After the 2020 election, all the weird stuff taking place after hours and the surprising results of the presidential election left people wondering what happened.

Questions were raised - and eventually, Dominion responded. It had to. CEO and Founder John Poulos swore under oath his company had done nothing wrong. It also sued a number of people and orgs who made false claims.

10 months later, that seems doubtful. But here's where it started....

Fake Claims About Dominion Voting Systems Do Real Damage
Our machines have no secret ‘vote flipping’ algorithm. We have no ties to dictator Hugo Chávez.
Nov 30, 2020
by JOHN POULOS
--CEO and Founder of DOMINION--

Accurate, transparent and accessible elections—this is the objective that motivated me to create Dominion Voting Systems 18 years ago in Canada. From the start, the company was focused on improving paper-based voting, and it continues to pursue vote-tabulation solutions that enhance accuracy and transparency through audits and reviews, as well as by allowing voters to create, verify and privately cast a marked paper ballot. But if you’ve heard about our role in the U.S. election on Twitter, it’s likely you’ve heard something different.

The allegations against Dominion are bizarre, but I’ll set the record straight. Dominion is an American company, now headquartered in Denver. Dominion is not and has never been a front for communists. It has no ties to Hugo Chávez, the late dictator of Venezuela. It has never been involved in Venezuelan elections. None of Dominion’s systems use the Smartmatic software that has come under attack, as any state certification lab could verify.

There is no secret “vote flipping” algorithm. Third-party test labs, chosen by the bipartisan Election Assistance Commission and accredited by the National Institute of Standards and Technology, perform complete source-code reviews on every federally certified tabulation system. States replicate this process for their own certifications. Postelection canvassing and auditing also exist to provide additional assurance of the vote totals’ accuracy.