The Comprehensive 2024 Election Theft Fact Check

The Streisand Effect is bringing all eyes to exactly what the DNC is trying to hide.

Wendy Lawrence at Glass Empires published a complementary report today. I’d recommend checking out her work: https://glassempires.substack.com

For Activists: The 60-Second Version

This is a 6,500 word article that can be summed up as saying: The GOP had motive. They had means. They had opportunity. Every institution that could have stopped them chose to look the other way or participate in stealing the 2024 election. The proof is here.

There is some urgency now. The DNC conducted 300 interviews and concluded their investigation into 2024 election theft.

DNC Chair Ken Martin promised to release that analysis. He lied. We need to tell him what we think about that. Don’t mince words.

Ken Martin, Chair, Democratic National Committee

DNC Feedback Form (goes directly to Martin’s team): Click on this sentence

430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, DC 20003

Phone: (202) 863-8000

Twitter/X: @kenmartin73 Bluesky: @kenmartin.bsky.social Instagram: @kenmartin1973 DNC Contact Form: Click here

Buymeacoffee.com/TheER if you want to help fuel this work, or if you want some free activism guides.

TheExistentialistRepublic.com for our Merch store

---

Executive Summary

On December 18, 2025, the Democratic National Committee announced it will not release its internal analysis of the 2024 presidential election.¹

In February 2025, DNC Chair Ken Martin had promised transparency. He criticized the party for suppressing its 2016 post-election analysis and said the new review would be shared publicly. “Of course it will be released, right? It will be released to our members and we all have to learn from that. There has to be some lessons that we bring on so that we can operationalize it.”²

The analysis included more than 300 interviews conducted in all 50 states. The DNC now says releasing it “doesn’t help us win.”³

What do they know? Why won’t they say it?

This report presents what is publicly documented, what has been demonstrated in federal court, what has been confessed to by guilty parties, and what has been deliberately ignored by every institution with the power to investigate. The evidence speaks for itself.

In law enforcement, they teach you when you can shoot someone. Three elements have to be present: ability, opportunity, and intent. Can they do it? Are they in position to do it? Do they mean to do it? Criminal prosecution uses a parallel framework: means, motive, and opportunity. One is meant to teach when officers can legally shoot; the other teaches us when we can convict. If you want a jury to convict without direct evidence, you show them that the accused wanted to do it, had the means to do it, and was in position to do it. When all three are present and no alternative explanation fits the evidence, juries convict.

The Existentialist Republic research team that compiled and vetted this report includes professionals with backgrounds in constitutional law, criminal law, human intelligence (HUMINT), open source intelligence (OSINT), election security, data analysis, and investigative journalism. We applied that expertise to publicly available evidence: court filings, government reports, congressional testimony, and journalistic investigations. Everything in this document is sourced. Everything is verifiable.

What follows is the case. Means, motive, and opportunity. You are the jury.

---

Timeline

Before reviewing the evidence, consider the sequence of events. Each date is documented. Each action is a matter of public record.

November 3, 2020: Donald Trump loses the presidential election.

November-December 2020: Trump’s legal team files more than 60 lawsuits challenging election results. All fail.⁴

December 18, 2020: White House meeting discusses seizing voting machines.⁵

January 6, 2021: Capitol attack fails to prevent certification.

January 7, 2021: Coffee County, Georgia breach. Dominion voting system software copied and distributed.⁶

January-February 2021: Stolen software distributed to operatives across multiple states.⁷

June 2022: CISA documents nine critical vulnerabilities in Dominion voting machines.⁸

December 2022: Cybersecurity experts formally warn FBI and DOJ of multistate breach.⁹

February 2023: FBI formally declines to investigate.¹⁰

August 2023: Stefanie Lambert indicted in Michigan on four felony counts for voting machine tampering. Her trial has been delayed repeatedly. It is currently scheduled for March 2026.

December 4, 2023: Twenty-two experts send letter warning of “potential criminal conspiracy of enormous consequences.” No public response from federal agencies.¹¹

January 2024: Professor J. Alex Halderman demonstrates in federal court that Dominion machines can be hacked with a pen, a smart card, a USB device, and minutes of access.¹²

March-September 2024: Pro V&V, one of two labs that certify voting machines nationwide, approves software updates without full testing, calling them minor. At least one update modified the cryptography keys used to verify the software hasn’t been tampered with. If those keys change, tampered software can pass as legitimate.¹³

August 2024: Michigan and North Carolina open investigations into America PAC, Elon Musk’s pro-Trump operation, after reports it collected swing-state voter data without actually registering voters. Both investigations went silent.¹⁴

August 2024: Tina Peters, the Mesa County, Colorado clerk who facilitated a voting system breach, is convicted on seven counts.¹⁵ In October, she is sentenced to nine years in prison.¹⁶ The judge calls her “a charlatan who used your prior position in office to peddle snake oil.” In December 2025, Trump announces a pardon for Peters, but because she was convicted on state charges, the pardon is legally unenforceable. His administration continues efforts to transfer her to federal custody.

November 5, 2024: Bomb threats from Russian email domains target polling places in swing states.¹⁷ Trump wins.

January 19, 2025: Trump says of Musk: “He knows those computers better than anybody. All those computers. Those vote counting computers.”¹⁸

October 2025: Scott Leiendecker acquires Dominion Voting Systems, rebrands as Liberty Vote. Settlement of lawsuits against Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani required as condition of sale.¹⁹

December 18, 2025: DNC announces it will not release its internal analysis of the 2024 election.²⁰

---

The Case

Donald Trump did not accept the results of the 2020 election. This is not disputed. He stated publicly, repeatedly, and under oath through his legal representatives that the election was stolen from him.

His legal team filed more than 60 lawsuits in state and federal courts challenging the results. Judges appointed by both parties, including judges Trump himself appointed, rejected every case. Many were dismissed with language describing the claims as baseless, lacking evidence, or frivolous.²¹

When litigation failed, Trump’s allies pursued an alternative strategy involving slates of alternate electors in seven states. These individuals signed documents falsely claiming to be the legitimate electors, despite certification of results for Joe Biden. Multiple participants have since been indicted.²²

On January 6, 2021, a mob of Trump supporters stormed the United States Capitol during the certification of electoral votes. Trump had told them to “fight like hell” and that if they didn’t, they wouldn’t “have a country anymore.” The attack delayed certification for hours but did not prevent it.²³

On December 18, 2020, a meeting took place in the Oval Office. Present were Sidney Powell, Michael Flynn, and others. The discussion included proposals to seize voting machines and appoint Powell as a special counsel to investigate election fraud. White House counsel opposed the proposals.²⁴

On January 7, 2021, less than 24 hours after the Capitol attack failed to prevent certification, operatives entered the election office in Coffee County, Georgia. They copied the software from Dominion voting machines. The breach was funded by Defending the Republic, a nonprofit organization run by Sidney Powell.²⁵ The timing is notable. The day after every legal and extralegal avenue failed, they began acquiring the tools.

Trump continued to claim he won the 2020 election throughout his time out of office. He announced his candidacy for 2024 on November 15, 2022. Throughout the campaign, he maintained that the 2020 election was stolen and that measures would be taken to prevent similar fraud in 2024.

On January 19, 2025, the day before his inauguration, Trump held a victory rally in Washington, D.C. Speaking about Elon Musk’s campaign support, he said:

“He journeyed to Pennsylvania where he spent like a month and a half campaigning for me in Pennsylvania, and he’s a popular guy, and he was very effective. And he knows those computers better than anybody, all those computers, those vote counting computers. And we ended up winning Pennsylvania like, in a landslide, so it was pretty good, it was pretty good. So, thank you to Elon.”²⁶

Fact-checkers have confirmed this quote is authentic and unedited.²⁷ They note there is no direct evidence Trump was claiming Musk manipulated vote-counting computers. The reader may assess whether any alternative interpretation of “he knows those computers better than anybody, all those computers, those vote counting computers” is plausible.

Trump and his allies attempted to overturn the 2020 election through every available mechanism: litigation, alternate electors, physical disruption of certification, and discussions of seizing voting machines. All attempts failed. They stated they believed the election was stolen. They stated they would return to power. They began acquiring voting system software the day after their final attempt failed. Motive is not circumstantial. It was stated publicly, repeatedly, and is documented in court filings, congressional testimony, and video recordings.

They wanted to do it. Could they?

On January 7, 2021, a team hired by Sidney Powell’s organization Defending the Republic entered the Coffee County, Georgia election office with the cooperation of local officials. They made complete copies of Dominion voting system software, including election management system software, ballot programming files, and security key data. Court exhibits include an email from Paul Maggio of Sullivan Strickler sent that morning: “We are on our way to Coffee County Georgia to collect what we can from the Election / Voting machines and systems.” A follow-up confirmed “Everything went smoothly yesterday.” The engagement letter showed $26,000 billed to Defending the Republic.²⁸

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation produced a 392-page report documenting the breach.²⁹ According to that report and civil litigation filings, the software was subsequently distributed through file-sharing websites to election deniers across the country. Named recipients identified in investigations include Jim Penrose, a former NSA official who worked with Powell’s legal team; Conan Hayes, a former professional surfer who became involved in election denial efforts; Todd Sanders, connected to Patrick Byrne’s The America Project; Doug Logan, CEO of Cyber Ninjas, the firm that conducted the Arizona “audit”; Jeff Lenberg, a computer security consultant who examined voting equipment in Michigan and New Mexico; Ben Cotton, founder of CyFIR, who claims to have examined voting equipment in Bibb County, Georgia; and Stefanie Lambert, an attorney indicted in Michigan for improper possession of voting machine data and tampering with voting machines.³⁰

Machines Lambert accessed were physically pried open and damaged, then decertified and removed from use. Her trial has been delayed so many times that the judge called it the oldest case on his docket. It is now scheduled for March 2026. Tina Peters, the Mesa County, Colorado clerk who facilitated a similar breach, was convicted on seven counts in August 2024 and sentenced to nine years in prison two months later. The judge called her “a charlatan who used your prior position in office to peddle snake oil.” Trump has since announced a pardon for Peters, but because she was convicted on state charges, he has no authority to grant one. She remains in prison while his administration pursues other avenues to free her. Peters is the first election official in the United States to be criminally convicted for a voting system security breach.

The breaches were not limited to Georgia. Similar unauthorized access to voting equipment occurred in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Ohio, Nevada, and Colorado. In December 2023, twenty-two cybersecurity experts sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and CISA Director Jen Easterly warning that the breaches affected both Dominion and ES&S systems, which together count more than 70 percent of votes cast nationally.³⁴

In June 2022, the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency published an advisory documenting nine vulnerabilities in Dominion voting machines. These included vulnerabilities that could allow malicious code execution, privilege escalation, and the ability to spread malicious code to other machines. Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger was aware of these vulnerabilities. He declined to patch or replace the approximately 34,000 affected machines before the November 2024 election. His stated rationale was that physical security and procedural safeguards were sufficient. The vulnerabilities documented by CISA remained in place on Election Day 2024.³⁶

In January 2024, Professor J. Alex Halderman of the University of Michigan demonstrated in federal court that those vulnerabilities were real. Working under judicial supervision in the case Curling v. Raffensperger, Halderman showed that with a pen, a smart card, and a USB device, an attacker could install malicious software on voting machines, cause QR codes printed on ballots to not match the human-readable text, and change vote totals without detection.³⁵

Judge Amy Totenberg acknowledged the vulnerabilities but did not order machines replaced before the election. Her stated reason was timing: the trial was in January, the election was in November, and ten months wasn’t enough to replace 34,000 machines. But the Halderman Report had been submitted in 2021. The judge herself kept it under seal for two years. Everyone who could have acted treated it as someone else’s problem until the clock became their excuse. Ten months wasn’t enough time to secure American democracy. As of this writing, Judge Totenberg still has not issued a final ruling.

Meanwhile, the operatives who stole the Coffee County software had nearly four years to study those same vulnerabilities. The officials responsible for securing the machines said they ran out of time. The people trying to break them had plenty.

Between March and September 2024, Pro V&V, one of only two laboratories accredited by the Election Assistance Commission to certify voting machines, approved multiple updates to Dominion and ES&S voting machine software. These updates were classified as “de minimis,” meaning they were deemed minor enough to not require full certification testing. The changes included modifications to ballot scanners, audit files, and software verification processes. At least one update modified cryptography keys and identity assurance protocols. A technical advisor reviewing the changes stated: “That is a major change and should require closer inspection. This affects the cryptography keys and identity assurance of the device.”³⁷

Shortly after the 2024 election, Pro V&V’s website collapsed to a single page with minimal content, where it remained as of June 2025. The lab operates without a public complaint mechanism, without an external audit board, and with an inherent financial conflict of interest: the vendors pay for their own testing. Pro V&V’s accreditation lapsed entirely from 2017 to 2019 due to what was described as an “administrative error.” It was re-certified in February 2021. In October 2020, a federal judge found that Pro V&V director Jack Cobb had “no specialized expertise in cybersecurity testing or analysis.”³⁸ The same person approved the 2024 changes.

Scott Leiendecker is a former Republican elections director from St. Louis who served under Ed Martin, then chair of the St. Louis election board and now Trump’s DOJ Pardon Attorney and Director of the Weaponization Working Group.³⁹ ⁴⁰ In 2011, Leiendecker founded KNOWiNK, a company that manufactures electronic poll books used to check in voters at polling locations. KNOWiNK’s Poll Pad devices are internet-connected and can sync in real time through a monitoring platform called ePulse. In the 2024 election, 36 million voters in 29 states were checked in using KNOWiNK devices. This represented approximately one in four voters nationally.⁴¹ Security researchers at Project Minnesota identified “precision cheating” vulnerabilities in the system, noting that internet-connected poll books could potentially be used to target specific precincts or voters.⁴²

In October 2025, Leiendecker acquired Dominion Voting Systems and rebranded it as Liberty Vote.⁴³ Dominion equipment was used in 27 states in the 2024 election. The acquisition price was not disclosed. Leiendecker claimed to have personally financed the purchase. As a condition of the sale, Leiendecker required Dominion to settle its defamation lawsuits against Trump allies who had falsely accused the company of rigging the 2020 election. In the weeks before the acquisition closed, Dominion reached undisclosed settlements with Sidney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, and One America News Network.⁴⁴

Liberty Vote’s acquisition announcement explicitly pledged compliance with President Trump’s executive order on voting procedures. That executive order has been blocked by federal judges as unconstitutional. The announcement used language echoing election denial talking points: “restore public confidence in the electoral process,” “paper-based transparency,” and “100% American-owned.” Three companies control 92 percent of the voting machine market. The combined KNOWiNK and Liberty Vote operation will function in more than 40 states. One individual now controls both the poll book systems used to check in voters and the voting machines used to count their ballots across a significant portion of the American electorate.

America PAC was created by Elon Musk to support Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign.⁴⁵ Its leaders included Joe Lonsdale, co-founder of Palantir, the data analytics company that provides surveillance and data mining services to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Pentagon, and intelligence agencies. America PAC’s website collected detailed personal information from voters in swing states, including name, address, phone number, and date of birth, under the stated purpose of voter registration assistance. However, investigation by CNBC found that the site did not actually register voters in swing states. Users in battleground states who completed the forms were shown a message thanking them for “taking the first step to register” but were not directed to voter registration. Users in non-competitive states were simply redirected to their state’s actual registration page.⁴⁶

In August 2024, election officials in Michigan and North Carolina opened investigations into America PAC’s data collection practices.⁴⁷ Those investigations have not produced public findings. On November 4, 2024, America PAC lawyer Chris Gober admitted in court: “The $1 million recipients are not chosen by chance. We know exactly who will be announced as the $1 million recipient today and tomorrow.”⁴⁸ The winners were pre-vetted spokespeople who had signed consulting agreements. The Philadelphia District Attorney said over a million people had been “scammed for their information.”⁴⁹ As a canvassing operation, America PAC was legally permitted to coordinate directly with the Trump campaign, unlike other PACs that must operate independently.

They had the software. They had the demonstrated capability. They had the data. They bought the infrastructure.

The final element is opportunity. Motive and means are not enough. The circumstances must permit the act. In this case, who was watching?

On December 4, 2023, twenty-two computer scientists, election security experts, and voter advocacy organizations sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and CISA Director Jen Easterly. The letter stated: “The multistate effort to unlawfully obtain copies of voting system software poses serious threats to election security and national security and constitutes a potential criminal conspiracy of enormous consequences.”⁵⁰

The letter documented that breaches had affected both Dominion and ES&S systems, which together count more than 70 percent of votes cast nationally. It named the network of individuals involved: Sidney Powell, Doug Logan, Stefanie Lambert, Misty Hampton, Matt DePerno, Ben Cotton, Jeff Lenberg, and the forensic firm SullivanStrickler. It warned that the stolen software could be used to develop malware, study vulnerabilities, and conduct disinformation campaigns. The letter concluded: “Urgent implications for the 2024 election and beyond.”

The FBI, DOJ, and Smith’s office declined comment. CISA did not respond. No federal investigation has been publicly announced. This was not the first warning. In December 2019, Senators Elizabeth Warren, Amy Klobuchar, Ron Wyden, and Representative Mark Pocan wrote to the private equity firms that own voting machine companies, stating that vendors “have long skimped on security in favor of convenience.”⁵¹ Five years later, nothing had changed.

In February 2023, the nonprofit organization Free Speech for People reported that the FBI had formally declined to investigate the Coffee County breach. The FBI’s stated rationale was that it would not assist without a formal request from Georgia state authorities.⁵² The FBI chose to treat a multistate breach of election infrastructure, funded by associates of a former president who was actively running for reelection, as a matter for state authorities to request assistance on. No such formal request was made. No federal investigation followed. The FBI’s declination came twenty-one months before the 2024 election.

The Georgia Bureau of Investigation’s Coffee County report was delivered to the state Attorney General more than a year before this document was written. No state charges have been filed against any participant in the breach other than those already charged in Fulton County. Sidney Powell and Misty Hampton pleaded to misdemeanors and received probation.⁵³ Stefanie Lambert was indicted in Michigan in August 2023 on four felony counts related to voting machine tampering. Her trial was originally scheduled for October 2024, then delayed to December 2024, then to July 2025. She was charged with possessing stolen voting machine software and remained free through Election Day.⁵⁴

Every prosecution related to the voting machine breaches has been delayed, minimized, or abandoned. The individuals who stole and distributed election software have faced either no charges or misdemeanor pleas with probation.

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger was aware of the CISA vulnerabilities documented in June 2022. He was aware of the Halderman demonstration in January 2024 showing that the machines could be compromised. He chose not to patch or replace approximately 34,000 affected machines before the November 2024 election. The machines that Halderman demonstrated could be hacked were the same machines used to count votes in Georgia on November 5, 2024.

Post-election audits in 2024 followed the same pattern as previous elections. They verified that machines counted ballots as programmed. They did not examine whether QR codes matched human-readable ballot text. They did not examine whether software had been modified. They did not examine whether voter roll purges had removed eligible voters. The audits checked whether the machines did what they were told to do. They did not check whether what they were told to do was legitimate.

On December 18, 2025, the Democratic National Committee announced it will not release its internal analysis of the 2024 election. This analysis included more than 300 interviews conducted across all 50 states. DNC Chair Ken Martin, who had previously promised to release the findings publicly, now says that releasing them “doesn’t help us win.”⁵⁵ David Hogg, former DNC Vice Chair, stated: “I ran for DNC vice chair after massive losses in 2024 because I believed we needed to change our party. Leadership disagreed with my work to primary asleep-at-the-wheel incumbents and challenge the status quo. Now, they are spiking an autopsy of the election that gave us Trump 2.0.”⁵⁶

Every door was left open. Every alarm was ignored. Every investigation was declined or stalled.

---

Corroborating Evidence

Dr. Walter Mebane of the University of Michigan is one of the world’s leading experts in election forensics. His statistical methods have been used to detect fraud in elections around the world and have been cited in peer-reviewed academic literature for decades. In his preliminary analysis of 2024 Pennsylvania results, Mebane identified approximately 111,088 votes in the presidential race that exhibited statistical properties consistent with fraudulent increments rather than legitimate voting patterns. His methodology, known as “second digit Benford’s Law” analysis combined with finite mixture modeling, has been peer-reviewed and published in academic journals.⁵⁷

In Rockland County, New York, voters filed suit after the 2024 election claiming their votes were not properly recorded. Multiple voters testified under oath that they had cast ballots for Senate candidate Diane Sare, yet official results showed fewer votes for Sare than the number of people who testified they had voted for her. In multiple districts, results showed hundreds of votes for Democratic Senate candidate Kirsten Gillibrand but zero votes recorded for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris.⁵⁸ A statistician retained by the plaintiffs determined these results were “statistically highly unlikely” when compared to 2020 voting patterns. On May 22, 2025, Judge Rachel Tanguay ruled that discovery could proceed.⁵⁹ Plaintiffs’ discovery requests included voting machines, software updates, forensic hard drive copies, network diagrams, communications with ES&S and Pro V&V, and documentation of any modem, WiFi, cellular, or Starlink Direct to Cell connections. Judge Tanguay subsequently dismissed the case, ruling that plaintiffs lacked standing.⁶⁰ The court didn’t rule the anomalies were explainable. The court said the plaintiffs didn’t have the right to ask.

On November 5, 2024, polling places in swing states received bomb threats. The FBI stated that many threats “appear to originate from Russian email domains.”⁶¹ Targeted states included Georgia, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, and Pennsylvania. Fulton County, Georgia, a Democratic stronghold, received 32 bomb threats.⁶² Five polling locations were briefly evacuated. DeKalb County, an overwhelmingly Democratic suburb of Atlanta, had five locations where voting was suspended until police confirmed no bombs were present.⁶³ Security analysts at Graphika and SentinelOne linked the email addresses used for Election Day threats to the same addresses used for bomb threats at LGBTQ+ Pride events in Massachusetts, Minnesota, and Texas in June 2024. Courts extended polling hours in some affected areas. The cumulative effect on turnout has not been quantified.

Investigative journalist Greg Palast, whose work on voter purges has been cited in federal litigation for over two decades, documented that between 2020 and 2024, states used voter roll purge programs to remove voters based on name matches with voters in other states.⁶⁴ These purges disproportionately affected voters with common surnames prevalent in minority communities. Palast’s research found that purged voters were often removed without notification, discovered their registration status only when attempting to vote, and were offered provisional ballots that in many jurisdictions were not counted. The cumulative effect of these purges across swing states has not been comprehensively quantified. What is documented is that voters were removed from rolls based on name-matching algorithms known to produce false positives, that these removals disproportionately affected Democratic-leaning demographics, and that many removed voters were not restored before November 2024.

---

Conclusion

In criminal trials, jurors are instructed to convict if they find the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This does not mean beyond all possible doubt. It means that the evidence leaves no reasonable alternative explanation.

Consider the alternative explanation required to dismiss this evidence:

Trump and his allies spent four years claiming elections were rigged. They attempted to overturn 2020 through every available mechanism: litigation, alternate electors, physical disruption of certification, discussions of seizing voting machines. All attempts failed. The day after their final attempt failed, they began stealing voting machine software. They distributed that software to operatives across multiple states. A federal court demonstration proved the machines could be hacked with a pen, a smart card, and a USB device. CISA documented nine critical vulnerabilities. Those vulnerabilities went unpatched through November 2024. A testing lab approved changes to machine software without full scrutiny in the months before the election. Investigations into America PAC’s collection of swing state voter data went quiet. One person acquired control of both voter check-in systems and vote-counting machines. The lawsuits that would have required discovery into 2020 election claims were settled as a condition of that acquisition. The FBI declined to investigate. Expert warnings went unanswered. Prosecutions were delayed and minimized.

And then Trump won.

And the day before his inauguration, he thanked Elon Musk by saying: “He knows those computers better than anybody. All those computers. Those vote counting computers.”

To dismiss this evidence, one must believe that all of this was coincidental. That stealing voting machine software had no connection to winning an election. That documented vulnerabilities left unpatched had no consequences. That untested software changes affected nothing. That collecting voter data from swing states without registering voters served some other purpose. That consolidating control over election infrastructure was innocent. That settling lawsuits to avoid discovery was unrelated. That every institution declining to investigate was simply exercising appropriate discretion. That suppressing analysis of what happened was merely political convenience.

That is what must be believed.

Motive: Documented. Stated publicly. Pursued through every available mechanism for four years.

Means: Stolen software. Demonstrated vulnerabilities. Untested changes. Consolidated infrastructure. Collected data.

Opportunity: Unpatched machines. Ignored warnings. Declined investigations. Stalled prosecutions. Suppressed analysis.

The evidence does not prove with certainty that the 2024 election was stolen. The evidence proves that every element required to steal it was in place, that every person with the motive to steal it had access to the means, and that every institution with the power to prevent or detect it chose to look the other way.

The 2026 elections will use the same machines. The same testing laboratories. The same ownership structures. The same institutions that declined to investigate.

All with fewer oversight and an “opposition” party that refuses to speak up.

---

DNC Chair Ken Martin promised transparency. He said the 2024 analysis would be released publicly. He broke that promise. If you believe the Democratic Party owes its members an explanation, tell him.

Ken Martin, Chair, Democratic National Committee 430 South Capitol Street SE, Washington, DC 20003 Phone: (202) 863-8000 Twitter/X: @kenmartin73 Bluesky: @kenmartin.bsky.social Instagram: @kenmartin1973 DNC Contact Form: democrats.org/contact-us DNC Feedback Form (goes directly to Martin’s team): https://ak.democrats.org/signup/share-your-feedback-2025/

---

Press the subscribe button to stay in the opposition conversation. Or grab some free resources:

Soft Secession: Policies that Pass

Grab Them By The E.A.R.R.: How to Get Politicians to Do What You Want

Intro to Soft Secession

Conservatism: America’s Personality Disorder (with clinical psychologist Dr. D. Carl Brown)

The Opposition Guide to Tax Warfare

Support this work by buying us a coffee at buymeacoffee.com/TheER, subscribing on Substack, or picking up Existentialist Republic merch and the physical Soft Secession booklet at TheExistentialistRepublic.com.

---

References

1. Allen, J., & Nichols, H. (2025, December 18). DNC will not release its report on what went wrong for Democrats in 2024. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/dnc-will-not-release-report-went-wrong-democrats-2024-rcna249925

2. Allen, J., & Nichols, H. (2025, December 18). DNC will not release its report on what went wrong for Democrats in 2024. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/dnc-will-not-release-report-went-wrong-democrats-2024-rcna249925

3. Allen, J., & Nichols, H. (2025, December 18). DNC will not release its report on what went wrong for Democrats in 2024. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/dnc-will-not-release-report-went-wrong-democrats-2024-rcna249925

4. U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (2022). Final report. U.S. Government Publishing Office. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-REPORT/pdf/GPO-J6-REPORT.pdf

5. U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (2022). Final report (Chapter 6: December 18 Oval Office meeting). U.S. Government Publishing Office.

6. Georgia Bureau of Investigation. (2024). Coffee County election office investigation report.

7. Berliner, U. (2023, September 6). What the heck happened in Coffee County, Georgia? Lawfare. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-the-heck-happened-in-coffee-county-georgia

8. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. (2022, June 3). Vulnerabilities affecting Dominion Voting Systems ImageCast X (ICSA-22-154-01). https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-22-154-01

9. Free Speech for People. (2023, December 4). Letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and CISA Director Jen Easterly. https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2023.12.04-Letter-to-DOJ-FBI-CISA.pdf

10. Free Speech for People. (2023, February). FBI declines to investigate Coffee County breach.

11. Free Speech for People. (2023, December 4). Letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and CISA Director Jen Easterly. https://freespeechforpeople.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/2023.12.04-Letter-to-DOJ-FBI-CISA.pdf

12. Niesse, M. (2024, January 22). Expert shows how to tamper with Georgia voting machine in security trial. Atlanta Journal-Constitution. https://www.ajc.com/politics/witness-shows-how-to-tamper-with-georgia-elections-in-security-trial/WUVKCYNV3ZGOVNB6X6TDX2GEFQ/

13. Graves, K. (2025, June 10). The quiet lab behind the 2024 election: What no one’s saying about Pro V&V. Medium. https://medium.com/@korryn.graves/the-quiet-lab-behind-the-2024-election-what-no-ones-saying-about-pro-v-v-16867a8fc731

14. Caputo, M. (2024, August 5). North Carolina election board investigates Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC after voter data complaint. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/08/05/trump-elon-musk-pac-election-north-carolina.html

15. Brasch, S. (2024, August 12). Tina Peters, former Mesa County clerk, found guilty on 7 of 10 charges in election security breach trial. Colorado Public Radio. https://www.cpr.org/2024/08/12/tina-peters-former-mesa-county-clerk-found-guilty-trial-verdict/

16. Associated Press. (2024, October 3). Former Colorado county clerk Tina Peters sentenced to 9 years for voting data scheme. U.S. News & World Report. https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2024-10-03/former-colorado-county-clerk-tina-peters-to-be-sentenced-for-voting-data-scheme

17. Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2024, November 5). FBI statement on bomb threats to polling locations. https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-bomb-threats-to-polling-locations

18. Fichera, A. (2025, January 21). Fact check: Yes, Trump said Musk knows vote-counting computers “better than anybody.” Snopes. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/musk-starlink-2024-election/

19. Basu, Z. (2025, October 9). Scoop: Dominion Voting sold to company run by ex-GOP election official. Axios. https://www.axios.com/2025/10/09/dominion-voting-machines-sold-elections

20. Allen, J., & Nichols, H. (2025, December 18). DNC will not release its report on what went wrong for Democrats in 2024. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/dnc-will-not-release-report-went-wrong-democrats-2024-rcna249925

21. U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (2022). Final report. U.S. Government Publishing Office.

22. U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (2022). Final report (Chapter 3: Fake electors scheme). U.S. Government Publishing Office.

23. U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (2022). Final report (Chapter 8: January 6 events). U.S. Government Publishing Office.

24. U.S. House Select Committee to Investigate the January 6th Attack on the United States Capitol. (2022). Final report (Chapter 6: December 18 Oval Office meeting). U.S. Government Publishing Office.

25. Georgia Bureau of Investigation. (2024). Coffee County election office investigation report.

26. Trump, D. (2025, January 19). Remarks at Make America Great Again Victory Rally, Capital One Arena, Washington, D.C. C-SPAN. https://www.c-span.org/video/?541556-1/president-elect-trump-holds-rally-washington-dc

27. Fichera, A. (2025, January 21). Fact check: Yes, Trump said Musk knows vote-counting computers “better than anybody.” Snopes. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/musk-starlink-2024-election/

28. Georgia Bureau of Investigation. (2024). Coffee County election office investigation report.

29. Berliner, U. (2024, August). You can now read the GBI’s Coffee Co. report in full. Lawfare. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/you-can-now-read-the-gbi-s-coffee-co.-report-in-full

30. Berliner, U. (2023, September 6). What the heck happened in Coffee County, Georgia? Lawfare. https://www.lawfaremedia.org/article/what-the-heck-happened-in-coffee-county-georgia

31. State of Michigan v. Stefanie Lambert. (2023). Case No. 2023-244682-FH. Oakland County Circuit Court.

32. Brasch, S. (2024, August 12). Tina Peters, former Mesa County clerk, found guilty on 7 of 10 charges in election security breach trial. Colorado Public Radio.

33. Associated Press. (2024, October 3). Former Colorado county clerk Tina Peters sentenced to 9 years for voting data scheme. U.S. News & World Report.

34. Free Speech for People. (2023, December 4). Letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and CISA Director Jen Easterly.

35. Niesse, M. (2024, January 22). Expert shows how to tamper with Georgia voting machine in security trial. Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

36. Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency. (2022, June 3). Vulnerabilities affecting Dominion Voting Systems ImageCast X (ICSA-22-154-01). https://www.cisa.gov/news-events/ics-advisories/icsa-22-154-01

37. Graves, K. (2025, June 10). The quiet lab behind the 2024 election: What no one’s saying about Pro V&V. Medium.

38. Curling v. Raffensperger, No. 1:17-cv-02989-AT, Document 964 (N.D. Ga. Oct. 11, 2020).

39. Daily Caller. (2025, October 10). Meet the Republican who just bought Dominion voting machines. https://dailycaller.com/2025/10/10/scott-leiendecker-dominion-voting-systems-liberty-vote-missouri-election-reform/

40. U.S. Department of Justice. (2025, May 14). Office of the Pardon Attorney: Pardon Attorney Edward R. Martin Jr. https://www.justice.gov/pardon/staff-profile/pardon-attorney-edward-r-martin-jr

41. KNOWiNK. (2024). Company website and product information. https://www.knowink.com/

42. Project Minnesota. (2024). Electronic pollbook vulnerabilities analysis.

43. Basu, Z. (2025, October 9). Scoop: Dominion Voting sold to company run by ex-GOP election official. Axios.

44. Steinberg, M. (2025, October 9). Dominion Voting Systems sold to GOP firm—right after settling defamation suits vs. OANN, Giuliani, Powell. Mediaite. https://www.mediaite.com/media/news/dominion-voting-systems-sold-to-gop-firm-right-after-settling-defamation-suits-vs-oann-giuliani-powell/

45. Musk, E. (2024, July). Statement on America PAC formation.

46. Caputo, M. (2024, August 2). How an Elon Musk PAC is using voter data to help Trump beat Harris in 2024 election. CNBC. https://www.cnbc.com/2024/08/02/elon-musk-pac-voter-data-trump.html

47. Caputo, M. (2024, August 5). North Carolina election board investigates Elon Musk’s pro-Trump PAC after voter data complaint. CNBC.

48. NBC Philadelphia. (2024, November 4). Judge rejects request to block Elon Musk $1 million voter giveaway. https://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/business/money-report/philadelphia-da-argues-musk-and-his-america-pac-know-theyre-doing-an-illegal-lottery/4018054/

49. NBC Philadelphia. (2024, November 4). Judge rejects request to block Elon Musk $1 million voter giveaway.

50. Free Speech for People. (2023, December 4). Letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland, FBI Director Christopher Wray, Special Counsel Jack Smith, and CISA Director Jen Easterly.

51. Warren, E., Klobuchar, A., Wyden, R., & Pocan, M. (2019, December 6). Letter to H.I.G. Capital, McCarthy Group, and Staple Street Capital. https://warren.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/H.I.G.%20McCarthy,%20&%20Staple%20Street%20letters.pdf

52. Free Speech for People. (2023, February). FBI declines to investigate Coffee County breach.

53. Georgia v. Powell, No. 23-SC-188947 (Fulton County Superior Court 2023).

54. State of Michigan v. Stefanie Lambert. (2023). Case No. 2023-244682-FH. Oakland County Circuit Court.

55. Allen, J., & Nichols, H. (2025, December 18). DNC will not release its report on what went wrong for Democrats in 2024. NBC News.

56. Olson, T. (2025, December 18). Hogg slams DNC over not releasing 2024 analysis. The Hill. https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/5655739-david-hogg-blasts-dnc-2024/

57. Mebane, W. R. (2025, June 2). eforensics analysis of the 2024 President election in Pennsylvania (Working paper). University of Michigan. https://websites.umich.edu/~wmebane/PA2024.pdf

58. SMART Elections v. Rockland County Board of Elections. (2025). New York State Supreme Court.

59. Rockland County Business Journal. (2025, June 17). Lawsuit challenging 2024 election results highlights irregularities familiar to Rockland voters. https://rcbizjournal.com/2025/06/17/lawsuit-challenging-2024-election-results-highlights-irregularities-familiar-to-rockland-voters/

60. News 12 Westchester. (2025). Judge dismisses Rockland election results lawsuit seeking recount of 2024 results. https://westchester.news12.com/judge-dismisses-rockland-election-results-lawsuit-seeking-recount-of-2024-results

61. Federal Bureau of Investigation. (2024, November 5). FBI statement on bomb threats to polling locations. https://www.fbi.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-statement-on-bomb-threats-to-polling-locations

62. Associated Press. (2024, November 6). Bomb threats disrupted what was otherwise relatively smooth voting on Election Day. NPR. https://www.npr.org/2024/11/06/nx-s1-5181834/election-day-voting-bomb-threats

63. DeKalb County, Georgia. (2024, November 5). Official press release on polling location disruptions.

64. Palast, G. (2024). Vigilantes Inc. [Documentary film]. Palast Investigative Fund.