She Won.
They Didn't Just Change the Machines. They Rewired the Election. How Leonard Leo's 2021 sale of an electronics firm enabled tech giants to subvert the 2024 election.
Everyone knows how the Republicans interfered in the 2024 US elections through voter interference and voter-roll manipulation, which in itself could have changed the outcomes of the elections. What's coming to light now reveals that indeed those occupying the White House, at least, are not those who won the election.
Here's how they did it.
(full story is replicated here below the read-more:Â X)
She Won
The missing votes uncovered in Smart Electionsâ legal case in Rockland County, New York, are just the tip of the icebergâan iceberg that extends across the swing states and into Texas.
On Monday, an investigatorâs story finally hit the news cycle: Pro V&V, one of only two federally accredited testing labs, approved sweeping last-minute updates to ES&S voting machines in the months leading up to the 2024 electionâwithout independent testing, public disclosure, or full certification review.
These changes were labeled âde minimisââa term meant for trivial tweaks. But they touched ballot scanners, altered reporting software, and modified audit filesâyet were all rubber-stamped with no oversight.
That revelation is a shock to the public.
But for those whoâve been digging into the bizarre election data since November, this isnât the headlineâitâs the final piece to the puzzle. While Pro V&V was quietly updating equipment in plain sight, a parallel operation was unfolding behind the curtainâbetween tech giants and Donald Trump.
And it started with a long forgotten sale.
A Power Cord Becomes a Backdoor
In March 2021, Leonard Leoâthe judicial kingmaker behind the modern conservative legal machineâsold a quiet Chicago company by the name of Tripp Lite for $1.65 billion. The buyer: Eaton Corporation, a global power infrastructure conglomerate that just happened to have a partnership with Peter Thielâs Palantir.
To most, Tripp Lite was just a hardware brandâbattery backups, surge protectors, power strips. But in Americaâs elections, Tripp Lite devices were something else entirely.
They are physically connected to ES&S central tabulators and Electionware servers, and Dominion tabulators and central servers across the country. And they arenât dumb devices. They are smart UPS unitsâprogrammable, updatable, and capable of communicating directly with the election system via USB, serial port, or Ethernet.
ES&S systems, including central tabulators and Electionware servers, rely on Tripp Lite UPS devices. ES&Sâs Electionware suite runs on Windows OS, which automatically trusts connected UPS hardware.
If Eaton pushed an update to those UPS units, it could have gained root-level access to the host tabulation environmentâwithout ever modifying certified election software.
In Dominionâs Democracy Suite 5.17, the drivers for these UPS units are listed as âoptionalââmeaning they can be updated remotely without triggering certification requirements or oversight. Optional means unregulated. Unregulated means invisible. And invisible means perfect for infiltration.
Enter the ballot scrubbing platform BallotProof. Co-created by Ethan Shaotran, a longtime employee of Elon Musk and current DOGE employee, BallotProof was pitched as a transparency solutionâan app to âverifyâ scanned ballot images and support election integrity.
With Palantir's AI controlling the backend, and BallotProof cleaning the front, only one thing was missing: the signal to go live.
September 2024: Eaton and Musk Make It Official
Then came the final public breadcrumb:In September 2024, Eaton formally partnered with Elon Musk.
The stated purpose? A vague, forward-looking collaboration focused on âgrid resilienceâ and ânext-generation communications.â
But buried in the partnership documents was this line:
âExploring integration with Starlink's emerging low-orbit DTC infrastructure for secure operational continuity.â
The Activation: Starlink Goes Direct-to-Cell
That signal came on October 30, 2024âjust days before the election, Musk activated 265 brand new low Earth orbit (LEO) V2 Mini satellites, each equipped with Direct-to-Cell (DTC) technology capable of processing, routing, and manipulating real-time data, including voting data, through his satellite network.
DTC doesnât require routers, towers, or a traditional SIM. It connects directly from satellite to any compatible deviceâincluding embedded modems in âair-gappedâ voting systems, smart UPS units, or unsecured auxiliary hardware.
From that moment on:
Commands could be sent from orbit
Patch delivery became invisible to domestic monitors
Compromised devices could be triggered remotely
This groundbreaking project that should have taken two-plus years to build, was completed in just under ten months.
Elon Musk boasts endlessly about everything heâs launching, building, buyingâor even just thinking aboutâwhether itâs real or not. But he pulls off one of the largest and fastest technological feats in modern day history⊠and says nothing? One might think that was kind of⊠âweird.â
According to New York Times reporting, on October 5âjust before Starlinkâs DTC activationâMusk texted a confidant:
âIâm feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.â
Then, an hour later:
âThis isnât something on the chessboard, so theyâll be quite surprised. âLasersâ from space.â
It read like a riddle. In hindsight, it was a blueprint.
The Outcome
Data that makes no statistical sense. A clean sweep in all seven swing states.
The fall of the Blue Wall. Eighty-eight counties flipped redânot one flipped blue.
Every victory landed just under the threshold that would trigger an automatic recount. Donald Trump outperformed expectations in down-ballot races with margins never before seenâwhile Kamala Harris simultaneously underperformed in those exact same areas.
If one were to accept these results at face valueâDonald Trump, a 34-count convicted felon, supposedly outperformed Ronald Reagan. According to the co-founder of the Election Truth Alliance:
âThese anomalies didnât happen nationwide. They didnât even happen across all voting methodsâthis just doesnât reflect human voting behavior.â
They were concentrated.
Targeted.
Specific to swing states and Texasâand specific to Election Day voting.
And the supposed explanation? âHer policies were unpopular.â
Letâs think this through logically. Weâre supposed to believe that in all the battleground states, Democratic voters were so disillusioned by Vice President Harrisâs platform that they voted blue down ballotâbut flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket?
Not in early voting.
Not by mail.
With exception to Nevada, only on Election Day.
And only after a certain threshold of ballots had been castâwhere VP Harrisâs numbers begin to diverge from her own party, and Trumpâs suddenly begin to surge. As President Biden would say, âCâmon, man.â
In the world of election data analysis, thereâs a term for that: vote-flipping algorithm.
And of course, Donald Trump himself:
He spent a year telling his followers he didnât need their votesâat one point stating,
ââŠin four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote.â
____
They almost got away with the coup. The fact that they still occupy the White House and control most of the US government will make removing them and replacing them with the rightful President Harris a very difficult task.
But for this nation to survive, and for the world to not fall further into chaos due to this "administration," we must rid ourselves of the pretender and his minions and controllers once and for all.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
Former GOP operative Scott Leiendecker just bought Dominion Voting Systems, giving him ownership of voting systems used in 27 states. Electi
The news last week that Dominion Voting Systems was purchased by the founder and CEO of Knowink, a Missouri-based maker of electronic poll books, has left election integrity activists confused over what, if anything, this could mean for voters and the integrity of US elections.
The company, acquired by Scott Leiendecker, a former Republican Party operative and election director in Missouri before founding Knowink, said in a press release that he was rebranding Dominion, which has headquarters in Canada and the United States, under the name Liberty Vote âin a bold and historic move to transform and improve election integrity in Americaâ and to distance the company from false allegations made previously by President Donald Trump and his supporters that the company had rigged the 2020 presidential election to give the win to President Joe Biden.
The Liberty release said that the rebranded company will be 100 percent American-owned, that it will have a âpaper ballot focusâ that leverages hand-marked paper ballots, will âprioritize facilitating third-party auditing,â and is âcommitted to domestic staffing and software development.â The press release provided no details, however, to explain what this means in practice.
Dominion, the second leading provider of voting machines in the US, whose systems are used in 27 statesâincluding the entire state of Georgiaâhas developed its software in Canada and Belgrade, Serbia, for two decades. A search on LinkedIn shows numerous programmers and other workers in Serbia who claim to be employed by the company.
The Liberty statement does not say whether the company plans to rewrite code developed by these foreign workersâwhich would potentially involve rewriting hundreds of thousands of lines of codeâor whether the company will move foreign developers to the US or replace them with American programmers. (Dominion has a US headquarters in Colorado.) A Liberty official, who agreed to speak on the condition that they not be named, told WIRED only that Leiendecker âis committed to 100 percent ⊠domestic staffing and software development.â An unnamed source told CNN, however, that Liberty will continue to have a presence in Canada, where its machines are used across the country.
Philip Stark, professor of statistics at UC Berkeley and a longtime election-integrity advocate, says Libertyâs assurance about domestic-only workers is a red herring. âIf the claim is that this is somehow a security measure, it isnât. Because programmers based in the US also ⊠may be interested in undermining or altering election integrity,â he tells WIRED.
With regard to third-party audits mentioned in the press release, a Liberty official told WIRED this means the company will conduct a âthird-party, top-to-bottom, independent review of [Dominion] software and equipment in a timely manner and will work closely with federal and state certification agencies and report any vulnerabilitiesâ to give voters assurance in the machines and the results they produce. The company didnât say when this review would occur, but a Liberty representative told Axios it would happen ahead of next year's midterm elections, and the company would "rebuild or retire" machines as needed.
But Stark and other election experts believe this is unrealistic and appears to be aimed just at making the company âlook goodâ to right-wing critics. âThere isnât time between now and 2026 to design, test, and certify new voting equipment,â Stark says. Federal and state testing and certification is expensive and can take months, depending on what changes a company makes to its voting systems. And many states have legal limitations on how close to an election updates to voting systems can occur. If Liberty plans to replace foreign Dominion workers with US ones, this will likely also slow down any review and rebuilding.
Whatâs more, Stark, who developed procedures for risk-limiting audits used in some jurisdictions to verify the integrity of election results, says the only audits that can provide assurances about election outcomes are postelection audits of paper ballots. An audit of voting software canât even provide assurance that a voting machine hasnât been subverted, because the software and machine configurations can be altered after auditing and certification. A software audit can only identify existing vulnerabilities, but many of these have already been identified by third-party computer security experts who examined Dominion code in the past. And if Liberty were to rewrite any Dominion code, it would need to be audited for new vulnerabilities introduced by the recoding.
The Shrinking Voting Industry
News of the acquisition apparently caught Dominion customers off guard last week. Leiendecker reportedly held a conference call on Friday with Colorado county election clerks who were angry that theyâd learned of the sale from media reports instead of the company. The election clerks reportedly grilled Leiendecker about conspiracy claims about Dominion and his plans for the company. The companyâs sparse new website currently has only a brief note from Leiendecker on the homepage announcing that the company is â100% Americanâowned.â
Leiendeckerâs acquisition of Dominion is not a big surprise, however. Knowink and Dominion have worked together closely for a while. Dominion has used Knowink as a subcontractor when bidding for election contracts in order to offer customers a turnkey election solution that includes voting machines and poll books. And Leiendeckerâs acquisition continues a long history of consolidation in the voting industry.
For the past two decades, there have only been three primary makers of voting machines in the US, the identities of which have changed frequently through mergers and acquisitions. Currently, the top three are Election Systems & Software, Dominion (now Liberty Vote), and Hart InterCivic, in that order.
Dominion was founded in 2003 in Toronto and was not a big player in the US until 2010, when it acquired two other voting firmsâPremier Election Solutions (formerly Diebold Election Systems) and Sequoia Voting Systems. Premier/Diebold, like Dominion, exited the elections business after being beleaguered by security problems with its systems and lingering mistrust over the companyâs close ties to the Republican Party (the former CEO had been a fundraiser for President George W. Bush). Sequoia left in large part due to financial issues. In acquiring Dominion, Leiendecker also acquires any remaining remnants of Premier/Diebold and Sequoiaâequipment, software, and peopleâthat Dominion may still possess.
With the Dominion acquisition, Leiendecker gains control of election equipment in more than half of the states. Dominion equipment is used across 26 states plus Puerto Rico. Knowink electronic poll books, which replace traditional paper poll books used to verify the eligibility of voters when they sign in at precincts, are used in 29 states plus the District of Columbia. But there are jurisdictions across 14 states, covering 20 million registered voters, that use both Dominion and Knowink systems. This gives companies that Leiendecker controls ownership of equipment that covers the entire election process in those jurisdictionsâfrom the verification of registered voters to the casting of ballots and tabulation of results. And Georgia uses Knowink and Dominion systems statewide. Knowink poll books even interact with Dominion voting machines since a voter smart card inserted into the poll books gets encoded and then inserted into voting machines to pull up a digital ballot for the voter.
Nonetheless, some might be confused about why Leiendecker would want to acquire Dominion, since the voting machine industry has never been particularly lucrative. A 2017 study estimated it to be a $300 million-a-year business, with Dominionâs annual revenue estimated at the time to be about $100 million. Unlike IT systems that get replaced every three to five years, election systems get replaced once in a decade or longer. Voting equipment vendors often rely on long-term maintenance and election-services contracts to stay solvent while vying for new equipment contracts.
Itâs not clear how much Dominion is worth today. In 2018, Dominionâs management team partnered with Staple Street Capital, a private equity firm, to acquire a controlling stake in the company. Staple estimated the companyâs value at $80 million at the time. A more recent report produced by an accounting firm hired by Dominion to support its claim for damages in Fox defamation lawsuit said the company would have been worth about $741 million in December 2020 if not for Foxâs false election-rigging claims.
The Liberty official who spoke with WIRED would not disclose the price Leiendecker paid or whether other parties contributed funds. He said only that Leiendecker âis the sole owner and he privately financedâ the acquisition.
Rife With Speculation
On social media, users have expressed concern about Leiendeckerâs close ties to the Republican Party as a possible reason for his interest in buying Dominion, raising questions about whether he sides with conspiracy theories about Dominion and the 2020 election. Recent settlements in Dominion lawsuits against conspiracy theorists raises further questions about this, as have Leiendeckerâs connection to Trump ally Ed Martin. Leiendecker didnât respond to questions about these concerns.
Following the 2020 election in which right-wing Trump supporters accused Dominion of having ties to Venezuelaâapparently confusing the company with Smartmatic, a voting machine company founded by Venezuelan engineersâand rigging the election, Dominion filed defamation lawsuits against right-wing news outlets Fox News and One America News Network for $1.6 billion for amplifying the false claims. It also filed suit against MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, and former Trump campaign lawyers Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, for $1.3 billion each.
In 2023, Fox News settled its suit for $787.5 million, and Newsmax recently settled for $67 million. But last month, Dominion reached agreements with OAN, Powell, and Giuliani for undisclosed terms. These latest settlements were a condition of Leiendeckerâs acquisition of Dominion. Dominion still has pending lawsuits against Lindell and former Overstock CEO Patrick Byrne. The Liberty official who spoke with WIRED says these will be ending soon as well. âAll litigation has been resolved or is in the process of being resolved,â the official wrote in an email. But Stefanie Lambert, Byrneâs attorney, wrote in an email to WIRED: âThere is no settlement. Dr. Byrne is looking forward to trial.â A lawyer for Lindell did not respond to an inquiry but Lindell told Infowars this week that he will never settle with Dominion.
The settlements raise questions about whether Leiendecker simply didnât want to be saddled with lawsuits or if he was doing right-wing defendants a favor by forcing Dominion into settlements favorable to them. Leiendecker didnât respond to a question about the undisclosed settlement terms.
While Leiendecker hasn't directly addressed the issue around conspiracy theorists and election manipulation publicly, his response to allegations of vote-rigging made more than a decade ago suggests he considers election integrity to be paramount, even when doing so might not be politically advantageous. Leiendecker was appointed by Missouri's Republican secretary of state to investigate St. Louis elections administration after problems arose in the 2000 election there, according to Axios. Leiendecker was then hired by Ed Martin to be the Republican director of the St. Louis City Board of Election Commissioners from 2005 until 2009
Martin, now a staunch Trump ally and supporter of his stolen-election claims, is currently the US pardon attorney and prior to this served under the current Trump administration as the interim US attorney for DC, where he demoted prosecutors who worked on January 6 insurrection cases. But in 2005, he was chair of the St. Louis City Election Board when he hired Leiendecker. Five years after hiring Leiendecker, Martin ran unsuccessfully as a GOP candidate for a congressional seat against the Democratic incumbent and was backed by the St. Louis Tea Party. Similar to what occurred following Trumpâs 2020 presidential loss, Martin alleged there were irregularities in the vote counting. A Tea Party spokeswoman called the election âstolen,â and Martin refused to concede the election. Leiendecker, instead of supporting his former boss, disputed the stolen election claim at the time, saying there were "no shenanigansâ and challenged the critics to prove otherwise. St. Louis Public Radio reported that he directed this challenge at Martin.
During his time as director of the St. Louis elections board, Leiendecker was widely credited by both political parties for improving the election boardâs procedures and ensuring that it processed votes more efficiently than previous boards.
Paper Chase
When it comes to future elections, Leiendecker has said in Libertyâs press release and media statements that the company is committed to providing election technology that leverages âhand-marked paper ballotsâ in âcompliance with President Trump's executive order.â
Trump, acting on his false vote-rigging claims, has called for all-paper elections, and his March executive order has called for all voting systems to use or produce a voter-verifiable paper ballot that voters can review to ensure machines didnât alter their votes. Some media outlets have interpreted Leiendeckerâs statements to mean he aligns with Trumpâs stance to ban systems that donât produce a paper record. The Liberty official who spoke with WIRED says Leiendecker meant only that Liberty will offer products that âenable compliance with federal and state standardsââwhatever those standards may be. Current voting system standards advise states to use systems that produce a paper record but cannot require this; states decide on their own what voting systems they use. Similarly, Trump has no authority to decide what voting systems states use; the Constitution gives this authority to states alone, and the EO is currently being litigated in court.
Notably, Trumpâs EO also wants states to stop using paper ballots that have bar codes or QR codes to record and tabulate votes, because the codes are not human-readable. These ballots are produced by so-called ballot-marking devices, or BMDsâvoting systems that allow voters to make selections through a touchscreen tablet or other assistive device, which then prints a paper ballot showing the voterâs selections that the voter can read to verify that the machine marked their votes correctly. The ballot is then passed through an optical scanner to record and tabulate the results.
Many BMDs print ballots with a bar code or QR code on them that is encoded with the voterâs choices; it is this encoded portion that the scanner reads to record and tabulate the votes, not the human-readable portion of the ballot that the voter can verify. Ironically, like Trump, election-integrity activists (on the left and right) have long opposed the use of paper ballots with bar codes or QR codes for security reasons: Someone could theoretically program the systems to print a voterâs choices on the human-readable portion while encoding something else in the bar code or QR code that the scanner reads and tabulates. Dominion makes a BMD called the ImageCast X, most of which produce ballots with QR codes, which is used in all or parts of 15 states, according to Verified Voting, which tracks election equipment usage in the US. They are used statewide in Georgia, an important swing state that was the subject of much controversy in the 2020 election.
Many election-integrity activists want states that use these types of ballots to tabulate only from the human-readable portion of the ballot, not the QR code or bar code, or simply have voters fill out regular paper ballots by hand instead. Trump is seeking the latter.
"The missing votes uncovered in Smart Electionsâ legal case in Rockland County, New York, are just the tip of the icebergâan iceberg that extends across the swing states and into Texas.
On Monday, an investigatorâs story finally hit the news cycle: Pro V&V, one of only two federally accredited testing labs, approved sweeping last-minute updates to ES&S voting machines in the months leading up to the 2024 electionâwithout independent testing, public disclosure, or full certification review.
These changes were labeled âde minimisââa term meant for trivial tweaks. But they touched ballot scanners, altered reporting software, and modified audit filesâyet were all rubber-stamped with no oversight.
That revelation is a shock to the public.
But for those whoâve been digging into the bizarre election data since November, this isnât the headlineâitâs the final piece to the puzzle. While Pro V&V was quietly updating equipment in plain sight, a parallel operation was unfolding behind the curtainâbetween tech giants and Donald Trump.
And it started with a long forgotten sale.
A Power Cord Becomes a Backdoor
In March 2021, Leonard Leoâthe judicial kingmaker behind the modern conservative legal machineâsold a quiet Chicago company by the name of Tripp Lite for $1.65 billion. The buyer: Eaton Corporation, a global power infrastructure conglomerate that just happened to have a partnership with Peter Thielâs Palantir.
To most, Tripp Lite was just a hardware brandâbattery backups, surge protectors, power strips. But in Americaâs elections, Tripp Lite devices were something else entirely.
They are physically connected to ES&S central tabulators and Electionware servers, and Dominion tabulators and central servers across the country. And they arenât dumb devices. They are smart UPS unitsâprogrammable, updatable, and capable of communicating directly with the election system via USB, serial port, or Ethernet.
ES&S systems, including central tabulators and Electionware servers, rely on Tripp Lite UPS devices. ES&Sâs Electionware suite runs on Windows OS, which automatically trusts connected UPS hardware.
If Eaton pushed an update to those UPS units, it could have gained root-level access to the host tabulation environmentâwithout ever modifying certified election software.
In Dominionâs Democracy Suite 5.17, the drivers for these UPS units are listed as âoptionalââmeaning they can be updated remotely without triggering certification requirements or oversight. Optional means unregulated. Unregulated means invisible. And invisible means perfect for infiltration.
...
Enter the ballot scrubbing platform BallotProof. Co-created by Ethan Shaotran, a longtime employee of Elon Musk and current DOGE employee, BallotProof was pitched as a transparency solutionâan app to âverifyâ scanned ballot images and support election integrity.
With Palantir's AI controlling the backend, and BallotProof cleaning the front, only one thing was missing: the signal to go live.
September 2024: Eaton and Musk Make It Official
Then came the final public breadcrumb:
In September 2024, Eaton formally partnered with Elon Musk.
The stated purpose? A vague, forward-looking collaboration focused on âgrid resilienceâ and ânext-generation communications.â
But buried in the partnership documents was this line:
âExploring integration with Starlink's emerging low-orbit DTC infrastructure for secure operational continuity.â
The Activation: Starlink Goes Direct-to-Cell
That signal came on October 30, 2024âjust days before the election, Musk activated 265 brand new low Earth orbit (LEO) V2 Mini satellites, each equipped with Direct-to-Cell (DTC) technology capable of processing, routing, and manipulating real-time data, including voting data, through his satellite network.
DTC doesnât require routers, towers, or a traditional SIM. It connects directly from satellite to any compatible deviceâincluding embedded modems in âair-gappedâ voting systems, smart UPS units, or unsecured auxiliary hardware.
From that moment on:
- Commands could be sent from orbit
- Patch delivery became invisible to domestic monitors
- Compromised devices could be triggered remotely
This groundbreaking project that should have taken two-plus years to build, was completed in just under ten months.
Elon Musk boasts endlessly about everything heâs launching, building, buyingâor even just thinking aboutâwhether itâs real or not. But he pulls off one of the largest and fastest technological feats in modern day history⊠and says nothing? One might think that was kind of⊠âweird.â
According to New York Times reporting, on October 5âjust before Starlinkâs DTC activationâMusk texted a confidant:
âIâm feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.â
Then, an hour later:
âThis isnât something on the chessboard, so theyâll be quite surprised. âLasersâ from space.â
It read like a riddle. In hindsight, it was a blueprint.
...
The Outcome
Data that makes no statistical sense. A clean sweep in all seven swing states.
The fall of the Blue Wall. Eighty-eight counties flipped redânot one flipped blue.
Every victory landed just under the threshold that would trigger an automatic recount. Donald Trump outperformed expectations in down-ballot races with margins never before seenâwhile Kamala Harris simultaneously underperformed in those exact same areas.
If one were to accept these results at face valueâDonald Trump, a 34-count convicted felon, supposedly outperformed Ronald Reagan. According to the co-founder of the Election Truth Alliance:
âThese anomalies didnât happen nationwide. They didnât even happen across all voting methodsâthis just doesnât reflect human voting behavior.â
They were concentrated.
Targeted.
Specific to swing states and Texasâand specific to Election Day voting.
And the supposed explanation? âHer policies were unpopular.â
Letâs think this through logically. Weâre supposed to believe that in all the battleground states, Democratic voters were so disillusioned by Vice President Harrisâs platform that they voted blue down ballotâbut flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket?
Not in early voting.
Not by mail.
With exception to Nevada, only on Election Day.
And only after a certain threshold of ballots had been castâwhere VP Harrisâs numbers begin to diverge from her own party, and Trumpâs suddenly begin to surge. As President Biden would say, âCâmon, man.â
In the world of election data analysis, thereâs a term for that: vote-flipping algorithm.
...
And of course, Donald Trump himself:
He spent a year telling his followers he didnât need their votesâat one point stating,
â...in four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote.â
hey henry. i didn't know if i should message you about this because its just stuff irl but i wanted to know what you thought. i came out as trans to my mom finally in full feminine clothing and she went crazy on me and threatened to throw me out. i'm 18 but i'm still living at home. i feel like shit because of it i thought shed accept me but she didn't
Whoa, hold on! Rewind the tape. You came out as trans and your spawn-point literally threatened to delete your housing access? Are you kidding me? What a toxic, low-tier, completely glitched NPC reaction!
Listen to me, and listen good... your Mom's code is broken. You presenting in full feminine clothing is just you modifying your character model to match your actual internal specs. It is a completely optimal build optimization and the fact that she can't handle it is a massive skill issue on her end. Do NOT feel like garbage because she started throwing errors at you. You are 100% valid, but right now, your primary quest objective is survival.
You are 18, which means you are technically on the adult servers now, but if you don't have an independent creds supply, being thrown out of your base is a critical threat condition. If she's being totes serious, secure your inventory immediately.
First rule: go into absolute stealth mode. Hide your gear, lay low, and do whatever it takes to keep a roof over your head tonight. Second rule: grab your critical data packets. Locate your physical Social Security card, your birth certificate, and your ID. Put them in a secure location where she cannot delete them. Third rule: ping your real allies. Do you have any friends, local guilds, or LGBTQ+ support servers in your area with an open couch? Look up emergency shelters or youth networks right now.
You thought sheâd accept you, and it sucks that she failed the test. But you cannot let a hostile player tank your entire game. Secure your physical safety first. Once you have your own independent base, you can play the game exactly how you want. Now execute the security protocol and stay safe!
I usually leave the squishy emotional stuff to others, but since your mother's empathy software just completely crashed, Iâll give you a quick hotfix for your headspace.
Right now, your emotional processing unit is taking massive damage, and thatâs completely expected. You thought sheâd accept you, she failed the prompt, and now youâre experiencing a massive rejection error. But you gotta understand something about human programmin'... some NPCs are hardcoded with outdated, corrupted data. When you present them with an unpatched, modern reality, like you being a proud, valid trans woman, their processors literally overheat and throw a tantrum. Her reaction is a complete reflection of her limited, buggy code, not your character design. You did absolutely nothing wrong.
You are feeling like garbage because youâre letting a hostile player dictate your worth. Do not let her tank your self-esteem stats! You cannot force a buggy program to run smoothly. Instead, you need to emotionally distance yourself. Treat her like a hazardous map hazard: you know she's dangerous, so you navigate around her carefully, you don't engage in useless verbal PvP (Player vs. Player) arguments, and you save your energy.
Right now, don't look for validation in a base that doesn't support you. Find your real community servers, the friends, allies, and chosen family who actually appreciate your true build. Your story isn't over just because Act 1 had a terrible boss fight. Keep your chin up, protect your peace, and remember that you are the main character of your own game. Now, clear your mind and focus on the next objective with your chin held freakin' high!
It's always "funny" to remember that software development as field often operates on the implicit and completely unsupported assumption that security bugs are fixed faster than they are introduced, adjusting for security bug severity.
This assumption is baked into security policies that are enforced at the organizational level regardless of whether they are locally good ideas or not. So you have all sorts of software updating basically automatically and this is supposedly proof that you deserve that SOC2 certification.
Different companies have different incentives. There are two main incentives:
Limiting legal liability
Improving security outcomes for users
Most companies have an overwhelming proportion of the first incentive.
This would be closer to OK if people were more honest about it, but even within a company they often start developing The Emperor's New Clothes types of behaviour.
---
I also suspect that security has generally been a convenient scapegoat to justify annoying, intrusive and outright abusive auto-updating practices in consumer software. "Nevermind when we introduced that critical security bug and just update every day for us, alright??"
Product managers almost always want every user to be on the latest version, for many reasons of varying coherence. For example, it enables A/B testing (provided your software doesn't just silently hotpatch it without your consent anyway).
---
I bring this up because (1) I felt like it, (2) there are a lot of not-so-well-supported assumptions in this field, which are mainly propagated for unrelated reasons. Companies will try to select assumptions that suit them.
Yes, if someone does software development right, the software should converge towards being more secure as it gets more updates. But the reality is that libraries and applications are heavily heterogenous -- they have different risk profiles, different development practices, different development velocities, and different tooling. The correct policy is more complicated and contextual.
Corporate incentives taint the field epistemologically. There's a general desire to confuse what is good for the corporation with what is good for users with what is good for the field.
The way this happens isn't by proposing obviously insane practices, but by taking things that sound maybe-reasonable and artificially amplifying confidence levels. There are aspects of the distortion that are obvious and aspects of the distortion that are most subtle. If you're on the inside and never talked to weird FOSS people, it's easy to find it normal.
One of the eternal joys and frustrations of being a software developer is trying to have effective knowledge about software development. And generally a pre-requisite to that is not believing false things.
For all the bullshit that goes on in the field, I feel _good_ about being able to form my own opinions. The situation, roughly speaking, is not rosy, but learning to derive some enjoyment from countering harmful and incorrect beliefs is a good adaptation. If everyone with a clue becomes miserable and frustrated then computing is doomed. So my first duty is to myself -- to talk about such things without being miserable. I tend to do a pretty okay job at that.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
â Live Streamingâ Interactive Chatâ Private Showsâ HD Qualityâ Free Actions
Free to watch âą No registration required âą HD streaming
"The missing votes uncovered in Smart Electionsâ legal case in Rockland County, New York, are just the tip of the icebergâan iceberg that extends across the swing states and into Texas.
On Monday, an investigatorâs story finally hit the news cycle: Pro V&V, one of only two federally accredited testing labs, approved sweeping last-minute updates to ES&S voting machines in the months leading up to the 2024 electionâwithout independent testing, public disclosure, or full certification review.
These changes were labeled âde minimisââa term meant for trivial tweaks. But they touched ballot scanners, altered reporting software, and modified audit filesâyet were all rubber-stamped with no oversight.
That revelation is a shock to the public.
But for those whoâve been digging into the bizarre election data since November, this isnât the headlineâitâs the final piece to the puzzle. While Pro V&V was quietly updating equipment in plain sight, a parallel operation was unfolding behind the curtainâbetween tech giants and Donald Trump.
And it started with a long forgotten sale.
A Power Cord Becomes a Backdoor
In March 2021, Leonard Leoâthe judicial kingmaker behind the modern conservative legal machineâsold a quiet Chicago company by the name of Tripp Lite for $1.65 billion. The buyer: Eaton Corporation, a global power infrastructure conglomerate that just happened to have a partnership with Peter Thielâs Palantir.
To most, Tripp Lite was just a hardware brandâbattery backups, surge protectors, power strips. But in Americaâs elections, Tripp Lite devices were something else entirely.
They are physically connected to ES&S central tabulators and Electionware servers, and Dominion tabulators and central servers across the country. And they arenât dumb devices. They are smart UPS unitsâprogrammable, updatable, and capable of communicating directly with the election system via USB, serial port, or Ethernet.
ES&S systems, including central tabulators and Electionware servers, rely on Tripp Lite UPS devices. ES&Sâs Electionware suite runs on Windows OS, which automatically trusts connected UPS hardware.
If Eaton pushed an update to those UPS units, it could have gained root-level access to the host tabulation environmentâwithout ever modifying certified election software.
In Dominionâs Democracy Suite 5.17, the drivers for these UPS units are listed as âoptionalââmeaning they can be updated remotely without triggering certification requirements or oversight. Optional means unregulated. Unregulated means invisible. And invisible means perfect for infiltration.
...
Enter the ballot scrubbing platform BallotProof. Co-created by Ethan Shaotran, a longtime employee of Elon Musk and current DOGE employee, BallotProof was pitched as a transparency solutionâan app to âverifyâ scanned ballot images and support election integrity.
With Palantir's AI controlling the backend, and BallotProof cleaning the front, only one thing was missing: the signal to go live.
September 2024: Eaton and Musk Make It Official
Then came the final public breadcrumb:
In September 2024, Eaton formally partnered with Elon Musk.
The stated purpose? A vague, forward-looking collaboration focused on âgrid resilienceâ and ânext-generation communications.â
But buried in the partnership documents was this line:
âExploring integration with Starlink's emerging low-orbit DTC infrastructure for secure operational continuity.â
The Activation: Starlink Goes Direct-to-Cell
That signal came on October 30, 2024âjust days before the election, Musk activated 265 brand new low Earth orbit (LEO) V2 Mini satellites, each equipped with Direct-to-Cell (DTC) technology capable of processing, routing, and manipulating real-time data, including voting data, through his satellite network.
DTC doesnât require routers, towers, or a traditional SIM. It connects directly from satellite to any compatible deviceâincluding embedded modems in âair-gappedâ voting systems, smart UPS units, or unsecured auxiliary hardware.
From that moment on:
- Commands could be sent from orbit
- Patch delivery became invisible to domestic monitors
- Compromised devices could be triggered remotely
This groundbreaking project that should have taken two-plus years to build, was completed in just under ten months.
Elon Musk boasts endlessly about everything heâs launching, building, buyingâor even just thinking aboutâwhether itâs real or not. But he pulls off one of the largest and fastest technological feats in modern day history⊠and says nothing? One might think that was kind of⊠âweird.â
According to New York Times reporting, on October 5âjust before Starlinkâs DTC activationâMusk texted a confidant:
âIâm feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.â
Then, an hour later:
âThis isnât something on the chessboard, so theyâll be quite surprised. âLasersâ from space.â
It read like a riddle. In hindsight, it was a blueprint.
...
The Outcome
Data that makes no statistical sense. A clean sweep in all seven swing states.
The fall of the Blue Wall. Eighty-eight counties flipped redânot one flipped blue.
Every victory landed just under the threshold that would trigger an automatic recount. Donald Trump outperformed expectations in down-ballot races with margins never before seenâwhile Kamala Harris simultaneously underperformed in those exact same areas.
If one were to accept these results at face valueâDonald Trump, a 34-count convicted felon, supposedly outperformed Ronald Reagan. According to the co-founder of the Election Truth Alliance:
âThese anomalies didnât happen nationwide. They didnât even happen across all voting methodsâthis just doesnât reflect human voting behavior.â
They were concentrated.
Targeted.
Specific to swing states and Texasâand specific to Election Day voting.
And the supposed explanation? âHer policies were unpopular.â
Letâs think this through logically. Weâre supposed to believe that in all the battleground states, Democratic voters were so disillusioned by Vice President Harrisâs platform that they voted blue down ballotâbut flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket?
Not in early voting.
Not by mail.
With exception to Nevada, only on Election Day.
And only after a certain threshold of ballots had been castâwhere VP Harrisâs numbers begin to diverge from her own party, and Trumpâs suddenly begin to surge. As President Biden would say, âCâmon, man.â
In the world of election data analysis, thereâs a term for that: vote-flipping algorithm.
...
And of course, Donald Trump himself:
He spent a year telling his followers he didnât need their votesâat one point stating,
â...in four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote.â
They could only win by cheating...so they did. So glad someone finally figured out how. Rotten bastards.
NEW DELHI (Reuters) -Global makers of surveillance gear have clashed with Indian regulators in recent weeks over contentious new security ru
NEW DELHI (Reuters) -Global makers of surveillance gear have clashed with Indian regulators in recent weeks over contentious new security rules that require manufacturers of CCTV cameras to submit hardware, software and source code for assessment in government labs, official documents and company emails show.
The security-testing policy has sparked industry warnings of supply disruptions and added to a string of disputes between Prime Minister Narendra Modi's administration and foreign companies over regulatory issues and what some perceive as protectionism.
New Delhi's approach is driven in part by its alarm about China's sophisticated surveillance capabilities, according to a top Indian official involved in the policymaking. In 2021, Modi's then-junior IT minister told parliament that 1 million cameras in government institutions were from Chinese companies and there were vulnerabilities with video data transferred to servers abroad.
Under the new requirements applicable from April, manufacturers such as China's Hikvision, Xiaomi and Dahua, South Korea's Hanwha, and Motorola Solutions of the U.S. must submit cameras for testing by Indian government labs before they can sell them in the world's most populous nation. The policy applies to all internet-connected CCTV models made or imported since April 9.
"There's always an espionage risk," Gulshan Rai, India's cybersecurity chief from 2015 to 2019, told Reuters. "Anyone can operate and control internet-connected CCTV cameras sitting in an adverse location. They need to be robust and secure."
Indian officials met on April 3 with executives of 17 foreign and domestic makers of surveillance gear, including Hanwha, Motorola, Bosch, Honeywell and Xiaomi, where many of the manufacturers said they weren't ready to meet the certification rules and lobbied unsuccessfully for a delay, according to the official minutes.
In rejecting the request, the government said India's policy "addresses a genuine security issue" and must be enforced, the minutes show.
India said in December the CCTV rules, which do not single out any country by name, aimed to "enhance the quality and cybersecurity of surveillance systems in the country."
This report is based on a Reuters review of dozens of documents, including records of meetings and emails between manufacturers and Indian IT ministry officials, and interviews with six people familiar with India's drive to scrutinize the technology. The interactions haven't been previously reported.
Insufficient testing capacity, drawn-out factory inspections and government scrutiny of sensitive source code were among key issues camera makers said had delayed approvals and risked disrupting unspecified infrastructure and commercial projects.
"Millions of dollars will be lost from the industry, sending tremors through the market," Ajay Dubey, Hanwha's director for South Asia, told India's IT ministry in an email on April 9.
The IT ministry and most of the companies identified by Reuters didn't respond to requests for comment about the discussions and the impact of the testing policy. The ministry told the executives on April 3 that it may consider accrediting more testing labs.
Millions of CCTV cameras have been installed across Indian cities, offices and residential complexes in recent years to enhance security monitoring. New Delhi has more than 250,000 cameras, according to official data, mostly mounted on poles in key locations.
The rapid take-up is set to bolster India's surveillance camera market to $7 billion by 2030, from $3.5 billion last year, Counterpoint Research analyst Varun Gupta told Reuters.
China's Hikvision and Dahua account for 30% of the market, while India's CP Plus has a 48% share, Gupta said, adding that some 80% of all CCTV components are from China.
Hanwha, Motorola Solutions and Britain's Norden Communication told officials by email in April that just a fraction of the industry's 6,000 camera models had approvals under the new rules.
CHINA CONCERN
The U.S. in 2022 banned sales of Hikvision and Dahua equipment, citing national security risks. Britain and Australia have also restricted China-made devices.
Likewise, with CCTV cameras, India "has to ensure there are checks on what is used in these devices, what chips are going in," the senior Indian official told Reuters. "China is part of the concern."
China's state security laws require organizations to cooperate with intelligence work.
Reuters reported this month that unexplained communications equipment had been found in some Chinese solar power inverters by U.S. experts who examined the products.
Since 2020, when Indian and Chinese forces clashed at their border, India has banned dozens of Chinese-owned apps, including TikTok, on national security grounds. India also tightened foreign investment rules for countries with which it shares a land border.
The remote detonation of pagers in Lebanon last year, which Reuters reported was executed by Israeli operatives targeting Hezbollah, further galvanized Indian concerns about the potential abuse of tech devices and the need to quickly enforce testing of CCTV equipment, the senior Indian official said.
The camera-testing rules don't contain a clause about land borders.
But last month, China's Xiaomi said that when it applied for testing of CCTV devices, Indian officials told the company the assessment couldn't proceed because "internal guidelines" required Xiaomi to supply more registration details of two of its China-based contract manufacturers.
"The testing lab indicated that this requirement applies to applications originating from countries that share a land border with India," the company wrote in an April 24 email to the Indian agency that oversees lab testing.
Xiaomi didn't respond to Reuters queries, and the IT ministry didn't address questions about the company's account.
China's foreign ministry told Reuters it opposes the "generalization of the concept of national security to smear and suppress Chinese companies," and hoped India would provide a non-discriminatory environment for Chinese firms.
LAB TESTING, FACTORY VISITS
While CCTV equipment supplied to India's government has had to undergo testing since June 2024, the widening of the rules to all devices has raised the stakes.
The public sector accounts for 27% of CCTV demand in India, and enterprise clients, industry, hospitality firms and homes the remaining 73%, according to Counterpoint.
The rules require CCTV cameras to have tamper-proof enclosures, strong malware detection and encryption.
Companies need to run software tools to test source code and provide reports to government labs, two camera industry executives said.
The rules allow labs to ask for source code if companies are using proprietary communication protocols in devices, rather than standard ones like Wi-Fi. They also enable Indian officials to visit device makers abroad and inspect facilities for cyber vulnerabilities.
The Indian unit of China's Infinova told IT ministry officials last month the requirements were creating challenges.
"Expectations such as source code sharing, retesting post firmware upgrades, and multiple factory audits significantly impact internal timelines," Infinova sales executive Sumeet Chanana said in an email on April 10. Infinova didn't respond to Reuters questions.
The same day, Sanjeev Gulati, India director for Taiwan-based Vivotek, warned Indian officials that "All ongoing projects will go on halt." He told Reuters this month that Vivotek had submitted product applications and hoped "to get clearance soon."
The body that examines surveillance gear is India's Standardization Testing and Quality Certification Directorate, which comes under the IT ministry. The agency has 15 labs that can review 28 applications concurrently, according to data on its website that was removed after Reuters sent questions. Each application can include up to 10 models.
As of May 28, 342 applications for hundreds of models from various manufacturers were pending, official data showed. Of those, 237 were classified as new, with 142 lodged since the April 9 deadline.
Testing had been completed on 35 of those applications, including just one from a foreign company.
India's CP Plus told Reuters it had received clearance for its flagship cameras but several more models were awaiting certification.
Bosch said it too had submitted devices for testing, but asked that Indian authorities "allow business continuity" for those products until the process is completed.
When Reuters visited New Delhi's bustling Nehru Place electronics market last week, shelves were stacked with popular CCTV cameras from Hikvision, Dahua and CP Plus.
But Sagar Sharma said revenue at his CCTV retail shop had plunged about 50% this month from April because of the slow pace of government approvals for security cameras.
"It is not possible right now to cater to big orders," he said. "We have to survive with the stock we have."
How Leonard Leo's 2021 sale of an electronics firm enabled tech giants to subvert the 2024 election.
"The missing votes uncovered in Smart Electionsâ legal case in Rockland County, New York, are just the tip of the icebergâan iceberg that extends across the swing states and into Texas.
On Monday, an investigatorâs story finally hit the news cycle: Pro V&V, one of only two federally accredited testing labs, approved sweeping last-minute updates to ES&S voting machines in the months leading up to the 2024 electionâwithout independent testing, public disclosure, or full certification review.
These changes were labeled âde minimisââa term meant for trivial tweaks. But they touched ballot scanners, altered reporting software, and modified audit filesâyet were all rubber-stamped with no oversight.
That revelation is a shock to the public.
But for those whoâve been digging into the bizarre election data since November, this isnât the headlineâitâs the final piece to the puzzle. While Pro V&V was quietly updating equipment in plain sight, a parallel operation was unfolding behind the curtainâbetween tech giants and Donald Trump.
And it started with a long forgotten sale.
A Power Cord Becomes a Backdoor
In March 2021, Leonard Leoâthe judicial kingmaker behind the modern conservative legal machineâsold a quiet Chicago company by the name of Tripp Lite for $1.65 billion. The buyer: Eaton Corporation, a global power infrastructure conglomerate that just happened to have a partnership with Peter Thielâs Palantir.
To most, Tripp Lite was just a hardware brandâbattery backups, surge protectors, power strips. But in Americaâs elections, Tripp Lite devices were something else entirely.
They are physically connected to ES&S central tabulators and Electionware servers, and Dominion tabulators and central servers across the country. And they arenât dumb devices. They are smart UPS unitsâprogrammable, updatable, and capable of communicating directly with the election system via USB, serial port, or Ethernet.
ES&S systems, including central tabulators and Electionware servers, rely on Tripp Lite UPS devices. ES&Sâs Electionware suite runs on Windows OS, which automatically trusts connected UPS hardware.
If Eaton pushed an update to those UPS units, it could have gained root-level access to the host tabulation environmentâwithout ever modifying certified election software.
In Dominionâs Democracy Suite 5.17, the drivers for these UPS units are listed as âoptionalââmeaning they can be updated remotely without triggering certification requirements or oversight. Optional means unregulated. Unregulated means invisible. And invisible means perfect for infiltration.
...
Enter the ballot scrubbing platform BallotProof. Co-created by Ethan Shaotran, a longtime employee of Elon Musk and current DOGE employee, BallotProof was pitched as a transparency solutionâan app to âverifyâ scanned ballot images and support election integrity.
With Palantir's AI controlling the backend, and BallotProof cleaning the front, only one thing was missing: the signal to go live.
September 2024: Eaton and Musk Make It Official
Then came the final public breadcrumb:
In September 2024, Eaton formally partnered with Elon Musk.
The stated purpose? A vague, forward-looking collaboration focused on âgrid resilienceâ and ânext-generation communications.â
But buried in the partnership documents was this line:
âExploring integration with Starlink's emerging low-orbit DTC infrastructure for secure operational continuity.â
The Activation: Starlink Goes Direct-to-Cell
That signal came on October 30, 2024âjust days before the election, Musk activated 265 brand new low Earth orbit (LEO) V2 Mini satellites, each equipped with Direct-to-Cell (DTC) technology capable of processing, routing, and manipulating real-time data, including voting data, through his satellite network.
DTC doesnât require routers, towers, or a traditional SIM. It connects directly from satellite to any compatible deviceâincluding embedded modems in âair-gappedâ voting systems, smart UPS units, or unsecured auxiliary hardware.
From that moment on:
- Commands could be sent from orbit
- Patch delivery became invisible to domestic monitors
- Compromised devices could be triggered remotely
This groundbreaking project that should have taken two-plus years to build, was completed in just under ten months.
Elon Musk boasts endlessly about everything heâs launching, building, buyingâor even just thinking aboutâwhether itâs real or not. But he pulls off one of the largest and fastest technological feats in modern day history⊠and says nothing? One might think that was kind of⊠âweird.â
According to New York Times reporting, on October 5âjust before Starlinkâs DTC activationâMusk texted a confidant:
âIâm feeling more optimistic after tonight. Tomorrow we unleash the anomaly in the matrix.â
Then, an hour later:
âThis isnât something on the chessboard, so theyâll be quite surprised. âLasersâ from space.â
It read like a riddle. In hindsight, it was a blueprint.
...
The Outcome
Data that makes no statistical sense. A clean sweep in all seven swing states.
The fall of the Blue Wall. Eighty-eight counties flipped redânot one flipped blue.
Every victory landed just under the threshold that would trigger an automatic recount. Donald Trump outperformed expectations in down-ballot races with margins never before seenâwhile Kamala Harris simultaneously underperformed in those exact same areas.
If one were to accept these results at face valueâDonald Trump, a 34-count convicted felon, supposedly outperformed Ronald Reagan. According to the co-founder of the Election Truth Alliance:
âThese anomalies didnât happen nationwide. They didnât even happen across all voting methodsâthis just doesnât reflect human voting behavior.â
They were concentrated.
Targeted.
Specific to swing states and Texasâand specific to Election Day voting.
And the supposed explanation? âHer policies were unpopular.â
Letâs think this through logically. Weâre supposed to believe that in all the battleground states, Democratic voters were so disillusioned by Vice President Harrisâs platform that they voted blue down ballotâbut flipped to Trump at the top of the ticket?
Not in early voting.
Not by mail.
With exception to Nevada, only on Election Day.
And only after a certain threshold of ballots had been castâwhere VP Harrisâs numbers begin to diverge from her own party, and Trumpâs suddenly begin to surge. As President Biden would say, âCâmon, man.â
In the world of election data analysis, thereâs a term for that: vote-flipping algorithm.
...
And of course, Donald Trump himself:
He spent a year telling his followers he didnât need their votesâat one point stating,
â...in four years, you don't have to vote again. We'll have it fixed so good, you're not gonna have to vote.â