You've probably heard this before but what's new is that they're using the updated information about the Dominion machines. Their claims about them, allegations I'll call them, that they found some data security issues. I'll tell you what they are in a moment. And that they're updating some Supreme Court filings. So there's some kind of Supreme Court case that is being pushed forward. Doesn't mean the Supreme Court will take it. It's just an application of some sort for them to take it. But of course they don't take most things so we'll see.

But here are the claims. So Kurt Olson says his security experts have found the following. That in the 2020 and 2022 elections Dominion used altered software and lied about it. That's the allegation. Meaning that they said they were using one version of software but the actual election was run on a different version. Now is that a problem? That's like a really big problem. That's as big as you can get. If the system was checked out for security with one version of software and then ran a different version that's the same as not checking it for security. I mean or at least it leaves a big hole.

But that's not the only thing. Also in those last two elections they said they performed pre-election tests on the machines which would sound like they tested all the machines before the election. That's how I interpret that. But the claim is that they didn't. They didn't test the machines. They only tested some spares. In other words they only tested machines that were not used in the election and said they tested the machines used in the election by testing machines that were not used in the election. Is that a problem? Yeah could be kind of sketchy.

But then the third one is the funniest one. That the claim is that the master encryption key was left open in plain text. That anyone who knew where to look could find out how to have god control over the entire election simply by knowing where to look. They wouldn't have to hack anything. They just have to know where to look. And it was so unsecure the claim is that you could have changed anything happening in the system without detection.

Now do you believe that? Now I'm going to say that there's some pushback on the claim that you could do massive election machine cheating and not get caught because there are some controls. There are some audits. There are some checks. So it does seem to me that some types of misbehavior would get caught. But does that mean that every kind of cheating can get caught? Because if you could check the counting machines as well as the voting machines and I think it was all part of one network so you could you had control of more than one kind of machine, the vote and also the count of the vote. Do you think that the allegation will stand that you could change something in the voting machines that wouldn't be detected? So the wouldn't be detected part is the part I think would be the hardest to prove because I would imagine that Dominion will have some kind of argument that sounds like well yeah you can make those changes but we would obviously catch them. So we'll see if that's a good argument. But I think that would be the argument. But what else would it be right? If it were you you would argue yeah we would catch that and here's how we would catch it. So I don't know if this is enough to get it into the court.

However anybody who's making a claim that the election systems are secure is going to have to deal with the fact that they found three potential problems. That don't mean they were exploited. So remember separate the two topics. One topic is did anybody do anything bad on the election and the other topic is could they, was it possible but maybe they just didn't do it. And I think the question was it possible is looking more credible than it has before.

But remember all these election claims they almost all turn out not to be true. So if we were look at it from the 30,000 foot level and I said hey there's another claim about the election you should bet against it. Do you agree? If I said there's another claim but I didn't give you any details about the elections what would you bet? Well the smart bet you know is 20 to 1 in favor of it not being conclusive. So we'll see. These are pretty big claims.

But then Steve Bannon asked the question would Murdoch have won that gigantic Fox News case in which Tucker was saying things about the security of the election systems. Would Murdoch have won that case if he had had these three pieces of information and he could have said in that trial well we don't know what happened but here's your security key right here. Imagine if during the trial where Fox News was under fire for saying the election machines were not secure, imagine if the defense had pulled out a document and they said you know your encryption security key, here it is. And then just walk in front of the jury. Not that they could read the digits. Would just