What I saw at Mike Lindell’s Cyber Symposium


The Cyber Symposium on election integrity being put on by Mike Lindell pulled together many like-minded conservatives from around the country. Doors opened at 8:00am on Tuesday, August 10, and ended on most days around 9:00pm. The last day was Thursday, August 12th. These were long days with little room for sleep. By the last day, they claimed to have representatives from 49 states in attendance. That’s not elected representatives, mind you, but citizens who reside in those states. Still, the number of elected representatives present was striking. A rough count seems to be between forty and fifty, with a few states having several elected officials there. There were no elected representatives from Louisiana present. However, William Wallis and I were there to represent our state.

One of the stand outs from the legislative group was Virginia State Senator Amanda Chase. Throughout the event, she seemed to be that elected representative that all of the others looked to for direction. During one of the unofficial legislative side-bars, she brokered an agreement among the other elected representatives to form a multi-state election integrity caucus. The point was for representatives to avoid rumors and misinformation being propagated by the mainstream media, and instead trade facts and best practices directly with their like-minded counterparts in the various states. Time will tell, but it appears to me that this was the best thing that came out of the entire event.

Gaffs and unforced errors

Certainly, our representatives and state-wide elected officials can’t be expected to fix Arizona. Their job is to focus on challenges and solutions in Louisiana. Therefore, I saw my job as gathering and bringing back as much information as possible about Louisiana. It was during one of the legislative side-bars, when I was out of the main auditorium, that the most distracting statement from the main stage took place. That is, that Louisiana had already signed a $100,000,000 contract with Dominion. My phone erupted with people all across Louisiana asking me if it were true. It took hours to tamp that down and get back on track.

Content made possible by:
BB's Auto Sales

If you didn’t know, no, it’s not true. The state of Louisiana has not signed a hundred-million contract with Dominion. That’s what the Louisiana Voting Systems Commission is supposed to be about: crafting an RFP for those new voting machines. Since we don’t meet until September first, how would it be possible that any contract would have been signed?

Another error happened in a legislative side-bar. It was there that someone said Arizona had de-certified their 2020 election. Arizona’s Rep. Mark Finchem quickly spoke up. He simply introducing himself as a legislator from the state in question and said the rumor was untrue. It’s these kinds of unforced errors that the mainstream media will pounce on to discredit the event’s overall effort.

No state-specific data was presented

From day one, there were supposed to be several state-specific breakout sessions. These were to happened on the afternoon of the first day. However, the sessions did not take place. At the opening of the second day, from the podium, Mike Lindell said the sessions were going on now. Immediately, I got up and walked the break-out rooms. The very muscular security team seemed puzzled. They sent a runner to check. After a few minutes, word returned that those state-level breakout sessions had not yet begun. I checked back every two hours with the same response.

Finally, after 8:00pm on the second day, the response was: we’ll have them tomorrow. The third day was a repeat of the first and second. Sometime around 8:00pm on the third day, Colonel Phil Waldron told me the promised data was still not ready. However, they would notify all of the attendees when it was.

Content made possible by:
Allen Edmonds Ad

You saw what I saw

Other than the legislative side-bar, the main, televised event ended up being the only thing going on that I had access to. There were breakout sessions for Cyber Experts. Event security precluded me from observing their work.

So, for hours, I sat in the main hall and listened to very compelling statistical anomalies from various states. I watched those videos that have been circulating online for months about the same ballots being scanning over and over again. They also recounted the professional shredding company arriving and destroying ballots only hours after the election had taken place, despite the federal law requiring election materials be retained for twenty-two months. They showed photographic and video proof of these and other things that would create strong concerns in the mind of any reasonable person.

They told us stories of people being detained or ordered to leave when they tried to photograph or video election officials performing their work. The people photographing the shredding trucks “from the bushes” said they were approached by “three-letter agencies.”  We were even shown bags of shredded ballots, with some of them pieced back together. Yep, those were ballots, alright. To be clear, these ballots weren’t present for us to inspect in person. However, if there is an ongoing investigation, it only makes sense that actual evidence wouldn’t be paraded about outside of a courtroom.

Lets talk about Louisiana

Seth Keshel’s statistical analysis, showing parishes where voting anomalies were most likely.

Remember, all of the things we were seeing on video, while infuriating, did not take place in Louisiana. I was not there to identify what happened in Arizona, or Georgia, or anywhere else. I was there to identify what, if anything, went wrong in Louisiana, and to carry it home with me. In an official capacity, that discussion simply never took place, and that data never materialized, despite my asking for it over and over again.

However, several Telegram activists reached out and suggested I chat with Seth Keshel. We talked several times, and he later presented his findings from the main stage. When I asked where voter fraud took place in Louisiana, he said, “St. Tammany Parish.” He also mentioned a few others, but he said the real red-flag was St. Tammany. He said, “Best target for a forensic in state is St. Tammany – way over norms, a 10k Dem vote bump as they’ve been stagnant for several cycles in a growing parish. GOP had 41 to 1 net registration advantage there – estimate minimum 7k heavy for Biden.”

I reached out to Keshel on Monday. He said he’ll get back with me. If the data of his analysis holds true that St. Tammany is the outlier in the entire state, I’ll want to see it broken down by precinct. Then we can pick the precinct outlier, and go from there.

Seth “Captain K” Keshel

What was the Cyber Symposium all about?

About mid-way through the second day, it became apparent to me that the event had specific goals:

  1. Attract as many elected officials (preferably legislators) as possible to attend in person. This is because the various state legislatures are the only ones who can effect change in election law.
  2. Show proof that election tampering did take place. They did well with this, even though it didn’t include any proof for Louisiana.
  3. Convince these legislators that they should order a full forensic audit of the 2020 elections in their respective states.

Yes, there is quite a bit out there about the 2020 election. Were the rules followed in all fifty states? Certainly, strong evidence exists that suggests they were not. However, in Louisiana, they only provided calculated, statistical anomalies in a few parishes. I wasn’t provided the raw data or methods they used to create those suppositions at the event itself. Hopefully, my future interactions with Seth Keshel will remedy that. I’m already connected with him, and he’s actively working on a short explainer of his methodology. This is important because, while parish-wide anomalies are helpful in narrowing down the entire state, we would still need to narrow down those parishes into smaller pieces. For example, St. Tammany Parish has some 175,000 active registered voters. However, a precinct generally contains no more than 2,000 voters. That’s a much more manageable number.

Remember, as we saw in 2016, statistics aren’t votes. Just because someone is statistically less likely to show up doesn’t mean they won’t. So the question becomes, what data exists that proves there was voter fraud in Louisiana during the 2020 Presidential election? Colonel Phil Waldron, who I also spoke with numerous times, promises that data is forthcoming. He provided his contact information, so I plan to reach out in the days ahead.

Because of the age of Louisiana’s election day machines, the only method we can use to determine election fraud in Louisiana will be by canvassing. That means walking door to door to determine that the people who they system says voted in the 2020 election are actually there and remember voting. Once all of the data or methodology allows us to narrow down our search to a precinct level, we can begin looking closer.

The final word

The experience and reminders of what went wrong in other states can and should help guide us in the upcoming Voting Systems Commission meetings. If we’re planning to use a solution that was used in other states, what are their vulnerabilities? Where were the lapses in ballot chain of custody? How can we ensure that Louisiana’s elections are secure? These are the things that the Symposium thrust to the front of my mind.

It was also a great place to meet with like-minded people who are committed to getting at the truth no matter what. Before this event, I had no idea who to talk to about the minutiae of election integrity and voting processes across the fifty states. That’s not a problem anymore.


Pin It on Pinterest

Share This