bena takes the bait...analysis provided, his precinct audits are no audits at all

Dear Friends,

I just sent the following letter to all the usual suspects across the State and in the Capitol:

---

Subject: bena takes the bait...analysis provided, his precinct audits are no audits at all

Dear Friends and Public Servants,

Deputy Secretary Wayne Bena testified before the Lancaster County Board of Commissioners this past Tuesday morning, July 18th. He did so in response to complaints made by citizens before the Board over the past several weeks regarding our "elections." 

He did himself a great disservice. Of course that's nothing new, but every time he does himself a great disservice, he also does all of us a great disservice, with all of the election disinformation/propaganda he feeds county public servants and the public in general. 

Keep in mind that he's doing all of this at our expense. Besides living off our hard-earned tax dollars (which he doesn't at all seem to be cognizant of or thankful for), the "outcomes" of his expensive and fraudulent elections adversely affect every aspect of our lives.  

The roughly 30 minute presentation can be found here. 

The plan in this letter is to begin (and only begin) disputing his many baseless, and very dangerous-to-our-Liberty, claims.

We will start by challenging his argument that manual precinct audits are any evidence at all of honest, computerized vote-counts. (Heads up: They are not.)

First of all, his precinct audits are self-audits, and for that reason, they are no audits at all. No one gets to audit themselves—especially government "employees" who are not only looking to stay in power, as Bena is, but who are also spending the People's money (rather than their own). 

Secondly, his precinct audits are no audits at all because they are only partial audits of a much larger computerized vote count. The secret software being used to count our votes isn't just written (presumably) to count votes, it is also written to distinguish between precincts. Software can be easily written to cheat in one precinct and not in another. Therefore, an audit of 3 precincts out of 198 (1.5%), as is the case in Lancaster County, doesn't constitute any kind of an election audit.

Last but not least, there's no transparency in the selection of precincts for audit. The SoS office has refused to tell us how they select precincts for their "audits."

Before analyzing two Lancaster County precinct audits from the 2020 General Election, let me first make an observation about the official number of people who voted in the 2020 General Election.

The 2020 General Election Official State Canvassers Report, which can be found here, says the number of registered voters in Lancaster County for the 2020 General Election was 202,820. (See pg 8 at the link above.) In contrast, the number of registered voters listed in the official Lancaster County report, which can be found here, is 203,163. 

Why the discrepancy? 

Obviously because Nebraska has no record-keeping standard regarding this number.

Nor do they have a standard for keeping track of exactly who votes in a given election. I filed a Public Records Request at the time for a list of everyone who voted, and Lancaster County Election Commissioner Dave Shively told me over the phone, in no uncertain terms, and with a rather nervous voice, that he did not have such a list and neither did the Secretary's office (he said he called and asked), and added that he had never been required to keep such a list.

What kind of election administration is this?? Wouldn't it be a no-brainer to keep such a list?? 

A list of everyone who voted in a given election is obviously a very important document for any kind of election audit, and one that should be kept for at least 22 months. The fact that our Secretary doesn't know who votes in a given election is a serious problem. Just knowing some of the People doesn't cut it.

For the record, our Secretary has delegated management of our voter rolls to a private company that keeps them online. This makes them easy prey for bad actors who want to stuff and manipulate them. Kris Jurski has clearly and without question demonstrated this fact in Florida. It's occurring all across our country. It's very sophisticated. 

Our SoS only allows public access to our voter rolls once a month. In other states, they can be accessed and monitored by the People on a running basis. Online centralized voter rolls are a really bad idea. And that really bad idea belongs to Evnen and Bena.

Moving on to an analysis of two precinct audits.

I recently filed a Public Records Request for copies of the precinct manual audit reports from two Lancaster County precincts (1A and 9F-10) that were selected for "audit" after the 2020 General Election. You are not going to like what I, and others, have found.

Regarding Precinct 1A:

According to the official report from Lancaster County found here, 645 ballots were cast in Precinct 1A. But the manual audit report above says only 313 ballots from that precinct were counted in the "audit." What gives?? Why didn't they count all the ballots cast in Precinct 1A?? Why don't these numbers reconcile?? What are they hiding?? 

Now look at this report from Lancaster County for the Presidential part of the ballot from Precinct 1A

What do we find??

235 + 378 + 19 + 6 only equals 638 ballots cast, compared to the 645 stated.. Did the other 7 voters not vote for any Presidential candidate??  If not, why didn't the report for this race include 7 undervotes, so the numbers reconcile??

Moving on to Precinct 9F-10:

According to the official report from Lancaster County again found here, 606 ballots were cast in Precinct 9F-10. The manual audit report above says only 322 of those ballots were counted. Again, why? What gives?? What kind of audits are these?? Why didn't they count all the ballots? Why don't these numbers reconcile?? What is Bena hiding?

And again, as above, if you look at this report from Lancaster County for the President's race in Precinct 9F-10, we find the same thing we found in 1A (7 votes missing):

Again, the numbers don't add up. 241 + 336 + 17  + 5  only equals 599, compared to the 606 stated. Did another 7 voters not vote for a Presidential candidate??  If not, why didn't the report for this race include 7 undervotes, so the numbers reconcile?? What are they hiding??

Can the machines be programmed to skip counting a certain number of votes in a certain race in each precinct, or in certain precincts? Of course they can. Would 7 missing votes in each of 198 precincts make a huge difference in a race? The answer is, "Duh." 

We don't know if these voters had their votes for President stolen or not. There's no transparency. We must assume the worst when dealing with government, until proven otherwise. Watchfulness in the Citizen is the Salvation of the State, not blind trust.

Bena's math doesn't even rise to the level of first grade, let alone sixth grade (which is a charge he made against others in his presentation above). He needs to look in the mirror. His numbers don't add up, and he refuses to show his work...i.e, the work of his machines, by providing the CVRs. He says they don't use the CVR option. 

The obvious question is Why not? 

I'll tell you why not. He obviously doesn't want to be transparent and accountable. And the obvious reason he doesn't want to be transparent and accountable is that he's hiding something. Why doesn't his boss fire him??? Is he in on it??? Or is he just clueless and inept?

Bena's secret partial self-"audits" aren't any evidence whatsoever that a larger computerized vote count is honest.

The only system that will give us honest elections is one in which verified voters cast their votes on election day (with very few exceptions) at the precinct level and then the votes are hand counted right there where they are cast, with absolute transparency. 

There are serious motives to cheat in elections. Decentralization, transparency and absolute chain-of-custody are all a must.

In closing, every elected official who took an oath to defend our Constitution and God-given rights should be irate with our SoS office. Every elected official not standing up for transparent and publicly verifiable elections should forsake their loyalty to this corrupt system while they still have the opportunity.

Robert J. Borer

credits: Jennifer Hicks, Kathy Fitzgerald

---

That’s all I have. Wanted to get this out before the work day ended.

God bless.