A man who claims to be a former CIA operative says, “Kamala Harris won the 2024 Election”

A man who says he worked in U.S. intelligence says Kamala Harris did not lose in 2024 the way the country was told she lost.

He did not whisper it in a group chat. He put it in print. In a July 31, 2025, Substack interview with This Will Hold, Adam Zarnowski said he was “personally involved in an NSA‑authorized forensic audit of the 2024 election.” Harris and Tim Walz, he said, won “by a wide margin.” Trump “lost dramatically.” The result, he claimed, was buried.

If you care about voting rights, private election vendors, and who actually holds power in this country, the claim is worth understanding. Understanding it is not the same as swallowing it whole.

What he said, exactly

Zarnowski described himself as a former CIA operative and a human-trafficking investigator. The audit, he said, happened in December 2024. He said the cover-up ran through “transnational organized crime syndicates,” and that his trafficking work overlapped with those networks. In his telling, the trail ran toward Trump and Epstein — not toward Biden, Harris, or Walz. He also said Democrats and “allied interests” helped keep the audit quiet. He called the material unclassified and said he would testify under oath.

Why this is big news

Liberals did not invent distrust of election machinery. The machinery earned it.

A handful of private companies count a huge share of American votes. ES&S alone has long covered well over half the electorate. These firms are not public utilities. They are vendors. They have been fined, failed certifications, shipped sloppy software, and operated inside a weak federal oversight system that too often treats “certified” as a magic word. Progressive election-law advocates have warned about that captured market for years — after Florida 2000, after HAVA poured money into electronic systems, after report after report found vulnerabilities that should have ended careers.

So when someone says a software change and a buried audit flipped 2024, it does not arrive in a vacuum. It arrives in a country that outsourced a core democratic function to contractors and then told the public to stop asking questions.

Add the rest of the atmosphere. Trump won the certified count and returned to office. The Epstein files remain a running wound. Voting-rights groups spent a decade watching restrictions pile up in Republican states. In that climate, a “Harris actually won” story feels less like a leap than like a missing chapter.

Feeling is not proof. It is context.

What he says happened in December 2024

This is the passage that keeps getting clipped and posted:

“In December 2024, I was personally involved in an NSA‑authorized forensic audit of the 2024 election. Kamala Harris and Tim Walz won—by a wide margin. Trump lost dramatically. There are multiple layers of complexity to this cover‑up, including transnational organized crime syndicates that extend far beyond the United States and our elections. To that point, I work in the human trafficking sector, which intersects with the stolen election(s) and has ties to Trump and Epstein—not to President Biden, Vice President Harris, or Governor Walz, but to the Democrats and other allied interests responsible for burying the audit.”

He has repeated the core of that claim in his own voice. On his Substack he wrote that “the results of the 2024 United States elections were manipulated,” and that he knew this because he was “personally involved in an NSA-authorized forensic audit of said election results.” He said the people in charge knew he planned to speak. He also said the work “wasn’t classified as it was set up over Signal,” and that he had “gave up my TS/SCI clearance years ago.”

That last detail matters to how he sells the story. He is not presenting himself as a man leaking from a vault. He is presenting himself as a man who already left the cleared world and is therefore free to talk.

What he says the NSA did — and did not do

When critics said the NSA does not audit elections, Zarnowski did not drop the claim. He narrowed the verb.

“I said they authorized the audit. One word, but a big, big difference.”

In the This Will Hold piece, he is described as having “personally assisted the NSA in collecting the data.” He said the completed results “have been submitted, yet so far have been met with silence.” He said none of his revelations were classified, that he had “full authorization to speak,” and that he was “prepared to testify under oath.”

He also widened the timeline. This was not, in his account, a one-off theft in a single November.

“I previously said that I wasn’t important in any of this, and that this goes much, much deeper than anyone wants to admit. This isn’t just about the 2024 elections, but many more going back decades. So much progress has been withheld and so much suffering has occurred due to this malicious subversion of our democracy.”

That is the emotional engine of the story for a liberal reader: not only that Harris won, but that a captured system has been quietly vetoing progressive outcomes for years.

What he says should happen next

Zarnowski’s demand is not vague “release the files” language. He named a starting point.

He said a full forensic hand-count of the 2024 election, “beginning with Representative Victoria Spartz,” must be “this country’s top priority.” The original article around his interview also argued that Section 3 of the 14th Amendment applies to a stolen election as rebellion against the Constitution, and that legislators had an obligation to remove what it called an “unelected illegitimate regime.”

He has pointed people toward lawsuits as well. After going public, he urged support for the Common Coalition, which he said was “working tirelessly to bring class-action lawsuits against ES&S, the EAC, and Pro V&V across the country for undermining the integrity of our elections and subverting the will of the American people for literally decades.”

On the vendor piece, the article built around his interview focused on ES&S and a September 2024 engineering change, ECO 1188: a move of the config.ini file from a static hash list to a dynamic one, which the piece said allowed vote-reporting changes without the usual security warnings. That is the closest the public write-up comes to a technical mechanism. It is also the part election-reform people on the left already knew how to hear. Private vendors. Weak certification. A software change late in a presidential year.

What he says about himself

Zarnowski does not describe himself as a random blogger. He describes himself as a former CIA officer, specifically of a paramilitary division, and as someone whose anti-trafficking work kept him adjacent to intelligence.

When his background was challenged, he wrote that a woman at the Common Coalition had “verified my service with the Agency, to a degree that I am admittedly a bit uncomfortable with.” He said he did not know how she did it or who she knew, “but her information is accurate.” He also said his identity as a former CIA officer of “THAT particular division was initially confirmed and announced on TikTok of all places.”

He has said he is “limited in what I can say in order to protect sources and methods as per my oath to the Constitution.” That sentence does two jobs at once. It explains why the audit file is not in your hands. It also makes the absence of the file sound like patriotism instead of a gap.

Later, answering critics on LinkedIn, he said those “who matter have verified my service,” that there were “three whistleblowers,” and that the press kept treating him as if he were the only one. He also circled back to the subject he says people are dodging: human trafficking, organized crime, and child exploitation, which he calls “fundamental to understand as to WHY the elections were rigged in the first place.”