Mike Lindell’s Controversial Cyber Symposium

Do election tactics like mail-in ballots and ballot harvesting explain how Trump “lost” the election nationwide? Or was there a Chinese-directed cyber warfare attack on electronic voting machines? That’s the issue as we count down to Mike Lindell’s August 10, 11, and 12 Cyber Symposium on voter fraud.

Some conservatives such as geopolitical analyst Jeff Nyquist question whether the hard evidence will ever be forthcoming. He gave me an interview on America’s Survival TV outlining his theory that Lindell, a strong backer of former President Trump, has been set up by Deep State forces to make charges that cannot be substantiated and that the symposium could backfire.

Lindell, described as the most seen man on TV, is a former drug addict who turned his life around through Christ. His firm employs almost two thousand people selling not only pillows but other useful American-made products.

As a result of his pro-Trump activism, he has been attacked personally and his firm has been blacklisted by various retailers for putting some of his wealth behind the claim that the presidency was stolen from Trump.

Although Lindell has become a favorite among conservatives for putting his money behind causes such as election integrity, he is seen by Nyquist and others as going too far in his voter fraud claims by saying he has “absolute proof” that foreign interests such as China conspired to sabotage Trump’s re-election.

The most recent Mike Lindell video, “Mike Lindell Releases First Packet Captures Ahead Of August 10, 11 and 12 Cyber Symposium,” teases viewers with what appear to be computer screens of data (at 8 minutes and 16 seconds of the video), as if intercepts of the cyber-attacks have indeed been captured. But the images are too vague to be able to be read by an average viewer. Lindell says they are data from the election in 6 states being captured in real-time. “We have all 50 states,” he says. “It’s billions of lines long.”

He says a screen at the cyber symposium will run this data, which was captured by “heroes” and validated by “white hat hackers.”

But analyst Nyquist questions the sources of the information and the analysis.

“I do not think it likely that thousands of voting machines were hacked by China, or that the whole thing was managed from overseas,” he says. He thinks “corrupt party machines” in key places like Detroit and Philadelphia conducted the voter fraud “for their own reasons,” primarily getting Biden and other Democrats elected.

Nyquist has analyzed and questioned the various claims made by Lindell and his supporters, concluding that a “three-letter agency” —  the FBI — has orchestrated a set-up to make the narrative of voter fraud look ridiculous and backfire. He adds, “If this whole thing is a setup of Lindell by agents or assets of a three-letter agency, then it is a very dirty game.”

In an article posted on July 22, he said, “I make the following appeal to Mike Lindell: I beg you, Mike, do not hold this Symposium in August. It could be a trap, or worse than a trap.”

Nyquist, the author of several books on geopolitics, did not automatically reject the alleged involvement of China and other foreign interests in the November 3 election. He believes China and Russia are enemies of the United States. But after talking to the various players in the controversy, he found deficiencies in the data and has questions about the sources.

Regarding one Lindell film, he said, “It is my belief that Lindell’s documentary Absolute Proof is an ‘absolute swindle.’” And Lindell is the victim of this swindle. His intentions are good, but he does not understand what proof is. Consequently, Lindell has been tricked into supporting a narrative that could derail the election audit process.”

The film “Absolute Proof,” described as “Exposing Election Fraud and the Theft of America,” is based on a report by Mary Fanning and Alan Jones citing “whistleblower” Dennis Montgomery.  An alleged former NSA/CIA contractor, Montgomery has reportedly provided extensive evidence of illegal wiretapping by U.S. intelligence agencies to the FBI, but that the Bureau has failed to act on the evidence that he provided.

Nyquist, however, concludes Montgomery is not trustworthy and that he may have been co-opted by the FBI.

I have extended an invitation to Montgomery and his backers to appear on my ASI TV show to counter the charges.

Turning the tables on his critics, Lindell is offering $5 Million to anyone who can prove the cyber data that he says came from the November 2020 election are fraudulent. He thinks the evidence is so strong that when it is presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, a ruling of 9-0 will restore Trump to the White House.

Yet, when various state parties after the election filed documented claims of illegal voting in certain swing states that went against Trump, they were denied standing for a hearing before the Supreme Court.

If Lindell’s claims fall apart, the well-documented case that election fraud and corruption were indeed at work in other ways on November 3 could be discredited. One observer told me, “I was part of the Trump election legal team. I was deployed to Detroit, I saw corruption. I do not know about computers. But from what I saw they were very bold and in your face about cheating and breaking the rules.”

Those tactics included keeping observers out of the vote-counting centers, putting cardboard on the windows at the center to hide what was happening, and using menacing “security guards” to discourage oversight.

Of all the programs I did on the subject, Larry Klayman, the founder of Judicial Watch and Freedom Watch, was most accurate. He said that Trump, despite proclamations about voter fraud and his own victory, would exit the White House.

The author of It Takes a Revolution, Klayman said Trump’s legal team was not able to prove its case and that the federal courts, including the Supreme Court, wouldn’t intervene to save his presidency.

Klayman’s Freedom Watch organization recently conducted a Third Continental Congress, featuring various speakers on the subject of how to neutralize the corruption in the American political system, including in the courts.