🚨 MAJOR: Texas Secretary of State just issued comprehensive hand count guidance (Advisory 2025-18)
Thank you @TXsecofstate for this detailed roadmap on implementing Chapter 65 hand counting procedures 🙏
KEY TAKEAWAYS THREAD 🧵👇
1️⃣ AUTHORITY CLARIFIED
• Commissioners courts control counting method for general elections
• County executive committees control their own primary elections
• Each authority can choose electronic OR hand count
2️⃣ PRECINCT-BASED VOTING REQUIRED
• Countywide polling places PROHIBITED for hand counts
• Must use voter registration precincts
• If one party hand counts in primary, BOTH parties must use precinct-based voting
3️⃣ CHAPTER 65 IS THE LAW
• Three tally lists mandatory
• One caller + at least two talliers per team
• Periodic comparison to catch discrepancies
• NO authority to use different methods
4️⃣ STRICT DEADLINES
• All counting must finish within 24 HOURS after polls close
• Class B misdemeanor for missing deadline
• Presiding judge must stay entire time (cannot be replaced)
5️⃣ TRANSPARENCY BUILT IN
• Poll watchers can observe entire count
• Cannot reveal results before polls close
• Counting area must be separate from active voting
6️⃣ ACCESSIBLE VOTING REQUIRED
• Must provide ADA equipment at each location
• Applies to both election day & early voting
• Federal law compliance mandatory
Texas Election Code Chapter 65 provides a complete, legally-sound framework for hand counting.
🚨 BREAKING: Ethics complaint filed against Colorado Judge Matthew Barrett who sentenced Tina Peters to 9 years in prison.
💰 THE JUDGE BENEFITS FROM THE CRIME: Barrett's 2022 retention election was RUN ON THE SAME DOMINION SYSTEMS Peters exposed as hackable and corrupt. His job literally depends on those systems working properly.
🤐public transcripts show Barrett NEVER disclosed this massive conflict of interest while imprisoning the woman who exposed flaws in the systems that KEPT HIM EMPLOYED.
⚖️ Think about it: Judge gets to keep his job because Dominion systems "worked." Then he sentences to PRISON the clerk who proved those same systems can be hacked undetected.
🔥 Barrett admitted he jailed Peters for her SPEECH: "She used her position as a pulpit to preach lies about our election systems" - the SAME systems his paycheck depends on!
Texas already rejected these Dominion systems as "not suitable" - Peters was RIGHT.
🚨 This appears to be a judge protecting his own financial interests by silencing his critic. Textbook corruption that needs investigations
📧 File complaints: judicialconduct@jd.state.co.us
📝 "Judge Matthew Barrett Ethical Violations"
📍 Any citizen can file
@realMikeLindell
@realtinapeters
@PeterTicktin
TO:judicialconduct@jd.state.co.us
SUBJECT:Request for Investigation - Judge Matthew D. Barrett Ethical Violations
---
Dear Colorado Commission on Judicial Discipline,
I am requesting an immediate investigation into serious ethical violations by District Judge Matthew D. Barrett in the case of People v. Tina Peters, Case No. 22CR371.
THE CORE VIOLATION:
Judge Barrett sentenced Tina Peters to 9 years in prison while concealing a massive conflict of interest. Barrett's own 2022 judicial retention election was conducted using the identical Dominion voting systems that Peters had investigated and documented as containing serious security vulnerabilities.
JUDGE BARRETT NEVER DISCLOSED THIS CONFLICT despite mandatory requirements under Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct Rule 2.11.
THE CORRUPTION:
- Barrett's continued employment as judge depended on his retention election
- That election used the same Dominion systems Peters exposed as flawed
- Barrett sentenced Peters to prison specifically for her speech about those systems
- He admitted punishing her for using her "pulpit to preach lies about our election systems"
- These are the SAME systems that kept him in office
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE:
- Texas examiners unanimously rejected these identical Dominion systems as "not suitable for their intended purpose"
- Court transcripts prove Barrett imprisoned Peters for her protected speech
- Barrett blocked expert testimony about voting system vulnerabilities
- No disclosure of conflict was ever made to the parties
VIOLATIONS:
This conduct violates Colorado Code of Judicial Conduct Rules 2.11 (disqualification), 1.2 (impartiality), 2.2 (fairness), 2.4 (external influences), and 2.8 (bias/prejudice).
RELIEF REQUESTED:
- Full investigation of Barrett's concealed conflict of interest
- Appropriate disciplinary sanctions
- New trial for Tina Peters before an unbiased judge
This represents one of the most egregious examples of judicial corruption in recent history - a judge protecting his own employment by silencing the person who exposed flaws in the systems that kept him in office.
The integrity of Colorado's judicial system demands immediate action.
Respectfully,
[YOUR NAME]
[YOUR CITY, STATE]
[YOUR EMAIL]
---
INSTRUCTIONS FOR USE: 1. Copy the entire email above 2. Paste into your email program 3. Add your name, city/state, and email at the bottom 4. Send to: judicialconduct@jd.state.co.us 5. Share this template with others who care about judicial integrity
NOTE: You can file this complaint from any state - Colorado accepts complaints from any member of the public concerned about judicial misconduct.
This represents the largest election security failure in Texas history, affecting millions of voters across 142 counties, with a vendor that continues to deceive officials about the scope and severity of their security problems.
The ES&S Shell Game: From One Broken System to Another
2020: The Original Hash Validation Fraud Discovered
- Brian Mechler, Texas Technical examiner discovers ES&S's hash validation system is fundamentally broken--meaning NOT secure
- Instead of checking against official EAC reference hashes, ES&S provided "golden hashes" from whatever was first installed
- the System approves ANY software as legitimate if reference hash is missing even if results changing software is installed
ES&S's gets busted by Texas SOS-their "Solution": Create an Even More Deceptive System
Rather than fix their broken system, ES&S appears to have created the EVS 6.3.0.0 system with what they presented as an "improved" hash validation method - but then:
1. Failed to provide complete documentation during Texas certification 2. Made false promises about how the new system would work 3. After certification, claimed their "improved" method wasn't actually EAC-certified
4. Tried to gaslight Texas officials by calling it "Texas-specific"
The Devastating Reality for Texas Elections😭
The approx. 142 Texas Counties at Risk Since at least 2020:
-Every election since 2020 conducted with ES&S equipment is suspect and results cannot be trusted
- All ~142 counties using ES&S systems have been operating with potentially compromised equipment
- No reliable way to verify that the software running on election day was actually the certified software free from fraudulent code
The Security Theater:
- Counties thought they were performing legitimate security checks
- ES&S techs were going through the motions of "hash validation"
- But the underlying system was designed to approve anything even if fraudulent software present
- This gave false confidence while providing no actual security
The Federal Failure
EAC Complicity:
- GAO warned EAC about these exact problems years ago
- EAC ignored the warnings and continued certifying ES&S systems
- EAC failed to properly test the hash validation software
- EAC allowed ES&S to self-certify their own validation tools
What This Means for Every Texas Election Since 2020:
Primary Elections:
- 2020 Primary and Runoffs
- 2022 Primary and Runoffs
- 2024 Primary and Runoffs
Local Elections:
- Countless municipal elections
- School board elections
- Special elections
All potentially conducted with voting equipment that had no reliable security validation
The Cover-Up Continues
Even when caught red-handed in 2023-2024, ES&S:
- Refused to admit the systemic nature of the problem
- Tried to minimize it as a "Texas-specific" issue
- Only provided honest answers when threatened with decertification
- Still haven't acknowledged the full scope of the security failure
The Broader Implications
This isn't just about Texas. If ES&S has been using broken hash validation since 2020:
- How many other states are affected?
- How many elections nationwide have been conducted with compromised validation AND SECURITY?
- What other ES&S security claims are fraudulent?
The Bottom Line:
It appears that since at least 2020, Texas has been conducting elections with ES&S equipment that had fundamentally broken security validation - and ES&S knew it, Texas SOS knew it and they all covered it up, and continued selling amd approving these systems to counties across Texas while providing false assurances about their security.
TEXANS YOU HAVE BEEN OVERTHROWN BY INSECURIBLE VOTING SYSTEMS
Starting in at least 2020 when Brian Mechler busted ES&S preprogramming their security software checker to report "Everything looks good" even if malware and results changing software was present--ES&S made sure no one could detect it
EAC missed the security breach and certified ES&S EVS
Only ONE of 5 TECHNICAL EXAMINERS caught it.
Christina Adkins right before the 11/2020 election says:
WE CAN'T TRUST YOU ES&S but CERTIFIES THEIR SYSTEMS ANYWAY
Texas Election Code 122.001 a. 1-10
A voting system MAY NOT BE USED if does not meet those standards.
Christina Adkins KNOWS these systems fail to meet the Constitutional and Statutory standards AND KEEPS APPROVING THEM FOR USE.
Texas SOS Election Director Christina Adkins, has declared war on the people of Texas.
Deployed military level speech police on the people injured by her fraudulent electronic voting system certifications.
(Longer article coming after Holy Week)
Christina Adkins has used tax payer dollars to hire Alethea to scour X for Texans injured by ES&S and Harts defective and deficient products so the injured, tax paying, registered voters are targeted by communist speech police 24/7.
Are all targeted as Adversaries to Adkins certification of systems that are grossly vulnerable to undetectable access & manipulation & that are destabilizing our Constitutional Republican form of local self government
Article 1, Section 2: "All political power is inherent in the people... they have at all times the inalienable right to alter, reform or abolish their government in such manner as they may think expedient."
1. Transfer of Power from People to Corporation:
- Places critical election functions under private corporate control rather than citizen control
- Corporate code and systems hidden from public view
- Requires trust in private corporation rather than local citizens
- Removes direct voter control over election process
- Violates principle that power is "inherent in the people"
2. Barrier to Citizens' Right to "Alter or Reform":
- Cannot verify code or observe counting process
- Complex systems obscure election processes
- Difficult for citizens to detect/prove manipulation
- Undermines ability to ensure accurate results
- Prevents meaningful citizen oversight