Kenneth Davis

August 5, 2022

This Document is for the public (Download for public distribution) to assist anyone in the pertinent questions any citizen of Colorado should be asking in regard to the usage of Dominion election equipment in any election and the recent Colorado Primary election and subsequent audit.

How blessed is he who considers the helpless; The LORD will deliver him in a day of trouble. 2 The LORD will protect him and keep him alive, And he shall be called blessed upon the earth; And do not give him over to the desire of his enemies. (Psalms 41:1-2 NAU)

 

August 5, 2022

RE: Colorado Primary Election Audit

To All Whom It May Concern:

The alleged validity of the elections results in Colorado is/are _____________.

I adamantly put forward the question to every individual brave enough to examine the situation of election integrity to seek how to answer the sentence above. What word does truth demand to finish the sentence?

Are ‘we’ to remain the WE THE PEOPLE if our elections are proven to be corrupt?

Why do those in control refuse to allow someone to examine the equipment they refer to as the ‘Gold Standard’? If it cannot be examined, validated and honestly shown to be just a computer counting machine without any subterfuge or nefarious intent hidden within it’s operation; then their ‘gold’ is nothing more than fool’s gold (iron pyrite)!

The attached Citizen Response only addresses and/or presents questions about:

• the history of voter counting accuracy
• the statistical improbability of the current primary results
• the probable evidence of pre-loaded ballot(s) in the election process
• the accuracy failure of the equipment during the pre audit test procedures
• the existence of external modifiable parameters that may modify machine behavior
• the presence of obvious security failures
• the existence of unsupervised equipment in the tabulation environment
• the absence of other pertinent factors, data, etc. that are logically required to validate the audit

The attached Citizen Response does not:

• review election law requirements that were ignored, bypassed or modified
• the corpulent and excessive monetary requirements placed on those requesting the audit and recount.
• the alleged absence of equipment certification
• the alleged absence of equipment re-certification after software changes
• the presence of equipment operators that potentially were operating outside of required surveillance
• the required denial of a hand count to verify compliance with equipment integrity

The challenge to the reader of these documents is to honestly seek the truth. Without that fundamental assurance every election conducted since the introduction of this equipment is questionable!

Sincerely submitted,

Kenneth Davis

 

 

CITIZEN RESPONSE TO THE EL PASO COUNTY AND COLORADO AUDIT OF THE 2022 PRIMARY ELECTION

This document is written with the expressed and implied purpose to bring into question the validity, integrity and potential subterfuge of the Dominion Voting System used in Colorado elections.

I am a citizen of the United States, a resident of Colorado for thirty-three years, hold degrees in Theology, History and Computer Technology. and a father, grandfather and great grandfather of Colorado residents.

Pertinent previous work experience and credentials: Data engineer for the Department of State, SATCOM (classified data architect for command and control data), Consultant for AT&T Wireless at start-up, Scripps-Howard data architect for web site ad revenue center.

Upon attending the El Paso county audit on Monday, August 1 & 3, 2022 as an observer in the hallway outside the audit room I noticed the following notice on the wall.

I spent the next 30 minutes watching the process and praying for guidance, insight and discernment from God as to what I knew I needed to do in response. This document only represents the first result of that endeavor.

Section 1: Previous Election Audits and the ballot integrity error criteria that established the results.

U.S. Presidential election of 2000.

The Electoral College results rested upon who was to win the state of Florida. 5,963,110 votes had been cast with only a difference of 537 votes between Bush and Gore. The election had been counted by hand and punch-card reader machines. With not all counties responding, a recount had reduced the difference to less than 400 votes. Note: If only 9 out of every 10,000 votes had been miscounted the scales could possibly been tipped to the other side. This election was decided by an error reduction accuracy of .00009005% for each vote cast.

The U.S. Supreme Court intervened and stopped the ‘hanging chad’ circus by determining that the rules and processes of an election audit could not be changed in the middle of the audit.

U.S. Presidential election of 2020.

Nationally 159,590,894 ballots were cast. Four states tipped the Electoral College to Biden with still contested marginal results. The States of Arizona, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Georgia were determined by 125,084 votes.

	Votes Cast	Victory Margin	Margin %
Arizona	3,397,388	10,457	0.30780%
Wisconsin	3,298,041	20,682	0.62710%
Pennsylvania	6,940,449	82,166	1.18387%
Georgia	4,999,960	11,779	0.23558%
	18,635,838	125,084	0.67120%

Note: The President was elected by a cumulative margin of error in vote tabulation of less than 1%.

Section 2: Questions that statistically arise from this previous election audit history relevant to the Colorado primary:

1. Why are the criteria for Logic and Accuracy deemed sufficient for Dominion machines to be 6-7% ? This threshold is more than 100x times greater than what determined the 2000 Presidential election in Florida when both hand count and card reader machines were used? Twenty-two years of technological advancement and why is the Dominion equipment a detrimental decline in accuracy from human hand count and primitive punch card readers?
2. Why are the criteria for Logic and Accuracy deemed sufficient for Dominion machines to be 6-7% ? This threshold is 6x times greater than what determined the 2020 Presidential election?

Section 3: Why are modifiable parameters existent in the Dominion equipment?

1. Why are Logic and Accuracy parameters allowed to be changed in sensitivity prior to the audit? Were they incorrect during the actual primary and needed to be corrected? The result of this change being a 53% error rate.
2. Who authorized the change of parameters?
3. Who witnessed the changes?
4. Who made the changes?
5. Why does the black-box Dominion machine even have parameters that can be modified to change it’s operation?
6. What other unknown parameters are there?
   1. Change adjudication criteria?
   2. Change tabulation data by ratio, deletion, switching numbers to another candidate?
   3. Predetermine the winners?
   4. Fixed Vote ratios? Or votes not counted by whole numbers?
   5. Log deletes to remove evidence of actions?
   6. Pre-loaded data to alter outcome from the beginning to overcome known deficiencies?
7. The rules (see notice on the wall from (page 1) explicitly demand the recount be in the exact same order as the election night count.
   1. Why?
      1. Is there a parameter that I have questioned the existence of, that would cause an internal algorithm to function differently?
      2. Would tabulated votes tally differently?
      3. Known vendor software could not maintain the same results?
   2. Why can’t the ballot batches be loaded in any order?
      1. It is the same number of ballots.
   3. Why is this rule important?
      1. The existence of this rule cast serious doubt about why this request is a fixed rule for no real logical reason. A vote counting machine that can’t be trusted to re-count correctly unless a controlled experiment is exactly repeated? That would only be valid IF YOU WERE ONLY TRYING TO CERTIFY THE EXISTENCE OF THE SAME ERRORS. Thus defeating the whole purpose of an audit.

These obvious questions are completely viable concerns that bring into serious legal ramifications concerning the unknown factors of structure, software, security and operations of this equipment.

Section 4: Other pertinent observations and questions concerning the Dominion audit.

1. Why are there printers in the counting room that are capable of printing a blank ballot or a duplicate? The rules already state that if the ballot is in discrepancy that it will adjudicated.
2. Why are ballots unreadable by the scanner ballots duplicated? You already said discrepancy ballots are adjudicated. The new printed ballot is only a copy of a ballot that Dominion can’t read. Who controls where these copies are logged and archived?
3. Since the election audit is for mail-in ballots, where are the envelopes? The number of voter envelopes must match the number of ballots counted. Otherwise why are there more or missing ballots? Why are they not part of the audit?
4. Have all ballots counted been physically examined to contain a fold representing that they were mailed and placed in a voter envelope? Is this not being addressed in the audit? Why not?
   1. NOTE: Why is there already a supply of ballot paper in the counting room so anyone can print as many ballots as some nefarious actor might need?
   2. The presence of unmarked ballot supplies and equipment to generate potential votes without an actual voter is simply a ‘fox in the chicken coop‘ and apparently an obvious contrived setup for fraud potential.
5. A review of the El Paso County primary election data creates serious questions:
   1. Why do election results graphed by tabulation over time counted show a pre-load of votes that predetermined the winner?
   2. Why do election results show a consistent ratio of votes per candidates in the results. Does it seem odd that every race seems to fall with 60+ percent to the winner and 30+ percent to the loser for two party races?

When all of these sections of historical data, questions and concerns are combined and overlaid against each other, the viability and probability of the election being legitimate is in grave serious doubt.

Integrity, Security, Transparency and Trustworthiness are cast aside and any logical, reasonable or common sense examination reveals a preconceived suspect for potential wrong-doing.

This election and subsequent machine audit controlled by Dominion machine processes and active company personnel present at the election facility during operation is a statistical, probability and logical failure.

The lack of accuracy, unknown parameters of performance, security of access by vendor control and outcome of questionable integrity demand an immediate law enforcement seizure and lockdown of the entire operation (servers, computers, scanners, hand written logs, ballots, envelopes , voter records, etc.) for a forensic examination without any election or vendor personnel present.

Signed,

Kenneth D. Davis

August 5, 2022