BYPATRICK BYRNE JULY 17, 2022
We’ve tried, Emma, let’s give each other that much.
Yet after 18 months of trying, it is time that we recognize that this relationship is not what we had hoped it would be at the start. After our first shy, fumbling yet adequate attempts in early 2021, I hoped for so much more might come of this relationship. I hoped it might become something breathtaking, historic.
Alas, it is clear to us both, I am sure, that it is best we move on. For both of us there are others out there to whom we will be more suited.
Reasons? I will share but two, minimizing them so as to make our parting sweet, and not acrimonious.
Wednesday I spoke to a group including journalists from Reuters and New York Times. I held up two items:•
- the DHS-CISA report (the one I call “Patrick Byrne was right again, again”) wherein the DHS at last acknowledges that there are nine severe security failures in election equipment in widespread use across the USA during November 2020. CISA shifted their position from “the most secure election in history” to one where acknowledge they do not know if those vulnerabilities were exploited in November 2020 (but will say mere that they are not aware of evidence that it was, which is a hell of a lot weaker claim).
- the Mesa County Forensic Report #3 (by Texas A&M Computer Science Professor Emeritus Walter Daugherty and cybersecurity CEO Jeff O’Donnell) which proves that those vulnerabilities were indeed exploited in Mesa County, Colorado in both November 2020, and April 2021 (a city election in Grand Junction, Colorado).
In sum, last month the DHS-CISA confirmed that the election equipment used in 2020 was extremely vulnerable to hacking, and the Mesa Report #3 proves that it was hacked.
Late last week I was in Vegas at the invitation of the Constitutional Sheriffs & Peace Officers Association . In the audience were reporters from (among other news outlets) both the New York Times and Reuters . I noted publicly that both had parroted the “baseless/Big Lie” claim endlessly, so I thought they would welcome a chance to explain why they either:
- still believed our allegations were baseless;
- would agree that our claims now indeed had a “base” (the DHS report gives overwhelming base to our concerns and the Mesa County Report #3 is decisive on top of that).
Given the amount of ink these publications spilled in their now-doomed attempt to maintain that our concerns were baseless, surely a minimal respect for intellectual integrity would cause them to leap at opportunity either to defend or reform their beliefs. So I gave them opportunity.