Apparently, one must be careful about how this information is shared on social media. The text of this letter to Senator Linehan apparently has some of the verboten "trigger words" that prevent a post from being shared (they do it under the guise of calling it "spam" when you do). What is it that they don't want you to know?

Dear Senator Linehan,

We spoke the other day at the town hall event in Nebraska City for Voter ID about my concerns regarding the constitutionality of our elections and my concerns about the vulnerabilities that our elections are open to through the potential for connectivity to the internet which you claim does not exist. You told me that your office would provide me with a timely response, and so I look forward to hearing from you.

I am requesting a written response from your office that addresses concerns that many Nebraskans have about the lack of transparency in our elections that we believe denies us an election that is without impediment or hindrance to our constitutionally protected right (Article 1-22 of the Neb. State Constitution) to know that our votes are counted as they are cast. The "Security Requirements" section of the contract between the State of Nebraska and ES&S contains non-disclosure terms that do not allow the transparency that is necessary for there to be no impediment in our right to a free and fair election. When vulnerabilities are detected through testing, the public is never permitted to know. But what we do know 100% is that our elections are so vulnerable due to the use of machines that the Department of Homeland Security, on January 6, 2017, used the Patriot Act to designate the cybersecurity of elections to be critical infrastructure. This allowed the federal government a level of overreach into our state elections which they should not be permitted to have.

This is the same DHS that issues (and one is presently in effect right now) bulletins stating that those who question the outcome of elections should be considered a potential threat to the government. (And you're not supposed to question the government's COVID-19 measures either.) The departments and agencies of the Executive Branch are the ones who are providing the oversight of our elections, and we are not allowed to have any oversight of them. The answer from our government, per the "misinformation and disinformation toolkits" provided by the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (part of DHS) is that if voters have questions about their elections, they should consult the "trusted voices" on elections to provide them with answers.

We are told that the "trusted voices" are the ones who conduct our elections, and yet, in the state of Nebraska, the oversight of our elections is conducted by Secretary of State Bob Evnen, whom we know for a fact lied to us when he told us that the $400,000 of Zuckerberg grant money spent in Lancaster County was spent on PPE (masks), when not one penny of it was spent on PPE. He also claimed that a thorough investigation of the matter showed that the Zuckerberg money had no influence on the outcome of elections in Lancaster County, but how could he possibly know that, when he wasn't even aware of how the money was truly spent? So why should we trust him? There are good and valid reasons why Nebraskans want outside oversight that ensures us that our elections are being conducted in a responsible way. The evidence we have shows us that they are not.

As I told you when I spoke with you the other day, all oversight is internal. I know that you and Governor Ricketts said you did not have a problem with there being no outside oversight of Secretary of State Bob Evnen conducting elections that he himself is a candidate in, but many Nebraskans see this lack of outside oversight as a significant problem. I look forward to your response to these concerns. You also told me that you were not familiar with the Albert sensors that are used in our elections, yet you have stated that you definitively believe that our elections are not susceptible to corruption because you believe they lack connectivity. As you know, many people all across our nation share concerns about the connectivity of the machines used in our elections. It seems silly to suggest that there is no connectivity, when the DHS deemed the cyber threats to our elections to be so great that they used those threats as a reason to give them greater access to the election processes of every state in the nation.

We don't even need to inspect the machines to know that information that is part of our election security is being transmitted and that remote services are being used. I'm not saying that the Albert sensors are the problem with our elections (though they certainly could be corrupted), but what I am saying is that I would like your office to provide me with answers that help to explain the adamant claims made to Nebraskans by our elected officials (including yourself) who insist that our elections are not in any way connected to the internet, when it is readily transparent that there is connectivity and that remote services are used. 

Please consult the links I am providing you with to learn more about Albert sensors so that you may become familiar with the reasons that many Nebraskans have concerns when we are told that the machines used in our elections have no connectivity. It was, in fact, Nebraska and ES&S who paved the way for the use of Albert sensors in elections across the nation.

I look forward to receiving and sharing your response. Thank you.


Jennifer Hicks

Peru, NE

* The email will not be published on the website.