I'm obliged to Matt Bracken for linking to the video clip below. In twelve minutes, from about 8m. to 20m., attorney Robert Barnes lays out seven clues to the presence of electoral fraud, and identifies every single one in what's happened since the polls closed on Tuesday evening. I've set the embedded video to play that twelve-minute segment only, but you can watch the whole thing if you have the time.
(If the video doesn't play, you'll find it here - unless it's taken down by "woke" censors, of course.)
That's pretty damning, right there. Now to get that evidence, plus the actual physical evidence of cheating, before the courts - and make sure that partisan judges don't discount it and award the election according to the "margin of cheat". If they do, it'll be time for the McMinn County War (also known as the "Battle of Athens") writ large.
This industrial-scale electoral fraud must not and will not stand.
Peter
You should check out Larry Corria's blog post on the same subject...
ReplyDeleteBlogs, blogs, blogs where unfounded rumours of fraud somehow transition to allegations of fraud, then magically transition to become proof of fraud. Strangely, these rumours of fraud are only affecting one side of politics.
ReplyDeleteYet this is enough for individuals to unilaterally declare their rejection of the entire outcomes and begin to reach for their guns.
If the confidence in the workings of government are so low, or they are actually so broken (and this is more likely to be massively overstated), then you don't have a country.
Mark:
ReplyDeletethe Democrats have a LONG history of voter fraud. The Republicans, not so much. There has been a notably more consistent effort on the conservative side of the country to play by the rules, and one of the strongest efforts in most contests/games/competitions has been to minimize cheating.
That mindset is one of the major differences between the two sides. How we end up dealing with it will be different, also. And you won't like the result. In the meantime, we will attempt to continue playing by the rules, which do have penalties for those caught cheating. Think of that effort as a software patch, instead of re-booting.
@Mark: That's precisely the point. From a statistical and probability point of view, the vote "blocks" suddenly emerging out of nowhere, all - without exception - cast for one single Presidential candidate, and for no other office on the ballot... doesn't that look very, very strange to you? It sure as heck does to me! And why are all the errors, all the questionable decisions, all the changes in procedures, benefiting - or harming - only one side of the equation? Doesn't that make you wonder about the integrity of the process?
ReplyDeleteBelieve me, I'd be saying precisely the same things if the problems were occurring in the other direction, favoring President Trump at the expense of Mr. Biden. There's something radically wrong with the process, and it's only happening in a few marginal states, and it's always in favor of Mr. Biden against Mr. Trump. Those are the plain, cold, hard, unalterable facts of the matter. Is that so hard for you to admit?
@Peter you're spending your energy looking for the potential fraudulent cause of these so-called "blocks" of votes being counted late in the process. Your pre-disposition is to suspect foul play.
ReplyDeleteA much more likely scenario is that the Republicans were encouraged to come out on the day to vote and the Democrats were both encouraged and were always more likely for a range of factors to vote by mail. Also, due to changes in demographics, the suburbs around large, developing cities (such as Atlanta, Phoenix etc) are expanding and are larger proportion of these new populations will be Biden supporters. In many states, such as Pennsylvania and Georgia, these votes are being counted last. So, it is a much more plausible explanation that large numbers votes are now being counted from large population areas and most of these support Biden. This is why there appears to be "blocks" of votes in one direction, there has been no real evidence of fraud. If there ultimately is, let the proper processes occur.
Fraud is always possible in any situation, but it is much, much more likely that ordinary, decent public officials are trying to do their job and are doing so within a process that has appropriate checks and balances.
@Mark: Sorry, but those scenarios are so improbable as to be silly. Remember Occam's Razor. It fits this situation perfectly.
ReplyDeleteAlso, see Larry Correia on the current mess. He's a retired forensic accountant, and knows whereof he speaks. The fraud is so obvious it's like a slap in the face. I'll be quoting from his article tomorrow:
https://monsterhunternation.com/2020/11/05/the-2020-election-fuckery-is-afoot/
Money quote:
"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."
@Peter I'm also a trained auditor and as you say red flags are an indicator of something. That's true, sometimes they indicate bad things that need following up, other times they also indicate the bleeding obvious.
ReplyDeleteAuditors are also supposed to be impartial and followers of evidence not fantasy novelists with a political agenda like Mr Correia.
I don't see any of these scenarios I previously outlined as being improbable at all, the underlying data is freely available. There is increasing urbanisation nationwide, much of this is in suburbs surrounding major cities, many of the occupants of these newer areas are of college educated, white collar demographics and a higher proportion are likely to vote Democrat. Additionally, the counts appearing now are from states counting mail votes at the end of the counting process. So which part don't you understand?
Show me evidence as opposed to assertions or rumours and I'm with you.
Dude. You *always* have to follow up the red flags. You have no way of knowing whether it is a "something" or a "nothing" until you do.
DeleteMy observation is simply practical. The late ballots showing up have votes for the president - period. The Democrats dumped serious $$$ into losing senate races and also lost several seats in the House. Well organized preparation should have included votes for the bottom half of the ticket as well. To me this is a half-assed clumsy operation that would only succeed if the subsequent narrative could be controlled. That much they can do. I for one do not look forward to 2 1/2 terms of Kamala
ReplyDeleteMark, you should have read the article by Correia before dismissing it - because he talks about the exact same points you bring up.
ReplyDeleteIf someone claims he is a "trained auditor", then he must give proof of it.
ReplyDeleteAlso, it would be better that someone is a "certified auditor".
Mark is proof that Democrats never, ever argue in good faith.
ReplyDeleteThere is no law, only Zuul.
There will be war.
The moment sane, civilized people allowed Al Franken to step foot on the floor of the U.S. Senate, it provided a signal to those invested in fraudulent elections that manipulation of elections was going to be the wave of the future; if it could be accomplished in one state, it could be done in all fifty.
ReplyDeletePlease tell me: what sane person would ever consider an election to be valid unless proof of one (valid?) citizen-(only) one vote could be provided.
The GOP has been the "Go Along To Get Along" party for waaaaaaaaaaay too long. I'm hoping their testosterone levels are rising. I'd love to see a gusher...
ReplyDeleteMark,
ReplyDeletemy wife is a big 6 trained auditor, and disagrees with your conclusion.
Interesting how a tactic of the left is to pretend to be something, in order to discredit a position. Media matters spoke of this in some training materials.
Larry Correia has done an amazing job in his post.
As an Engineer and mba that does a lot of analysis, this election has issues. An easy proof is the difference between Democratic Senator votes vs Biden’s. In the 4 questionable states the differ, but in other states they don’t.
R
@Ray-SoCal If your wife is really an auditor and you say you do a lot of analysis, then you would be both aware that there are 4 orders of progression in both auditing and legal investigation, namely rumours-allegations-evidence-proof. I've not seen anything that passes the first stage and any allegations have so far failed to pass the evidence hurdle in the courts.
ReplyDeleteIf you've ever performed root cause analysis, it's often the case that a range of co-incident causes can influence the outcome of complex events. In other words, you're guilty of looking for simple solutions (such as fraud allegations) to complex events.
Whether you do or don't like the outcomes, more plausible explanations can be explained by the differences between the party voting patterns and demographic changes I detailed earlier.
It's also more difficult to sustain the fraud argument when 2 of the states to which you refer are Republican. It would also seem strange that this supposedly nefarious Democrat plot has been so unsuccessful in influencing the House and State results and yet has been so successful in bringing down the President.
Finally, (and I admit that as in 2016 it's not always the case), the candidate with the majority of the popular vote will be statistically much better placed in most instances to win individual states.
As I said to Peter, show me evidence of widespread, systematic voter fraud then I'm with you.
In Georgia, elections are run by the counties, not the state. So deeply-embedded fraud in Fulton and DeKalb counties is quite plausible.
DeleteMark - Please try proving there was no Fraud.
ReplyDeleteFor indicators of Fraud, try Benford's Law.
The 7 Indicators of Potential Fraud Per the above video of Barnes Law:
1. Sitting on ballots. Amazing how this was only done in contested cities that are Democratically Controlled. This way they see the needed margin and can give the needed votes.
2. Voting Turn Out Disparities. Unusual turn out in contested cities, compared to other comparable areas. There is very higher turn out compared to other cities that are his. Compare Cleveland Ohio to Milwaukee.
3. Unusual vote margins in these cities. Biden is getting a higher percentage of votes for Obama margins.
4. Historical Anomalies. More voters voting than registered.
5. Massive amounts of ballots being reported. Some areas had 200% turn out.
6. No evidence of over whelming voting in these areas physically in photos. Other comparable areas had below average turn out. African American voters are more excited in Milwaukee than Cleveland?
7. Ballots only with Biden's name on it, about 100,000 ballots. This is not happening in uncontested states. The reason is this way other candidates won't challenge the results.
Note - it was hard to figure out what the 7 items were, since he stopped saying the number after 4.
Unfortunately election fraud is hard to prove in court per the video.
Ray-SoCal
@Ray-SoCal Benford's Law can be useful, but it's only a predictive model, and has occasionally been used as evidence, but it's not proof.
ReplyDeleteYou ask me to try proving there was no fraud in the list of 7 allegations you've provided. Firstly, it's a difficult task to prove a negative and would involve pages of explanation. It's also not how courts work, you have to prove a crime occurred.
I will rebut one point, namely 4. It should be the easiest to prove if widespread fraud occurred, because you can simply reconcile the votes lodged against the register to identify anomalies. The simpler and much more plausible explanation why more people voted than were on the rolls is that you can register to vote in-person on Election Day in California, Colorado, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
So in these states there was a legal, valid reason to explain this allegation.
Similar rebuttals can be made against each of the allegations in the other points but you get the idea.