Matt Braynard, Executive Director of Look Ahead America, is being threatened and harassed by Dominion Voting Systems for being a vocal advocate for election integrity. Look Ahead America is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit dedicated to standing up for patriotic Americans and their right to a fair election. Along with fighting corporate censorship, the organization’s principal goal is to ensure voter integrity by investigating cases of illegal ballots and advocating for election reform to prevent them from being cast in the first place.
Dominion’s First Threatening Letter
Launching their attack on Braynard, Dominion’s counsel, Clare Locke, sent their initial threatening letter on Feb. 11. The letter’s first paragraph reads, “Our firm is defamation counsel to Dominion. With this letter, Dominion formally demands that you cease and desist promoting bogus claims about the election being stolen.”
According to Braynard, the letter’s first sentence, which he says is full of false and misleading claims about his work and him personally, is untrue. He is certain he has never stated that the 2020 election was stolen. Instead, he has been entirely consistent in stating the conclusion of his work, which is:
“The number of illegal ballots surpasses the margin of victory in enough states such that the deserved winner of the presidential election is unknowable.”
Incorrect statements continue in the letter, according to Braynard, with the allegation that he has stated that Dominion is responsible for voter fraud irregularities. Braynard maintains that while others have made defamatory comments about Dominion, his work on election integrity has been explicitly focused on illegally cast ballots. Therefore he questioned the motive behind their baseless letter, which included no reference to his astonishing illegal ballot discoveries in the 2020 election. Braynard highlights one sentence that stuck out and to him, revealing the main objective of Dominion’s letter: “We demand you retract calls to boycott Dominion.” The letter continues, saying:
“Make no mistake, Dominion is determined to set the record straight and to defend its good name. We have already filed suits against Sidney Powell and Rudy Giuliani. More will follow. We are enclosing copy of Dominion’s complaints against Powell and Giuliani (and the voluminous exhibits supporting those complaints) so that there is absolutely no doubt in the future that you are fully aware of the facts and that you know your accusations about Dominion are false.”
The letter states Braynard “must preserve, without limitation, all communications” with:
- Any member, volunteer, staff, or employee of the Trump campaign;
- Sidney Powell, Rudy Giuliani, Jenna Ellis, L. Lin Wood, and each of their partners, associates, and paralegals;
- Every individual who assisted you in drafting, or drafted for you, any and all affidavits or declarations you submitted in litigation related to Dominion or the November 2020 presidential election;
- Every individual who assisted you in drafting, or drafted for you, any and all prepared remarks related to Dominion or alleged voting improprieties.
- Every reporter, editor, blogger, host, or other members of the media with whom you communicated about Dominion or the November 2020 presidential election, regardless of whether they published any of your claims; and
- Every individual who has compensated you or any related entity in any manner for making public statements about, submitting affidavits or declarations in litigation
Braynard is represented by attorney Harmeet Dhillon, who characterized Dominion’s claims in her email response to Clare Locke as frivolous, factually and legally baseless, and nothing more than “an attempt to harass and intimidate Mr. Braynard and chill his constitutionally protected free speech, dressed in the mock-serious garb of a legal demand letter purporting to assert valid legal claims where none exist. Mr. Braynard will not be intimidated by these thuggish tactics.”
Dhillon points out that Dominion’s letter “fails to even address, much less refute, Mr. Braynard’s findings.” Instead, by mentioning correspondence with Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, it suggests that Mr. Braynard could be a potential witness in the lawsuits filed against them by Dominion and is nothing short of an attempt at witness intimidation, ultimately affecting the possible future testimony of her client.
Dominion’s Second Threatening Letter
Dominion’s most recent letter to Braynard, dated Feb. 26, again claims he made two false statements about the company, claiming it has “a monopoly on U.S. elections“ and that its equipment and software is “unavailable for examination by government officials.” In closing, the letter again asked Braynard to “retract his false claims” and renewed the request that he “retain all materials relevant to his claims about Dominion.”
In response to these claims, Dhillon specifically points out that Dominion meets at least two of the criteria for the definition of “monopoly,” adding:
“The Supreme Court of the United States has defined monopoly power as “the power to control prices or exclude competition.” Dominion arguably has such power, given the acknowledgment by Dominion companies on their website that their products are employed in nine of the top twenty counties in America and are used by 40% of U.S. voters.”
In addressing Dominion’s claim that Braynard wrongly accused its software of being unavailable for examination by government officials, Dhillon corrects them to what Braynard actually said, which was that “Black box voting equipment runs on software and hardware that is a corporate secret and unavailable for examination by government officials and the public.” She explained in further detail:
“While Dominion may allow a certain federal government agency to audit or test its equipment and software in a limited fashion from time to time, it is still the case that the actual government parties that contract with Dominion are unable to “examine” the equipment and software in detail. Dominion’s software is known colloquially as “black box,” not open source, and thus as a practical matter, cannot be inspected or audited. This fact has been widely reported in the media—for example, one report on Dominion’s contract with Michigan provides that the Dominion required that the state “agree not to reverse engineer or otherwise attempt to derive the [Dominion] source code.” Georgia state senator Elena Parent also recently testified that state officials were not allowed to inspect Dominion’s source code.”
Black-Box Voting Equipment
Black-box voting equipment is in the systems Dominion sells for hundreds of millions of dollars to counties and states across the country. A key policy objective of Look Ahead America is to forbid the use of black-box voting equipment in future elections. Braynard explained further why Dominion is trying to silence him on this issue:
Black box voting equipment runs on proprietary software and hardware that is a corporate secret and unavailable for examination by the public and government officials. For this principled reason, and many others, Look Ahead America is leading the fight against its use in U.S. elections, and his mission has broad, bipartisan support and is backed by peer-reviewed science. And this is the real reason why Dominion is coming after me—because they’re worried about their bottom line and their monopoly on U.S. elections.
Concerns over voting irregularities in Dominion machines are a bipartisan issue. In a December 2019 letter to Dominion Voting Systems, Democratic Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Ron Wyden, Amy Klobuchar, and Congressman Mark Pocan warned about reports of machines “switching votes,” “undisclosed vulnerabilities,” and “improbable” results that “threaten the integrity of our elections.”
Braynard has pledged to continue to speak out against black box voting equipment and affirms that Look Ahead America will continue to lead the way in getting it banned in the United States. Braynard’s message to the rapidly growing tech firm is clear: “I am sorry, Dominion, but you picked the wrong fight with the wrong guy.”