Mike Lindell's 2-Hour Election Fraud Claim Video "Absolute Proof": Hacking Claims

Status
Not open for further replies.

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Mike Lindell, aka "The My Pillow Guy" is a Trump supporter who thinks there was massive election Fraud, and he's created a 2-hour video attempting to demonstrate this. It was broadcast, at his own expense, on OAN (a right-of-Fox cable news channel). It can be viewed in full on Lindell's personal web page (https://michaeljlindell.com/). It was posted on YouTube, but removed after a few hours.

I have not watched it all, but it appears to be a lots of similar things that were shown before. At one point, the apparent money shot of the video, he says there is "100% Proof" of a cyber attack, and brings on Mary Fanning by phone. (1h 36m), since this seems like the focus of the video, it's probably a good place to start.

She shows a list of what she describes as hacking.

2021-02-05_11-37-10.jpg

It's a time-stamped list of supposed source and targets of some kind of connection. It's not clear how this was obtained.

Each line is linked with a "Method of Intrusion and a "Votes changed"
2021-02-05_11-40-59.jpg

Lindell cites this as 100% proof, which is a bit bemusing, as there's no actual evidence of these intrusions or the "stealing" of votes. It's not documentation, it's not evidence, it's a claim - or rather, it's lots of little claims. Any one of which, if true, would be foreign interference in the election. None of these claims are backed by any evidence.

The presentation seems nonsensical. There's a column listing if the attack was successful, which is either Yes, No, or blank. Regardless of the value in this column, there's an entry in the "Votes Changed" column.

The entries are weird, in that they (and presumably the entire spreadsheet) seems to have been sorted alphabetically, which makes no sense at all - possibly a failed attempt to put the biggest numbers on the first page.

They then show an animation, with moving dots that are apparently "the actual files that are being moved and sent"
2021-02-05_12-03-02.jpg

No information as to what is in these "files", of how they know.

She mentioned "prismatic scoring algorithms" stealing the votes at "the transfer points".

This huge dump of vague data seems rather pointless, what you need is ONE demonstration of a foreign attack. Take the first line of that spreadsheet, demonstrate how you got these numbers, and how you know it caused the vote to be changed.

The bottom line here is that this is just a spreadsheet, with no evidence that it's actually what they claim it to be.
 
Last edited:

Akton

Member
Especially in Georgia, surely any changing of digital vote tallies would have been noticed in the hand recount.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Looking at Georgia, there's two "Cobb County Election" entries on that first page, which apparently were different computers, 104.16.0.195 and 104.16.0.1

Problem is, those are not Cobb County computers, those are Cloudflare computers. Cloudflare is a CMS/Firewall service that sits between the users and the actual web server.

The two lines say Trump Down 13044 and 18904, a total of 31,948

Trump actually got 165,459 (see attached), so a change of 31,948 would be hugely significant, and would have shown up in the hand recount.
 

Attachments

  • 03Nov2020-Election Summary Report Official and Complete (1).pdf
    360.2 KB · Views: 201

JMartJr

Senior Member
This huge dump of vague data seems rather pointless, what you need is ONE demonstration of a foreign attack.
Puts me in mind of the publication of "One Hundred Physicists Against Einstein," back when relativity was being debated and argued over. Einstein's purported response (possibly apocryphal) was "If I was wrong, one would be enough."
 

Justin Adalet

New Member
I haven't been following this stuff very much - had some trying family times recently - but what of Dr. Shiva's claims? He says in the video that he has two lawsuits that have not been thrown out still pending - I can't find anything about that. What does come up though which obviously I'm not a big fan of is that he's been suspended from Twitter. I hadn't heard much about him before but he claims to have invented email, and appears to be somewhat of a grifter while at the same time also appears to be quite brilliant.
 

FatPhil

Active Member
I haven't been following this stuff very much - had some trying family times recently - but what of Dr. Shiva's claims? He says in the video that he has two lawsuits that have not been thrown out still pending - I can't find anything about that. What does come up though which obviously I'm not a big fan of is that he's been suspended from Twitter. I hadn't heard much about him before but he claims to have invented email, and appears to be somewhat of a grifter while at the same time also appears to be quite brilliant.

Being mathematically inclined, I've never felt the word "brilliant" ever applied to his output, in fact I consider most of it to range from "just plain wrong" to "not even wrong". StandUp Maths debunked one of his vids, the one with the "slope" being the proof of ill-doing, probably the vid with this ID/title:
aokNwKx7gM8 Do these scatter plots reveal fraudulent vote-switching in Michigan?
That's great, but only starts to address the issues I had with that Shiva vid. The very initial core assumptions that Shiva based everything on were (a) unsupportable just from basic principles, assuming you knew nothing in advance; and worse (b) exactly the *opposite* of what you'd expect if you had as priors any information about the demographics of the region and the campaigning that took place (i.e. pro-mail for Dems, anti-mail for Reps). However, Matt's point that if you perform the analysis on Biden's data you see the same trend that was supposedly proof of bias, therefore the trend *cannot* be used to infer bias one way or the other (but could be used to infer bias both ways, if you're sufficiently hatstand) absolutely kills Shiva's argument dead.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
A deeper look into the spreadsheet of IP addresses, etc., that Lindell pointed at.

Article:
Even a superficial evaluation of Montgomery’s data shows that it’s laced with errors and anomalies. Here are a few examples:

  • Many of the source and destination IP addresses don’t match the geolocations specified
  • Some of the company/entity names don’t match the assigned locations ( e.g. a company identified in Beijing China is actually located in Hong Kong)
  • The “SOURCE OWNER” column uses DBA names for companies instead of the actual legal name, which is what you would get if you did a low level IP to organization resolution (a mandatory step for the intelligence to be actionable)
  • All of the destinations are protected with firewalls so the “INTRUSION METHOD” referencing the word “FIREWALL” is meaningless. From the limited attack vocabulary it’s obvious that whoever wrote this isn’t familiar with actual cyber offensive operations
  • The DATE column is missing time zone data. The repeating distribution pattern of date time stamps also strongly suggests that they are non-organic and rather were produced using some sort of cyclic function with a random number generator
  • Some of the records are incomplete. For example, one row in the “CHANGED VOTES” column states “TRUMP: DOWN 44,905”, but it failed to add the “Y” under the corresponding “SUCCESS” column
  • The tabs on the spreadsheet show that the titles were created manually (“Sheet 1” vs. “Sheet1” missing the space), which is unlikely if this data came from an automated process
  • The values in the fields titled “SOURCE ID” and “TARGET ID” which have a MAC address format were most likely created with a random number generator. A sampling of these addresses yielded no results of known network card manufacturers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Top