Newly released intelligence and investigative records describe voter-data breaches, foreign efforts to obtain registration information, concerns about electronic voting systems and noncitizens appearing on voter rolls, although the material released so far does not establish widespread fraud or show that 2020 vote totals were manipulated.

By yourNEWS Media Newsroom

Newly declassified intelligence and investigative records are adding detail to security problems that federal officials were tracking before, during and after the 2020 presidential election, complicating the sweeping assurances subsequently given to Americans that the contest was the “most secure” in U.S. history.

The documents do not establish that voting results were altered, nor do they provide evidence proving widespread fraud in the election that Democrat Joe Biden won over incumbent Republican President Donald Trump.

They do, however, show government agencies were aware of vulnerabilities involving voter-registration databases, foreign collection of American voter information, cyberintrusions and the potential exploitation of electronic voting technology.

Several batches of records released by the White House this summer have brought those concerns into public view after years in which much of the underlying intelligence remained classified.

A Just the News report examining the newly released material said officials possessed information about significant election-security risks even as government representatives publicly emphasized confidence in the integrity of the system.

One of the most prominent assurances came from Chris Krebs, who was then director of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and one of the federal officials principally responsible for election security.

Krebs testified before the Senate after the election that he approved an assessment declaring “the 2020 election was the most secure in U.S. history.”

That conclusion was presented as officials pushed back against concerns over voting-system security and the expansion of mail-in voting.

The newly released records show that government agencies were simultaneously examining threats that ranged from compromised voter information to potential foreign interference.

Trump has pointed to the disclosures while pressing Congress to enact the SAVE America Act, legislation that, among other provisions, would require individuals to provide proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections.

The significance of the newly public intelligence lies primarily in the vulnerabilities agencies were monitoring rather than evidence that those vulnerabilities changed the 2020 outcome. The records released so far do not demonstrate manipulated votes, but they document multiple ways in which domestic or foreign actors could potentially exploit election-related information or systems.

Maricopa County Voter Files Breached Before Election

One of the latest disclosures concerns a cyberincident in Arizona shortly before Election Day.

Federal authorities investigated the unauthorized extraction of voter-registration records from Maricopa County, Arizona’s most populous county, after a self-described hacker circumvented security measures and obtained approximately 633,000 voter files.

The incident occurred in the days immediately preceding the Nov. 3, 2020, election and became the most heavily flagged event contained in a cyberintrusion log maintained by U.S. intelligence agencies around Election Day.

That record indicates intelligence officials were monitoring the breach while voting was taking place.

Local officials initially alerted federal authorities, prompting an FBI investigation.

According to FBI case files, agents eventually confronted the man believed responsible. He admitted creating a computer script that exploited the county’s voter-security systems and allowed him to scrape registration records.

Among the files were 930 containing what the FBI described as “sensitive voter information such as domestic violence victims, judges and law enforcement officers.”

Despite the confession, neither the Biden Justice Department nor local prosecutors ultimately brought charges, according to the information released.

China Acquired Data on 220 Million Voters

Separate intelligence disclosures describe a much larger foreign effort directed at American voter information.

Beginning in 2020, U.S. intelligence agencies detected Chinese attempts to acquire voter-registration information concerning millions of Americans.

By 2023, the Intelligence Community had concluded that China obtained approximately 220 million individual voter records.

Those records contained information including voters’ names, addresses, telephone numbers, party preferences and other personal data.

The warnings about such databases preceded the election itself.

Months before Americans voted in 2020, the Intelligence Community produced a classified assessment warning that foreign adversaries possessed the capability to “compromise” U.S. voting infrastructure.

That pre-election intelligence warning specifically raised concerns about the security of voter-registration databases.

Those same types of databases would subsequently become targets of Chinese collection efforts.

In the years that followed, intelligence officials concluded Beijing succeeded in gathering American voter information through several means, including purchasing, stealing or hacking data.

U.S. intelligence chiefs later said China’s acquisition of voter-registration information that began during the 2020 election period likely satisfies the Intelligence Community’s definition of “election interference,” according to records concerning China’s voter-data operations.

The finding does not mean China changed vote totals. Rather, it reflects the government’s assessment of the effort to target information tied directly to American voters and the election system.

Electronic Voting Concerns Emerged From Venezuela Intelligence

Declassified records also provide new insight into longstanding U.S. intelligence concerns involving electronic voting technology.

Between 2004 and 2020, intelligence agencies monitored plans by Venezuela’s leadership to manipulate electronic voting machines inside Venezuela as part of efforts to preserve socialist control of the government.

Those methods reportedly included inserting false votes into the system.

The intelligence drew attention from U.S. officials well before the 2020 American election.

As early as 2006, agencies were concerned that Venezuelan capabilities could potentially be used in attempts to “undermine confidence in, or manipulate the electoral process in, the United States,” according to a June 2026 CIA summary reviewing earlier intelligence.

By 2020, the CIA had obtained additional reporting describing Venezuelan plans to influence that year’s election in Venezuela through manipulation of electronic machines.

The contemplated system was designed to make false votes appear valid while leaving no detectable trace that the results had been altered.

The intelligence prompted questions within the U.S. government about whether election equipment used in the United States could be vulnerable to comparable manipulation techniques.

Agencies nevertheless assessed that Venezuela did not possess the capability to conduct such an operation against U.S. voting systems.

Noncitizens Found on State Voter Rolls

A separate election-integrity concern centers on voter-registration records for people who are not U.S. citizens.

A Department of Homeland Security assessment found hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens on voter rolls in four states and estimated that the nationwide figure was higher.

A review conducted earlier this year using publicly available records in California, Nevada, New Jersey and Pennsylvania identified more than 250,000 illegal voters on registration rolls, according to the information provided.

New Jersey disclosed another registration problem in July.

Democratic Gov. Mikie Sherrill announced that a software malfunction involving the state motor vehicle system had registered approximately 6,600 noncitizens to vote.

Sherrill also acknowledged that as many as 400 of those individuals had voted in recent elections.

The disclosure added a concrete example to broader concerns over safeguards intended to prevent noncitizens from entering voter-registration systems.

The Intelligence Concerns Predated Declassification

Questions about the government’s characterization of the 2020 election did not begin with this summer’s White House releases.

Before the latest documents became public, reporting had already examined discrepancies between federal assurances about election security and internal intelligence describing vulnerabilities.

That reporting included concerns about voter databases and election infrastructure, as well as Chinese and Iranian attempts to obtain sensitive American voter information.

The newly declassified material provides additional context about what federal agencies were observing at the time.

Taken together, the records describe an election environment in which government officials were dealing with a successful breach of hundreds of thousands of voter files in Arizona, warnings that foreign adversaries could compromise election infrastructure, Chinese efforts that ultimately resulted in access to information on roughly 220 million voters and intelligence concerning methods for manipulating electronic voting systems overseas.

Those facts existed alongside public assurances that election systems had performed securely.

They do not establish that the vulnerabilities were successfully used to change the winner of the 2020 presidential election.

No evidence released by the White House to date proves that voting machines altered American votes, that foreign governments changed vote counts or that widespread fraud determined the outcome.

The disclosures instead sharpen a different question: whether officials’ categorical description of the 2020 election as the “most secure” adequately reflected the range of cyber, data and foreign-interference threats their own agencies were monitoring at the time.

Original article