Election fraud proof

Author: Wylted

Posts

Total: 15
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
People were asking for some evidence of election fraud last thread. Democrats in the media were claiming that fraud was impossible, because their was no remote access to voting machines. Well now it looks like their was remote access and breaches. These breaches should if we lived in a law and order society decertify the election

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Barney
Edit the title of my post to say proof instead of proog please
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Never mind figured it out
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Physicist absolutely proves Trump won the majority vote

Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
Mathematician proves with math that there was fraud during the election

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
proog, indeed
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
This case was dismissed as "moot" one month ago.  Judge Kevin Elsenheimer was formerly Republican leader in the Michigan House of Representatives and a member of Rick Snyder's cabinet, who also appointed Elsenheimer.

Judge dismisses Antrim County election fraud lawsuit
Clara Hendrickson
Detroit Free Press

An Antrim County judge dismissed an election fraud lawsuit Tuesday that has served as a vehicle to advance the unfounded conspiracy theory that tabulators manufactured by Dominion Voting Systems switched votes last fall from Donald Trump to Joe Biden.

More than six months after the election, the lawsuit sought an audit of Michigan’s election results. Michigan election officials already undertook a statewide audit of the presidential election starting in January in which more than 18,000 randomly selected ballots from more than 1,300 jurisdictions were reviewed by clerks.

The Bureau of Elections found that the tabulators counted ballots properly and uncovered no evidence of widespread issues with the machines.

The judge declared the case moot, ruling Central Lake Township resident Bill Bailey, who brought the lawsuit, had already been granted the forensic imaging of the election equipment he requested and there had also been a lawful election audit.

"There is no reason to do it twice," 13th Circuit Court Judge Kevin Elsenheimer said during the Tuesday hearing.

Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson, a defendant in the lawsuit, praised the ruling. 

"The dismissal of the last of the lawsuits attempting to undermine democracy in furtherance of the Big Lie affirms that despite intense scrutiny, and an unprecedented misinformation campaign, the 2020 election was fair and secure, and the results accurately reflect the will of the voters," she said in a statement.

Attorney General Dana Nessel said the ruling "should be the nail in the coffin for any remaining conspiracy theories surrounding the outcome of the Nov. 3 general election." 

The lawsuit was filed Nov. 23, 2020, the same day that the Board of State Canvassers certified Michigan's election results.

It alleged that tabulators used in Antrim County were preprogrammed to switch votes. But in fact, a human error led to inaccurate election night reporting of the unofficial results, which showed Biden winning the GOP stronghold.

The error was caught and corrected the next morning, the results were certified and a hand recount of the ballots affirmed Trump's victory. Trump won the county with more than 61% of the vote. 

There is no evidence of widespread fraud in the Nov. 3 election. Judges across the country dismissed lawsuits filed in battleground states across the country seeking to delay and derail the certification of election results. The lawsuit against Antrim County seemed to be the only one alleging election fraud that remained active. Meanwhile, Dominion has filed defamation lawsuits against Trump allies and news organizations that peddled misinformation about its machines. 

Matthew DePerno, the Portage attorney who represented Bailey, warned that dismissing the lawsuit would leave a cloud over all future elections.

"How can anyone trust the system in the future?" he asked.

Bailey did not vote in the recent May 4 election because he no longer trusts Dominion's voting machines, DePerno said during a May 10 hearing in the case. 

In December, Elsenheimer authorized a forensic examination of the tabulators used in Antrim County.

The investigation resulted in a flawed report by a self-proclaimed cybersecurity expert who mistook voting jurisdictions in Minnesota for Michigan and made wildly inaccurate claims about voter turnout in Michigan in two other election lawsuits that sought to overturn the results.

Another analysis filed in support of the Antrim County lawsuit falsely claimed that an algorithm was deployed in Michigan's election system to manipulate the results.

In making the case against the lawsuit's dismissal during the May 10 hearing, DePerno said that Bailey's request for an independent audit of Antrim County's election hadn't been granted. Elsenheimer ruled Tuesday that it had. 

A newer provision of the Michigan Constitution enacted when voters backed no-reason absentee voting gives voters the right to have the results of statewide elections audited.

But it does not give Bailey the right to a custom audit, Elsenheimer said Tuesday.

During a news conference Monday in Traverse City hosted by DePerno, a crowd cheered on the lawsuit and DePerno's call for an audit in Michigan like the one being carried out in Maricopa County, Arizona.

The audit in the state's most populous county has breathed new life into Trump's baseless claim that the election was stolen from him. 

Jack Sellers, the Republican chairman of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors, which oversees the county's elections, called the work carried out by the Florida-based firm Cyber Ninjas hired for the job "a grift disguised as an audit" during a meeting Monday.  

"One should be more concerned about what this exercise is costing us in time and money and why the ninjas can't even find files that were already given to them by Maricopa County," Sellers said. 

Cyber Ninjas provided analysis to support the fraud allegations leveled in the Antrim County lawsuit and the firm's CEO has promoted election fraud claims, the Arizona Republic reported.

DePerno said Monday that he already has a team of experts lined up who are ready to conduct an audit in Michigan but did not specifically name Cyber Ninjas. 

DePerno and Bailey could appeal the court's decision. 

(One month later, De Perno has not yet filed an appeal although he is still blogging about new information.  There are currently zero cases open before the Michigan court challenging the 2020 election or requesting an audit.)



Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@oromagi
None of that addresses the evidence I provided. I trust the science, and a mathematician and a physicist as linked above has proven that Trump not bbn only won, but got the popular vote. We also have evidence from a court showing the machines were accessed remotely when Democrats previously said the machines were not even connected to the internet 
dustryder
dustryder's avatar
Debates: 5
Posts: 1,080
3
2
4
dustryder's avatar
dustryder
3
2
4
-->
@Wylted

We can dismiss this one straight off.

Needs to release his data and methodology for review. But my assumption is that this one can be dismissed, by the reasoning that no new source seems to have leaped on this "evidence" of the first instance of widespread voter fraud. 


Even if one were to accept that Colorado, Michigan and Arizona went to Trump, Biden still would've won. Your statement that Trump would've won the popular vote as well as the entire election seems to be inconsistent with your provided evidence. I can only assume that you've assumed that Trump won, and are working backwards to find anything that supports this view. Hence the evidence that does not support the conclusion, and flawed evidence that hasn't been scrutinized in the slightest.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
@oromagi
None of that addresses the evidence I provided.  We also have evidence from a court showing the machines were accessed remotely when Democrats previously said the machines were not even connected to the internet 
You do not have evidence.  You have a Trumpnut tweeting that he has evidence:

The Antrim County election management system (EMS) was REMOTELY and successfully logged into anonymously on 11/05/2020 at 5:55 PM and again on 11/17/2020 at 5:16 PM.
But DePerno fails to explain what evidence corroborates or how some random lawyer has come into possession of state login information unavailable to the court or why he has never presented this evidence during his prior 15 court appearances trying to cast doubt on the 2020 election which were all rejected as meritless by the same Trump-friendly judge or why DePerno hasn't yet filed for appeal based on this evidence.  A tweet saying you think you have evidence is not by itself evidence.   A claim that has not yet been submitted for scrutiny by skeptical inquiry is not evidence.

I trust the science, and a mathematician and a physicist as linked above has proven
Oops.  Dr. Douglas G. Frank is not a physicist or even a scientist.  Frank holds a Phd in Chemistry but teaches high school math part-time in Ohio.  Since any student of mathematics can be correctly called a mathematician, I'd call that an accurate but unimpressive credential. 

Let's recall that Dr. Frank's last moment in the spotlight was pretending to be an epidemiologist last August when he claimed that his "algorithms" showed that the COVID pandemic was over, which went super-viral but was of course, horribly wrong and likely killed some people.



oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
Here's a very good Colorado Times-Recorder article from last month debunking Frank quite thouroughly:

“You know the story about the Navajo Windtalkers in World War Two? Imagine if I was a German and I just happened to know Navajo, right? Then maybe I could break the code. Well, that’s what happened.”

The man asking me to imagine him as a Nazi is Dr. Douglas Frank, a part-time math teacher who is currently visiting Colorado to push an eye-popping election fraud conspiracy at events across the state.

Frank, who teaches at a private school in Cincinnati, believes he’s uncovered an algorithm that proves that Colorado’s 2020 election results (along with those in many other states) were rigged in favor of President Biden.

Frank first made these claims in an online video called “Scientific Proof,” which is hosted (and bankrolled) by mustachioed Trumper Mike Lindell, better known as the “My Pillow” CEO who wanted Trump to declare martial law to remain in power. The video features Frank claiming to have analyzed publicly available election data and determined that someone used computer algorithms to manipulate votes all across the nation.

From the video’s promo:
“Dr. Frank testifies to host Mike Lindell that deviations and mathematical impossibilities could not have been done by humans, by artificial intelligence and computers that were running before, during, and after the 2020 U.S. election. Dr. Frank’s investigation reveals that the 2010 national census data was used to manipulate the 2020 election rolls and to inject phantom votes into the election totals.”
“I found the algorithms that control how many registrations and how many ballots you need in every county to control an election,” Frank tells Lindell at the start of the interview. “That’s what I figured out. And it’s widespread- it’s in every state that I’ve checked so far and it’s in magnificent parts-per-million detail, so I know it’s not an accident. It has to be done by an algorithm.”
The slides Frank shows to Lindell in the video purport to show data on county-level population, registration, and actual votes cast. He and Lindell gleefully point to spikes that appear to show more votes cast than people registered or even living in various Colorado counties, including Broomfield, Mineral, and Bent.

Doug Jones, computer science professor at the University of Iowa and a national expert on election security, is skeptical.
“Every one of those graphs of age versus population for the different counties is obviously smoothed data,” says Jones. “Perhaps he took the real data for age versus population and smoothed it with a 6th order polynomial…The usual presentation of census data is in bins that are 5-years wide.  Taking such data and smoothing it with a polynomial would give exactly the kind of curves that Douglas Frank was showing.
Then, comparing such a curve with data he extracted with voter registration would, of course, have a finer scale, because the voter registration data gives the actual birthday of every voter.  So the voter registration curve is all bumpy compared to the population curve.  The net result of this is that, even if our voter registration data was perfect (no “phantoms”), we’d have bumps in the voter registration curve that exceeded what the census said.”
Furthermore, the numbers Frank are showing for verifiable totals such as ballots cast are simply wrong.  Republican political consultant Ben Engen documents the numerous errors between Frank’s slides and actual vote totals in an April 22 blog post.

Graphic from Engen’s blog showing incorrect ballot total in Frank’s data
His estimate isn’t just off by nine percent,” writes Engen. “The number he’s using for verification is too! This isn’t an isolated incident, he’s using incorrect ballots cast figures as the basis for his entire analysis. You can’t get a real result when the underlying data you use is wrong.
This isn’t Frank’s first rodeo. He authored a similarly flawed but widely shared Facebook post, “Why is the Epidemic Fading?” last August, which was quickly debunked by the Associated Press.

In the video, Frank spends a lot of time on Broomfield, noting apparent discrepancies in the charts he created between the supposed number of residents, registered voters, and ballots cast in the 2020 election.

Reached for comment, the Broomfield Elections Division also disputes Frank’s data and calls his analysis, “misinformation.”
The City and County of Broomfield Elections Officials want to alert residents of misinformation circulating on a video posted to social media. 
While the Broomfield 2020 General Election voter registration data seems correct and unmanipulated, the census data used in the video incorrectly portrays the number of eligible registered voters and does not account for population growth, community growth, the influx of out-of-state voters into Colorado, or naturalization of new citizens.
We are confident in our proven process and look forward to answering any questions or concerns residents may have. Please reach out to the Elections Division directly at [email protected] or 303.464.5857.  
Even if all the data were accurate, a county’s voter registration rolls showing more people than live in the county isn’t at all surprising- it’s the way our voting system is supposed to work.

As a general rule federal law is designed to encourage voter participation, which means it’s easy to get on a county’s voter roll than it is to get off.

Jones, the computer science professor, explains:
“[Federal] law forbids voters to be struck from the records if they move away and do not inform the county that they moved, their registration must remain on the books,” says Jones  “Moving in-state, since 2002, when a voter re-registers in their new address, their old registration is cancelled, but out-of-state moves don’t do this because voter records are state records, and each state has no obligation to talk to other states. This is awful [from a clean data perspective], but in studies of cross-state-line voter fraud that I’ve seen, the numbers are minuscule. The vast majority of ‘ghost voters’ don’t abuse the fact that they are inadvertently registered in two states. Doug Frank and Mike Lindell take this fact and misrepresent it as part of some vast conspiracy.”
According to Chris Jackson an election law attorney at Holland & Hart and adjunct professor of election law at Denver University, the discrepancies created by these rules are anticipated by election administrators and understood to be a cost of increasing ballot access.
“The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA) regulates how states manage their voter rolls,” says Jackson. “States can’t unilaterally remove voters. The process varies by state, but generally, if the Secretary of State’s office suspects a voter has died or moved, [which is often based on information from the U. S. Postal Service] it first has to send a postcard to the voter’s address. If there is no response to the mailing and subsequently no vote cast by that voter in the next two federal elections, then the office may remove the voter.
“This is expected and understood and the system is built to accommodate this in order to make it easy for people to vote.”
Frank goes on to explain that he believes a computer program inserted into the election machines casts a “phantom ballot” on behalf of a real registered voter who didn’t actually vote.

As Samuel L. Jackson’s character from Pulp Fiction once said, “that’s a bold statement.”

U.S. elections are managed at the county level. The claim that a person or group of people secretly hacked the election machines of all 64 counties in Colorado is dubious not only logistically but politically, especially when one is talking about Mineral County, population 824.

Furthermore, Colorado ballots are physical items. Voters sign paper ballots that then undergo signature verification by a bipartisan pair of election judges.

Afterwards the statewide results are double-checked via a risk-limiting audit. Colorado became the first state in the country to require these audits in 2009.

Asked via phone how this rigging would work, Frank said, “I’m saying that people printed ballots and mailed them in on behalf of people that were unlikely to have returned to ballot.”

Dr. Frank also claims his analysis of the voting data shows that the election was rigged in favor of Joe Biden.

“Yeah, whoever rigged it, rigged it that way,” affirmed Frank. “And you know it’s rigged because it came out exactly as rigged. I mean the fact that I can predict all [64 counties’ vote totals] means it is conforming to an algorithm.”

In the video, Frank doesn’t ascribe blame for this unprecedented hack, described as “the biggest cyber-crime in world history,” but Lindell does:
“We have been attacked by foreign actors, starting with China and with help of domestic actors here, you know, they had to be let in.”
To be clear, there is zero evidence of this.

In a report declassified on Mar. 16, the U. S. Director of National Intelligence released the nation’s Intelligence Community’s assessment of foreign threats to the 2020 federal elections. The report distinguishes between foreign interference, trying to actually change votes or registrations, and influence, spreading disinformation to undermine public confidence in our election system.

The top finding: “We have no indications that any foreign actor attempted to alter any technical aspect of the voting process in the 2020 US election, including voter registration, casting ballots, vote tabulation, or reporting results.”



oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 117
Posts: 8,696
8
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
8
10
11
-->
@Wylted
None of these facts or objections is preventing Frank from enthusiastically promoting his conspiracy theory to conservative groups across Colorado. Grand Junction “Patriot” group Stand for the Constitution, whose Facebook members include U. S. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO), state Rep. Rich, and Pueblo GOP Chair Marla Reichert, hosted him on the evening of Friday, April 23. Sheronna Bishop, a Grand Junction conservative social media personality who formerly served as Boebert’s campaign manager, invited Frank to Colorado and organized the event, tickets for which cost $15.

Dr. Frank told the Colorado Times Recorder he’s working closely with Bishop. In a Facebook video to her nearly 13,000 followers, Bishop confirmed that she and other activists are conducting “voter integrity canvassing” in Mesa County. According to Dr. Frank, this consists of volunteers knocking on doors of registered voters’ houses to confirm if and who cast ballots in the 2020 general election.

Today, the Republican Study Committee of Colorado (RSCC) hosted Frank along with another election fraud conspiracist, former professor John Eastman, who retired from Chapman University (but remains a visiting scholar at The University of Colorado’s privately-funded Benson Center for the Study of Western Civilization) following his public statements that the 2020 election was stolen.

Frank and Eastman presented their election fraud conspiracy theory at an event hosted by the U. S. Election Intergrity Project at the Doubletree Hotel in Cherry Creek. Elected officials attending the event included Republican state Reps. Kim Ransom, Ron Hanks, Mark Baisley and Stephanie Luck, who herself participated in an election fraud conspiracy panel last month.

Luck asked Eastman if there were still legal claims that can be pursued as far as proving fraud and overturning the 2020 election. Eastman detailed a few ongoing complaints but expressed doubt at their likelihood of success.

Hanks asked the following question: “Was it obligatory that President Trump walk away and cede power to Joe Biden? Was there any other course of action that could have been taken earlier in the process?”

Eastman responded by lamenting the disorganized nature of the Trump team’s legal response, and noting some missed opportunities, but made it clear that he was not among those (such as Mike Lindell) who were advocating for “crossing the Rubicon” and taking action outside of the Democratic and legal systems.

The conspiracy theory that Dominion Voting system rigged the election against Trump was featured prominently in the recent election of the Colorado GOP chair, with Kristi Burton Brown, who eventually won, and leading contender Scott Gessler both embracing the possibility that the company acted maliciously to flip votes to Biden. Since then Luck and other Republicans brought bills based relating to various election fraud conspiracies that have since been killed or withdrawn.
Nevertheless, today’s panel and the questions posed to the speakers by sitting elected officials make it clear that, at least among Republicans, the “Big Lie” of election fraud is very much still circulating in Colorado.

So, when Frank says the numbers don't add up, we should note that his base population numbers are incorrect by an average of 9% and that when comparing smoothed 2010 Census data to actual county election counts, we trust the actual counts over the ten year old hypothetical population counts, not the other way around.  Franks follow up assertion that therefore some secret "AI" hacked all 64 county databases and unfailingly submitted votes for Biden on behalf of people registered to vote but who secretly didn't vote on a scale of hundreds of thousands of ballots is a classic "God of the Gaps" argument without a shred of evidence, much less Liddell's furtherance of that God as a Chinese/Democratic conspiracy.


Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,356
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Wylted
None of that addresses the evidence I provided. I trust the science, and a mathematician and a physicist as linked above has proven that Trump not bbn only won, but got the popular vote.
That’s not how science works. Some guy who claims to be a physicist and some guy who claims to be a mathematician saying they figured out what no one else in the country has, is not how we go about developing our understanding of reality.

Science is process. It involves unmistakable transparency to the point where anyone can recreate your work precisely, and only after all of your scientific peers have had the opportunity to prove your work wrong and failed to do so, do we consider something a matter of scientific fact.

I’m curious though, since you put so much stock into what these two individuals say merely because of their stated credentials… what is your attitude towards Dr. Fauci and everything he has said about COVID?
Wylted
Wylted's avatar
Debates: 34
Posts: 5,754
3
4
11
Wylted's avatar
Wylted
3
4
11
-->
@Double_R

I’m curious though, since you put so much stock into what these two individuals say merely because of their stated credentials… what is your attitude towards Dr. Fauci and everything he has said about COVID?
It seems like he lied about a few things. For exa mlm ple at first saying masks were useless. I understand he did it so people did not start panic buying masks and leaving medical staff without the ability to get them, but common sense says masks would be effective to at least some degree, so he lied. 

He also lied when he said chloroquine was ineffective at battling covid, when his own research suggests it does. Now I understand why he did it. There are some people who really need the drug and it is in very limited supply, so a run on it would be very harmful to those individuals.  People are still in denial that chloroquine works, merely because Trump suggested it MIGHT work.

So we can't really trust what he says. These aren't malicious lies of course, but I do think you s hi would be honest with the public, no matter how much damage the honesty does.
HistoryBuff
HistoryBuff's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,222
3
3
3
HistoryBuff's avatar
HistoryBuff
3
3
3
-->
@Wylted
So we can't really trust what he says. 
so you won't trust an expert on Epidemiology about a pandemic because some of the thing he said weren't true. But you are taking at face value fairly obviously insane or stupid things from people who offer no evidence and/or lie about their credentials. Not to mention that the proof that their insane theories are wrong are readily available since oromagi was able to provide this for you.

You should really re-evaluate how you judge sources. You are clearly picking sources that say what you want them to say and trusting them, rather than looking for trustworthy sources and trusting what they say.