Win uses cookies necessary for site functionality, as well as for personalization. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
This part (I transcribed it with OCR from the affidavit of Russell James Ramsland, Jr., of Allied Security Operations Group):
The final red flag is perhaps the greatest Something occurred in Michigan that is physically impossible, indicating the results were manipulated on election night within the EMS. The event as reflected in the data are the 4 spikes totaling 384,733 13. The final red flag is perhaps the greatest Something occurred in Michigan that is physically impossible, indicating the results were manipulated on election night within the EMS. The event as reflected in the data are the 4 spikes totaling 384,733 ballots allegedly processed in a combined interval of only 2 hour and 38 minutes. This is physically impossible given the equipment available at the 4 reference locations (precincts/townships) we looked at for processing ballots, and cross referencing that with both the time it took at each location and the performance specifications we obtained using the serial numbers of the scanning devices used. (Model DRM16011 - 60/min. without accounting for paper jams, replacement cover sheets or loading time, so we assume 2,000 ballots/hr. in field conditions which is probably generous). This calculation yields a sum of 94,867 ballots as the maximum number of ballots that could be processed. And while it should be noted that in the event of a jam and the counter is not reset, the ballots can be run through again and effectively duplicated, this would not alleviate the impossibility of this event because duplicated ballots still require processing time. The existence of the spike is strongly indicative of a manual adjustment either by the operator of the system (see paragraph 12 above) or an attack by outside actors. In any event, there were 289,866 more ballots processed in the time available for processing In four precincts/townships, than there was capacity. A look at the graph below makes clear the This is not surprising because the system is highly vulnerable to a manual change in the ballot totals as observed here.
Without unique machine IDs or an exact inventory of a precinct's machines and the time they were running, there's no way to know what machines were used for what period of time to produce a given result. Are all machines batched every time a specific area updates? A lot of unknown variables at play.
There'd be a few columns to the spreadsheet but yes it's something
My precinct was jam-packed and had only one scanner running. I can't imagine it being that different everywhere if precincts are carved up by number of voters.
FYI per Sidney Powell: Civil cases do not need to meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement of criminal cases. They require a "preponderance of evidence". I think we have that.
To make a map where any anomaly could show up, we need the the total number of machines per precinct, the model used, and when they started the counting. Also, the precise time when they received ballots, when they published the results (like the link below, the scrapper of NY Times, but for each precinct in the state). It would be great if we have this data as much as detailed as possible.
Reading the commentaries I had another idea: when we have all the data we should have look at the average speed of workers too. The machines have a physical limit but people also have a limit. Especially when they are governmental workers and they are used to take their time for everything. If hundreds of thousands of ballots arrived at 4 AM, there is much less time for a human to verify the envelopes.
Below, from another affidavit (min 1:05): "the same batches being run through the tabulator 8 to 10 times"..
This page says between 150 to 300 pages per minute. At 100 ppm there are 6000 per hour under Ideal conditions, as you said. I don't think the precincts have hundreds of those.
This part (I transcribed it with OCR from the affidavit of Russell James Ramsland, Jr., of Allied Security Operations Group):
https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.gand.283580/gov.uscourts.gand.283580.7.1_2.pdf
You could find the machines used in the process and the protocol here:
https://verifiedvoting.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/mageCast%C2%AE-Central-User-Guide-Colorado.pdf
Without unique machine IDs or an exact inventory of a precinct's machines and the time they were running, there's no way to know what machines were used for what period of time to produce a given result. Are all machines batched every time a specific area updates? A lot of unknown variables at play.
There'd be a few columns to the spreadsheet but yes it's something
My precinct was jam-packed and had only one scanner running. I can't imagine it being that different everywhere if precincts are carved up by number of voters.
FYI per Sidney Powell: Civil cases do not need to meet the "beyond a reasonable doubt" requirement of criminal cases. They require a "preponderance of evidence". I think we have that.
This is kind of a Sydney case, she's working on the machines -- physical impossibility would clobber even a reasonable doubt standard.
What we need is the number of machines per precinct -- if anyone has it, we're grateful
Did anyone make a counter argument against this? If true, this is very strong evidence.
It's strong evidence, but we don't have all the information. With discovery, they'll get the unknowns ironed out and we'll figure out the truth.
Not yet, and yes it would be very strong
More units processed within a time period than the machines are actually capable of?
I was just trying to think where have I seen that before??
Based as fuck, saw this post on /pol/ before it was nuked.
Wtf was up with that
To make a map where any anomaly could show up, we need the the total number of machines per precinct, the model used, and when they started the counting. Also, the precise time when they received ballots, when they published the results (like the link below, the scrapper of NY Times, but for each precinct in the state). It would be great if we have this data as much as detailed as possible.
https://github.com/alex/nyt-2020-election-scraper
One hour ago Trump retweeted a link with our affidavit. :))
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump
https://twitter.com/DrPaulGosar/status/1330725927051960322
This is awesome! I really love the way regular people are making a difference
The Kraken is "We, the people". All around the world. :)
Reading the commentaries I had another idea: when we have all the data we should have look at the average speed of workers too. The machines have a physical limit but people also have a limit. Especially when they are governmental workers and they are used to take their time for everything. If hundreds of thousands of ballots arrived at 4 AM, there is much less time for a human to verify the envelopes.
Below, from another affidavit (min 1:05): "the same batches being run through the tabulator 8 to 10 times"..
https://streamable.com/iew76o
https://cdn.website-editor.net/e8f26a258535496299d8d695de96345e/files/uploaded/2018%2520HiPro_8x1%2520Brochure.pdf
scanner specs here -- under IDEAL conditions they would not be able to handle that kind of volume
This page says between 150 to 300 pages per minute. At 100 ppm there are 6000 per hour under Ideal conditions, as you said. I don't think the precincts have hundreds of those.
https://www.interscanllc.com/hipro1