Peter Ticktin, a Florida lawyer with a long-standing friendship with Donald Trump – and a shared history as former platoon sergeant and subordinate at the New York Military Academy – has become a central figure in a developing narrative surrounding the 2020 election. He’s now working alongside Ed Martin, Trump’s US Pardon Attorney, focusing on potential pardons for those caught in the legal fallout of election challenges.
The story gained momentum when Independent Election Integrity Investigator Peter Bernegger shared a video featuring Ticktin making a startling claim. In a segment broadcast on Real America’s Voice, Ticktin asserted he possesses evidence suggesting Michigan’s 2020 election Dominion voting machines contained what he described as “phone chips” directly mounted on their motherboards.
This revelation centers on the case against Matt DePerno, Stephanie Lambert, and Daire Rendon – individuals facing charges related to examining Dominion voting equipment. They are accused of unauthorized access and conspiracy, stemming from an effort to investigate concerns about the election’s integrity. Despite the serious allegations, all three maintain their innocence, and no convictions have been secured.
The prosecution alleges that voting tabulators were taken from several Michigan counties to locations including a hotel room and a private residence, where technicians conducted tests and accessed the machines’ internal components. The defense disputes this characterization, arguing their actions were a legitimate attempt to address public concerns and that the state is deliberately misrepresenting the events.
Ticktin argues the state retroactively criminalized actions that were not illegal at the time they occurred. He contends that the state, seeking to prosecute these individuals, simply changed the law to create a crime where none previously existed. This, he asserts, is a blatant “weaponization of government.”
According to Ticktin, the charges against DePerno and Lambert specifically involve allegations of damaging election equipment. However, he clarifies that the alleged damage occurred when experts opened the machines to conduct a thorough examination – not by the lawyers themselves. He emphasizes the examination was performed by qualified experts.
The core of Ticktin’s claim lies in what these experts discovered during their examination. He states they found “phone chips” embedded within the machines’ motherboards – chips capable of receiving signals from telephones or computers. This discovery, he suggests, raises serious questions about the security and potential vulnerability of the voting process.
Independent investigator Peter Bernegger elaborated on Ticktin’s claim, noting that these chips, while reminiscent of older technology from the 1980s and 90s, could potentially allow external communication with the tabulators. He points out that while Dominion machines typically use USB-style modems, the presence of a chip directly on the motherboard presents a different, potentially more concerning, avenue for interference.
Bernegger highlights a crucial detail: the voting machines were willingly handed over by local clerks – the individuals responsible for signing contracts with Dominion. Ticktin emphasizes the clerks’ role, stating they “owned these machines” and “handed them over gladly” for examination. This suggests a level of cooperation that contradicts the state’s narrative of unauthorized access.
The implications of these claims remain under investigation. While the allegations are significant, it’s important to remember that the defendants maintain their innocence and are awaiting due process. The case underscores the ongoing debate surrounding election integrity and the potential for vulnerabilities within voting systems.
