“It Defies Logic”: Scientist Finds Telltale Signs Of Election Fraud After Analyzing Mail-In Ballot Data
By Tyler Durden – Zero Hedge – 11/09/2020
A most interesting thread popped up on Twitter Sunday from a data scientist who wishes to remain anonymous, regarding mail-in ballot data which strongly suggests fraud occurred in the wee hours of election night, when several swing states inexplicably stopped reporting vote counts while President Trump maintained a healthy lead over Joe Biden.
Using time series data ‘scraped’ from the New York Times website, the data – comparing several states (swing and non-swing) – clearly illustrates what fraud does and does not look like, and how several anomalies in swing states left ‘fingerprints of fraud’ as Biden pulled ahead of President Trump.
Presented below via @APhilosophae:
The following information is provided via an anonymous data scientist and another anonymous individual who wrote a script to scrape the national ballot counting time series data of off the @nytimes website.
— CulturalHusbandry (@APhilosophae) November 9, 2020
Continued…
This is based on their proprietary “Edison” data source which would ordinarily be impossible to access for people outside the press. The CSV is available here. And the script to generate it is here. I suggest that everyone back up both of these files, bc this is an extremely important data source, and we cant risk anyone taking it down.
What we are looking at will be time series analysis and you will see that it is extremely difficult to create convincing synthetic times series data. By looking at the times series logs of the ballot counting process for the entire country, we can very easily spot fraud.
One of the first things noticed while exploring the dataset is that there seems to be an obvious pattern in the ratio of new #Biden ballots to new #Trump ballots.
As we can see on this log-log plot, for many of the counting progress updates, we see an almost constant ratio of #Biden to #Trump. It’s such a regular pattern that we can actually fit a linear regression model to it with near-perfect accuracy, barring some outliers. How could this be possible? Is this a telltale sign of fraud? Surprisingly, as it will be shown, the answer is no! This is actually expected behavior. Also, we can use this weird pattern in the ballot counting to spot fraud!
Here is the same pattern for Florida. We see this linear pattern again.
And again (Texas)
And again (South Dakota)
And again all over the country. What appears to be happening is that points on the straight line are actually mail in votes. The reason they’re so homogeneous across with respect to the ratio of #Biden vs #Trump votes is that they get randomly shuffled in the mail like a deck of cards. Since the ballots are randomly mixed together during transport, spanning areas occupied by multiple voting demographics, we can expect the ratio of mail-in #Biden ballots to mail-in #Trump ballots will remain relatively constant over time and across different reporting updates.
Lets dig a little deeper into this:
Here is a plot of the same Florida voting data, but this time it’s the ratio of #Biden to #Trump ballots, versus time. What we see is that the initial ballot reportings are very noisy and “random”.
The initial reporting represents in-person voting. These vote reports have such large variation bc in-person voting happens across different geographic areas that have different political alignments. We can see this same pattern of noisy in-person voting, followed by homogeneous mail-in reporting in almost all cases. What we see in almost all examples across the country is that the ratio of mail-in Dem to Rep ballots is very consistent across time, but with the notable drift from Dem to slightly more Rep.
This slight drift from D to R mail-ins occurs again and again, and is likely due to outlying rural areas having more R votes. These outlying areas take longer to ship their ballots to the polling centers.
Now we’re getting into the really good stuff. When we see mail-in ballot counting where there isn’t relatively stable ratios of D and R ballots that slightly drift R, we have an anomaly! Anomalies themselves are not necessarily fraud, but they can help us spot fraud more easily.
Now let’s look at some anomalies:
This is the Wisconsin vote counting history log. Again, on the Y axis we have the ratio of D to R ballots in reporting batch, and on the X axis we have reporting time. Around 4am there, there is a marked shift in the ratio of D to R mail-in ballots. Based on other posts in this thread, this should not happen. This is an anomaly, and while anomalies are not always fraud, often they may point to fraud.
Around 3am Wisconsin time, a fresh batch of 169k new absentee ballots arrived. They were supposed to stop accepting new ballots, but eh, whatever I guess.
— CulturalHusbandry (@APhilosophae) November 9, 2020
By 4am the D to R ratio was all thrown out of whack. That is because these ballots were not sampled from the real Wisconsin voter population, and they were not randomized in the mail sorting system with the other ballots. They inherently have a different D to R signature than the rest of the ballots quite possibly bc additional ballots were added to the batch, either through backdating or ballot manufacturing or software tampering. This of this being kind of analogous to carbon-14 dating, but for ballot batch authenticity.
Lets look at another anomaly (Pennsylvania):
Here is Pennsylvania’s vote counting history. For the first part of the vote counting process, we see the same pattern for mail-in ballots that we’ve seen in every other state in the country, which is relatively stable D to R ratio that gradually drifts R as more ballots. But then as counting continues, the D to R ratio in mail-in ballots inexplicably begin “increasing”. Again, this should not happen, and it is observed almost nowhere else in the country, because all of the ballots are randomly shuffled in the mail system and should be homogeneous during counting. The only exceptions to this are other suspect states that also have anomalies.
Again, this is evidence of ballot backdating, manufacturing of software tampering.
Lets look at another anomaly:
In Georgia we see pretty much the same story as Pennsylvania: increasing fractions of mail-in D ballots over time even though it defies logic and we see this pattern no where else in the country.
In Michigan, we see a combination of Wisconsin strangeness, together with the GA/PA weirdness. We see both signs of contaminated ballot dumping, and ballot ratios drifting toward dems when they should not be.
Virginia:
Now in fairness, VA is the only state out of the 50 that has anomalies but has not had accusations of voter fraud, yet. I think this is the exception that proves the rule. Yet to figure out what causes this anomalous shift, but here it is so no one accuses me of holding it back.
Lets wrap this up: It appears Dems shot themselves in the foot bc making everyone do mail-in ballots actually makes it easier to catch mail-in ballot fraud. Bc all of the ballots go through the postal system, they get shuffled like a deck of cards, so we expect reported ballot return to be extremely UNIFORM in terms of D vs R ratio, but to drift slightly towards R over time bc some of those ballots travel farther. This pattern proves fraud and is a verifiable timestamp of when each fraudulent action occurred.
UK Intelligence to Fight Anti-Vaccine Propaganda Spread by State Actors, British Media Reports
Anti-vaccine demonstrators in Edinburgh © Sputnik / Jason Dunn
By Tim Korso – Sputnik – 09.11.2020
A UK intelligence unit, known as the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), has been authorised to conduct cyber operations to tackle the spread of anti-vaccine propaganda online, The Times reported citing an anonymous government source. According to the newspaper, the government increasingly views anti-vaxxers as a new priority because of the upcoming registration of domestically-developed vaccines against the coronavirus.
Apart from GCHQ, a secretive UK Army unit within the 77th Brigade specialising in information warfare will be taking part in the efforts “to quash rumours about misinformation” related to the COVID-19 vaccines, General Sir Nick Carter confirmed to The Times.
The newspaper’s source claims that GCHQ will be using the same toolkit it utilised to combat Daesh and its propaganda and recruitment efforts. The toolkit includes ways of taking down undesired content and conducting cyber attacks against the cyberactors behind it, for example by encrypting the perpetrators’ computer data, The Times added.
“GCHQ has been told to take out anti-vaxxers online and on social media. There are ways they have used to monitor and disrupt terrorist propaganda”, the anonymous source claimed.
However, GCHQ will not be able to use its tools against everyone online because its authority only extends to dealing with [alleged] state cyber actors and the content created by them, the newspaper reported citing another anonymous government source.
Russia as Main target for UK Intelligence Cyber Operations?
The British newspaper claims Russia will be the GCHQ’s prime target, citing its own investigation into the country’s alleged ties to the surge of internet memes questioning the safety of the vaccine developed by Oxford University in concert with AstraZeneca. The said investigation was based on a trove of documents and images provided by an anonymous source, who claimed to be part of an alleged propaganda effort purportedly seeking to hurt the image of the British vaccine. The Times, however, admitted in its article that it could not directly link the alleged social media campaign, targeting only the UK vaccine, with the Kremlin.
According to the newspaper, the alleged campaign against the AstraZeneca/Oxford vaccine started after the head of the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) that developed Sputnik V, Kirill Dmitriev, called the UK-developed medicine a “monkey vaccine” on several occasions. Dmitriev referred to the vaccine’s usage of a monkey virus as a vector to deliver the COVID-19 material needed to form immunity. He did not directly call the drug dangerous or ineffective, but noted that the use of human adenoviruses was more reliable, as their influence on the human body is better understood.
Dmitriev’s use of the term “monkey vaccine” prompted the emergence of numerous internet memes, baselessly alleging that the British drug would be turning recipients into monkey-like creatures or otherwise negatively affecting patients’ health. The head of RDIF later denounced the use of his words to besmirch the UK-developed vaccine, but defended his concerns over the possibility of its long-term side effects.
Media “Fact Checking”: President Trump “Censored” by CNBC
By Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Vanessa Beeley, Max Parry, and BlackCatte | Global Research | November 08, 2020
I am not a fan of Donald Trump. But this concerted action on behalf of the corporate media to prevent the President from speaking on election results is tantamount to a de facto “Color Revolution” Made in America.
Trump is not an online “conspiracy theorist” subject to media censorship. He is the sitting president of the US.
We must understand, however, that this election is not between Trump and Biden.
Biden is a groomed politician, a trusted proxy, serving the interests of the financial establishment.
The Smoking Gun is Covid-19. Biden is committed to closing down the US economy as well as the global economy as a means to “combating the killer virus”.
The closing down of the global economy is a “crime against humanity”.
Biden is the presidential candidate of the upper echelons of the financial establishment.
Trump has not endorsed the dominant Covid narrative. He favors the reopening of the US economy. And that’s why he is now being “sidetracked” by the “Deep State”. Of course, this “sidetracking” goes back to November 2016. (It is not limited to Trump’s stance on Covid-19).
According to The Atlantic in a timely article published on November 2, 2020:
“President Donald Trump has repeatedly lied about the coronavirus pandemic and the country’s preparation for this once-in-a-generation crisis”.
Here, a collection of the biggest lies he’s told as the nation endures a public-health and economic calamity.
Below are pointed comments by three prominent authors, who present an independent viewpoint: Max Parry, Vanessa Bealey, and Catte Black
(They are not supporters of Donald Trump)
Max Parry
I am going to be crucified by many of my fellow “leftists” for saying this, but something smells incredibly fishy about these election results. How in the world can the Democrats lose several house seats, gain no ground in the senate, but manage to win the presidency?
How did Trump win Ohio again (which previously went to Obama twice) by 8 points just like he did in 2016, but lose all these other key swing states at the 11th hour? Am I really supposed to believe a candidate as poor as Biden got more votes than even Obama in his 2008 landslide?
The projection polls were again way off and Trump was massively exceeding expectations getting several million more votes than last time, but he still ends up losing? Did the media cut away in the middle of Bush’s speeches when he was stealing the 2000 election?
None of this adds up and you have partisan blinders on if you can’t see it.
Not to say the GOP doesn’t engage in voter suppression, but there is no way in a million years you will ever convince me there isn’t a coup d’etat under way right now.
Vanessa Beeley
“The world has really gone insane. Trump is still President of the US and he just got fact checked live on air.
I am not pro Trump but if you can’t see the madness heading our way, please try to inform yourself beyond a binary argument of Trump vs Biden.
Both are largely irrelevant compared to the gathering predator class storm on the horizon.
They are both part of the same theatre that is designed to plunge humanity into chaos for the foreseeable future while the powers behind the throne roll out the Great Reset road map.
#Covid_19 is a gateway to hell.”
Catte Black
Thought I was shockproof but this really shocked me – and should shock anyone with any sense of what this actually means.
Like him or hate him this man is the elected and sworn-in president of the United States – and he’s being silenced in front of our eyes by the paid and unelected employees of a privately owned propaganda outlet.
Also see the full press conference:
Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, November 8, 2020
Selected Articles: Examining the Anti-Trump Protest Movement
U.S. to be Subject to UN “Climate Conciliation Commission” if Re-Joins Paris Climate Pact
By Chris Horner | Government Accountability and Oversight
Paris Climate ‘Accord’ FOIA Case: State Dept. Releases, Withholds Parts of Memo to Sec. John Kerry Requesting Authority to Sign Paris Agreement
It appears possible that, come January, the United States will rejoin the 2015 Paris climate agreement, committing to adopt the “Green New Deal” agenda (now rebranded for political purposes as “Net Zero”). This will not be accomplished by Senate ratification, but by the ‘pen and a phone’ approach first used by President Obama to claim U.S. “ratification” of what is on its face and by its history a treaty, requiring approval instead by a two-thirds Senate vote.
A document released last week by the State Department, in Freedom of Information Act litigation by the transparency group Energy Policy Advocates, includes a reminder of one consequence of this for America, should it occur: claiming to “re-join” the Paris climate treaty will immediately subject U.S. energy policy — and thereby economic and to some extent trade policy — to a UN “climate conciliation commission”.
Already, as the United Kingdom has shown, developed nations’ courts can be expected to cite the Paris climate treaty in blocking infrastructure development. The UK’s Court of Appeal ruled earlier this year that Heathrow Airport cannot be expanded because that would violate the UK’s ‘net zero’ commitment under Paris.
Then, Canada offered a reminder how progressive politicians will raise taxes in the name of complying with Paris: In Ottawa, “The parliamentary budget officer says the federal carbon tax would have to rise over the coming years if the country is to meet emission-reduction targets under the Paris climate accord.”
Now we are reminded that the U.S. can also expect a forum for antagonistic nations to bring their complaints about U.S. policy and claims of non-compliance with Paris’s required “Net Zero” agenda for resolution.
This might be one of the reasons that avoiding a Senate vote on Paris was a key objective of the Obama administration, which stated in August 2015 before there ever was even Paris text, that it would not be a “treaty”. This was the lesson learned from the U.S. Senate’s refusal to consider the 1997 Kyoto treaty: If the Senate votes on it, its details would be debated, and defeated.
That objective of an end-run around the U.S. Constitution’s process was shared by European nations: the French climate change ambassador to the U.N. and President of the Paris COP, Laurence Tubiana and Laurent Fabius, respectively, both openly admitted.
Yet, those same countries treated Paris as a treaty for their own ratification purposes. This cavalier approach to the Constitution in the Obama years makes it easy to forget the U.S. supposedly has the more stringent system for joining international entanglements.
Instead, the Obama team showed what one Senate Foreign Relations Committee lawyer decried as a “disturbing contempt for the Senate’s constitutional rights and responsibilities” by circumventing its constitutional treaty role on Paris. Unfortunately, the institution shrunk from a constitutional fight, and all parties spoke as if calling Paris an “accord” instead carried weight — though the the Kyoto Protocol was alternately called the “Kyoto Accord” and, yes, was still a treaty.
This brings us to the newly released (in part) memo — “Request for Authority to Sign and Join the Paris Agreement, Adopted under the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change” [UNFCCC] — reaffirming that Paris is the result of “a 2011 negotiating mandate (the “Durban Platform”)”. The Durban “mandate” was to “adopt…a protocol, another legal instrument or an agreed outcome with legal force at the twenty-first session of the Conference of the Parties and for it to come into effect and be implemented from 2020”.
That of course is Paris, the crushing provisions of which are found in Article 4, emission reduction promises. Art. 4.3 requires that the U.S. revisit and tighten its reduction promises every five years. That would cleverly make this the climate treaty…sorry, “accord”… to end all climate treaties. It commits the U.S. to ever greater “climate” policy restrictions, every five years, in perpetuity.
Pull this off and there will never be the threat again of facing the tyranny of the Constitution’s requirement of popular approval.
Political rhetoric aside, nothing in Paris’s terms says this provision is legally binding, but no that one over there isn’t. Instead, Paris was merely sold to and promoted by much of the press with the claim that Paris contains “a mix of legally binding and not legally binding provisions”.
As we have seen already in the UK/Heathrow Airport case, that did not last, as it was not intended to. Lawyers and courts have already begun to see to something of which Americans should be reminded, including that you can have promises of massive infrastructure spending, or you can have the Paris climate pact, but you can’t have them both.
And it won’t just be courts. Recall, first, that the Paris agreement as originally circulated contained a climate tribunal, or court. This was dropped after being noticed outside of polite circles. Nonetheless, the recently released if still heavily redacted memo reminds us that U.S. compliance with the legally binding here but maybe not over there Paris obligations is subject to the terms of that 1992 agreement, ratified by the U.S. Senate on the condition that it was and remained non-binding (again, stated nowhere in its terms).
UNFCCC declares, in Art. 14, “Settlement of Dispute”, that:
“5. … if after twelve months following notification by one Party to another that a dispute exists between them, the Parties concerned have not been able to settle their dispute through the means mentioned in paragraph 1 above, the dispute shall be submitted, at the request of any of the parties to the dispute, to conciliation.
6. A conciliation commission shall be created upon the request of one of the parties to the
dispute. The commission shall be composed of an equal number of members appointed by each party concerned and a chairman chosen jointly by the members appointed by each party. The commission shall render a recommendatory award, which the parties shall consider in good faith.”
This language governs U.S. compliance with the Paris climate “accord”. It is not open to dispute that any U.S. president who claims to “re-join” the Paris climate treaty will subject US energy policy — and thereby the U.S. economy — to a UN climate “conciliation commission”.
Paris requires, and mandates the U.S. revisit and tighten “Green New Deal”-style policies every five years. This is among the many reasons why the Paris climate agreement is a treaty, and also why it never would have been ratified. However, very soon, Americans may nonetheless be subject to its long-envisioned climate court.
Why it is right to question the orthodox Covid-19 narrative
The authors of ‘Welcome to Covidworld’ defend their stance
By Matthew Ratcliffe and Ian James Kidd | The Critic | November 6, 2020
In a reply to our piece “Welcome to Covidworld”, Ben Bramble engages in precisely the sort of thinking that we raised concerns about. He suggests that we are mistaken in comparing harms done by lockdowns and other measures to harms caused by the virus. Instead, we ought to have weighed up the costs of lockdowns against what would have happened without them.
Bramble’s case hinges on a counterfactual claim: in the absence of lockdowns, the virus would have inflicted much more harm than it has done. The cost of not locking down would, he says, have been “mind-bogglingly great”.
What could be wrong with Bramble’s claim? First of all, his use of the term “lockdown” is insufficiently discerning. Lockdown is not a simple, straightforward policy measure that took the same form in every country. There are, for instance, important differences between early and late lockdowns. Australia and New Zealand both locked down early and suppressed the virus.
Setting aside the issue of whether or not the actions taken by these countries are morally justifiable, it remains to be seen whether or not this is a success story. If a highly effective vaccine is not forthcoming, both countries will face the painful options of cutting themselves off from the rest of the world indefinitely, having strict lockdowns whenever the virus reappears, or eventually succumbing to the virus, none of which amount to success.
However, the current UK situation is very different. Given where we are now, nobody is claiming that this second lockdown or any future UK lockdowns will be able to suppress the virus here. It is too well established for that. Rather, the stated aims have been to buy us some time until a vaccine arrives and, most recently, to ensure that the NHS is not overwhelmed. In evaluating the effectiveness and appropriateness of such policy measures, it will not do to make sweeping claims about the effectiveness of lockdowns in general. When considering interventions so extreme and destructive, we need to proceed more carefully.
Bramble simply accepts that lockdowns in general work. He does not specify exactly what it would be for a late lockdown to work, when the goal is no longer complete suppression. Presumably, the relevant criteria will include reducing hospitalizations and deaths due to Covid-19, during the lockdown and in the longer term as well. But where is the evidence that lockdowns generally have this effect? Bramble doesn’t provide any. Maybe he thinks it’s just obvious that they achieve this, but it really isn’t.
A strict lockdown in Peru is associated with one of the highest Covid-19 death tolls in the world (currently recorded as 1,047 people per 1 million of the population). Other countries that have resorted to exceptionally long and strict lockdowns, such as Argentina, have also fared badly. One could, of course, run Bramble’s counterfactual here: it would have been even worse for these countries had they not locked down. But where is the evidence for that? Indeed, what would even count as evidence?
It would be intellectually and morally unacceptable to make the pro-lockdown position unfalsifiable by always insisting on the following: (1) where cases drop after a lockdown was introduced, it must be the lockdown that achieved this; (2) where cases rise after a lockdown was introduced, it would certainly have been even worse without the lockdown; (3) if other countries, such as Sweden, adopt less extreme approaches than us and fare better or at least no worse, this must be due to other differences between the two countries – the Swedish strategy would never have worked here.
So, how do we go about evaluating the effectiveness of lockdowns? Where is the evidence that the virus ultimately causes far more deaths in the absence of extreme social restrictions? Where are those countries that followed a different course from countries like the UK (which locked down, but did not suppress the virus) and now have higher death tolls than us? By simply assuming that his counterfactual claim is true, Bramble illustrates our worry that lockdowns risk becoming an unfalsifiable article of faith. In fact, he even asserts that “the science on this is beyond question”. Is it really? If so, all the disease modelers who have made dire predictions concerning the current UK situation will be delighted to hear that their work will be forever immune from critique, even if it turns out that their models have little bearing on reality. And, in any case, none of them would endorse Bramble’s exaggerated claim that, without a lockdown, there would have been “many millions of deaths” in countries such as the UK.
In fact, much about the behaviour of this virus remains unclear, including how the infection rate is influenced by growing immunity within a population. There is no single, homogeneous entity called “the science”. Rather, there are many different and often conflicting perspectives, theories, and claims. Furthermore, this is a complicated, fast-changing situation that impacts on all aspects of human society. Relevant expertise thus encompasses a wide range of academic disciplines and areas of practice. Philosophers should not simply defer to “the experts”; they also have plenty of relevant expertise themselves.
What we do know is that lockdowns are immensely damaging in so many ways. This second UK lockdown will further disrupt the social and emotional development of our children, cause a substantial rise in severe mental health problems, force many elderly people to live out the final weeks and perhaps months of their lives in loneliness and misery, exacerbate and prolong the pain of bereavement by depriving people of interpersonal and social interactions that shape and regulate grief, destroy livelihoods and risk mass unemployment, increase regional social and economic inequalities, reduce the life-opportunities of young people while saddling them with an ever-growing mountain of debt to pay off, suspend much of what gives our lives meaning, deprive people of countless precious, irreplaceable life-moments, and cause deaths due to the numerous resulting impacts on people’s health.
However, the true extent of certain harms, such as the long-term effects of sustained lockdown measures on children’s development, may not become fully clear for some time.
Others have similarly warned that policy makers are paying insufficient attention to these growing costs. For instance, an open letter by psychologists, which appeared on 1 November, spells out the widespread and damaging psychological effects of continuing restrictions, including the harms done to children. Similarly, an article published in the British Medical Journal on 2 November raises the concern that the “collateral damage” caused by public health interventions has “yet to be considered systematically”. Others have drawn attention to the global costs of national lockdowns. For instance, the charity Oxfam has stated that, by the end of this year, over 12,000 people could be starving to death every day due the global impact of national-level responses to Covid-19.
Bramble observes that the orthodox view has in fact been subjected to critical scrutiny. But the problem is that – in the UK, at least – alternative perspectives have had little influence on the processes of recommending, making, and implementing policy decisions. And we worry that this may be partly because of blinkered and inflexible attitudes that are widely held. People are often very quick to dismiss or express moral disapproval of dissenting voices. However, those who confidently endorse lockdowns with an air of moral authority also need to acknowledge the full extent of the harms these measures have caused, are causing, and are likely to cause. Furthermore, explicit and sufficiently specific criteria should be supplied for determining the effectiveness of any proposed lockdown, accompanied by convincing evidence to show that it is very likely to achieve its intended effects.
Instead of pursuing such a path, Bramble speculates that our own concerns originate in cognitive impairments caused by our distressing experiences of lockdown. This is the kind of response that motivated our earlier account of “Covidworld”, a simplified, virus-centric reality where various norms of reason, scientific enquiry, and moral conduct have ceased to apply.
Copyright © Locomotive 6960 Limited 2020
Trump attorneys will expose Biden’s ‘abject fraud,’ says lawyer on president’s team
RT | November 8, 2020
Trump lawyer Sidney Powell said that computer “glitches” were used by Democrats to flip votes from Donald Trump to Joe Biden, and that she will “fight tooth and nail in federal court to expose this abject fraud.”
As President Donald Trump’s legal case challenging the results of Tuesday’s election builds steam, former federal prosecutor Sydney Powell – who is helping Trump’s legal team – told Fox News that she has seen evidence of massive fraud.
“To manufacture votes for Joe Biden, they have done it in every way imaginable,” Powell told Fox News’ Maria Bartiromo on Sunday. “From having dead people vote in massive numbers to absolutely fraudulently creating ballots that exist only voting for Biden.”
“We have identified at least 450,000 ballots in the key states that miraculously only have a mark for Joe Biden on them and no other candidate,” she continued, before alleging that vote-counting software and hardware manufactured by Dominion Voting Systems was used to “flip” votes from Trump to Biden.
Dominion’s equipment was used in 28 states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, Georgia and Arizona, where the Trump campaign has alleged fraud took place.
Powell claimed that computer “glitches” in Dominion’s software were used to tilt the vote against Michigan Senate hopeful John James and Georgia Rep. Doug Collins. “There were many people affected by this,” she said. “We have got to fight tooth and nail in federal court to expose this abject fraud and the conspiracy behind it.”
Recounts and audits, she concluded, are needed in “frankly most of the country.”
Biden claimed victory on Saturday, after Associated Press called the state of Pennsylvania, and with it the presidency, in his favor. Trump has declared Biden’s win fraudulent, though mainstream media and Democrat officials have stated that there is no evidence of foul play.
Trump’s legal team is determined to prove them wrong, though, and the president’ lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, told Bartiromo on Sunday that the first lawsuit – which alleges widespread fraud in Pennsylvania, will be filed on Monday. As many as five legal cases may be brought before the end of the week, Giuliani added, telling Bartiromo that he has gathered enough evidence to overturn Biden’s razor-thin wins in both Pennsylvania and Michigan.
Seemingly unperturbed by the looming legal challenges, Biden has pressed ahead with his transition into office. The former vice president opened a “Biden-Harris Presidential Transition Team” Twitter account on Sunday, promising to “rise stronger than we were before.”
Congratulations President Kamala
By Taxi | Plato’s Guns | Movember 8, 2020
The kindest thing we can say about Joe Biden is that he is a proven scatterbrain whose physical and cognitive daily life depends on his wife’s vigilant handling of his word and foot. She is forever present wherever he is: whispering to him his forgotten word, and showing him where podium and exit door is. Simply, she is his guide-dog and theatrical standby coaching him from the wings. And for all we know, Biden may also already be incontinent and needing adult diapers under his pajamas and Mrs. Biden here plays the role of personal diaper-changer too.
This is the pre-election status of our new president, Joe Biden.
But what of post-election? How will our handicapped and dependent president manage complex state affairs and even more complex foreign policies for the next four years? He is already 77 years of age and clearly his cognitive abilities will continue to naturally diminish with age, with no prospect whatsoever of their return to robust elasticity.
Begs the question here therefore: why on earth did the Democratic party choose him as leader of party and presidential candidate when they know better than you and I of Biden’s dwindling mental stature? Surely an unspoken yet blatant ruse is at hand here? Yes? No? Yes, indeed there is and let’s here code-name it ‘Operation Kamala’. The Democratic party leadership that is desperately needing to win the White House and remain there for eight years have resorted to employing unconventional methodology to insert their real preferred candidate: an unpopular candidate by presidential standards; a selected candidate and not an elected one.
The real candidate that’s preferred by the Jewy Deep State and by Jewish Power is Kamala Harris, Joe Biden’s pick of Vice President, and not Joe Biden himself. The Democratic party will soon enough be performing their ‘great switcheroo’, to be executed soon as it becomes impossible to cover up Biden’s mental failings. What these Democratic Party honchos and desperate strategists have done in essence is cynically exploit our constitution and election rules by playing a Two-card Monte trick against the American voter. Now you see the democratically elected Biden card, and NOW you see the selected VP Kamala Harris’ card. Every guess made at this sly game makes every single American voter a loser.
Kamala Harris: a slime-ball lawyer who reached the high office of District Attorney of uber liberal San Francisco is of mixed-race: of Asian-Indian and African-American extraction. She is a combination of Israel-firster Modi and Israel-firster Sammy Davis Jr – yet the mainstream media consistently refers to her as a “Black-American”, and clearly this is because ‘Asian-Indian’ does not sell well at the voting booth. Here we have the same intentional racial inaccuracy as with how mulatto president Obama was sold to the voter. And like presidents Obama and Trump before her, Kamala is both besotted and beholden to Jewish power. The Jewish Lobby promoted her selection as president-to-be despite her being the first Democrat to drop out of the presidential race, nay the first Democrat to be elbowed out of the race by Tulsi Gabbard. Being childless at 56 years of age and married to a divorced Jewish man, she refers to herself as a “proud and loving stepmother” to his two Jewish children. Kamala thus evidently has a personal and careeristic investment in serving Israel above all else. In this sense, we can say that Kamala actually married Israel and guaranteed thus her rise to political rank in the US, despite her low popularity even among Democrats. How else to explain the biggest loser in the primaries eventually becoming actual president of the United States of America? This here is the “unconventional” ruse devised by the criminal Democratic strategists. This here is the crime scene where American democracy was stabbed in the heart and in the eyeball. This here may very well be the race-war trigger planned for America by Jewish power when America finds itself, overnight, ruled by a selected (not elected) female president of color.
I can see an ocean of Whitey froth and bullets when this happens.
And until the day Kamala takes the White House with the help of Jewish sleight of hand, we have Biden.
Biden the committed Zionist. Biden the old man with a penchant for inappropriate touchy-feelys of little girls. Biden, the supporter of color revolutions and wars for the Jews. Biden who doesn’t know where the exit door is. Biden who is bad at math but good at pocketing monies from corrupt deals. Biden the poster-boy and linchpin of the biggest Jewish subterfuge operation against the American voter and their beloved constitution.
What’s left to say except: good luck, Americans. You’re certainly fucked for the next 4-8 years. You’re fucked perhaps even for eternity.
Russiagate disciple Michael McFaul upset that Putin hasn’t congratulated Biden for presumed election win
RT | November 8, 2020
Former US envoy to Russia Michael McFaul is unhappy that Moscow hasn’t declared Joe Biden the election winner without official results, apparently tossing aside years of hysteria about Kremlin “meddling” in US internal affairs.
McFaul, who became one of the most outspoken proponents of the debunked theory that Moscow “colluded” with the Trump campaign in 2016, expressed his disappointment on Twitter that Russian President Vladimir Putin has yet to offer his congratulations to the Democratic nominee, who declared himself president-elect on Saturday.
“Has Putin joined the chorus of world leaders in congratulating Biden yet? I haven’t see (sic) the statement. Do post if its (sic) out,” he wrote.
Over the past four years, McFaul has rarely passed up an opportunity to suggest that Moscow is somehow exerting shadowy influence over Washington. Now he is apparently disappointed that the Kremlin hasn’t chosen sides in a contested election. Several states are still counting votes, and recounts and lawsuits brought by the Trump campaign could make declaring a clear victor in the contest premature.
Biden claimed victory after media outlets projected that he would win Pennsylvania, overcoming Donald Trump’s previous considerable lead in the state. The Republican president has refused to concede.
Earlier in the day, Fijian Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama became the first world leader to offer his congratulations to the former vice president, expressing hope that Biden would help the world navigate a “climate emergency.”
By Saturday evening, governments from around the world issued statements recognizing Biden as the president-elect. Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said he was “looking forward” to working with Biden, while UK leader Boris Johnson said he was eager to begin cooperation with the Democrat’s new administration, a sentiment that was echoed by many European heads-of-state. All members of the Group of 7 (G7) economic organization have issued congratulatory messages to Biden.
Although it’s true that Putin has yet to recognize Biden’s projected win, he’s not alone. Chinese President Xi Jinping has said nothing on the subject, along with Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan.
In fact, some world leaders have even hinted that they don’t recognize Biden’s victory. Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa on Wednesday declared Trump the victor, and then issued a follow-up statement insisting that the election should not be called until the courts rule on the matter. He wasn’t the only world leader to express unwillingness to recognize a winner in the contest. Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said on Saturday that he wanted to wait for legal challenges to finish before assuming a clear victor.
Similarly, Polish President Andrzej Duda congratulated Biden for running a “successful presidential campaign,” adding that his nation was waiting to see who would be declared the official president-elect by the Electoral College.
The 2020 election: fuckery is afoot
By Larry Correia | Monster Hunter Nation | November 5, 2020
I am more offended by how ham fisted, clumsy, and audacious the fraud to elect him is than the idea of Joe Biden being president. I think Joe Biden is a corrupt idiot, however, I think America would survive him like we’ve survived previous idiot administrations. However, what is potentially fatal for America is half the populace believing that their elections are hopelessly rigged and they’re eternally fucked. And now, however this shakes out in court, that’s exactly what half the country is going to think.
People are pissed off, and rightfully so.
Before I became a novelist I was an accountant. In auditing you look for red flags. That’s weird bits in the data that suggest something shifty is going on. You flag those weird things so you can delve into them further. One flag doesn’t necessarily mean there’s fraud. Weird things happen. A few flags mean stupidity or dishonesty. But a giant pile of red flags means that there’s bad shit going on and people should be in jail.
Except for in politics, where apparently all you have to do to dismiss a bunch of red flag is be a democrat and mumble something about “fascist voter suppression” then you can do all sorts of blatant crime and get off.
I’ve been trying to keep up with the firehose of information about what’s going on during this clusterfuck of an election. Last night I was on Facebook talking about the crazy high, 3rd world dictatorship level voter turnout levels in the deep blue areas of these swing states was very suspicious. Somebody gas lighted me about how “I’d have to do better than that”, so this was my quick reply, listing off the questionable bullshit I could think of off the top of my head:
The massive turn out alone is a red flag.
But as for doing better…
The late night spikes that were enough to close all the Trump leads are a red flag.
The statistically impossible breakdown of the ratios of these vote dumps is a red flag.
The ratios of these dumps being far better than the percentages in the bluest of blue cities, even though the historical data does not match, red flag.
The ratios of these vote dumps favoring Biden more in these few battlegrounds than the ratio for the rest of the country (even the bluest of the blue) red flag.
Biden outperforming Obama among these few urban vote dumps, even though Trump picked up points in every demographic group in the rest of the country, red flag.
The poll observers being removed. Red flag.
The counters cheering as GOP observers are removed, red flag.
The fact that the dem observers outnumber the GOP observers 3 to 1, red flag (and basis of the first lawsuit filed)
The electioneering at the polls (on video), red flag.
The willful violation of the court order requiring the separation of ballots by type, red flag.
USPS whistleblower reporting to the Inspector General that today they were ordered to backdate ballots to yesterday, red flag.
The video of 2 AM deliveries of what appear to be boxes of ballots with no chain of custody or other observers right before the late night miracle spikes, red flag.
Any of those things would be enough to trigger an audit in the normal world. This many flags and I’d be giggling in anticipation of catching some thieves.
And it isn’t that I have to do better. I’m just an gen pop observer who happens to be a retired auditor with a finely tuned bullshit detector. This is going to the courts.
##
So now I want to delve into some of these some more. The problem is that there’s a ton of info swirling around, some good, some crap. It doesn’t help that reporters are usually dishonest or not very bright and absolute trash at presenting data. Part of our problem is Big Tech is actively stomping on stories that make their guy look bad. (while compiling these I discovered that several of the links I’d looked at yesterday had been vanished by Facebook or Twitter)
For the last four years half the country was all “Trump is illegitimate! He’s not my president! He stole the election!” so on and so forth, and that was all based upon nebulous ideas about “Russian Interference”, The Russian Interference mostly boiled down to them buying ads on Facebook, or having fake bots trolling on Twitter last time. This time the actual giant megacorporations, Facebook, Twitter, and Google themselves have actively censored stories in order to protect their candidate. So you think after this pile of suspicious election clusterfucks that makes the game look totally rigged, the other half of the country is going to accept Joe Biden as legitimate? Oh hell no.
When you are auditing you see mistakes happen all the time. Humans make errors. Except in real life, mistakes usually go in different directions. When all the mistakes go in the same direction and benefit the same parties, they probably aren’t mistakes. They’re malfeasance.
Let’s go back a bit to before election day to see why people would be suspicious that the game has been rigged.
Most of the mainstream polls were utter garbage, off by what I believe to be the largest amounts ever in all of American history. Of course, this thing that surely demoralized the right and helped the left raise funds was just an innocent sampling error rather than a purposeful sampling bias… uh huh.
Then in the weeks leading up to the election, Big Tech and the media had a concentrated censorship effort to stop what was probably the juiciest October Surprise in modern history. But them silencing major newspapers and US Senators was just a mistake in their innocent efforts to “fact check”.
Then on election day, states like Florida that were obviously swinging hard for Trump with no possible mathematical way for Biden to come back, the news wouldn’t call for Trump. States where it was still clearly up in the air just based on even the most cursory of statistical analysis (Arizona) they called for Biden ASAP. But that was just innocent mistakes, and not an attempt to set the narrative of inevitable Biden victory by major media.
When Trump pulled ahead in the midwestern swing states by what were starting to appear to be insurmountable amounts, they suddenly threw the brakes on the counts. (my favorite part of this was when it looked like Trump was going to win, the Chinese Yaun crashed, which is pretty telling about just how shitty a candidate Joe Biden is) Okay, suddenly stopping all those counts seemed a little weird, but most of America went to bed thinking that this was a close race, with Trump in the lead in the EC.
Then we woke up in the morning, and everybody saw the 538 graphs showing a massive middle of the night spike for Joe Biden, with almost zilch in corresponding votes for Trump.
Now, one of those got walked back as “typo”. (again, funny how all these “mistakes” keep going in one direction) but the damage was already done, and all of a sudden most of America was paying a whole lot more attention to places like Wisconsin and Michigan than we usually do. That’s how flags work. And it turned out that single six figure typo was only one of many statistically improbable Biden vote dumps to come.
Now, all of my liberal acquaintances were quick to dismiss these, with some gas lighting about how it was just deep blue inner cities votes coming in, and of obviously they’re going to vote for Joe Biden… Except that is them deliberately missing the point. It isn’t that Biden won those, it is that he won them with statistically improbable amounts.
I don’t know what the current numbers are now, but as of yesterday morning the Wisconsin Midnight Mystery Dump was something like 98.4% for Joe Biden. That’s better than the bluest of blue cities manage. That’s better than Biden did in DC. I saw one 28k dump yesterday (I want to say it was 538 talking about PA) that was listed as ALL for Biden. That’s basically statistically impossible.
In a small populace, you can get 100% of the vote. However the larger the sample, the more likely there will be dissenting votes. Even in the bluest of blue areas or reddest of red areas, somebody is going to be a cranky dissident, or an old person is going to fill in the wrong circle. When you get into the hundreds or thousands yet maintain that kind of perfect ratio, basically impossible.
Plus we are supposed to believe that Joe Biden, the guy barely campaigned, who got like 12 sad looking people to his rallies, was more popular than Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama? This election was just that much more special? Uh huh… Except that these few battleground state blue cities vote ratios don’t match up with other blue cities around America, where it appears Trump’s support among every demographic group other than white males went UP.
Then people were quick to dismiss these statistically improbable spikes with “of course the mail in voting favors Biden, republicans vote in person.” Yes, but they don’t favor Biden with these kind of ratios anywhere else in America. The ratios are more like 60-40 or 70-30. But 97-3? Oh fuck no. So either Biden is a better campaigner to the inner cities (though he rarely left his basement) than the eloquent messianic figure of Barack Obama, or there’s something fishy going on here.
Now, as a suspicious auditor type who spent a lot of hours looking for fuckery in complex systems, my gut tells me fake ballots were getting dumped into the system to make up the difference. And oh look, here is a giant pile of red flags indicating that’s the case.
Yesterday there was a meme going around about how Wisconsin had something like 90% voter turnout, and how this was 20 points higher than usual, and how it would also be one of the highest voter turnouts in all of American history. If Wisconsin was at 90% that beats the highest national number in all of American history by EIGHT points. And that was 1876 (which was legendarily fraudulent by the way).
Except, this is the problem with using memes to make your argument, it was only partially accurate, and the previous Wisconsin numbers were cited one way, and the current year was calculated a different way. (don’t feel bad, I fell for that one too, and as an accountant, that’s SO ANNOYING). When most people think of voter turnout, they think what percent of registered voters vote. But because Wisconsin has same day voting (a gift for fraudsters) their prior year percentages were votes compared to eligible population (that’s so goofy). But it meant the meme was comparing apples to oranges. So the leftists immediately jumped on that error to dismiss the idea that there was anything weird about how many people turned out to vote this time.
HOWEVER, that’s useless obfuscation. Because if you calculate the number the same way that most Americans do, their turn out was still like 90%, which is a rate normally reserved for dictators (that combined with the vote ratios would have made Saddam Hussein blush). I had one liberal guy point out that notoriously corrupt Seattle also gets 90%… which doesn’t exactly help his case.
Because here’s the kicker, the high turn out is the average for the state, but when you drill down on the source of these statistically improbable blue vote dumps, they’ve got districts with TWO HUNDRED PERCENT TURN OUT. That’s over 200%. There’s 7 over 100%, and a ton of them in the 90s. https://mkecitywire.com/stories/564495243-analysis-seven-milwaukee-wards-report-more-2020-presidential-votes-than-registered-voters-biden-nets-146k-votes-in-city
Now the quick liberal dismiss explanation for this is that Wisconsin has same day registration (again, a fraudsters dream) and thousands of people ignored months of TV and social media beating them over the head to get registered to vote, and just decided to do it at the last minute because Biden is just that awesome/Trump is just that bad.
Except if you’re an auditor, when you see super suspicious spikes like that in certain places, the first thing we think is that’s the place where you’ve got somebody over the controls colluding. So that’s where you go to fabricate your bullshit.
200% turn out is fucking insane. Same day voting or not. That’s madness. When I was looking into this stuff I pulled a HuffPo article about the 2012 election and how it was controversial that some Madison ward had gotten 119% turnout.
Oh, but wait, there’s more.
A whistleblower has come forward from a Michigan post office saying that they were given ballots on November 4th, and ordered to post mark them to election day so they would still be valid.
That is so insanely illegal. When the reporter called the postal supervisor who gave the order and asked about it, he immediately hung up.
Now, on this one, liberals were quick to dismiss it because it was from Project Veritas. (who they hate, and say cherry picks their investigative reporting, yet they keep winning all the lawsuits against them) However, the very next video was the response from the US Postal Inspector General (or whatever his title is, I can’t remember) about how they are investigating, so this wasn’t just some crank going to a reporter, it’s been passed up the chain of command. It’s an actual whistle blower.
I had someone else try to dismiss this one as innocent, because the post office accepting these late ballots had no way of knowing who they voted for so it would balance out. That’s is so naïve its cute. Of course they knew who the ballots were for. They were probably dropped off by people they were colluding with. You don’t commit felonies for clueless strangers because you feel sorry they got their votes in late.
A quick note on collusion because I mentioned it a couple times now. Collusion is the key to successful fraud. Systems have controls and checks in places, so the best way to circumvent them is to team up with somebody over one of those controls and exploit the gap. That’s fraud 101. Which is why you go to the post office your buddy runs to drop off your illegal late emergency Save Biden ballots. Or you go to the ward your buddy the poll worker is running the log in book to same day register all your imaginary friends.
Speaking of the imaginary vote, this one is actually hilarious. Democrats are quick to say all votes must count, which apparently includes people who are 118 years old.
All those little fraud schemes come in from various directions, except the fraud numbers add up quick in a tight race. However, if you are behind by hundreds of thousands of votes in the middle of the night it requires some audacious level fuckery, which brings us to a red flag you can see from space. The 4 AM Biden Miracle. Here is an account from somebody at the counting center.
This is the third link I’ve had to pull for this one, because Facebook keeps killing the others. Listen to the whole thing. Because after the statistically impossible votes came in, they had to toss a bunch of the GOP judges out of the building because of Covid.
Remember what I said about collusion? If you’ve got the actual system with the controls on your side, you can basically do any outlandish bullshit you feel like, and the only way you are going to get stopped is by an outside power (hence the multitude of lawsuits we’re going to see over the next few days).
Another thing you learn to spot when people are fraudulently manipulating data, is the mission-oriented spikes. On this one I’ve seen a few links, but the data has been so in flux that I’ve not been able to confirm it, but supposedly a bunch of the sudden Biden spikes weren’t just statistically improbable, they also voted for president but not the down ballot races. Now, lots of people will vote for president but don’t care about down ballot. However, when you get a pile of those in a row, that suggests somebody in a hurry filling out the mission critical bubble and then moving down stack, assembly line style.
There was also video taken of one guy delivering these mystery ballots to the counting center in the middle of the night (unloading them from a white van into a little red wagon) the link I used yesterday had been deleted by YouTube but I found this new one (can’t stop the signal, Mal)
Gee whiz. I can’t imagine why mysterious boxes are being moved into this supposedly secure voting facility in the middle of the night with no observers or chain of custody.
And there’s more. They just keep coming. Yesterday morning I saw a small article about a republican official calling shenanigans on the voting in his small county, which went overwhelmingly Trump last time, and how it appeared the votes tallied weren’t even enough to account for his immediate family. Of course he got laughed at by caring liberals. Fast forward a few hours and it turns out that the voting program was faulty.
Worse, the same broken ass software was apparently used in 33 other counties. Hmmm… Again, with all these magical errors in these swing states all going in one side’s favor.
Then there’s SharpieGate, but I’ve heard so much conflicting stuff about that one, with sharpies actually working fine in the scantron machines, that I’m not putting much stock in that one yet. There’s a lawsuit already though, so it’ll be interesting to see what new information comes out.
Here’s another thing you learn about auditing. The more chaotic the system, the more chances for fraud. So when you come across a system that is extra chaotic on purpose, that tells you that the people running it want it that way for a reason.
And the flags just keep coming in. This is going to be way worse than Florida in 2000.
What happens now? Beats me. It goes to court, and then the real question becomes how much spine the republicans have to actually fight. In previous years I’d assume they’d be a bunch of spineless chickenshits and wimp out like usual, but I’m not so sure this time. I don’t know if or how any of these will pan out, and without access to the real data, all I can do is guess.
I can say without hesitation though, that fuckery is afoot, and if an actual real investigation happens they’ll be able to prove it. Only this is politics, so who knows. The only thing I do know for certain is that this election is so fucked up it is just going to make America’s two halves hate each other even more.
Ask yourself the crucial question: why?
The Saker | November 7, 2020
Why is it that US news channels censored a press conference by a President of the United States?
Why is it that tech giants feel the need to censor Trump’s tweets?
Why is it that in key Dem states the GOP observers were not allowed to actually observe anything?
Why did the Dems counter-sue just to try to prevent GOP observers from observing the ballot count?
Why do the media conglomerates all declare Biden the victor even though they all know for a fact that this is false (only the courts can declare a victor)?
Why is it that FoxNews was spearheading the anti-Trump cheering during this entire week?
Why is it that the US deep state needs EU leaders to suddenly all congratulate Biden on a victory?
Think of what is coming next: lawsuits in state and federal courts, right?
Then IF the Dems felt confident that the Trump campaign had no case, why not simply relax, wait and see the courts reject the Trump campaign’s petitions?
But no, instead, they are acting exactly as if they were all terrified that the courts might do something which would compromise the victory of the Biden campaign!
The very fact of the need for such extreme haste and such un-retractable statements can only be explained by the fear of the Dems that something in their coup plans might go wrong. And, after all, it is said that Giuliani won over 4000 lawsuits in his career, and he would scare me too :-)
So, in a way, we could consider the Dems massive push to win in the court of public opinion a clear sign that they are much more afraid of a court of law.
Good.
Will they succeed? Yeah, probably, Trump’s “aggregate power” is dwarfed the the power of the multi-billion dollars interests who are using all their “propaganda firepower” to settle the issue before the courts get to.
Yet another proof that the Dems are no democrats at all, but a completely immoral gang of USA-hating thugs who are willing to destroy their own country to defeat any outsider, good or bad, daring to challenge them. They very much remind me of Kerensky and his own gang of masonic plutocrats.
Still, until we actually see that the USSC is also willing to betray the people of the USA, we can still keep a tiny little sense of hope in our hearts.
But we now all better prepare for the worst, because if the USSC also caves in, it will be the end of the United States as we know them.
Trump flips Michigan county after ‘error’ initially had Biden in the lead
RT | November 7, 2020
Donald Trump has won a recount in a Michigan county, after election officials questioned Joe Biden’s lead in the Republican stronghold. Another error elsewhere in the state also skewed down-ballot results in the Democrats’ favor.
Preliminary results in Antrim County showed a decisive victory for the Democratic challenger, who was up more than 3,000 votes with 98 percent of precincts reporting. Trump won the county by 4,000 votes in 2016, raising questions in this deep-red area of Michigan. Local election officials decided to carry out a partial hand recount, which showed Trump ahead in the county by nearly 2,500 votes.
The strange tabulation error was mentioned during a press conference held by Michigan Republican Party Chairwoman Laura Cox in which she raised questions about an alleged “glitch” in the election software used in 47 Michigan counties.
Antrim County had to hand-count all of the ballots, and these counties that use this software need to closely examine their results for similar discrepancies.
The software, Election Source, is used by Antrim County, and the incorrect results were initially blamed on the program. However, the county’s election officials now say human error was behind the problem, explaining that it’s likely a small change made to the ballot resulted in the miscalculation, according to local 9&10News. The Detroit Free Press reported that the issues were the result of both human and software errors. Officials stressed that there was always a clear paper trail that allowed for any errors to be corrected.
Michigan’s Board of State Canvassers is now verifying a full audit of the county’s ballots, 9&10News said.
Antrim isn’t the only Michigan county to report counting issues. In Oakland County, a computer glitch erroneously handed victory to a Democratic candidate for commissioner. The Republican incumbent was declared the winner on Friday. Some state officials and voters have raised concerns that the faulty tabulations could have occurred elsewhere in Michigan.
The problems come amid accusations from the Trump campaign that voter fraud linked to late or improperly marked mail-in ballots tipped the scales in Biden’s favor. Trump was initially leading in Michigan before the state flipped blue. On Wednesday morning, the president was ahead by about 1.3 points with 83 percent of the votes tallied. Biden now has a 3-point lead.
Featured Video
Iran War Confusion & Mixed Messaging /Lt Col Daniel Davis
or go to
Aletho News Archives – Video-Images
From the Archives
The Tragic Consequences of believing Anti-Science
The Naked Emperor’s Newsletter | January 17, 2023
I try not to write about anyone who has died because if it was my family member I would not want to read any speculations about their death. However, in this case I feel that justice has not been given a chance and therefore it needs highlighting. ... continue
Blog Roll
Aletho News- ‘Project Freedom’ perishes in 48 hours as Trump retreats under the wall of Iran’s asymmetric deterrence
- Iran War Confusion & Mixed Messaging /Lt Col Daniel Davis
- Israel threatens Gaza flotilla activists with death after abduction
- Met refuses to probe British nationals accused of war crimes in Gaza
- Hezbollah denies activity in Syria amid persistent and false claims
- Melkite bishops concerned over Israeli demolitions in South Lebanon
- Israel’s Obliteration Ecocide from Gaza to Lebanon and Beyond
- UAE deports tens of thousands of Pakistanis, seizes their savings amid war on Iran: Report
- Wheels Down in Tbilisi: Was a Routine U.S. Military Stopover a Deliberate Signal to Iran?
- Trump’s second strike on Iran would be suicidal. But that’s not the reason why he won’t go ahead with it
- If Americans Knew
- An All-American Retort to Israel’s Invasion of Lebanon
- How Dr. Adam Hamawy’s experience as a surgeon in Gaza inspired him to run for Congress
- Under Trump, Green Card Seekers Face New Scrutiny for Views on Israel
- With World Distracted by War, Extremist Settlers Intensify Attacks in West Bank
- Israel’s brutality toward Gaza flotilla activists – 3 articles
- “Spitting and humiliation are daily. People are afraid to walk in Jerusalem with Christian symbols.”
- How the US-Israel Relationship Weakens America and Harms the World
- 1 in 5 amputees in Gaza is a child, UN warns amid prosthetic care crisis
- 6,000 Gazans lack prosthetic and/or rehabilitation care – Daily Update
- As in Gaza, Israel is targeting rescue workers in South Lebanon, killing more than 100 since March
- No Tricks Zone
- New Study: Declining Trends In 1980-2023 Tropical Cyclone Frequency, Accumulated Energy
- 46 IPCC Scientists Break Rank, Publicly Challenge Long-Standing Dogmatic Climate Claims
- Another Study Links Warming To Cloud Forcing, Shortwave Radiation, Natural Atmospheric Circulation
- Wind Energy Is Toxic, Hazardous To Human Health, Scientific Review Shows
- Oversupply Of Volatile Solar Energy Leads To Record NEGATIVE Prices!
- New Study: Extreme Heat Records, Heatwaves, Extreme Cold Records Declining Across US Since 1899
- It’s The Cold, Stupid! Cold 20 Times More Lethal Than Heat, Multiple Studies Show
- European Institute For Climate And Energy: “Climate Debate is Seldom About Science”
- New Study: The Climate May Be 5 Times More Sensitive To Solar Forcing Than Commonly Assumed
- EV Industry Reached $70 Billion In Losses In 2024 Due To Delusional Green Ideologies
Aletho News 