I wrote the introduction for this, because it is awesome. š
The Founder Effect
This anthology is about the settling of a new world, but it isn’t just a regular sci-fi story. It’s about the legends that grow up around figures in history, compared to what really happened. It came out really good.
Jack Wylder here, with an important announcement:
Commenting on the Blog will be temporarily disabled while we complete the upgrade to the site. Like last time, we are not being censored by BigMedia, being attacked by reptoids, dolphin separatists, or red lectroids from the planet 10- we are simply preparing the site to move to its new home. This involves copying the site and all of its contents and then cloning them in the new location. We are turning off commenting because any changes that came in after the initial copy would be lost. THIS IS EXPECTED. We are NOT under attack- repeat, we are NOT under attack. The process should take slightly less than one of your Earth weeks.
11/30/20 UPDATE: The process is now complete. We have normality. I repeat, we have normality. Anything you still can’t cope with is therefore your own problem.
The next MHI novel will be out next summer, but it is available for preorder on Amazon now.
I noticed yesterday that I was having lots of strangers show up to scream at me whenever I posted any information about election fraud, but they were all low information types just barfing up āfact checksā which was basically whatever the news had just told them, but none of them had the basic knowledge of how fraud works to even sorta discuss any of the actual data. So I got curious and posted the following on facebook:
One quick question, only answer if you have worked in auditing/stats/fraud/investigations/or other data analysis type fields. In your entire career, have you ever seen a case that threw up this many flags that DID NOT turn out to be fraud?
Again, flags are not proof. They are merely anomalies which would cause an auditor to check. Nor am I claiming this is a scientific poll (though Iād bet Iām still more accurate than Nate Silver!). There is of course a sampling bias as I know many of these people in meat space (and their resumes on this topic are killer) but it was also open to the public so anyone could comment and it got shared a hundred times.
The consensus thus far is overwhelming. No. Not only no but hell no. There have been a few hedging their bets (but they are still suspicious) and zero saying that there is nothing wrong (like in every single other thread, where I get screamed at by Dunning-Krugerands). Iām not claiming this is an accurate sampling of every professional of this type in America, but it is pretty telling.
#
Big Six accounting for four years. #4 global investment bank, running the antifraud unit, also for 4 years.
No.
#
Worked in immigration fraud for many years and currently an Intel analyst at a different agency. Just the sheer number of statistical anomalies covered here and elsewhere raises so many red flags, itās like all the coaches in the NFL started frantically tossing their challenge flags. Then thereās the poll worker shenanigans in Georgia, Michigan and Pennsylvania that tells me the Democratic city machines in those states were going āFuuuck, heās behind! Quick, find more Biden only ballots!ā…..
#
No. 25 yrs investigating financial fraud and money laundering. Where there is smoke there is fire. When you have this many unconnected witnesses saying the same/similar things, that is very strong corroboration. Not evidence of made up stories.
#
I was a CPA for 45 years and never saw anything as suspicious as this election.
#
25 years of investigating white collar crime, primarily complex DoD contracting fraud. Something with this many allegations would absolutely deserve a very thorough preliminary investigation. The Hunter Biden situation would have already gotten an accepted referral to an AUSA for gj subpoenas for records.
#
18 years insurance work comp fraud investigator.
This many red flags. Id be able to retire on the billing
#
Investigation background.
No. Not a single time. The flags here show clear cut illegal activity being concealed by multiple sources. At this point I’d reach out to others I trust/know and begin a more broad based approach to the investigation including into as many of the secondary involved parties as possible.
#
Not much but in 3 years of AP/investigations; no.
#
I’m a workers comp investigator. I follow people committing fraud every single day. In my experience, when something seems this far off, its because it is.
#
I’ve had lots of red flags where I couldn’t prove in court either that there was fraud, or I could prove the fraud but not who committed it.
But there’s definitely enough to trigger a thorough investigation.
#
Certified Fraud Examiner since 1992 here. I have never seen such an oversupply of red flags. 3 or 4 might be explicable or coincidence, but dozens all pointing the same way? This would be too implausible for fiction, let alone a case study.
#
Insurance analysis here. And the answer is āNoā.
#
Investigated a case at a casino with this many flags, approxamaty 60% of the leads turned up theft/fraud. There were some that were anomalies but they were able to be checked out via witness accounts.
#
I’ve assisted in some fraud investigations doing the digital forensics. These many red flags and you’d want to line the investigator’s chairs and desks with plastic.
#
In 28 years as a certified fraud examiner Iāve had many similar cases where I had multiple huge red flags but I couldnāt prove it in court. Fraud cases are hard to prove.
#
Former Army CID. Answer is a hard no. Smoke= Fire. This is damn near Napalm.
#
IT Forensics. I’ve never had to do a full blown fraud investigation that involved more than one individual at a time.
But if I was looking at a single computer, and saw this all, I would be telling my bosses that there’s some problems needing to be addressed.
#
(My credentials: Fellow of the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales. Former senior manager in the audit methodology and audit quality control department of a big 4 firm. I used to run the audit quality review programme for the whole of Europe for that firm. I’m also pretty much neutral as far as US politics is concerned – I’m not American, and I’m no fan of either Trump or Biden.)
In a financial statements audit situation, I would always tell people that discrepancies are much more likely to be errors than fraud. You’ll often get excitable young auditors convinced they have found some devious director-level fraud, when actually they’ve just found a cock-up by Doreen in the accounts department.
However…
When you’re a financial statements auditor, you’re mostly looking for material errors – errors which are singularly large enough to change someone’s perception of the accounts. But you also bear in mind that smaller errors might add up to make a material difference. So what auditors do is they keep track of those smaller differences. This list is sometimes called a “scoresheet”, sometimes an “overs and unders schedule” and sometimes something else, but they are all the same thing.
On the scoresheet, the auditor records the double entry required to correct the difference, and the effect that the error has had on accounting profit. Typically you would expect some errors to increase profit and some to decrease profit, because that is the nature of errors. But if you get a situation where almost all of the ‘errors’ are in the same direction – for example, they almost all increase profit, and the directors have a clear incentive to overstate profit – then you start to think it looks suspicious.
As an auditor, you wouldn’t instantly shout “FRAUD!”, but you would investigate further. You’d look more carefully at areas of the accounts that previously you had considered lower risk. You’d maybe think about doing some computer-based auditing on routine transactions. If you were concerned that perhaps some sales invoices were fictitious, then something you might do (among many other possible tests) is see if the distribution of significant initial digits in the invoice numbers and / or the invoice values fitted the distribution suggested by Benford’s Law. Yes, _that_ Benford’s Law.
So if I was running an audit that had this many discrepancies, would I have concluded that this was because of fraud? No, at least not yet. But I definitely would want to investigate further. (And if the directors tried to prevent me from doing so, then I’d get even more suspicious…)
#
Fraud manager, banking and finance and a stint in credit reporting. I canāt recall a single case with the sheer number of red flags attached, probably because most organized bad actors take some pains to hide their tracks. Cases with multiple reporting parties and multiple data anomalies, always turn out to be fraud. The only question is how widespread it turns out to be when you start pulling on the threads (usually turns out to be long running and widespread).
#
No. In fact I would say that in about 34 years of this work it is my professional opinion that at this level it is mathematically more likely that our sun blinks out of existence as a result of every particle in it spontaneously āblinkingā into another state than it is that fraud did not take place on the order of millions of votes.
#
Data Forensics.
No.
#
Accountant/Small Fry Auditor/ MS in Fraud Investigations/ working on CPA licensure.
The example cases in my textbooks weren’t this level of ham fisted. Anyone with the sense that God gave a billy goat could see those. This is a flashing sign that can be seen from space.
#
Former military intelligence professional here (yes, we did investigations without any evidentiary standards to get in the way). I’m insulted at how sloppy with was carried out.
Information operations depend on not being noticed. They have to be part of what looks like the background noise to nudge people toward a conclusion. If the hand is seen, the magic is lost and the mark spots the trick.
#
Nope – bank auditor for 30 years – damn I am getting old
#
Fucking newb IT security chiming in with my .02 Cents (depreciated for lack of experience) IF I’M seeing shit thats fucky the experts must be having a field day.
#
I’ve been in infosec for over 10 years now (at least I’ve had my CISSP that long). It’s just standard practice to assume that any hole in information security will be exploited eventually. I can think of a number of ways to game the election system in the US without having to think hard. Or at all, really. Seems like there’s solid evidence to suggest each technique I’ve come up with was used somewhere.
#
Larry, about ten years of Engineering Failure Analysis/Materials, did vendor investigations/stats. It smells bad…
#
No. Patterns, Patterns. forensic analysis in cases where men try to mimic natural causes always reveals improbable elements. Even showing a pattern of trying to avoid patterns. But this is far more obvious than any case Iāve examined in the last 12 years of expert witness/ consulting work.
#
Insurance Fraud Special Investigator for 10 years (personal and commercial lines)… One possibly two red flags could be attributed to stupidity, mistakes, etc. This many, screams rampant fraud and intenent to commit a fraud. The statistical improbabilities are also a great indicator that something is wrong. The fact that the media completely dismisses any of these claims without any interest or investigation is sure curious. It should not matter what party you are for. If the there is an indication of wrongdoing shouldn’t everyone be outraged when the possibility of affecting the outcome of an election is at hand?
#
This many flags all in one direction? No. But I’ve seen places where it was just that screwed up that we THOUGHT they were stealing but once we dug in they were just that terrible. Ended up just closing the whole facility. It was easier rather than trying to fix all the incompetence.
#
Last case I investigated, there were only small red flags that were actually not things that jumped out. I knew at once something was very wrong. There is also gut feelings, which seem to be right more than wrong. Yeah, I getcha!
#
I teach financial accounting not fraud detection. That said, I still cover some of the basics in my classes. One thing that is not discussed much is the idea of controls. In any business, there are procedures (controls) to limit and detect fraud. In our elections, there are almost no controls. And, to directly answer your questions, no there are no textbook examples that with this much smoke without fire.
#
I used to run the front end for a RE investing team. You’d be amazed how much fraud there is therein.
We busted an entire drug smuggling operation – multiple players, multimillion$/year… on maybe 2% of the evidence in this case.
#
No and all of my very liberal friends who have done the grind is statistical analysis with me are silent…because they know this is all BS.
#
I’m a criminal atty and I’d tell my client to pray for a good plea bargain offer
#
Not accounting or fraud investigation, but significant amounts of research statistics. Not exactly the same, but once the p-values get out beyond the 0.0000000x range, it’s easy enough to point at something and say that fuckery has been happening.
#
Ex-military intel, prosecutor and trial attorney. I’m gonna be a bit contrarian, but just a bit.
What we have right now is a lot of data and data analysis. Certainly the data analysis is *a lot* of smoke. But I don’t feel good about there being a fire yet because, right now, the fishy data looks like magic. I want somebody to flip. I want somebody to indict. Where are those people? With this much information out in public, how is it that someone hasn’t lost his nerve and confessed his involvement?
So far, there is no explanation for *how* the fraud was accomplished, which is very useful to know when you’re trying to figure out who accomplished it.
So…my investigatory hackles are up, all right, but I won’t really feel confident until we have some information on *how* the large scale, result-flipping work must have been done.
#
Former Air Force OSI agent, practicing attorney. I have more respect for people who still believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny than those who claim to believe there wasn’t massive amounts of vote fraud in the battleground states where Trump’s substantial leads suddenly evaporated after counting was paused.
#
Former auditor here – I actually can think of one time, but only because we didnāt/couldnāt find evidence the errors were intentional so it couldnāt be called fraud.
And it might not have had nearly this many red flags – it was 20 years ago when I was just starting my career
#
PhD in finance and major stat nerd here. And I do this stuff both professionally and for fun (nerd – Duh).
Here’s some stats goodness. When you have a binomial distribution (i.e. two outcomes, like vote for Biden or for Trump), it’s pretty easy to calculate probabilities of unusual outcomes.
Let ‘b” be the “true” probability of Biden getting a given vote (i.e. his normal or expected share of the vote), and ‘t’ be Trump’s probability. The standard error (think of it as the standard deviation of the deviation from the expected) is Square Root of “the sample size * b * t”.
Here’s an example: Take a sample of 1,000 voters and assume (let’s be generous) that Biden’s True percentage of the votes is 60%. That means you expect to see 600 Biden votes out of 1000, with a standard error of Square Root (1000 x 0.6 x 0.4) = 15.5 votes, or 1.55%.
So Biden getting 70% of the votes (a 10% deviation) on a sample of that size is something something like 6 standard deviations away from the expected 60%. And as the sample size increases, even smaller percentage deviations are highly unlikely.
When you look up the probability of a 6 standard deviation event occurring by chance in a states table, all the table says is “Here There Be Feckery” or, in probabilities, about 1 in 500 million.
Or, as Sir Pterry once said, “pull the other one – it’s got bells on it”.
#
Lawyer, and this election has taught me that I’ve clearly been underestimating the genius of the op party who used white out and a photocopier to falsify employee records for a compliance audit and the other op party that embezzled money by writing checks directly to their personal account.
#
I spent 17 years as a private investigator, and part of that time I spent investigating and building fraud cases on behalf insurance companies to submit to local law enforcement for prosecution. Just what is known in the media on voter fraud is more probable cause than I had in any of my cases which resulted in a conviction.
#
I used to work in welfare fraud for Fresno county and damn this is all very fishy Iāve also been a voting center captain which means I was in charge of a designated voting area and at the end of the night had to take the locked up ballots to the designated counting center. There are so many chances for fraud to happen itās ludicrous to think it couldnāt happen
#
Investigations, and still in the game. You have one of my coins actually.
So once upon a time, we were looking at a guy that was throwing out flags, smoke signals, and hand gestures. We kept poking and poking at him, and couldnāt find what we were looking for. Finally reached out to some colleagues, turns out guy was deep into shenanigans, but on a different playing field than we were on*. Thatās about as close as Iāve come to the question you asked.
*we ended up talking to the guy, and he ended up giving us a ton of information that was later used to bury him. He had no problem talking to us, felt safe because we werenāt directly asking about the stuff he was involved in. Apparently unaware that professionals often talk to each other across fields.
#
I have worked in corporate investigations for over 10 years, and only once when a server holding data got corrupt, showed 100,000,000,000,000 dollar loss for a store that earned no more then 15 million a year. Other then that no. Especially if you make a spreadsheet of pa voters. Only reveiwing 1/3 of mailed in votes, and look up same day mailed out, and received that same same day for over 8,000 votes, and 8,000 votes that were received before being mailed out. And about 20,000 more votes that were received after November 4th.
#
Iāve worked in insurance claims for 25 years. Over that entire time, I have been involved in exactly 1 group of related claims involving an organized fraud ring with NICB and local law enforcement involved as well. That type of fraud exists, but is relatively rare. The bigger issue in my industry is opportunistic fraud. Someone has an accident and sees it as a way to make a little extra by exaggerating things. Even that level of āsoftā fraud is relatively rare compared to legitimate claims. Now, the election results…they smell like carefully orchestrated and organized fraud or a large concentration of opportunistic fraud situations to me. Everything has become so partisan now that it does not take that much of a stretch to see poll workers in battleground states putting their thumbs on the scales to favor their preferred candidate.
#
15 years with insurance and safety compliance. Some fraud. Lots of stats and analysis for a large multinational corporation with hundreds of locations. Used to catch people fairly often trying to cheat at injury statistics or workers comp claims.
Mistakes are generally random, or, they are caused by one error and replicated in a predictable way. Creating a consistent pattern that you can track, identify, trace,and fix, usually instantly.
Multiple inconsistencies all making a number bigger only in one column, that’s usually someone doing something who can’t hide it too well.
You can get away with it once. Or maybe, a little, once in a while. But I met a few fools who thought they figured out how to ice skate uphill. Like they were the smartest people ever.
It looked about as blatant and stupid as this.
When it gets this blatant it is usually “systemic” .
Real errors go both ways. I had to call a lot of people because they were being too hard on themselves and over reporting; ignorance & incompetence creates errors both ways.
When there were lots of “errors” that resulted in better stats in one location across all work cells… thats a problem in mgmt at the top of the location. Usually someone at the top of their little food chain was sending the message/ motivating their people to try to show initiative and hide things. But you can’t hide that very long. It shows up at the corporate level when things don’t jive.
What I am getting at is this variety of errors going all one way means it is systematic across the entire organization. Different errors all going one way means that it isn’t one state, one software company, one voting method… this is everyone in the organization getting the message to move the stats one way. And they did it sloppy and across the board because although the message was sent and received, it wasn’t *organized* from the top. It was handled from the local level. It was impossible to be slick and smart, the front line knew what the top level wanted as a result and no one knew how much it would take so it became super obvious…
The late night miracles? That was the front line folks scrambling to make magic happen when the usual methods weren’t sufficient.
Tl:dr its too many error types across too many locations with all the errors going one way to be unintended. It is way too widespread to be the usual background fraud that always happens. It was done too many ways on too many places to be locally driven. But it was so sloppily done that it wasn’t coordinated as a policy, but more as a goal because it relied on local initiative to implement.
#
I do a lot of statistical analysis and groupings at work. If i was given this data as a sample set. I’d throw it out and require the submitter to correct their data.
#
I need more specifics and details. But mail in ballots have a great potential of fraud. And given the emotional and media disgust for this great President, large volume of fraud would not surprise me.
#
No. When we found this many red flags, someone went away in handcuffs courtesy of the RI State Police. Including a Finance Director for a town.
#
And the thread is still going on. As of yet nobody has showed up to scream about how weāre all big stupid moron idiots who should shut up and listen to our betters in the totally unbiased news media, like in every other post I make about the election (Itās almost like the left has made social pressure compliance shaming into an art form or something). And nobody claiming to have an audit/fraud/investigation background has chimed in to gaslight everyone yet, probably because they realize they would get eaten.
On the morning of November 5th I compiled a list of some of the suspicious things from the election that were red flags. https://monsterhunternation.com/2020/11/05/the-2020-election-fuckery-is-afoot/ As I explained at the time, a flag isnāt proof of fraud or mistakes, it is something that appears anomalous which an auditor would drill down on further to check for fraud or mistakes (and like I said last time, when the errors go in different ways they suggest mistakes, but when all the errors go in the same direction it suggest malfeasance). A couple of the things I listed turned out to be nothing or the original reporting on them was incorrect. However, several others did turn out to be serious improprieties, and thereās been a ton of new flags since.
On Thursday morning I said that I thought there was fuckery afoot. My opinion has not changed. There are an extraordinary number of red flags, both street level witnessing of fraud and overall statistical anomalies in a few places with violate the basic laws of the universe levels of improbability. A friend of mine used to work at the US State Department and observed south and central American elections and heās blown away by how goofy this is.
Before I get into the flag update, I want to talk about the big picture situation as I see it, because thereās reality and then thereās the narrative getting crammed down everyoneās throat. Weāve now reached the point where whenever you open your mouth youāre going to get jumped on by a bunch of Caring Liberals that youāre stupid, insane, and imagined the whole thing. How dare you suggest that there could possibly be any impropriety in this new voting system we just crammed into place this year for the first time. It is the Great National Gas Lighting. The chosen lefty narrative is that voter fraud never happens, and when it does happen, itās insignificant and changes nothing, the totally unbiased news media and big tech have called it for Biden, and youāre just crying and irrational because youāre a stupid Trumpkin, so let the healing begin.
Donāt fall for it. These are the same people who barked Not My President Trumpās whole term, even though weāve got more evidence of voter fraud in four days than they found of Russian collusion in four years. However lots of people will be cowed and go along with this even though they know its bullshit, because social pressure is incredibly powerful and bullies wield it like a club. Every post Iāve made on Facebook about this subject has drawn random strangers to show up and scream that Iām an ignorant sucker conspiracy theorist.
Most of their āfact checksā and ādebunkingā just boil down to excuses. Like I saw one for the Dominion vote fuckery that moved 6k votes from Trump to 6k votes for Biden in ONE county. And the fact check headline was FALSE. But when you actually read it, it says they werenāt āstolenā it was an āerrorā. (except nobody actually knows that yet) Or the dead people voting in Detroit headline being FALSE, but when you click on it, their excuse isnāt that these dead people voted, itās that weāre supposed to trust that the system totally would have caught that and thrown them out. Except they didnāt catch it, regular people on the internet tracked those down. So when were they going to check this, after Bidenās inauguration?
A note on the dead people voting and regular people tracking it down because our professional news media is oddly incurious about all these flags. I watched this unfold live on Thursday night. People would post a file of names of 100 year olds in Michigan, and then other people would check the state website to see if they had turned in ballots. Whenever somebody found one they would post that name so that other people could confirm it for themselves. They found hundreds just while I watched. But at the same time Twitter kept actively banning the accounts of anyone who shared the file, because the fix is in. Trust the system, comrades. Big Tech knows whatās best for you.
Keep in mind that just because there is fuckery afoot, be careful because thereās loads of bad information floating around. Lots of people asked me about the supposed leaked DHS press release. My gut reaction when I saw it was suspicion (Iāve worked with too many federal agencies and that simply didnāt read like their stuff) so I called some friends who still work there and it sounded like wishful thinking to them too.
On the same note, people keep asking me about the possibility of electronic vote meddling but Iām not a programmer or a software guy, so Iām not going to pretend to be one on the internet. No idea on that stuff. I can tell you if the end product appears statistically wonky but Iāve got no idea on the electronic mechanism that got to that.
On the overall statistical oddities here is an excellent break down of why the numbers in these swing states make no sense: https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2020/11/05/excuse-me-while-i-call-bs-n275572
And the author of this piece told me that he is working on a follow up that goes into greater depth, breaking it down county by county, and he says it is nuts. EDIT: here is Wisconsin’s break down: https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2020/11/09/excuse-me-while-i-call-bs-in-wisconsin-n276884 Wow. Those swings are insane.
From physicist and author Travis Shane Taylor ā āIn a sample space of 1 million marbles, 800,000 blue and 200,000 red the probability of drawing a blue marble is 80% the first time. To draw about 30 blue in a row is 0.124%. To draw 100 in a row is 0.0000000235%. To draw 250 in a row is more zeros to right of decimal point than stars in the universe!!!! To draw 138,000 blue marbles in a row is mathematically impossible within the age of the universe without human intent and interaction. In other words, cheating.ā
Of course, when he wrote that it was before the 138k ātypoā got retracted. So of course all the liberals who canāt balance their own checkbook immediately dismissed the whole thingā¦ Problem is his math is almost as damning for 1k, 2k, 4k, 14k, or 23k marbles. You could even change it so that a bucket is 95% blue marbles, and the odds of you getting a thousand blue marbles in a row are functionally impossible. He used MathCad to calculate this. Excel doesnāt have enough zeros.
Youāve probably also seen a lot of mention of Benfordās Law over the last few days. Posts talking about it have been getting vanished off of Facebook (that I can confirm firsthand). https://theothermccain.com/2020/11/09/articles-mentioning-benfords-law-are-reportedly-banned-on-facebook/
Basically, when numbers are aggregated normally, they follow a distribution curve. When numbers are fabricated, they donāt. When human beings create what they think of as ārandomā numbers, theyāre not. This is an auditing tool for things like looking for fabricated invoices. It also applies to elections. A normal election follows the expected curve. If you look at a 3rd world dictatorshipās election numbers, it looks like a spike or a saw.
Thereās a bunch of different people out there running the numbers for themselves and posting the results so you can check their math. It appears that checking various places around the country Donald Trumpās votes follow the curve. The 3rd party candidates follow the curve. Down ballot races follow the curve. Hell, even Joe Bidenās votes follow the curve for MOST of the country. But then when you look at places like Pittsburgh the graph looks like something that would have made Hugo Chavez blush.
Itās amazing how all these extremely improbable statistical events just keep on happening, but only in the places where they make the most difference. Go figure. āItās a miracle!ā declared the Party of Science.
One extremely dishonest tactic democrats are using to dismiss this stuff, when we talk about specific incidents of fraud, they declare it statistically insignificant. But when we talk about the big picture of overall mathematical oddities, they switch and say but that doesnāt provide specific examples. They motte and bailey between the two, when in reality theyāre the same thing. Itās all the individual examples of fuckery that lead up to the big weirdness.
Since my last post thereās been so many flags popping up that I canāt keep up. Iām not a reporter, this isnāt my job. The reporters with their staff of researchers are all too busy trying to convince America that the Electoral College has been replaced by Jack Dorsey and Anderson Cooper.
There have been more USPS whistleblowers coming forward that they were ordered to illegally back date late ballots. The one I shared the video of last time is now identified as a real person. https://www.projectveritas.com/news/update-pa-based-usps-whistleblower-richard-hopkins-comes-forward-and-agrees/
In Nevada the GOP is pushing for criminal charges against people who voted who donāt legally live there, and I just saw a report about a Clark county whistleblower coming forward but thatās still developing. https://www.westernjournal.com/nevada-whistleblower-says-told-process-ballots-without-signature-verification/
In Wisconsin it appears that poll workers were directed to illegally alter thousands of absentee ballots. https://redstate.com/scotthounsell/2020/11/08/ballot-clerks-in-wisconsin-allegedly-added-witness-statements-to-thousands-of-invalid-ballots-n276848
In Pennsylvania, Supreme court justices tend to not like it when people straight up ignore their rulings. https://politicalpatrol.com/2020/11/08/justice-alito-orders-pennsylvania-counties-to-segregate-late-ballots-while-counting-2/
There was a report the other night that declared the military absentee ballots for Pittsburgh broke 80-20 in favor of Biden. This was gleefully shared by some NeverTrumpers and it immediately set off my bullshit detector (I was a military contract accountant for years, and after that I was the bestselling author in Baghdad, so I know a couple vets!). The obnoxiously left wing Military Times did a poll earlier this year where they surveyed a thousand military personnel and they proudly said that Biden was ahead by something like three points (which every active duty guy I know laughed at), but even if the Military Times was far better at accurate sampling than Nate Silver and the entire US polling industry (hint, theyāre not) 80 fucking 20?
So I delved into this on FB (Iāve kind of been on a tear on there) and had a pile of vets and active duty show up help, but as far as we could find the report said it was absentee ballots, with the military among them. So this one gets a big question mark for now because we donāt know the break down (but the whole county was only 59/40).
Amusingly I had one lefty immediately declare the 80-20 to be plausible because of Trumpās supposed āLosers and Suckersā comment from Anonymous DOD Official. (remember when Anonymous Senior Trump Official You All Heard Of was revealed to be some junior assistant deputy director nobody ever heard of? Good times). Even after being told by a ton of retired and active duty that none of them believe that, let alone 80% of them, he still libsplained to them that statistical anomalies routinely fall like rain upon Joe Biden. (And weāve got Joe Biden on tape talking about how PTSD Marines will murder you and your dog and then rape your corpse, but the media didnāt fixate on that for some baffling reason)
The left keeps declaring that everybody who is finding this clusterfuck to be suspicious must be a Trumpkin blinded by their salty tears of sadness. Yet Iāve noticed most of my honest liberal friends have been suspiciously quiet on this subject. And clearly not everybody who is calling bullshit on this is a Trump supporter. For some fascinating reading, check out Tariq Nasheedās Twitter feed.
If you know anything about politics, Tariq Nasheed is the last person anybody could accuse of being a Trump fan. He despises Trump. But heās also pointing out that thereās no fucking way that the black community turned out more for Biden more than Obama and heās worried that the black community is being used by white liberals as a shield, and if this blows up in their faces, white liberals will blame it on blacks to take the fall. Now the things that me and Tariq Nasheed could agree on could probably be counted on the fingers of one hand, but my gut tells me that heās spot on this time.
Honestly I have no idea how this is going to shake out, but it is clear that the media and big tech will set the narrative and just gas light Republicans that there was no impropriety and we just imagined it all. I donāt think Trump will fold. I figure he will litigate this as far as possible, and just off the stuff the general populace like us can see, heās got plenty of ammo for lawsuits.
So the real question is how chickenshit are the Republicans? And you can never go wrong assuming that most elected Republicans are invertebrates. One of my senators is Mitt Romney and heās nothing but hair gel in a Ziplock bag. Iāve met jelly fish with more spine. When Romney lost his run for the presidency, Barack Obama got a statistically impossible 14,000 votes in a row out of Philly, and Romney didnāt do shit.
Trump will certainly litigate and there will certainly be evidence presented of impropriety. But we all know the media is so dishonest that theyāll just ignore reality and write a compelling narrative of Orangeman Dictator to isolate the Trump loyalists and pressure everyone else to fall in line. Now how many will, I have zero idea.
Even if Trump conceded today the election process has been irreparably tainted. Even the people pretending this process is sainted and innocent know they are full of shit, but they are going to keep up the polite lie, because they are cool with fraud as long as it benefits their interests. And the people who got robbed have little hope that the system will ever represent them again, because no matter how many votes they have on their side, whatās the point if some blue metroplex can middle of the night fabricate however many votes needed to counter them?
I believe most people on the right already believed that fraud happens in these machine cities, because duh. But I think most of us also believed that our votes still mattered because we could win by beating the margin of lawyer. But after this audacious fuckery? If they can pull off this level of blatant, clumsy, in your face bullshit and get away with it, no amount of regular votes will ever matter again. Even if we overcome Big Tech and the media controlling most information and get more people on our side, theyāll just stop the count when we are too far ahead and make more votes appear until they win. Then the media and Big Tech will declare nothing weird happened. Shut up.
So I canāt say how this is going to go, but none of the ends from this point will be good. At best this marriage goes back to an abusive relationship with irreconcilable differences, and at worst it ends in a murder suicide.