November 18, 2020

President Trump on Tuesday fired his top election security official Christopher Krebs (no relation). The dismissal came via Twitter two weeks to the day after Trump lost an election he baselessly claims was stolen by widespread voting fraud.

Chris Krebs. Image: CISA.

Krebs, 43, is a former Microsoft executive appointed by Trump to head the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), a division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. As part of that role, Krebs organized federal and state efforts to improve election security, and to dispel disinformation about the integrity of the voting process.

Krebs’ dismissal was hardly unexpected. Last week, in the face of repeated statements by Trump that the president was robbed of re-election by buggy voting machines and millions of fraudulently cast ballots, Krebs’ agency rejected the claims as “unfounded,” asserting that “the November 3rd election was the most secure in American history.”

In a statement on Nov. 12, CISA declared “there is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.”

But in a tweet Tuesday evening, Trump called that assessment “highly inaccurate,” alleging there were “massive improprieties and fraud — including dead people voting, Poll watchers not allowed into polling locations, ‘glitches’ in the voting machines that changed votes from Trump to Biden, late voting, and many more.”

Twitter, as it has done with a remarkable number of the president’s tweets lately, flagged the statements as disputed.

By most accounts, Krebs was one of the more competent and transparent leaders in the Trump administration. But that same transparency may have cost him his job: Krebs’ agency earlier this year launched “Rumor Control,” a blog that sought to address many of the conspiracy theories the president has perpetuated in recent days.

Sen. Richard Burr, a Republican from North Carolina, said Krebs had done “a remarkable job during a challenging time,” and that the “creative and innovative campaign CISA developed to promote cybersecurity should serve as a model for other government agencies.”

Sen. Angus King, an Independent from Maine and co-chair of a commission to improve the nation’s cyber defense posture, called Krebs “an incredibly bright, high-performing, and dedicated public servant who has helped build up new cyber capabilities in the face of swiftly-evolving dangers.”

“By firing Mr. Krebs for simply doing his job, President Trump is inflicting severe damage on all Americans – who rely on CISA’s defenses, even if they don’t know it,” King said in a written statement. “If there’s any silver lining in this unjust decision, it’s this: I hope that President-elect Biden will recognize Chris’s contributions, and consult with him as the Biden administration charts the future of this critically important agency.”

KrebsOnSecurity has received more than a few messages these past two weeks from readers who wondered why the much-anticipated threat from Russian or other state-sponsored hackers never appeared to materialize in this election cycle.

That seems a bit like asking why the year 2000 came to pass with very few meaningful disruptions from the Y2K computer date rollover problem. After all, in advance of the new millennium, the federal government organized a series of task forces that helped coordinate readiness for the changeover, and to minimize the impact of any disruptions.

But the question also ignores a key goal of previous foreign election interference attempts leading up to the 2016 U.S. presidential and 2018 mid-term elections. Namely, to sow fear, uncertainty, doubt, distrust and animosity among the electorate about the democratic process and its outcomes.

To that end, it’s difficult to see how anyone has done more to advance that agenda than President Trump himself, who has yet to concede the race and continues to challenge the result in state courts and in his public statements.

534 thoughts on “Trump Fires Security Chief Christopher Krebs

  1. voter

    the voting system can be easy and effective.

    rceipe for that: every person will get the number after voting the his voting number will be destroyed before the voting there will be all the numbers known and all the ammount of voters known.

    this is the simple and most effective to assure you cant fraud elections

    1. SeymourB

      Except something like that already happens.

      Everyone who gets issued a ballot, whether mail-in or in-person, has a particular numbered ballot assigned to that person. No other numbered ballot will be accepted from that person. The person and ballot are tied together.

      When you hear a story about voter fraud it almost always completely ignores that ballots assigned to someone else can’t be used to vote. You can’t print off sample ballots from the state’s voting website and turn them in (or, as was done in a brazen attempt at falsifying evidence, burn them). You can’t steal a ballot out of someone’s mailbox, fill it in yourself, and turn it in – if you try to do it as that person, the signature won’t match. If you try to fill it out as yourself, the ballot will get rejected since that ballot wasn’t assigned to you.

      You would have to precisely duplicate a particular voter’s particular ballot including its number and anti-forgery measures, but without their recorded votes in order to cast a vote for that particular voter while also matching that voter’s signature closely enough to not trigger a machine & person reject. On both the ballot and the numbered & sealed envelope containing the ballot and then the actual envelope, yada yada yada.

      And which voter gets assigned which ballot is done on a precinct by precinct basis. You would have to literally compromise every precinct in a state in order to determine which ballot number every voter was assigned in order to fraudulently cast votes for them, while simultaneously intercepting their mailed in ballot because two ballots = instant rejection & evidence of fraud (which hasn’t been found so far).

      Each precinct keeps its own records, there’s no central state registry in greater detail than whether or not a person has or hasn’t registered to vote. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if many of these records aren’t kept electronically but are instead kept in fireproof filing cabinets that weigh several hundred pounds each, inside locked rooms, inside alarmed buildings, inside… you get the idea.

      If you’re going oh oh oh but I meant electronic voting, guess what, only a few states use electronic voting machines. A few more went electronic then went back to paper after the 2000 election shenanigans. But all mail-in ballots are, by their very nature, paper ballots. Those are the ballots that a certain someone told their voters not to use, remember? Voting with a paper trail… voting without a paper trail… hmm, I wonder why they’d prefer voting without a paper trail…

      1. Skeptic

        “the signature won’t match”

        Are you not aware that in Pennsylvania signature matching is out the window this election? A ballot envelope is simply tossed out and the ballot within it is then processed.

        So actually quite easy in PA to get ballots from any number of places – mailboxes, group homes, dense living arrangements – till ’em out as one wishes, put an “X” on the outer envelop and mail.. Voila, fraud.

        This reality exists in other states as well.

        1. JamminJ

          No, he is not aware of that lie.

          I’m sorry, but if you don’t understand the basic rules of the system, don’t comment and spread lies.

          The signature IS checked against registration and usually that’s the driver license signature. Yes, even in PA.

          Just because they separate out the ballot from the external envelope that has the signature, doesn’t mean there is no check.
          That’s like data in the OSI model… once one layer is read, it can be stripped out and the payload passed on. Don’t blame the application (7) for not processing the MAC address (2).

          In elections, we still do a “secret ballot” whether in person or by mail. So that people can’t see who a person voted for… so the ballot is only processed AFTER verification of the voter. Same as in person, you check into the voting center, then you take a ballot into the booth. That ballot doesn’t have your name on it.

          1. JJ

            Jammin you said: “The signature IS checked against registration and usually that’s the driver license signature. Yes, even in PA….”

            How do you know? Were you there at 3AM in PA?

            1. JamminJ

              The judge asked the Trump lawyers… and the lawyer tried to be a smartas saying, “there are a non-zero number”. Then the judge got upset, and basically called him out and mentioned that he is risking disbarment if he doesn’t stop his nonsense.
              Then Trump’s lawyer admitted that Trump did have observers in the room. Yes, at 3 am, and every point ballots were being counted.

  2. ssssssssss

    I wonder if we’ll still be calling it all “baseless” once this goes to the Supreme Court and Sidney Powell brings thousands of witnesses of fraud, who have all signed sworn affidavits, with her.
    So baseless, right? Cheaters never win. Get ready.

    1. JamminJ

      People wave signed affidavits all day long on TV… but when people ask to see them… there are no names.

      When someone who actually signed an affidavit, is investigated or asked to appear in court… their story changes.
      Why? Affidavits don’t mean anything and are easy to retract. And claims of affidavits mean even less… as anyone can wave paper at a camera.

    2. David Piepgrass

      Thousands? TheBlaze reported that the Trump campaign released 101 affidavits from Michigan, out of which 15 “raise the potential of voter fraud” according to that (conservative) outlet. Where are these “thousands”?

    3. Anthony Rimoli


      1. WWG1WGA

        Getting nervous? President Trump has the goods, he would be out of his derelict of duty if he handed over the Office to a provable criminal enterprise. Next few weeks will be incredible. Conservatives are united, enjoy the show.

        1. JamminJ

          Qanon idiots still believing that “soon” something will happen.
          Just like every doomsday cult… the date comes and goes, and you’ll move on to the next prediction.

        2. A. Bosch

          Yes, along with, “Durham is coming!”

          How’s that working out?

    4. BrianMke

      Baseless. Well, that is a strong stance when the evidence points otherwise. Will there be a last page retraction?

      1. JamminJ

        Do you know how magicians work? Misdirection.
        Evidence of irregularities, mistakes and even a few accounts of real fraud… are NOT a basis for the larger claim of widespread fraud and that the Trump really won. So yeah, “Baseless” accurately refers to the extraordinary claim that lacks extraordinary evidence.

  3. Fondell MiBaullz

    Folks, all these “baseless” folks are Russian trolls. Pay them no mind and don’t feed them.

  4. soluition

    you get number you vote and system will destroy the number and also everybody will on the blockchain the number so once the voting number been used once it will be destroyed.

    the voting numbers are equal with the total ammmount of voters.

    so if there is 200k voters there is numbers issued from 1 to 200k only.
    so do i really need to teach you guys how to make xthings right?

    lets grow up kids !!!

    1. JamminJ

      You English is very poor, so you aren’t even communicating your idea very well.
      But from what I am piecing together… you are talking about blockchain voter integrity.
      Fine, that may fix a handful of possible problems.

      But numbers not adding up isn’t even the accusation here. The Trump team wants to invalidate votes that WERE COUNTED, claiming they were illegal. Blockchain doesn’t fix that.

  5. Brian Cummings

    This is consistent. A competent person gets fired for failure to support the world view of his boss. Most of us have probably worked for the same type of boss. That’s when we understand at least one meaning of a “hostile work environment.” Good leaders listen and ask questions to elevate their understanding. Think about your best boss ever. Bad bosses want it their way and want a “Yes” team, depriving themselves of their team’s insight and intelligence.

    1. Steven

      Brian, I don’t believe we know exactly why Chris Krebs was fired– was it his world view, or something else? But in the face of this much election shenanigans it is perhaps a bit premature for Krebs to call this the most secure election ever. On the other hand, if THIS truly was the most secure election ever, what does that say about what we’ve been putting up with in the past? Yikes

      1. Steven

        I am a gov worker that utilizes CISA services. They have made great leaps forward in encouraging security awareness across all state and gov entities. CISA is funded on their interactions and judged on success. In a primal sense if one were to say there were Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security issues they are sniping at CISA. If we were all so rational then we would not be offended by what the president or the CISA director said because they are both largely true. However, this is politics and none of us are rational.

      2. Brian Cummings

        This is beyond discussion if you are convinced that there was voter fraud and irregularities on a scale that would tip the vote in favor of a candidate. But, why would we be so ready to lose trust in our election process, the free press, the US Intelligence agencies, the Justice Department and everything else that has been trashed over the last 4 years? Because one man claims it to be so without providing any supporting facts? We are not perfect, but we are not so broken. Many good people have also been trashed. It is incomprehensible that they all deserved it. I don’t believe Krebs did.
        You may think from this that I did not vote for Trump. In fact, I did. Twice now. I don’t like his style. I think his behavior is deplorable and completely overshadows his accomplishments. I would not want to work for him. I just believe we would be worse off with the Democratic Party Platform.

  6. Marie Sibenik

    President Trump would like to run the entire U,S, government like his T.V. show The Apprentice. no wonder the show is no longer on the air.

  7. Mike Gale

    Those fired like this should wear their firing as badge of honour. A badge more valuable maybe than all the medals.

    We might need a hall of fame for all honoured in this way.

  8. NewsCanRuinUs

    This man has worked for his reputation and has fallen pray to the system and country he warked for! Now I think that this type of affairs should raise some sings of the stuff happening around here!

  9. Rich

    Right on, Brian! Thanks for awesome reporting. Chris Krebs was awesome in developing his department and helping secure the nation. This election, as all elections do, had some minor hiccups. However, by all legitimate accounts no fraud, no widespread errors and, while unknown to most of us, seemingly little foreign interference. I hope President Joe Biden hires him back?

    1. Pete2

      The important thing, from the perspective of this venue, is whether a computer security issue existed.

      The referenced Joint Statement was poorly worded. How can it be so definitive, especially in the world of cybersecurity where it can take years to flesh out what really happened, if ever.

      Have they really proven a negative, that no evidence exits?

      The statement sounds more like the kind of thing that Mr. Krebs reports here when he confronts stonewalling companies at being hacked.

      Has their statement served a purpose of placating those who are questioning matters? Or, as some have said, is it simply the result of a Machiavellian strategy by political appointees for their future?

      Let us encourage our government agencies to stick to the facts. Avoid sweeping statements that aren’t effective at addressing concerns about computer systems that can determine election outcomes.

      1. clown 2

        no unclassified evidence was released, and won’t be

        “most secure ever” doesn’t really say much as the baseline was poor to begin with

        having said that, democracy is messy (to quote biden), expecting otherwise is insanity

      2. Solar

        If I asserted election was compromised by an intergalactic task force–how would anyone know for sure it was not? People cannot disprove charges that are not revealed

      3. brett

        Pete nailed it. How do you get anyone to admit that an event happened if the people best at knowing it happened are always blamed and punished for allowing it to happen? Economics states that answer will always be “nothing to see here.” Just like the stolen USB drives at the Philly election staging place. The person in charge says the USB drives were encrypted which makes no sense if they hold the private keys to program the voting machines. Again, what was their answer? “Nothing to see here.”

  10. gtodon

    Kudos, Brian, for having the guts and the integrity to call Trump’s fraud claims “baseless.” Sadly, some of your readers appear to have the brains of MAGAts.

    1. Heywood

      No longer a reader. Should have kept to cyber-security and away from taking a political stance.

      1. JamminJ

        Heywood is upset with the politics discussed on this blog… yet had no problem with Brian Krebs other articles that involved politics, until he disagreed with his personal politics.

        You only object because you voted for Trump and the cognitive dissonance is catching up to you. When you join a cult of personality… you take disagreement personally. You are to blame for worshiping Trump. You backed yourself into this corner and now you are triggered by his loss. Don’t blame Brian Krebs for reporting the truth.

  11. Dennis

    Brian, since when did you start posting political content on your blog?

    1. Tom W

      Dennis, since when did factual statements become political in your eyes?

  12. Steven

    Each state currently sets their own federal election laws…

    What if Congress passes a federal election Law– the Fair Election Act, that sets up a universal and truly transparent Voting System. Consistent through all states, and monitored by both parties (or all parties), with a paper trail that’s easily verifiable (unlike many of our current very vulnerable voting systems). California currently offers no voting receipt.

    This would be a system that creates trust, not the mistrust of the massive anomalies of our current swing states.

    1. JamminJ

      Sounds nice… but unconstitutional.
      For those worshiping every compromise/decision made by the founding fathers… here you go.

      1. krazijoe

        Not if it’s a federal election. Congress can control a Federal Election over anything a state does.

        “With regard to the administration of federal elections, Congress has constitutional authority over both congressional and presidential elections. have held that the Elections Clause grants Congress broad authority to override state regulations in this area”

        1. JamminJ

          It’s a good read. Yes, federal election law have a lot of say in how states conduct an election. To the original post being replied, yes that’s a good point.

        2. JamminJ

          I read, “Consistent through all states” as something a bit more broad than the original comment may have intended.

          There indeed could be federal law that makes certain aspects of the election consistent through all 50+1 states.
          But many WILL be challenged as unconstitutional depending on how much they are perceived to be overreaching.

          For instance, no matter how the elections are conducted… fairly or unfairly. Even to the point of violating the constitution… a state legislature could still allocate electoral votes in accordance with their OWN state law. Very dangerous indeed.

  13. Anon

    Regardless of what one might think, the US voting system is crap. Every state has a different set of rules and laws, and can be manipulated by any political party or group out there with an agenda just because they don’t like the guy that’s in office at the time or running for office

    Krebs may have have been a great security guy in CISA. But his employment is never a guarantee, regardless of circumstance. No one is beyond getting fired for any cause.

    1. bp

      He’s not the only one who got fired. So did his direct reports. So obviously they did something wrong. Trump also fired the heads of FERC and NNSA (nuclear weapons). If Brian did his homework, he’d know that this intimates that an attack did occur. Brian I’d say your reputation is on the line here.

      1. JamminJ

        Do not spread fake news.
        Who else at CISA was fired? Direct reports often quit when the boss leaves. This is normal turnover.
        Pressuring the deputy to follow the head out the door indicates a political move, like he’s worried the deputy might reiterate that no attack happened. Trump wants loyalty, not competence.

        Brian’s reputation is just fine. He doesn’t need to cowtow to the President any more than Chris did.
        A top CISA official sent a note late Tuesday reassuring employees that President Donald Trump’s firing of CISA Director Chris Krebs would not dissuade the agency from its mission of protecting U.S. computer networks, including helping to defend election systems.

        “A change in leadership is not a change in mission and it is essential that we do not lose focus on the important work we collectively undertake on behalf of the American people,” Emily Early, CISA’s chief of staff, told employees. “Fortunately, we have the best workforce in all of government and I know we can count on each of you to continue the excellent work you do every day as we all work together to Defend Today and Secure Tomorrow.”

        Next in line: In her email, Early confirmed that Trump had designated CISA Executive Director Brandon Wales as the agency’s new acting director. Matthew Travis, CISA’s deputy director, would have been next in line, but he submitted his resignation under White House pressure, a person familiar with the matter told POLITICO.

  14. GKruser

    Unfortunate. Is he your brother? Too bad your column today has its readers so divided. Not sure how this will affect my daily InfoSec concerns.

    1. mealy

      Readers are not divided. Russian trolls (& Republicans) don’t read.

      If they did, they’d know that Trump lost the election and firing Krebs for doing his job and not kowtowing will only cement Trump’s legacy as a loser before he ultimately goes off to prison.

      Also, that’s not Brian’s brother, he noted that (no relation)

      Read more kids.

  15. Barry

    Why are all the liberals so scared of finding out if the election was rigged or not?

    Security researches are promoting the misinformation that this was the “most secure election ever”, which is a complete nonsense when the hardware was created to rig elections in Venezuela and there have been countless reports of how insecure the voting machines are for years, including being connected to the internet.

    Brian also promotes the Russia Russia Russia hoax, it’s all so tiring.

    The evidence of fraud is forming a tsunami since Trump won in a landslide and the Democrat machine got very sloppy trying to catch up. It’s being crowd sourced here for enquiring minds:

    1. Freedom Fighter

      Go to sleep you Russian troll. No one believes your s#*t!

  16. Mainer Forlife

    Angus King is not an Independent! he votes liberal democrat 99.99999999999995% of the time

  17. Chad

    So it seems that their accusation is that Pennsylvania maybe Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Arizona and Georgia cheated.
    Why would they think that when you can look at Florida, Indiana and even Texas. Such as Florida it’s a Republican state but president Trump lost pretty much all the Miami area he lost Tampa he lost Jacksonville and he lost Tallahassee, I believe.
    Indiana which Mike pence is from Biden won Indianapolis area and Gary Indiana area the two largest cities in the state.
    President Trump won Texas but he lost in Dallas Houston Brownsville area and El Paso, area I believe. My point is this even in a lot of Republican states Biden won the large cities so why would he not have won Pittsburgh, Philadelphia, Detroit and so on?

    1. Notme

      This exactly. If the fraud was so widespread why aren’t the Trump people asking to examine the results of all fifty states? It seems unlikely that the results that fall in Trumps favor are immune to this massive fraud and incompetence. Let’s hurry up and recount all 50 /s.

      1. Steven

        Because, Notme, there doesn’t seem to be any evidence of foul play in those states. If the Liberals believed there was fraud in those states, they’d have to right to pursue that as well.

        1. JamminJ

          But Dominion was also used in Florida and Ohio.
          So Republican calls for investigations into Dominion, has to acknowledge that they are also suggesting fraud in those states too.

  18. Hans

    “Krebs, 43, is a former Microsoft executive”

    This is the first clue that he should not have been hire.

    This election was the largest fraud in history of our Republic.

  19. Maureen Mason

    There is astounding proof of massive voter fraud and a stolen election process. Didn’t he ever hear of Dominion? He is a bought and paid for Microsoft plant into the administration. Good riddence.

    1. Bitzie

      No there really isn’t astounding proof. Every court case has been thrown out there is seriously no evidence people. Stop watching propaganda.

    2. JamminJ

      You’ve never heard of Dominion either… until someone with an agenda told you they were bad.

  20. BLT

    Questions worthy of an inquiry and timeline build:

    1. Have any of the executive officers at Dominion Voting Systems shown public biases that would lead a reasonable person to believe they are not impartial?

    2. Has Dominion Voting Systems made any political or charitable contributions that would lead a reasonable person to believe they are not impartial?

    3. Have any members of either political party stated historical questions about problematic aspects of Dominion Systems? What does that timeline look like?

    4. What are the historical issues logged with Dominion Voting Systems related to vote handling and accuracy?

    5. What manual controls allow override/maintenance of Dominion systems software?
    1. How are these controlled?
    2. How are these logged?
    3. Who is reviewing the reports and validating the propriety of manual overrides?

    6. How has the LinkedIn company profile (number of employees) changed over the last 3 months for Dominion Voting Systems?

    7. What manual non system end to end voting processes leave the system subject to fraud and how can these processes be made more robust?
    1. Voter id/non repudiation
    2. Vote collection/harvesting
    3. Vote change processes
    4. Vote reporting and synchronization

    8. How can/should AI be deployed to look for patterns and signs of fraud similar to how the credit card/banking industry does this analysis?

    1. zboot

      Of course, this presupposes we’ve answer the question of “Why are we investigating Dominion but not any other contractor used in this election”?

    2. Jennifer Rose

      Where is Dominion located? Are any foreign citizens involved or working with USA’s voting software or systems? If so that’s foreign election interference. Also what’s Dominion’s involvement with Toronto Dominion bank — the bank that owes American citizens $7Billion in stolen funds. A/K/A TD Bank

      1. JamminJ

        Stop spreading fake news.

        No, Dominion is not owned or affiliated with any Canadian company. If your impressed or convinced by name similarity… then there is a Jen Rose that is sitting in prison right now for fraud.

        Everyone can be tied to a foreign citizens via some level of “involvement”.
        Wanna play six degrees of separation?
        It doesn’t mean foreign election interference. That’s absurd.

  21. ActYourAge

    Excuse my french, but given the current situation and behavior (which is only bound to get much worse) is there no legal provision in the US Constitution to declare this president to be psychologically and mentally incompetent to be able to perform his job at the helm of the most powerful nation and coming dangerously close to become single-handedly himself a very real potential internal treat to national (and global) security, and just throw his ass out on to Pennsylvania Ave? And BTW time to take away those nuclear codes!

    I think he is just desperate about the legal entanglements that he will be facing once he becomes a private citizen, and is recklessly doing whatever he feels would help to cause chaos and anarchy around him just to hang on to his political power by any means. FCOL, he was just thinking of attacking Iran!! Anything goes for this sick little demented person that should have never made it into the White House to start with. He knows very well a lot of legal flack will be pointed his way and there is a very good chance that he will end up in jail, but worst of all will be the even worst humiliation he will have to face then.

    Just declare him a lunatic with some nice medical wording although that is exactly what he really is, and sit the vice-p in the oval to finish these 2 months with some dignity and presidential decorum so the rest of us, the thinking ones, and our planet at large can move on from this horrible 4-year fiasco. This sad show that has been put forward by this crazed 74 year old baby in the past 4 years and specially during the past week has unfortunately done enough damage already to last decades. The USA will never be the same anymore.

    Just my 2 cents.

    1. JamminJ

      25th amendment does… but requires the cabinet to agree. But they are hand picked by the president. So it would have to be super obvious, and not a “technically, he’s out of his mind”. Rather, it would need to be, “he’s literally been shot in the head or suffered a stroke”.

      Impeachment is the closest thing to what you describe. But of course, the Senate would have to agree. And with everything being so partisan, it didn’t work this time. It did work back in the 1970’s though. Less partisanship, Nixon knew he would not get acquitted.

  22. Aaron

    Can we all agree that Canada got in a good burn against US Election systems when they said… “that’s why we still use paper ballots, only”

    I don’t care what level of security a voting machine has, if it is connected to the internet it’s not secure, end of story.

    In a contract with Santa Clara county, bullet points listing how a Dominion voting system is authorized to be used (2.26 and 2.27) include the ability to login an change votes. I know that this is for the ability to fix an error from a user, or small genuine accidents; but having a function that is open to abuse begs for security issues.

    1. JamminJ

      But the Trump legal team is not even accusing the electronic voting system of anything. They are still accusing paper ballots of being fraudulent.

      Why? Because Democrats voted overwhelmingly by mail and Republicans were more likely to use in-person electronic voting machines.

  23. Ron Wright

    So what about the Dominion vote system is so full of holes that it can be it can be exploited from inside and outside? First rule to red-team the system you’re trying to detect.

  24. Gold

    It is indeed sad to see the levels that this great country has come down to. A country with the largest per capita winner of Noble Prizes on one hand and almost 71 million adult citizens supporting a village idiot.

  25. Insider

    Physical ballots were changed/tampered with, thrown out, destroyed, forged outright, illegally cast, mailed in late, scanned multiple times. Electronic voting machines were manipulated before, during and after election day resulting in the changing of millions of votes. Poll watchers were not allowed to do their jobs and in some cases were threatened or ejected.

    Do you think it is highly suspicious that all “errors” resulted in Biden gains and Trump losses?

    There was widespread fraud in the 2016 election but Trump pulled out a victory because the opposition only had fake poll numbers (attempted voter suppression by the mainstream media, social media/big tech) to go on. In 2020 the Coronavirus Scamdemic sparked changes in election protocol in many states; in some of these cases the altering of these protocols by means other than legislation (as the US Constitution dictates) will be ruled unconstitutional. Counts in key states were paused in the middle of the night to allow for fraudulent ballot harvesting in order to overcome Trump’s leads in those states. Expect these illegal votes to be discounted.

    Not only will there be a major shift in the election results (with Trump winning the electoral and the popular votes) but there will be significant jail time for those involved in the collusion, including some higher-ups in the U.S. government.

    The Democratic party as we know it is OVER.

    Just a heads up.

    1. Jeremy Lansman

      Election fraud has been practiced for decades in the American midwest and south. What’s new?

    2. Clyde Tolson

      So the democrats were devious enough to change the results of the Presidency but left down ballot voting alone to ensure a divided Congress and gains for Republicans in the house? What’s your Q leader say about that? Clown.

      1. JJ

        It was said: “So the democrats were devious enough to change the results of the Presidency but left down ballot voting alone to ensure a divided Congress and gains for Republicans in the house? What’s your Q leader say about that? Clown.”

        The “Clown” ending is always a great display of class by a poster, for those paying attention.

        The reports are that the 3AM ballots were only marked for Biden, no down ticket markings at all. We’ll see what turns up in the end– the Supreme Court will make the determination of baseless or not.

        What is interesting is that both Florida and Ohio went for Trump. The last time that Ohio and Florida got it “wrong” was 1960 when they both voted for Nixon. It is interesting to note that that election of 1960 is generally believed to have been stolen from the Republicans by the Democrats as well, though unlike President Trump, Nixon decided to let it go unchallenged.

        I believe that for the sake of the credibility of our system, if anyone believes there are discrepancies, the system should be challenged, dug into and put on display for all to see. That is the only path to true credibility.

        1. Notme

          I’d say we need an immediate recount of Florida and Ohio to ascertain why this result is so off!!!! Check those fraudulent Trump votes

        2. JamminJ

          Yes, Qanon followers are clowns. Classy or not, its accurate.

          When votes are tallied and reported/uploaded to be viewed by the networks, it comes in “traunches” or bundles. Just because these votes were updated at the same time, doesn’t mean they all come from a single county that would expect to have a mix of votes.
          Some traunches simple had all Biden votes, followed by traunches of all Trump votes minutes later. It is arbitrary based on who is updating the system.
          It’s like pressing Ctrl-S on every update.

          Haha… yeah, Trump’s presidency shares a LOT with Nixon. There are a lot of, “hasn’t happened since Nixon” going on lately.
          Remember, Trump literally took pages from the Nixon playbook, and even hired the “dirty trickster” campaign guru himself, Mr. Roger Stone.

          I agree the system needs to be examined. I would not be surprised if the solution would be to look hard at eliminating/bypassing the electoral college.
          But to suggest we should “wait” or halt the certification, is ridiculous and shows the true motivation is not credibility or integrity… but a malicous coup of the democratic process.

  26. James

    Baseless? With thousands of signed affidavits alleging election fraud? The use of mail-in ballots has removed the in-person ID check and facilitates vote harvesting. Krebs, it’s disappointing that you are being so partisan.

    1. JamminJ

      Only a few states ever had ID checks. Many simply had, “tell me your address” checks. Once checked in, nobody else could vote under your name. So it was always possible to vote fraudulently this way.

      But there is a reason why “widespread” voter fraud conspiracies don’t really exist in the real world. Because there is no cost/benefit like there is in typical financial fraud.
      Each successful occurrence of financial fraud, can reward the fraudster with real benefit in the form of cash money. Voter fraud is an all or nothing enterprise. The fraudster gets NOTHING unless they perform tens of thousands of occurrences enough to swing an election. Even beyond a single state in the case, as several states would need to be swung to have any tangible benefit for the fraudster.
      The benefit is hard to attain, and a massive conspiracy is needed to pull it off. And the more fraudulent votes cast, the higher the cost (risk) of being caught.
      So voter fraud is usually a losing game for the fraudster every time.

      Evidence of irregularities, mistakes and even a few accounts of real fraud… are NOT a basis for the larger claim of widespread fraud and that the Trump really won. So yeah, “Baseless” accurately refers to the extraordinary claim that lacks extraordinary evidence.

  27. push and shove

    Did not Trump say in the media, prior to the election, “vote twice?”

    He did.

    What you’re witnessing now is a tiny taste of what a future dictator will be like for America.

  28. Will Jackson

    Apart from making a ballot counting system secure, maybe the Electoral College needs to be changed? When destructive very low quality characters are ‘elected’ then something is going wrong. It seems to be a problem of the English speaking world. We have the same problem here in the UK.

Comments are closed.