I have written a few times that from what I could dig up is that the two companies hired by the Maricopa County Supervisors appear only to exist to exonerate voting machine companies like Dominion Voting. As it turns out I was on the money. Both, SLI Compliance and Pro V&V derive half of their income from testing voting machines for the manufacturers and that is why they always find them blameless.
It is not wise to bite the hand that feeds you. That is why they found no problems in Maricopa County and Cyber Ninjas found so many problems. Cyber Ninjas is not on Dominion’s payroll but the other two are. This is clearly a conflict of interest and explains why the Maricopa County Supervisors hired them. They were hired to cover their corruption. They wanted the audit to come back clean as did Dominion Voting.
This is no secret to all of those involved, and it is proudly advertised on the home page of Pro V&V’s website:
Since our founding in 2011, we have always had one focus: our clients. Pro V&V exists to help its clients comply with regulations in systems and software testing in the most efficient and professional manner possible and will always be dedicated to verifying your products to your satisfaction. (emphasis added)”
Both Maricopa County and Georgia claimed that the two companies performed forensic audits which is not true. They hqave no experience in doing a forensic audit. There are four problems with their claims.
First is the existing conflict-of-interest issue which is only worsened by the present circumstances. To put it bluntly, an audit that resulted in problems with a voting system that is made by a company that pays you to test their voting systems wouldn’t necessarily be good for business. Especially when that company accounts for nearly half of your income.
Second is the fact that neither of these two VSTLs is qualified to perform forensic audits of computer-based voting systems. Contrary to what the public officials, voting system manufacturers, and the media claim, these companies are not certified by the EAC to audit voting systems. In fact, the EAC specifically addresses the qualifications recommended for forensic auditors.
The following is from the EAC’s “Best Practices: Chain of Custody” guide:
Third Party Post-Election Audits and Electronic Discovery Services”
“Digital forensics require specialized skillsets, and the audit team should possess certifications or applicable work experience in this specialty. Industry standard certifications are offered by organizations such as the International Association of Computer Investigative Specialists (IACIS) or the Sans Institute. “
Third, the audits by the VSTLs in both Maricopa and Georgia were not forensic audits and they didn’t follow the protocol set forth by standards established by court precedent of preserving evidence and chain of custody as those mirrored by the EAC guidelines detailed here:
VIDEO OF THE DAYIdiots Twerk On Ambulance After Shooting In Oakland, CA
The shortcomings are easily established when comparing the audit reports by Pro V&V and SLI Compliance for Maricopa County, and Pro V&V’s report for the State of Georgia with the chain of custody best practices referenced above.
Fourth, the officials of the state of Georgia and Maricopa County have misrepresented the audits by Pro V&V and SLI Compliance to the people of the United States. Including the qualifications and certifications of those who did the work and the work that was performed.
Here is a description of the audits by Maricopa County:
Maricopa County’s election equipment and software passed all tests performed by two independent firms hired to conduct the forensic audit, according to reports by two federally certified Voting System Testing (my emphasis added) Laboratories.”