Posted on 11/20/2020 5:13:34 AM PST by TigerClaws
2/ “My colleagues and I… have studied… the November 3, 2020, election results. Based on the significant anomalies and red flags that we have observed, we believe there is a significant probability that election results have been manipulated…”
5/ “The final red flag is perhaps the greatest. In the data are 4 spikes totaling 384, 733 ballots allegedly processed in a combined interval of only 2 hours and 38 minutes. This is physically impossible given the available equipment at the 4 reference locations.”
That is interesting.
Ezra needs to be drilling down if any CIA operatives work for Dominion
It’s an interesting article, but I have a problem with it. All of the townships that are listed as being in Michigan, are actually in Minnesota. This gives me some doubt as to the care they have taken in the whole analysis.
(It just happens that I grew up in Minnesota near one of they listed as being in Michigan, while my parents met in another Minnesota township which was also listed as being in Michigan. That caused me to look up some of the others, and no townships in Michigan had the same names.)
‘the use of decimals shows the “override pick your own winner” feature was used’
Whoever wrote this software was very sloppy. Maybe they figured they didn’t have to be at all careful in disguising the cheat.
So the article detailing Michigan vote counting says 80 votes per minute per machine (not your 6). You calculate this over count at 106 votes per minute per machine. Taking the difference of 26x 24 machines x 150 minutes, STILL leaves an over count of 93,600 from just 4 precincts!
I doesn’t matter! The Democrat candidates in Philadelphia often garner more votes than their are people of voting age in the city. The same is true for reservations, where tribes run their own elections. Once a person is registered vote Democrat in these areas, they vote Democrat in perpetuity.
The question is did MN use Dominion servers???
“why did employees of Dominion show up in person DURING the voting and the later ballot counting to “adjust” machines?”
Why did the polygraph operator adjust his machine during David Westerfield’s lie detector test in San Diego in 2002?
He (the polygraph operator) thought Westerfield’s weekend trip was crazy and that therefore he was guilty, leading to the suspicion that he falsified the test to “prove” his guilt to the police.
I was thinking the same thing. Especially, when someone just calls up with some hot evidence. Still though, you'd THINK someone would check it out.
A “P” value of less than 0.05 plus plenty of other evidence should be all that’s needed in court.
do you know if Trump won those townships?
I don’t know. I don’t live anywhere near them now.
“do you know if Trump won those townships?”
I’m in MI and caught this the day after the doc was signed. I notified the Allied group that day and got a response that they were correcting the error.
I did a quick check on a handful of the listed precincts that day. The ones I checked were all in Becker County, which went for Trump. I expect that someone keyed in on Detroit Lakes precinct and ran a sampling of that county as an example of turnout anomalies.
Never should have gotten in front of a judge - just gave him a reason to throw all the other data out. The only MN data seemed to be that list of precinct turnouts. Pity.
He estimated the number of ballots reported exceeded the number possible to count by a factor of 4, considering real world factors on how fast they could keep feeding the machines.. Is their any scenario in which 10+ hours was available for counting that batch of ballots? If you deny real world human and other limitations and just consider the rated top speed of the machines the reported number is still high by a factor of 1.8, which would still take 4:45. A duration that still doesn't fit any timeline.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.