<Taking Back the Republic - BIND the Deep State
The Hidden Infrastructure of Voter Surveillance:Evidence of an Unlawful Relational Database Linking Ballots to Voters
Prepared by TBTR Strategies 1/4
Apr 13, 2025
Executive Summary
This report details extensive findings suggesting the unlawful construction and use of a relational database that can track ballots back to individual voters, thereby violating federal and state protections of ballot secrecy. Drawing on public records, grassroots investigations, and expert analyses, including those from Barry Wernick, Dr. Andrew Paquette, Susan Valiant, TBTR Strategies, Dr. Laura Pressley, and more, we outline a pattern of activity and system design that undermines the integrity and transparency of elections in multiple jurisdictions, including Tarrant County, Dallas County in Texas, counties like Nassau County in New York, and potentially every county using computerized voting systems to conduct elections.
I. Introduction
The secrecy of the ballot is a bedrock principle of democratic elections, mandated by both Texas and federal law. However, research conducted by multiple independent teams, compiled by TBTR Strategies, reveals an alarming pattern in which computerized voting systems—especially those employing electronic poll books (epoll books), ballot marking devices (BMDs), and integrated ballot printers—are producing ballots embedded with identifiable data linked directly to voter check-ins. These identifiers may take the form of barcodes, QR codes, access codes, or hexadecimal-style numerical tags.
Through both human-readable and machine-readable formats, voter data from check-in to ballot creation is potentially being used to build a covert and unlawful relational database, allowing administrative actors or external entities with administrative access, to associate individual ballots with specific voters, in direct violation of constitutional and statutory mandates. Independent researchers report the potentially unlawful inflation and deflation of active voter rosters both pre and post-election, inconsistent vote totals between county and state reports, the facilitation and obfuscation of the replacement of electronic totals and physical ballots, and the inability to audit records to detect these issues inherent in modern computerized voting systems.