Hi again!
I'm Justin Mealey, and I testified at the Georgia Senate hearing today. Our team provided hard evidence of voter fraud, using the same data the Georgia certified the state with.
Here's a copy of the testimony: https://rumble.com/vcay7j-data-scientists-shocking-election-testimony.html
I wanted to do an AMA so that people can ask more questions related to our data methodology, clarify items about the voting process which we painstakingly investigated across multiple states, and hear your ideas about we could better get the word out about the fact that we seem to be one of the only groups operating off of hard, irrefutable conclusions based off of data.
EDIT: Thanks so much for the questions (heading to bed) -- hope I was able to clarify a few things for you guys. We'll ask Dave (the head data scientist who also testified from my group) to come do any AMA tomorrow as well.
EDIT 2: I'm sort of back right now (9AM EST) so will be periodically checking for new questions as I refresh tdw looking for spicy memes to repost on facebook.
EDIT 3: (10:32AM EST) I'm going to post a reply to a MrCaveman (which, thank you for the question) that I really want everyone to read:
https://thedonald.win/p/11RO7PRc9Q/x/c/4Drwoe2gIJ7?d=50
When doing work that you deem is important, the most vital thing you can have is focus. A lot of the times that means putting to the side all of the noise that surrounds a certain path. The poll pads are the noise when it comes to the actual ability to commit fraud during this election.
If you were creating a system to enact a fraud, how many points of contact would you design for that system to interface with in the voting process? How many confederates would you need to enable in that system? One way we've discovered only requires one true confederate to enact in a county, and we've actually identified some of these actual confederates. Depending on how things go, we might have to just release that in a video in the future.
My point being, that while your intentions are good (as most everyone's on this site's are), they distract from the actual fraud. By distracting from the actual fraud, parts of which we've proved through hard data analysis, it actually detracts from the ability for us to bring that fraud to light and abolish it.
Please, for the love of God, stop talking about poll pads.
It's absolutely a great idea to do that -- the major issue was that we were so limited by time to release things, that we had to cut away any unnecessary (or less important) things and only focus on what could get the message out there the fastest, and what could make the message better understood while requiring the least manpower to put together.
In future elections, now that we're aware of all this blatant fraud, I think we'll have to have all that stuff you're talking about built and ready for the public to consume easily.
What about my analysis I did a while ago on the precinct tabulation log in Georgia: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TSN18YRIb0_q5MBNO8RUdRExTCXLl_b7/view in case you haven't seen it
Thanks for doing an analysis! Can you please put it on something not google drive so I can take a look at it? It's not loading for me.
Doesn't use Google - good man! I've had weird users attach themselves "edit" privileges at work on Google docs. I run a finance department at a very large dealership. I looked up the names and found that they were actual Google employees who gave themselves privileges to our companies sensitive docs. We have since moved on from Google docs
Zoho is good
That's incredible
https://easyupload.io/sryf7t
https://we.tl/t-PrzsFUsGH0
https://filebin.net/ae1bwzknke3dhsns/Detailed_statistical_analysis_of_the_fraud_in_Georgia_in_the_US_2020_election.pdf?t=5urid2q9
Uploaded it on 3 different sites for you, hope it works.
Thanks for doing that. You're a patriot.
We live in a PowerPoint generation - I totally agree, we need to explain this like people are five. Graphics wins minds.
Our intention exactly. The raw data charted out would only impress about 1% of the potential viewers, but 0% of the intended audience (legislators). You have to make the connections very apparent if you intend to broadcast things to legislators.
TLDR; legislators are fuckibg retarded.
I know you meant to say "fucking" but in my head I read it as "fuckbig" and I think I like that more. :)
Thanks so much for the answer! Is there any publicly available database I can query for some of this info your team has compiled?
Maybe I can try my hand at some report writing and graphical representations.