FIRST AND FOREMOST THIS IS NOT CONFIRMED OR DEFINITE AND NEEDS TO BE VETTED BY SOMEONE ELSE RIGHT NOW IT IS JUST MY OPINION
ADDITIONALLY IF OTHERS AGREE THESE LOOK TO BE DUPLICATE I THINK IT WOULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO HAVE THE POLL WATCHERS KEEP A CLOSE EYE OUT FOR THESE BATCHES TO SEE IF THEY VISIBLY LOOK SUSPICIOUS SUCH AS BEING GENERATED BY A BALLOT MARKING MACHINE - I BELIEVE YET ANOTHER RECOUNT IS TAKING PLACE THIS WEEK
TLDR - I THINK THERE ARE UP TO 13,000 DUPLICATE (6500 unique) BALLOTS IN ABSENTEE BATCHES FOR FULTON - peer review and feedback wanted please!
Okay, so as most people know Georgia completed the manual hand-count the other day and they have finally published the detailed results.
I have grabbed these results with a particular interest in Fulton county, which is where the largest share of votes are from and also happens to be the location where the State Farm Arena is, that video footage Lin Wood has mentioned MAY tie into this if they secretly have duplicated these physically (or not i havent looked up where the scanners physically are - could be somewhere else entirely)
I believe there are numerous batches of votes which have either been physically duplicated or were simply fed through the scanner more than once inflating the results, BY UP TO 10k BIDEN 3K TRUMP, but would appreciate a second opinion and some validation im not imagining things or made a stupid mistake :)
This is the quick spreadsheet i put together, links to original sources are further below:
NOTE1: i have done some slight data massaging for the batch name to remove whitespace, fixup typos and similiar, reason for this was to make it easier to detect the duplicates, so you may not be able to find some entries EXACTLY but if you search for the end batch number you should find the matching mangled batch name in the original source eventually
NOTE2: there is two tabs in the spreadsheet, first is ALL the batches for Fulton which i've kept intact so people can see what other batches look like near the ones i've flagged as duplicate/suspect and make an assessment as to the likelihood of batches with near identical numbers being just a co-incidence or not, there are many which are not close enough for my liking, there are some additional ones i could add and there are some in my results which MAY NOT be duplicates but have highlighted cause well, i may as well since it took a while to go through this carefully.
NOTE3: *Georgia uses DOMINION scanners and the final results seem to be aggregated and processed by a SCYTL server, also i feel i should point out that Georgia seem to have a history of hacked equipment in 2018 but i'm not sure that was the issue here, i belive its more likely to have been a bad actor that knew how to operate the scanners in a dodgy way to reprocess batches that error and duplicates the results (or maybe didnt and was incompetent) I CANNOT CONFIRM OR DENY THIS THOUGH ITS PURELY SPECULATION (links further below for original sources i first checked the totals to the certified results and they match)
WHY DO I THINK THESE ARE DUPLICATES?
There are a few different scenarios i will lay out and my confidence in each. I've tried to place them in the file from most confident to less, but also keep it somewhat neat in terms of alphabetical and grouping like batches together.
SCENARIO #1 - LITERAL DUPLICATE NAME AND COUNTS
These are towards the top of the file and well, contain either the same exact name or an obviously very similar near identical name, they may or may not contain identical vote counts depending - it seems that what might be happening is that when a blank/undervote is detected it might be flagging the batch, which then gets corrected or adjusted by a human and scanned again - im not certain on this though. For example:
AbsenteeScanner2Batch244-249 110 556 7
AbsenteeScanner2Batch244-249 110 556 7
AbsenteeScanner2Batch112 20 80 0
AbsenteeScanner2Batch112-2 41 55 3
SCENARIO #2 - SIMILAR NAME BUT IDENTICAL RESULTS
These are ones which i believe might have been either related to human manually entering them in differently, or potentially have been snuck in on purpose by using a slightly different but clearly similar name. In this situation the counts match or are near identical - essentially they are unique enough that the probability of the two just being co-incidentally the same is very very unlikely but not impossible. Keep in mind some of these i may have cleaned up the batch name - so the original might have whitespace or typos. For example
AbsenteeScanner3Batch212 11 86 1
Scanner- 3/212 11 86 1
SCENARIO #3 - DIFFERENT NAME, SIMILAR RESULTS BUT IN SEQUENCE
These ones are the more difficult ones and are open to interpretation. Now i've made a few assumptions here but it goes a little something like this. Lets say i had a batch and it didn't correctly finish or at the end was flagged for human correction. I'm assuming they take that batch out, shove the next one in and hit go, then fixup whatever is needed for the first one and once the scanner is free again they then put the "corrected but duplicate" batch through the scanner again. So essentially in these scenarios you'll see very similar counts but more importantly if you look at the batches in sequence its pretty obvious IMO that many BUT NOT ALL are the same batch just with corrections or adjustments.
In particular what i have noticed is that it looks like when there is a 'blank/undervote' detected this might be throwing up the error, what you will then find is the next time its scanned there might be a write-in or change to the other counts accordingly. So they are sort of in sequence but may skip a number or two - when you look at them in the full list its a little more clear how they are interleaved and why i think they are related
To make it a little more clear i added a column at the end and given each a group number so you can see which ones i think are related to each other. The closer the numbers all match the higher the confidence, some of these MAY NOT BE and hence i've tagged em suspect. For example below is group 17 and 24:
AbsenteeScanner2Batch219 36 62 2 0 0 0 0 Suspect 17
AbsenteeScanner2Batch220 35 62 2 0 0 1 0 Suspect 17
AbsenteeScanner2Batch425 34 61 2 0 2 1 0 Suspect 24
AbsenteeScanner2Batch427 32 64 3 0 0 1 0 Suspect 24
AbsenteeScanner2Batch429 36 61 2 0 0 0 0 Suspect 24
SIDENOTE, take a look at the Military batches, the 950 to biden 0 to trump one is sus but i haven't included it as a duplicate its just something i noticed
So in closing, i would appreciate if someone with a TECHNICAL BACKGROUND and/or familiar with the scanners and processing batches could look over this and provide their opinion on whether they too feel at least some of these ARE DUPLICATES and warrants further INVESTIGATION.
If you're giving feedback i'd appreciate using the work FEEDBACK in the reply to make it easy for me to see... i'm going to be rather busy for the next day sorry.. THANKS! :)
Official page where the results where sourced, its the 3rd HERE link on the page but the others are useful for anyone interested in the audit results.
Certified results can be searched through here (this is the SCYTL server, if you get a weird "results not available" error strip away the path in the URL and then navigate your way back through, or find it on the sos.ga.gov site.. its somewhere.. cant remember and im too tired to go looking atm.. this has happened to me once i think due to session timeout)
https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/GA/105369/web.264614/#/access-to-races
Web archive versions in case they remove the above:
**SO WHAT DO OTHERS THINK? ARE THESE DUPLICATES AND OF CONCERN?? OR IS THERE ANOTHER LOGICAL EXPLANATION FOR THIS I AM NOT AWARE OF?? **
THANKS IN ADVANCE TO ANY FEEDBACK... THERE MAY BE HOPE FOR GEORGIA STILL!!
Contact Rudy's office or someone!!!
I like this idea...share this with others working on Georgia results.
yes i know the formatting is bad i dont know how to have it retain linebreaks - if anyone could illuminate me pls :(
You need two linebreaks.
thanks, its not perfect but throwing in a heap of additional line breaks has helped.. i've seen others make even better text posts so there has to be an even better way.. but as they've disable searching it makes i near impossible to figure any of this out by yourself
Yeah, that was because of DDoS attacks by the Left.
Yup figured as much as ive used it plenty until we all became cybercrimals haha
I do try figuring stuff out myself before bothering ppl.. the lack of search is sorely missed but id rather the site be up without it than a yoyo Ta
Try this. Pick your favorite search engine and append
site:thedonald.win
to your search query.
they spent the 13 to 19th doing a hand count