Texas Dominion Voting Systems testing and rejection, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton: tested three times, System failures were evident in both software and hardware

Texas Dominion Voting Systems testing and rejection, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton: tested three times, System failures were evident in both software and hardware

“We discovered that these systems are subject to different types of unauthorized manipulation and potential fraud,”  “There is a reason that Texas rejected it,”...Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton

“Trump’s not gonna win. I made f*cking sure of that!”...Eric Coomer, executive with Dominion Voting Systems

“It’s Massive, Criminal Voter Fraud! – It’s Going to Blow the Mind of Everyone In This Country!”...Attorney Sidney Powell on Dominion Voting Systems 

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton as been in the news cycle recently explaining why Texas decided not to use Dominion Voting Systems for their election processing.

From The BL November 12, 2020.

“Texas tested Dominion voting machines and found them untrustworthy, confirming President Trump’s suspicions”

“Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, said they decided not to go with Dominion software for vote counting in the 2020 election, as they had recognized there were problems with it, and it couldn’t be trusted.

Dominion Voting Systems has been used widely across many states in the United States. Fraud and inaccurate results have plagued areas where it’s used, resulting in the Trump campaign filing lawsuits to expose voting corruption across the nation.

Paxton explained to Newsweek they had tested Dominion and found it unworthy of use.

“There is a reason that Texas rejected it,” Paxton told “Stinchfield” host Grant Stinchfield. “We didn’t do it arbitrarily. We knew that these were unreliable systems. We didn’t want to trust them.

“We didn’t want to be in the same situation that some of these other states are in now where we’re questioning the results, so we believe that this was a problem.”

Paxton said the Dominion system was tested three times, starting in 2012, and each time system failures were evident in both software and hardware.

“We discovered that these systems are subject to different types of unauthorized manipulation and potential fraud,” he said.”

“Dominion has been heavily criticized for not preventing the system irregularities and the opportunity for fraud.

Dominion purchased Sequoia Voting Systems in 2010, a system suspected of being used to rig the Venezuelan elections in 2004, reported Newsweek.”

Read more:

https://thebl.com/us-news/texas-tested-dominion-voting-machines-and-found-them-untrustworthy-confirming-president-trumps-suspicions.html

Texas Dominion Voting Systems testing and evaluations report dated February 15, 2019.

“Re: Inspection of the Dominion Voting Systems’ Democracy Suite 5.5 conducted on January 16 and 17, 2019

Dear Mr. Ingram:
Pursuant to my appointment by the Texas Secretary of State as a voting systems examiner under TEXAS ELECTION CODE § 122.035, please allow this letter to serve as my report concerning the above referenced examination. I, along with the other statutory examiners and staff from the Secretary of State’s office, examined the Democracy Suite 5.5 voting system presented by Dominion Voting Systems (“Democracy 5.5 System”) on January 16 and 17, 2019, at the offices of Elections Division of the Texas Secretary of State in Austin, Texas.”

“RECOMMENDATION
Based on the foregoing observations and my examination of the Democracy 5.5 System, its accompanying literature and the presentation made by Dominion officials both in its literature and at the examination, I cannot recommend that the Democracy 5.5 System be certified as compliant with the requirements of the TEXAS ELECTION CODE and the TEXAS ADMINISTRATIVE
CODE. My opinion could potentially change of corrections to the identified problems (in my report and other reports) are properly corrected and presented to the Secretary’s office. ”

https://www.sos.texas.gov/elections/forms/sysexam/jan2019-hurley.pdf

The following excerpt is timely and informative:

“In a follow-up, the vendor stated that only black Sharpie markers should be used for marking the ballots; however, when the black sharpie was used during testing, it did, on a few occasions, bleed through to the back side of the two-sided ballot in such a way that it could confuse the ballot scanner or kick the ballot out. “

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/