Math doesn’t lie—people do.
A buried NSA‑authorized audit paved the way for this unelected illegitimate regime.
JUL 31, 2025
“In December 2024, I was personally involved in an NSA‑authorized forensic audit of the 2024 election. Kamala Harris and Tim Walz won—by a wide margin. Trump lost dramatically. There are multiple layers of complexity to this cover‑up, including transnational organized crime syndicates that extend far beyond the United States and our elections. To that point, I work in the human trafficking sector, which intersects with the stolen election(s) and has ties to Trump and Epstein—not to President Biden, Vice President Harris, or Governor Walz, but to the Democrats and other allied interests responsible for burying the audit.” — Adam Zarnowski, ex-CIA agent and author of Jörmungandr
In an exclusive interview, former CIA operative Adam Zarnowski laid out pieces of an intricate network of bad actors and covert operations behind transnational organized crime and the stolen 2024 election. Some of his disclosures confirmed long‑held suspicions; others were shocking, exposing connections between organized crime, political operatives, and global power brokers.
Adam’s testimony paints one of the clearest—and most disturbing—pictures yet of how the cover‑up was orchestrated and why it has remained buried. His free book Jörmungandr expounds on this testimony, making these intricate networks impossible to ignore.
He explained that none of his revelations are classified; he has full authorization to speak and is prepared to testify under oath. Having personally assisted the NSA in collecting the data, he stressed that a full forensic hand‑count of the 2024 election—beginning with Representative Victoria Spartz—must be this country’s top priority. The completed NSA audit results have been submitted, yet so far have been met with silence.
That silence is not just political inertia—it’s a cover for how the 2024 election was subverted. And at the center of it lies the machinery itself: ES&S, and the quiet installation of their own back door through ECO 1188.
ECO 1188: The Unlocked Backdoor
In September 2024, ES&S quietly pushed a change into its certified election software: ECO 1188. Pro V&V rubber stamped it. The EAC signed off.
On paper, it was filed as a “de minimis” update — a minor tweak that wouldn’t require deep review.
In reality, it moved a critical file (config.ini) from the static hash list to the dynamic hash list inside ES&S’s Electionware software.
For anyone who doesn’t speak vendor-euphemism, here’s what that means:
Certified voting software normally has cryptographic hashes — a kind of digital fingerprint — for every file.
If even a single character in a protected file changes, the hash doesn’t match, and the system throws an error.
ECO 1188 told the software: Don’t check this file anymore.
The config.ini file isn’t trivial. It controls how Electionware generates and formats vote totals for reports — the very outputs that are read on election night. By moving it to the “dynamic” list, ES&S, Pro V&V and the EAC created a window where reporting behavior could be altered without triggering any security warning.
If that sounds reckless, it’s because it is. And it’s not as if we weren’t warned. Princeton’s Andrew Appel and Susan Greenhalgh have been sounding the alarm for years that vendor‑controlled hash systems are little more than security theater—especially when the vendor can exclude or reclassify files at will.
To understand how we got to a place where a private vendor can slip in last-minute backdoor access right before a presidential election, we have to rewind — all the way back to the year 2000.
2000 Florida: The Ballot “Failure” That Built the Case for Electronic Voting
This corruption begins in a warehouse—with stacks of defective punch card ballots in Florida. The 2000 presidential election in Florida became a crisis of “hanging chads” and unreadable punch cards. At the time it looked like bad luck—in hindsight, it was engineered.
In 2007, Dan Rather aired an investigation with former Sequoia Voting Systems employees—whistleblowers who alleged that Sequoia knowingly used substandard paper stock in Florida’s punch cards. They claimed they had warned management the paper wouldn’t punch cleanly, but the company proceeded anyway. One whistleblower described being ordered to destroy evidence of the defective stock, including Boise Cascade labels that would have identified the supplier.
Why would a voting machine company sabotage paper ballots? The answer became clear in 2002 with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA).
HAVA banned punch card ballots.
It poured billions of federal dollars into replacing them with electronic voting machines.
Sequoia, ES&S, and Diebold were perfectly positioned to sell.
The manufactured “failure” of paper created a crisis—and that crisis became the sales pitch for the electronic equipment “solution.”
The Vendor Web Is Born
Sequoia sells electronic systems into states replacing punch cards.
Diebold floods the market with touchscreens, later rebranding to Premier after scandals.
ES&S grows aggressively, absorbing contracts, equipment lines, and entire competitors.
By 2010, ES&S controls roughly half of the U.S. election equipment market.
2010–2020: Steady gains as counties migrated from Sequoia, Dominion, or Hart systems to ES&S ExpressVote & DS200 series.
2024: Estimated 65–70% of U.S. voters use ES&S equipment in some form (precinct scanners, ballot markers, or tabulation systems).
Why This Matters
Every time a vendor collapsed in scandal, its customers didn’t escape the ecosystem—they just shifted to another vendor in the same circle.
Sequoia → Dominion
Diebold/Premier → ES&S (and some Dominion)
ES&S and Dominion share the same labs (Pro V&V, SLI Compliance), the same supply chains
(Eaton/Tripp Lite), and the same history of “de minimis” changes to critical code.
Look no further than the 2007 EVEREST Report commissioned by Ohio Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner.
That study exposed deep, systemic flaws in Diebold (later Premier) and ES&S voting systems—vulnerabilities ranging from weak encryption and unsecured memory cards to exploitable software and inadequate physical security.
Two years later, ES&S absorbed Premier Election Solutions, inheriting the same flawed technology. Those vulnerabilities were not meaningfully corrected—only rebranded, updated, and carried forward into ES&S’s current systems.
Why is all of the above problematic? ES&S is all-in on Republicans—embedding itself deeply in GOP power structures, using advisory boards and hospitality to curry favor with election officials. They’ve spent heavily on lobbying and deployed voting systems in roughly 70% of jurisdictions—totaling hundreds of millions in contracts secured under Republican administrations.
Major ES&S Scandals & Failures
1. Nebraska Origins & BRC Merger (1997)
• ES&S began as American Information Systems (AIS) in Nebraska, later merging with Business Records Corporation in 1997.
• BRC brought along its own controversial history, including ballot mishandling allegations in Texas.
• ES&S quickly became the dominant voting machine vendor in the U.S. through acquisitions.
2. Unauthorized Software Installed in California (2007)
• California Secretary of State Debra Bowen found ES&S had installed uncertified software on 1,000+ machines in at least five counties.
• The company was fined $15,000 and its certification was temporarily suspended.
3. New York Certification Scandal (2009–2010)
• ES&S’s DS200 scanners failed basic accuracy and usability tests during New York’s certification process.
• Despite repeated problems (misreading ballots, jamming), the state eventually certified the systems under political pressure.
4. Purchase of Premier Election Solutions (2009)
• ES&S bought Premier (formerly Diebold) from Diebold Inc., inheriting all of its known vulnerabilities.
• The DOJ later forced partial divestiture to Dominion for antitrust reasons—but ES&S retained Premier’s intellectual property and software code.
5. Installation of Unauthorized Software in North Carolina (2010)
• ES&S delivered machines with uncertified firmware to North Carolina counties.
• The uncertified software led to ballot definition errors that risked miscounts.
6. Modem Transmission Controversy (2018–2020)
• ES&S admitted to installing cellular modems in DS200 tabulators in multiple states to transmit results—creating a potential attack vector.
• They initially denied it, then quietly confirmed it to the Associated Press after investigations.
By the time ECO 1188 was slipped in under the radar in 2024, there were no “clean” vendors left. The entire voting infrastructure had been tested—and repeatedly signed off—by the same compromised labs for decades.
The Collapse of Oversight:
CIBER reincarnated to Pro V&V
Pro V&V is run by Jack Cobb, a former executive of CIBER, Inc.—a voting lab shut down by the feds in June 2007 for similar unethical practices. Their ability to test voting equipment was revoked, and they were barred from further participation in federal certification.
Four years later, Cobb reemerged with a $200,000 “angel investment” and started Pro V&V—which now certifies more than 70% of U.S. voting machines. It quickly became ES&S’s go‑to lab, consistently approving ECOs without pushback, including ECO 1188. New name, same game. Same glaring oversight failures.
It gets worse:
Public records reveal that the EAC uploaded a falsified, unsigned, and unauthenticated accreditation letter for Pro V&V—complete with official metadata—falsely implying valid federal authorization. If you’re asking why this wasn’t pursued as a felony, so are we.
That forged document? Was to cover up Pro V&V’s federal accreditation lapse from February 2017 to February 2021—a lapse in which they continued certifying systems through the 2018 midterms, the 2020 presidential election, and into 2021.
The EAC:
By the time ECO 1188 hit the EAC’s desk, the chain of oversight was already broken. The testing labs worked for the vendors. And the EAC — the body that’s supposed to regulate those labs — was operating more like a concierge service for them.
Why? As reported by Dissent in Bloom, look who’s running it. These individuals are embedded political operatives with no background in election forensics or cybersecurity and a history of approving vendors’ ECOs regardless of the vulnerabilities created.Christy McCormick
Sued by the non‑partisan watchdog American Oversight for secretly collaborating with the Heritage Foundation, the think tank behind Project 2025.
Consistently votes in favor of vendor‑friendly policies, often at odds with the best interests of the American public.
Donald Palmer
Active participant in Federalist Society election law panels.
Lawsuit alleged the EAC, under Donald Palmer, held closed‑door meetings with vendors during VVSG 2.0 drafting, weakening security standards without public review.
Also sued by the non‑partisan watchdog American Oversight for secretly collaborating with the Heritage Foundation.
The EAC’s leadership has turned oversight into advocacy for the very companies it’s meant to regulate—at the expense of the collective voice of the American people.
Next Steps
We cannot continue to play by the same rulebook that nefarious officials are actively burning. The so‑called “high road” has become the site of the GOP’s hit‑and‑run—and the American people, along with our republic, are the casualties.
We’re encouraged to see Governor Newsom and other leaders finally taking the gloves off, but words aren’t enough. The compromised equipment must be scrapped before the next election—democracy cannot survive another cycle of denial and delay.
That’s why The Common Coalition
is seeking swing state and Texas plaintiffs to build a class action lawsuit against ES&S, Pro V&V, and the EAC—holding them accountable for decades of negligence, conflicts of interest, and failure to secure our elections.This isn’t just about one ECO or one election cycle; it’s about a captured system that has eroded public trust and stolen the collective voice of the American people, year after year—for decades.
Email: thecommoncoalitionclassaction@protonmail.com
What We Can Do Together
We now know that an NSA‑approved audit of the 2024 election was buried—an audit that confirms what 41% of Democratic voters already suspected: Vice President Kamala Harris and Governor Tim Walz won the 2024 election—and it wasn’t even close. Adam Zarnowski is prepared to testify to this in court.
Section 3 of the 14th Amendment was written for precisely this moment—a stolen election is a rebellion against the Constitution. It’s time for pro‑democracy legislators to act. By ignoring clear evidence of a stolen election, they are no longer just bystanders—they are in violation of their own oaths to defend the Constitution.
Just because something hasn’t been done before doesn’t mean it can’t be done now. We don’t need a Democratic majority. We don’t even need criminal charges. We have the authority and the obligation to remove this entire unelected, illegitimate regime.
What YOU can do—circulate this Substack series to everyone, ask them to do the same. We the People are the media until they decide to step up.
You can: Fund The Common Coalition campaign—so they can continue their critical investigations, data analysis, and public education efforts on the 2024 election. Click here to donate.
You can: Fund the Election Truth Alliance’s lawsuit in Pennsylvania—to get to the bottom of 225,000 anomalous ballots, including 111,088 identified by Dr. Walter Mebane, Jr., as intentional, malevolent manipulations.
You can: call, email, and tag state attorneys general and members of Congress on social media. They don’t have to be your own. It only takes one to step up and get this process moving. Remind them: They work for us.
Hold on to your hope. Because again—we don’t need permission to enforce the Constitution. We just need courage.