First off, this will not be a post about lawyer Sidney Powell and her fellow attorney Lin Wood’s allegations about Dominion Voting Systems (DVS). Whilst the allegations they make are interesting and could end up being correct, it is not possible to prove such grand and sweeping statements with anything remotely close to what a court needs to overturn an election result. Their various lawsuits have been chock full of foreign interference allegations and her various proof documents require a computer science degree to decipher. In the tight timeframes and high burden of proof that is required to prove election fraud in 2020, they are both indulging in wishful thinking however well intentioned. Lin Wood has complicated matters with his recent inflammatory and bordering on crazy tweets.
That said, there are clearly issues with the Dominion voting machines but filing affidavits with a 12 year old story from a former Venezuelan army intelligence officer is not ever going to persuade a court to overturn election results or even get an order to examine machines. A good number of the thrown out lawsuits on election fraud have sourced from Powell and Wood and it doesn’t take a law degree to figure out why. There is a reason why the Trump campaign’s lawyers (Rudy Giuliani and Jenna Ellis) early on in the litigation process made a public statement distancing themselves them Powell and Wood and one only has to read the court filings from the different ‘camps’ and compare their quality to see why.
There is no denying that a series of unusual statistical anomalies occurred with the vote counts mostly of absentee ballots early in the morning of November 4th in the 6 key states where Trump either led substantially after the polls closed (PA, MI, WI and GA), was expected to lead based on historical vote counting patterns (AZ) and was in with a chance to overcome a Biden lead (NV). The same could be said for Minnesota, Virginia and New Mexico. This is a short summary of three of these anomalies that have no precedent either in prior elections or can be found in other battleground states such as Florida, Ohio, Iowa and North Carolina (all states that Obama won easily, Trump won in 2016 and easily won re-election in 2020):
1 – Virginia: when you view the raw data feed (graph 2/3rds down the article) sent to the pool media outlets from the county recorders’ offices via Edison Research (the nominated aggregator of real time election counting data), a series of 37 consecutive absentee ballot counting dumps from 8.02 am EST on 4/11/20 to 9.30pm EST on 6/11/20, all reported an almost identical winning margin for Biden (54/45). It is hard to draw any other conclusion than there was some kind of electronic manipulation of the data.
2 – Pennsylvania: The absentee ballot vote counts reported through the night of 3 November and into the following days, when you examine the Biden/Trump split of absentee ballots by county (see graph 2/3rds through the article), Biden leads Trump by 40% evenly in every county in PA regardless of where and yet the split on election day was more pro Biden in the big cities and more pro Trump in the smaller towns and rural counties, a pattern that is the norm. The same regional variation in party strength was evident in the absentee ballot count in PA in 2016 and in other states in 2020 that were not part of the disputed 6. Such a bizarre statistical anomaly again can only be explained by something preprogrammed into the machine doing the counting of the absentee ballots.
3 – Georgia: I will cover what happened in GA in a separate post tomorrow.
4 – Michigan: Analysis of precinct by precinct candidate vote splits (begins at 34’ 37”) in Macomb County revealed similar odd results that defy statistical and historical norms. In the historically strongest Democrat precincts in the county, the Biden/Trump split appears to be normal but if you plot each precinct by its historical party voting strength in a continuum with strongest Democrat on the left to strongest Republican on the right and plot them in descending order of GOP strength from left to right, in the traditional GOP precincts, the stronger the traditional GOP vote, the wider the margin of victory for Biden! This trend continues in a clean direct linear line and against all the norms of voting behaviour (i.e., the stronger the precinct has been for the Republican party, the bigger the margin of Trump’s victory – a trend that is obvious in other states not in the fraud firing line). The only logical explanation is the possibility of a vote switching algorithm designed to skim Trump votes to Biden in even but small incremental steps based on the core Trump vote.
It is one thing to report these anomalies and to hypothesise on their electronic origin, it is something else to prove that the voting machines caused them. The raw results are suspect, unusual, statistically next to impossible to happen randomly and have never before been seen but proving how they occurred is not easy if you can’t forensically examine the voting machines and getting that done has not been easy as Democrat controlled county election officials and courts have been unanimous and swift in rejecting requests to perform audits or for courts to order them. One exception occurred in Antrim County in rural northern Michigan with a population of only 24,000 residents and with small towns and villages of between 1,000 and 2,500 being the norm. Trump won Antrim County 62/33 or 8,469 to 4,448 in 2016. On election night 2020, Biden appeared to have pulled off a landslide in this conservative rural community 7,769 to Trump 4,509 or almost a complete reversal of the 2016 result. 3 days later the vote was changed to Trump 9,783 to Biden 7,289 and then again on 16/11 it was changed to Trump 9,748 to Biden 5,760 or back to the same split he got v Clinton in 2016. This reversal and mistake was described by the Michigan Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson as a “clerical error” – more on that later.
Suspicions in Antrim County over the accuracy of the Dominion machines were heightened when a bizarre result of a school board election in the Ellsworth School District on election night showed 653 people had voted when in fact only 3 people were eligible to vote. Similar anomalies occurred in Central Lake School District where election night vote totals were out by 800 votes out of a total of 1,800. Likewise, a ballot initiative in Central Lake as to whether a marijuana shop could open showed the initiative winning on the night but tying after a revision. On top of the huge swings in the Presidential race, a local lawyer Matthew dePerno began to demand answers and sued to have a forensic analysis done on five Dominion machines in Antrim County.
On 27/11 and 6/12 Allied Securities Operations Group, a Texas based expert computer cyber security analysis firm, visited three townships in the county to examine voting tabulation machines and finally the Antrim County election office to do what is called a forensic duplication of their servers, flashcards, and memory sticks of both the central computer and site Poll Books (what we’d call the electoral roll in NZ). What was the upshot of the forensic analysis? Please note, it took a court order to get the report released. The MI Democrat Secretary of State fought to keep it from being released.
Before going over the findings, it is important to summarise how DVS works. Essentially there are two types of ballots stored in the system after tabulation (either by scanning manual ballots or done at voter touch screen terminals depending on the state or county procedure): normal ballots and adjudicated ballots. Normal ballots are counted immediately whilst adjudicated ballots are sent to a separate computer folder where an election official looks at the ballot and decides as to which candidate received this voters vote. The official (or anyone with sign in credentials in the DVS machines) can arbitrarily decide which candidate got that vote. Federal regulations govern the adjudication rate that voting machines can be set to which is only 1 vote in every 250,000 can be sent to adjudication or 0.008%. This reflects the historical trend in the percentage of ballots that cannot be clearly read by the machines.
What Allied Securities Operations Group found with the Antrim county machines they examined is that they were set to a default adjudication rate of a whopping 68%, that means 2 out of every 3 ballots that the machines in Antrim county were tabulating votes for were being sent to an adjudication folder in the computer and anyone with access to the system could enter in and assign each and every one of those votes to whoever they decided. It explains why so many vote tallies were messed up but more worrying, it demonstrated that Dominion’s voting machines were hard wired to make fraud easy to perform as there is no recourse to reverse an adjudicated ballot except by those operating the machines. Once it is formally counted after adjudication the original scanned ballot is deleted and only the adjudicated ballot remains in the system so this fraud could never be detected in a recount.
The MI Secretary of State then claimed that the Antrim County “glitch” occurred because of a post-election software update but the Allied Securities forensic audit found that the software update occurred before 3 November and a second one occurred well after the furor over the “glitch”. The cyber security analysts concluded that the Antrim county voting machines loaded with such a massive error rate so blatantly out of sync with federal adjudication guidelines meant that it was not safe to certify the results in Antrim County as tabulated by DVS machines.
This audit made no difference to the Michigan result and indeed I have left Michigan out of my analysis because the 150,000 vote margin for Biden, whilst I believe is fraudulent, would require a court to rule a large category of ballots ineligible such as all ballots counted in the TCF Center on the evening of 3 November due to the expulsion of all GOP vote count observers in contravention of Michigan election law. No judge is going to do that without an examination of all the voting machines used in Wayne County.
Whilst some commenters on this blog have crowed about all the failed lawsuits, they forget that not all have failed and the one that lead to this forensic audit was a success. The concern arising from the Antrim County audit has emboldened state legislators to demand forensic audits in other contested counties. I already mentioned that the AZ Senate has subpoenaed the voting machines used in Maricopa County suspecting the same adjudication and other issues. Just on Thursday the Georgia House Justice Committee unanimously voted for a forensic examination of Fulton County voting machines. More on Fulton County, GA tomorrow.
The Antrim County forensic audit did not move the needle in Michigan, but it provided proof of built in software mechanism that are ripe for fraud to occur. Watch for growing pressure from state legislators to subpoena and examine more voting machines in contested counties. If all the election officials in the six contested states believe the 3 November vote was fair and there was no fraud (as they and the media allege) then surely allowing forensic examination of voting machines should be welcomed to prove there was no fraud. Instead, all we see is obfuscation, dissembling, delaying tactics and maneuvers in court to block the Republicans and others from examining the machines.