.
• And lastly, with the 17k missing ballot images, 20k ballots counted on non-existent tabulators, appx. 6,000 ballots double and triple scanned in the risk-limiting audit, missing poll tapes and other election documents for hundreds of tabulators, and much more evidence:
• When will Georgia unseal the paper ballots and allow an independent inspection and investigation in Fulton County, and statewide, for the 2020 Election?  

Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis is prosecuting Donald Trump right now for racketeering (RICO) in Fulton County.  Let that sink in.

Copyright 2023 The Gateway Pundit