THE FOLLOWING IS THE EMAIL EXCHANGE WITH PENNINGTON COUNTY COMMISSIONER CHAIRMAN GARY DREWES
To Contact Commissioners, See here: https://www.pennco.org/commission
THE LATEST EMAILS FIRST (SCROLL DOWN FOR PREVIOUS)
Thank you for your quick response. I appreciate you addressing several points directly. And thank you for the special meeting. My default position is not to trust most people, especially government. I wanted to mediate this. And, I so want you to be upright and honest. Character is determined with time, and based on your comments at face-value for me, you to have operated in good faith. Thank you. Mr. LaCroix called me back and expressed the same sentiment you have. Miss Hadcock said she will get back to me next week. I spoke to Mr. Lassetter after the meeting. I left a message with Mr. Rossknecht.
Mr. Roger Thompson first addressed you in May , and again in August. I recall you making the comment in one of the meetings, to the effect “this is not our duty to deal with as the commissioners”, as well as an auditor office staff member denying any concerns Roger had (https://rumble.com/v1kqmqh-roger-thompson-air-force-vet-speaks-election-truth-at-county-meeting-5-3-20.html ; https://rumble.com/v1ks2z9-8-2-22-voting-machine-manipulation-roger-thompson-air-force-vet-pennington-.html) Mr Lassetter also was unable to “verify” his information. You have also stated:
“Tabulators are just to count votes and the tabulators are not hooked to the internet. We have no other devices inside those that anybody from the outside can make contact with it or change it so that it is casting votes for others,” said Pennington County chairman Gary Drewes.
I too have many responsibilities, and by the time I got around to it, it was “better now than never”, as a Christian and Patriot, who desires to have a clear conscience and be a responsible citizen. If we are merely conspiracy theorists, then we deserve to be shamed publicly, but if we are telling the truth, the evidence we are providing deserves the utmost priority. I did see the KEVN news clip of you stating that the tabulators just tabulate, and our concerns are De Facto moot…THAT does concern me…TO ILLUSTRATE: THE HOUSE (ELECTION SYSTEM) IS ON FIRE; DOES IT MATTER IF I GET YOU OUT 5 MINUTES, 20 MINUTES, OR 30 MINUTES BEFORE THE HOUSE COLLAPSES ON YOU? NO, THE MAIN POINT IS: GET OUT OF THE HOUSE…
- ES&S (which every county in South Dakota uses: including Rapid City, SD) is notorious for dishonesty concerning their equipment.. BEFORE THE 2020 ELECTION
- In trouble with Election Assistance Commission (Established as a result of Congress passing the Help America Vote Act, in 2002). 33,000 machines with modems (wireless capable)
NBC video and article on ES&S connection to internet
Top Voting Machine Vendor Admits It Installed Remote-Access Software on Systems Sold to States
“ES&S has in the past sometimes sold its election-management system with remote-access software preinstalled, according to one official; and where it wasn’t preloaded, the company advised officials to install it so ES&S technicians could remotely access the systems via modem, as Venango County’s contractor did, to troubleshoot and provide maintenance. An ES&S contract with Michigan from 2006 describes how the company’s tech support workers used remote-access software called pcAnywhere to access customer election systems. And a report from Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, that same year describes pcAnywhere on that county’s election-management system on June 2 when ES&S representatives spent hours trying to reconcile vote discrepancies in a local district race that took place during a May 16th primary. An Allegheny County election official told me that remote-access software came pre-installed on their ES&S election-management system.”
2. The SOS office has denied Cast Vote Records exist ( a Cast Vote Record would show you, from your own county data that there is/isn’t manipulation; A Cast vote Record is an electronic vote tally of how your ballot is counted; it does not identify you, and is anonymous; 1,000/3,000 roughly, counties have given us these. 95% have shown manipulation; and they are so common, that San Francisco County posts them online (see attachment). Despite the Election Assistance Commission, and SDCL stating that the machines must produce them to be certified (that is the affidavit I gave you from Rick Weible…computer expert and SD citizen), the SOS office was in denial. SEE ATTACHED SCREEN SHOTS (email from Kea Warne, SOS Director of Elections) Also, see clips from September 2nd, Capitol Meeting with SD Legislature (Freedom Caucus https://rumble.com/v1j1jal-do-cvrs-exist-and-whats-that-about-3rd-party-information.html Now, they have changed their tune:
“Barnett told News Watch in an interview that South Dakota voting machines do produce the CVRs but do not include images of actual ballots that could prove useful to someone trying to reconcile votes cast with vote tallies”.https://www.keloland.com/news/local-news/lawmakers-question-election-process-in-sd/ Just so you know, we are asking for CVRs, NOT ballots…
This is how the chain of command works in South Dakota elections
- citizen shares concern with commissioner
- commissioner speaks to auditor
- auditor quotes Sec. of State office
- Sec. of State checks with ES&S
- ES&S is the authority on their machines, and run our elections.
- POINT, ES&S runs our election system and is ACCOUNTABLE TO NO ONE.
Both the Sec. of State, and ES&S, have shown that they are not to be trusted for factual information…
Here is world-renowned physicist and statisticition, Dr. Doug Frank, who would be willing to visit with you:
” “The Election Machines are Not Connected to the Internet”
This lie has been perpetrated on the American public for too long. When you hear it, remember the following:
1) We’ve proven that every vendor includes modems in their machines (many don’t even require passwords);
2) CISA, EAC, and the Halderman report have shown that all of the machines are remotely hackable (there is no such thing as a defensible ‘air gap’);
3) Several Secretaries of State have now openly admitted (some in legal documents) that their voting systems are remotely hackable;
4) All modern election systems employ what officials naively believe are “internal secure networks”;
5) Passwords for remote access to election systems are kept by the vendor and the Secretary of State (except that the Secretary of State systems are readily hacked);
6) Federal (home,and security) malware protection hardware and software has been installed in nearly every US county, and it is readily hackable;
7) Most US county networks use security protocols that have been readily hackable for several years;
8 ) Any election systems that use portable media to transfer data are easily hackable (the military hasn’t used thumb drives for decades, because that’s how we hacked Iran’s nuclear infrastructure);
9) Even our finest Air Force electronic systems are assumed to be hacked, as their cyber security teams are endlessly detecting new hacks;
10) Recounts and forensic images of computer systems have shown multiple cases of voter and ballot manipulation (proven in several court cases);
11) etc., etc…
Need I go on?
Let me make it simple for you.
You shouldn’t use a computer to raise your children. Computers are the wrong tool for the job, and it’s too important. You should be using your own eyes, hands, and feet.
And we shouldn’t be using computers in our elections either. It’s too important.
If even our military and our financial institutions can’t defend against intrusions despite billions spent in cyber security, you’d have to be ignorant to believe that our elections systems are secure. Especially since US elections are a high value target, domestically and internationally.
Let me make it simple for you.
We need to “Vote Amish.” Paper poll books, paper ballots, one day of voting with photo ID, hand counting, and complete transparency.
And anyone who tells you that this isn’t feasible need only look so far as most of Europe. They do it in a single day.
The US is the laughing stock.
DR. FRANK IN REGARDS TO “TESTING” ELECTION SYSTEMS…
“Logic and Accuracy Tests”
People around the country have been asking me to attend the “logic and accuracy” testing of their election systems.
It’s kind of a waste of time for me to be there…
First of all, the “logic and accuracy” tests themselves are a complete charade:
1) Every programmer understands that they can make software behave differently on different days with a single line of code.
2) Every IT person understands that whenever someone puts any kind of portable media (e.g. thumb drives) into a device it can reprogram that device.
So, if someone were to attend such an event, I would suggest that they ask the following two questions:
1) Do you perform logic and accuracy tests randomly throughout the election, or just before and after?
2) Do you use portable media to transfer any of the election information?
It might be worth attending such an event if there were others in the room. You would be educating them, and it would be fun to watch the officials squirm.”
Mr. Monfore, I don’t know who you refer to as to telling you about “dirty” politics; an anomaly to delay this issue; and an effort to silence etc., but none of that is true as well as several other points you attempt to make. If you felt timing was such a critical issue on this matter why would you wait until just a little more than a month prior to the General Election to try and schedule time on our agenda.
You requested a special meeting in an email to me. I told you I would ask the commission to give that consideration, as they did. Instead of taking time during the early part of the meeting to try and figure out time availability, I suggested we do that at the end of the meeting. Five commissioners, all of which have regular jobs, plus making sure appropriate staff could be available after hours is not always an easy task in trying to schedule special meetings.
The request for an attorney to address us relative to elections was made several weeks in advance.
I do not have LaCroix or Rossknecht emails, so please forward.
Commissioners of Pennington Co.
Matthew Monfore here. I spoke to you at the Oct. 4th commissioner meeting regarding Elections in the county.
According to state law, you are responsible for certifying elections. I have concerns regarding the Special session date you selected, Oct 26th.
1. Thank you for the opportunity to address you.
2. I hope politics in the county aren’t as “dirty” as people who are speaking to me say they are, because I am acting in good faith.
3. SDCL 1-25 guarantees the public an opportunity to comment at your meetings and any violation is a class 2 misdemeanor.
4. We believe, through factual basis, that our elections are not in compliance with law nor are they secure. Affidavits have been submitted in SD, including affidavits from Pennington County.
5. This matter is urgent, as elections are the people’s voice of representation in self government and it affects all areas of our lives.
4. We followed the rules to be placed on Oct 4th, Tuesday agenda, and submitted speaker request forms a day before the meeting.
5. I was notified ahead of time that our chance to present to you was going to be moved to special meeting, and that Oct 26th was chosen by the Commission as the date.
6. I have been told that it is an anomaly to delay an important issue until 3 weeks later. What is your guideline or policy?
7. I have been informed that an attorney will be speaking and giving a presentation on elections at your Oct 18th meeting. If that is true, what is the purpose of the presentation?
8. I have also been told that the 2nd hour of the proposed special meeting will be for County Staff only.
9. We were made aware that the vote to set the special meeting date took place at the end of the meeting last Tuesday, October 4th. I was first on the meeting agenda, and it was not clear to me that we were able to give input on the date that was selected. The Chairman’s statement “at the end of the meeting” was taken to mean in “executive session”.
10. If the above is true, it is an apparent effort to silence, mute, or deny citizens an adequate opportunity to present evidence, voice concerns, and propose solutions.
11. A violation of SDCL 1-25 may occur if the party scheduled to speak at the Oct 18th Commission meeting is allowed time and we are not allowed adequate time to present at the Oct 26th meeting. We were prepared to speak at length at the Oct 4th meeting, but under the guise of allowing sufficient time for presentation, we were put off until the 26th. We followed all of your rules but still this urgent matter has been punted three weeks down the road – even past the last day one can register to vote in the coming election