dominion
/

Dominion Vote System Was Flagged As ‘Fragile And Error Prone’ In 2019

Start

Dominion Voting was rejected by the Texas Secretary of State for use in elections in 2013 and 2019 over a plethora of issues which led it to fail basic tests for reliability and accuracy.

The voting system is alleged to have improperly counted ballots leading to a false Biden win in Antrim County, Michigan and mainstream media reports suggest several glitches that forced extended voting hours and delayed results.

It’s not difficult, therefore, to understand why the Texas Secretary of State refused to adopt the voting system twice – in 2013 and 2019.

Per a comprehensive, five-page report on Dominion Voting Systems from 2019, the Designee of the Attorney General recommended that “certification should be denied.”

READ:

TX Dominion Report by Natalie Winters on Scribd

“Computer systems should be designed to prevent or detect human error whenever possible and minimize the consequences of both human mistakes and equipment failure. Instead the Democracy Suite 5.5-A is fragile and error prone. In my opinion it should not be certified for use in Texas,” he noted.

In addition to a “complex, error prone, and tedious” installation process – with 184 steps – the report chronicled a host of red flags that arose when investigators tested the system.

“During our voting test, we discovered that some party names and proposition text were not displayed, and one scanner was not accepting some ballots,” the report noted.

The Secretary of State’s office also flagged Dominion’s software as potentially confusing voters:

At one point while scanning ballots, something flashed on the display so briefly we could not read it. After several attempts to re-scan the ballot, we were able to discern that it was a message reading “Ambiguous Marks” that was displayed for a second or less. It then reverts to the “System Ready” message. The voter has no way of knowing what, if anything, is wrong since the error message does not persist long enough to read it.

The report continues, “The ballot-marking devices incorrectly informed voters that they were casting their ballots, when in fact they were only printing them. The ballots are not be counted until they were scanned on a different device.”


Natalie Winters

Natalie Winters is an Investigative Reporter at the National Pulse and contributor to The National Pulse podcast.