Lew referred to a video that contains “smoking gun” evidence of voting fraud in Philadelphia. Lew’s entry is here.
The video is fairly easy to follow, and it’s also quite persuasive. Several things need to be done before it is heralded without reservation or qualification as a smoking gun.
First, the spread sheets shown as exhibits need to be replicated in real time from the basic precinct data. If those exhibits are genuine results from the voting feed data, that kind of replication should be rather easy to accomplish on EXCEL. A replication assures us that the exhibits were not constructed by the video-maker to attain the results shown, but were “natural” outcomes of analysis of the data.
The video analysis makes a case for a particular kind of vote manipulation. Support for this case will be enhanced greatly if the same kind of pattern appears in other voting areas in which it is alleged that votes were undercounted for Trump and over-counted for Biden by machine programming intervention. Failure to find corroboration is not, however fatal to the case presented, because there may exist, and almost surely do exist other ways to tamper with the vote totals by machine. Still, this presentation offers clues as to what sort of tampering may occur elsewhere or what sort of other allied methods may have been employed to build up votes for Biden and take them away from Trump. The method pointed out in this video is for a ratio of Trump to Biden voting that favors Biden one-sidedly to be transferred or made to apply to other precincts, by subjecting the total vote to that ratio. A bad showing of Trump in one precinct then becomes a machine-made seed for many other precincts.
Another experiment that may prove valuable is to analyze the voting in an earlier election that has been widely regarded as non-fraudulent. In such a case or cases, one should not see the kind of pattern that’s illustrated in this video. Conversely, if there are prior elections in which Dominion machines were used and in which fraud was probable or widely thought to have occurred, then if those data can be obtained and analyzed, the same kind of pattern may emerge that seems to be present in the Philadelphia data.
Now, if these experiments are conducted and the theory posited in this video finds support of the kind suggested, then we can be more sure that the Philadelphia vote was manipulated to Biden’s benefit and in the manner suggested.
To nail this fraud down, we could use a further thing, which is some idea of how to code or program the flow of precinct votes so as to produce the results that the video shows.That should not be all that difficult to do.
Ultimately, to get to a smoking gun, there should be identification of the people who bring (or brought)this code into play such that it tilts (or tilted) the election results. Is the code already present? Presumably it is, and presumably it is not a highly abstruse matter for operatives who are trustworthy and who will keep their mouths shut to bring it into play. How was the fraud worked?
Further evidence is required before a smoking gun can be declared with a high degree of scientific certainty, a gun that implicates the Biden side as the perpetrator and beneficiary of election fraud.We surely should have these kinds of experiments done. The cost will not be high but the potential gain is very great in learning how to protect elections that are using machines to tabulate voting results. It may be that all such technologies are to be avoided if there are no ironclad ways to safeguard the true votes.
The presentation is very worthwhile and provocative. It provides a definite theory whose ramifications can be tested with other related experiments. It contains an explanation of how a fraud could be worked or was worked. The theory presented can be falsified, i.e., we can conduct further testing that may reject it.
The evaluation of the election’s validity and fairness is of great importance because elections are one of the few institutional methods of control of government that are non-violent (well, in theory) and that relate to basic rights we wish to preserve.
Other helpful experiments follow. Go to a district or county that Trump won. See if there is the same kind of vote-manipulation going on except in Trump’s favor, and see if the flipping in Biden’s favor is absent or amounts to a rather low amount that’s outweighed by the Trump votes. See if Trump wins without this kind of vote-flipping in counties that he won.
If possible, experiments should be done in districts that do not employ either Dominion machines but paper ballots. The idea is to test that the vote-counting patterns found in the video are peculiar to Dominion and /or to electronic methods of tabulating votes. Mail-in votes present another variable whose possible impact can be explored.
7:24 pm on November 22, 2020
