On Friday, we reported that Dominion Voting Systems had backed out of a scheduled meeting with Pennsylvania officials regarding the use of their equipment in the 2020 election and that they appeared to have lawyered-up. As this was a developing story, the plan was to provide a more detailed account on Saturday.
The story is developing more slowly than that.
New details are hard to come by right now. Here’s a local news blurb from Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
It seems intended to offer a brief defense of Dominion for not showing up. “Dominion addresses [the software issue] and other questions on its website," it says, "disputing what it says are fraudulent claims. It says it is a nonpartisan, American company, its results are 100 percent auditable, and there were no glitches in its software.”
Well, that’s good enough for me! It’s right there on their website. So why should they bother to attend any hearings and answer any questions, even if they had agreed to do so?
Here’s what they post on their website as of November 17 –- “setting the record straight,” as they put it –- that it seems they’re reluctant to say face-to-face in a Zoom call with state officials questioning their claims.
Anyway, the Harrisburg story continues: “Multiple fact-checkers say there’s no evidence that Dominion Systems switched any votes from Trump to Biden.” Actually, some have gone farther than that, to say definitively that Dominion systems DID NOT switch any votes. But the conclusion that there was no vote-switching is still open to legitimate question. It would be more accurate to say something like, "If there is evidence, it has not been made public."
It is true, at least at this point, that we have NOT seen conclusive evidence that this happened, only statistical anomalies suggestive of it. (Also, note that the specific wording in the Harrisburg story still allows that someone else besides Dominion might have done it.) Let me make it very clear, I am making no accusations about the voting machines or the software or what anyone did; I’m just saying that it’s something that should be looked into, like just about everything else surrounding this chaotic election. The lack of curiosity in the media about these issues and the desire to shut down all questions is amazing.
"The federal agency that oversees election security says the election was secure,” the story also says. Ah, well, I guess that’s that. But this statement conveniently glosses over the problems with that agency’s conclusion.
The agency is CISA, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which was headed by Christopher Krebs until President Trump unceremoniously (as in, by tweet) fired him, after CISA issued a statement saying this election was “the most secure in American history.” As you saw if you visited the Dominion website, the outrageous assertion that got Krebs in hot water is the very one quoted there.
The FEDERAL NEWS NETWORK says “CISA works with the state and local officials who run U.S. elections as well as private companies who supply voting equipment to address cybersecurity and other threats while monitoring balloting and tabulation from a control room at its headquarters near Washington.” What it doesn’t say is that two of those private companies happen to BE Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic. And at the time CISA issued their statement, this information was not disclosed.
Again, we haven’t seen evidence that Dominion machines and/or the election software were used to commit voter fraud. It’s also true that we’re not legally entitled to see such evidence before it’s presented in court, so we can’t conclude it doesn’t exist. That applies to the fact-checkers as well; just because they haven’t seen it doesn’t mean there isn’t any. And we sure can’t count on the media to uncover it and show it to us. So right now, we can’t do much more than wait while the attorneys assemble their case.