Thread by @benda4congress

#transparencyproject
Part 3: EVS Version 5.3.2.1; or the story of the Lincoln County Cattleman.
My initial motivation to initiate a lawsuit against Rice County was driven by simple frustration over the utter lack of responsiveness by local election officials. tweet 1 of 18.

As we were drafting the complaint to request the disclosure of government data under Minnesota Data Practices Act, we were also processing the fact that Rice County likely utilized modems in their election equipment machines. 2 of 18

The 8/22 complaint requested court review of the fact that the modems were not certified: ”Upon information and belief, Defendant intends to utilize an Electronic Voting System that has hardware, software or features that are not properly approved, certified or secure.” 3 of 18

This pleading quickly erupted into a firestorm of accusations calling our claims vague, inadequate, and defective with, “no legal or factual basis for the requested relief.” Secretary of State, Steve Simon quickly intervened into the lawsuit claiming, 4 of 18

the lawsuit would “threaten to cast doubt on the management of the 2022 election and to impose crippling burdens on election officials statewide.” An October 25, 2022 article declared: “Rice County lawsuit could upend the November election, if successful.” 5 of 18

Facing these grandiose claims, we were still needing to confirm the existence of modems & the version of machines in Rice County. As will be explained below, our journey for information was eventually boosted by a farmer in Lincoln County-more on that later. 6 of 18

Co-Plaintiff Kathleen Hagen is an engineer specializing in Systems Engineering. Professionally, she spends a significant amount of her time making sure processes are efficient, safe, and secure for a fortune 500 company. Hagen was also employed as a head election judge. 7 of 18

Following her election judge service during the 2020 election, she observed concerns based on her expert training and more importantly that she felt violated the pledge that she had made. She reported these concerns to Rice County election boss, Denise Anderson. 8 of 18

In response, Kathleen Hagen was removed as a head election judge. Hagen then reported these concerns up the chain of command to the Rice County Commissioners without success. This lawsuit followed. 9 of 18

We were both following the rules but were getting little or no response. With that background, where do you suppose we received the most complete and comprehensive overview of the facts at issue in this case? A cattle farmer from Lincoln County in southwest Minnesota. 10 of 18

Contact from this source disclosed a 9.1.22 letter from Anderson detailing the existence of modems, and their use. Most intriguing about this letter is that it is dated a mere eight days after we served this lawsuit to compel transparency on this exact topic. 11 of 18

Hagen started in 10/21 & I started asking for data in 4/22 and I sent a detailed follow-up request on 8/8/22. We then initiated a lawsuit to obtain this information through the MGDPA. 8 days later, Anderson pens a detailed response to a cattle farmer in SW MN. 12 of 18

My wife is from Lincoln County and my dad was a cattleman, so I have tremendous respect for anyone raising cattle in this part of the State. Fortunately, Minnesota is a small enough place that we were able to connect the dots and submit his affidavit into the record. 13 of 18

Armed with the crucial knowledge in this letter, we then used the power of the subpoena. On 9.28.22, we served a subpoena on the Secretary of State requesting the records of the ES&S machines, providing another piece of puzzle regarding the use of modems in our elections.

As the motion hearing was approaching what was still missing was confirmation of the version of ES&S machines. 2 weeks prior to the hearing, D submitted a #5page Voting Plan for 2022, which contains no reference or inventory of the ES&S version of machines being used. 15 of 18

The VERY NEXT DAY, the Office of Secretary of State filed with the court the “actual” 2022 Voting Plan for 2022 which contains #7pages. What is contained in those #missing2pages? The fact that election machines use version, “Electronic Voting System 5.3.2.1. 16 of 18

I will discuss the certification process in more detail in a later post, but in short, this disclosure confirmed what was previously based upon “information and belief” that Rice County runs on Electronic Voting System version 5.3.2.1. 17 of 18

We now can confirm that Rice County has modems inside their election machines that rely upon the State’s certification of version 5.3.2.1. As clearly admitted in this lawsuit, this certification does not cover the modems inside the Rice County voting machines. 18 of 18