by Sharon Rondeau

(Oct. 14, 2022) — In an interview Tuesday on “The David Pakman Show,” MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell proffered yet another explanation for why over a year ago he did not release the “PCAPS” data he claimed to have acquired proving that the 2020 presidential election was “stolen” from Donald Trump.

The alleged proof of the heist was set to be released at Lindell’s August 2021 “Cyber Symposium” held in Sioux Falls, SD amid Lindell’s invitations to the media, “cyber experts” and elected officials across the country to witness the revelation in person.

Although at the time refraining from identifying his source, Lindell now openly states that the PCAPS were gleaned from former government subcontractor Dennis Montgomery, who of late claims to have invented software associated with elections during the early 2000s as well as to have collected proof of votes being changed in real time from Trump to Joe Biden on November 3, 2020.

Where is the Evidence?

Lindell had built much anticipation and mystique around the “PCAPS” in the months leading up to the symposium but on the second of the three-day conference announced he was unable to proceed after he was allegedly physically accosted outside his hotel. “Threats” to the symposium were “detected,” Lindell surrogate Phil Waldron told the audience at the time, which he interpreted as “typical insurrection-type activity,” in addition to what he said was the “credible threat” of a “poison pill” injected into the PCAPS data.

At his “The Moment of Truth Summit” a year later, Lindell in a solo presentation extolled Montgomery’s skill, intelligence and credibility as a source before turning to his attorney, Kurt Olsen, to break down a “Declaration” signed by Montgomery on August 19, 2022 (p. 8). The 194-page document, parts of which Olsen read aloud to Summit attendees, accompanied Lindell’s August 20, 2022 Motion to Intervene in a federal case Montgomery filed in Nevada in 2006 against his former business partner, Warren Trepp.

In his presentation, Olsen asserted that Montgomery’s evidence on the 2020 election continued to be held captive by a protective order and State Secrets Privilege invocation requested over the 2006 litigation by then-Director of National Intelligence (DNI) John Negroponte and granted by U.S. District Judge Philip M. Pro on August 29, 2007. In his order, Pro described specifically the material not to be released as well as those items which could be testified to during litigation.

The Motion, Lindell’s attorneys wrote, seeks to have the protective order lifted so that Lindell can incorporate Montgomery’s technology and evidence in his defense against a $1.3 billion lawsuit filed against him by Dominion Voting Systems, Inc. early last year.

When was the Technology Created?

In 1998, Montgomery and Trepp co-founded Intrepid, later renamed eTreppid Technologies, LLC, to develop video and audio compression software for use by the gaming industry. Following the attacks of 9/11, the U.S. Department of Defense became interested in eTreppid’s work and contracted with it to produce technology anticipated to be helpful in the War on Terror.

Montgomery’s suit against Trepp, and Trepp’s countersuit against Montgomery, were fully settled in September 2008. Since that time, Montgomery has frequently claimed that the protective order and State Secrets Privilege prohibit him from fully releasing information he claims to have acquired on illegal government surveillance of U.S. citizens allegedly by a system consisting of a super-computer, “The Hammer,” and software dubbed “Scorecard”; election-tampering by that method and others; the January 2021 Solar Winds cyber-attack; and military “biodefense.”

There is no evidence that eTreppid developed software or technology relating to elections or voting; the company is now defunct.

On October 6, the government filed its reply brief to Lindell’s Motion to Intervene in which it wrote that Lindell is not a party to the protective order and that no material pertinent to “elections” or “voting,” among other related items, was included in the order.

The Montgomery-Lindell Connection

On January 3, 2021, Mary Fanning and Alan Jones of The American Report claimed Montgomery possessed irrefutable evidence showing that China and other foreign bad actors launched a massive “cyberwarfare attack” on the 2020 election resulting in millions of votes being altered from Trump to Biden. According to Lindell, on January 9, 2021, he was introduced to Fanning by WVW-TV host Brannon Howse. Fanning then reportedly introduced Lindell to Montgomery, who, according to Lindell, provided the information which in significant part formed the basis of the “Absolute Proof” nine-part video series Lindell, Fanning, Howse and Jones produced early last year.

Prior to that claim, Fanning and Jones purported, citing Montgomery as their source, that “The Hammer” and “Scorecard” were utilized to switch votes from Trump to Biden in eight states with no mention of foreign interference.

Howse hosted Fanning and Jones on both claims on his WVW-TV show without questioning why their narrative abruptly changed in the span of just over two months. On January 18, 2021, Howse recounted how he introduced Fanning to Lindell with the purpose of “getting the computer forensics data” (from Montgomery) “to President Trump.”

Pakman Demands Answers

During the opening minutes of the interview, Pakman asked Lindell to explain why numerous pledges and predictions he made, many of which originated with the Cyber Symposium and included that Trump would be reinstated as president last year, did not come to pass.

“Well, there’s a big reason for that,” Lindell replied. “The evidence I got on January 9th was by a person which I can come out with his name now: Dennis Montgomery [sic]. He was a whistleblower with the CIA; he worked with the CIA and the government for years developing a thing called ‘Hammer/Scorecard,’ and this is all the information he gave me on January 9th. When we were going to release it at the Cyber Symposium we were told because there’s a government gag order on it that we cannot release it, but Dennis put in to get it released about the same time we did our show last year. He put that in, and they said they wouldn’t release it; we went ahead with the Cyber Symposium; we can show that we had the data that it was from the 2020 election, but we couldn’t show the back-end data. There was on the third day they would not let us show it; my lawyers said ‘No’; they advised us, ‘Don’t put it out; let’s work on this gag order.'”

“Dennis has had this to get released in Nevada,” Lindell said, referring to the time of the Summit. Further, Lindell claimed, he and his legal team “put in Nevada to get it released about a month ago.”

As he told the audience at the Summit, Lindell told Pakman he “owns the software” Montgomery allegedly invented.

“Just this last Thursday, the government came in and said, ‘You can — this is not going to be part of the gag order’ — so that is big news; it’s breaking news,” Lindell told Pakman. “I didn’t know that when we were going to get on your show. So now we release it; I can bring it to my lawsuits, and we subpoenaed on Friday Brennan, Clapper, Negroponte, Baker: we’ve subpoenaed all these guys…”

Shifting Narratives, Different Players

Currently Fanning and Jones appear to have been sidelined from their years’-long advocacy and promotion of Montgomery’s allegations, perhaps by a defamation lawsuit filed by The Gateway Pundit and Yaacov Apelbaum of XRVision involving The American Report‘s claims about Montgomery and them.

Since the Cyber Symposium, Lindell has continued to vouch unconditionally for Montgomery’s credibility despite Montgomery’s past involving allegations of perjury, fraud, and “The Man Who Conned the Pentagon,” an issue Pakman raised early in Tuesday’s interview.

Prior to Trump’s October 9 appearance at a rally in Mesa, AZ, Lindell asserted to RSBN reporter Brian Glenn that based on the government’s reply brief, he is free to release Montgomery’s election information and encouraged viewers to visit the website, “dennismontgomery.com” (7:09:40). In his interview with Pakman, Lindell acknowledged establishing the website to combat “comments” about Montgomery’s past.

In the latest development, Lindell’s legal team on Tuesday asked for an extension to reply to the government’s response which Du granted on Wednesday to October 21.

At 9:40, Pakman inaccurately stated that former 2016 Trump campaign adviser Carter Page was “charged” with a crime as a result of the government’s obtaining four FISA warrants over his communications. He was correct, however, in asserting that former informal Trump adviser Roger Stone was charged with crimes stemming from the Special Counsel investigation into the question of whether the 2016 Trump campaign “colluded” with the Russian government.

Later convicted of lying to Congress, obstruction and witness-tampering, Stone received a commutation of what would have been a three-year prison term.

Lindell responded in the negative to Pakman’s question as to whether he believed he would be “criminally charged” after the FBI seized his phone several weeks ago, asserting that the FBI was investigating a case in Colorado, which was reported by The Washington Post.

At 15:10, Lindell stated there have been “two preliminary injunctions” against the use of electronic voting machines in Alabama and Arizona, respectively, as a result of legal actions he took or supported in those states.

In speaking with the media, Lindell referred to “filing” a “temporary injunction” rather than requesting one of the court in each case. Neither a plaintiff nor a defendant in a case can issue an injunction.

The Arizona case, filed by plaintiffs Katie Hobbs and Mark Finchem, both of whom are seeking statewide elected office in Arizona, was dismissed on August 29; the Alabama case was dismissed on September 12, although Lindell did not acknowledge those developments. “We just did a preliminary injunction down in Arizona,” Lindell told Pakman at 26:55, although the case and Lindell’s filing were submitted in April.

Throughout the interview, Pakman attempted to harness Lindell’s meandering narrative and claims to focus on specific questions. Subjects Lindell raised as he spoke included the number of registered voters in the state of Wisconsin and the number who actually voted in 2020; Lindell’s new endeavor, “MyStore“; his goal of eliminating voting machines in the United States; the case of Moore v. Harper, which the U.S. Supreme Court will hear during its fall term to examine “the extent of a state court’s authority to reject rules adopted by a state legislature for use in conducting federal elections”; and Lindell’s “MyPillow” product, among many others.

An unanswered question is why Pakman subtitled the video, “MyPillow Mike Lindell Returns, EXPLODES,” as the conversation was animated and vehement at times on Lindell’s part but arguably did not take on an angry or belligerent tone. In fact, Lindell said he would return to the show at any time while observing that neither Fox News Channel nor Newsmax will host him. Like Lindell, both outlets have been sued by Dominion.

Approximately a year ago, Lindell interviewed with Pakman speaking about his first meeting with Trump in 2016 and the “divine appointments” he believed occurred leading up to it. Whether or not the interview went “off the rails,” as Pakman claims in the subtitle, is left to the viewer to decide.

Pakman’s broadcasting career began in 2005 at age 21 when he was attending the University of Massachusetts at Amherst and has continued since that time to reach greater numbers of viewers and encompass controversial figures. In addition to “The David Pakman Show,” he hosts “Pakman Live” and “Pakman Finance” and considers himself a “progressive.”

His podcasts can be found here.

Join the Conversation

3 Comments

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. On Mary Fanning’s Twitter account recently, she tweeted (and it now appears she deleted) a cryptic tweet that suggested the PCAPS were never important. One wonders what this meant, and why she would delete the tweet.
    Did Montgomery change his story again?
    Did Fanning realize that the PCAPS were never sufficient to prove any type of fraud?
    Is this a “CYA” move to absolve them of criticism in the future, when they finally release some data (if they do)?
    I wish I had saved the tweet… alas, I didn’t think it would be erased!

  2. I’m sure you’ve heard of “dual use” technology. The intellectual property (IP) developed by Montgomery can be applied in numerous ways…. And it has been. I sent you earlier this week, the link to the story of the whistleblower who works for Team Cymru who alleges that the government is using PCAP technology, right now, today, to monitor EVERYTHING, that moves across the internet. So when Mike Lindell’s lawyers say that the technology covered by the protective order is capable of effecting elections… and the DOJ answers that the protective order does not cover election/voting machine technology, the DOJ is just covering their collective butts and playing dumb. Montgomery’s IP was stolen by the government and is now being used in a Ubiquitous and, in some cases nefarious manner…. And Montgomery isn’t making a red cent from it…. THAT’S the main reason the government has seen to
    It that Montgomery was smeared and his life ruined….