they arent worth investing in a forever box. I say just dump them all in some random hole, and instead of putting a memorial, put a urinal on top that just drains into the ground.
Dropping a massive basalt obelisk with "Sic semper fures Democratia" carved two inches deep on both sides atop the mass grave isn't exactly a memorial to them. It's a reminder for the future.
The key is making the traitors believe it. Up until this point I don't think they do. They think it will just be more small gatherings of people waving flags, yelling at empty buildings on a Saturday afternoon and then cleaning up after themselves.
100%. For the last 5 years we have been called deplorables, white nationalists and even terrorists. We have been taking in the chin day after day from these people. They openly stole the election right in front of our eyes and they are saying that there is no evidence of fraud, its like saying, we will do whatever that fuck we want and there is nothing you can do. I am tired of taking this abuse peacefully. The only solution is violence, specially before they decide to take our guns. Remember that the Founding Fathers were called Terrorists by the British Crown.
I heard one of them on the radio just say that. He said, "Hell yes, we stole this election. We were successful, and you lost! And you're going to lose the next one, and all of them after that! We will always win, because we can do what we want. We own the voting process!".
It was a blatant declaration. "We cheat, we win, you lose. Tough shit, you can't stop us!"
They don't have to outright say it. Their actions have declared exactly the same thing. Just because too many people are too moronic to notice it doesn't change that fact.
Most of them won't ever declare it openly because that would go against their nature since it would require telling the truth.
Yeah, Benford's law can be used in like 30+ states, last I saw. But if the courts refuse to look at or listen to ANY evidence, then what good is a mountain of evidence? I pray Jan 6th will be the day we make them listen or hold them accountable.
Gimme Shelter is the sht. Mary Clayton's vocals are just so fcking great..... Her voice crack in that is outta this world. Few can pull off what she did, man. It just conjures up so much emotion.
Your so right. I hope people realise this. Make the police choose whos side they are on in DC tomorrow amd Wednesday. Move them out of the way if necissary
People made posts like this 8 weeks ago and literally like within a week of the election. Nothing was done and nothing will be done. Just accept Biden's going to be an asterisk President unless Trump pulls a rabbit out of his hat and the GOP grows a spine.
This was posted 8 weeks ago, many times. It was never great. The "Benford's Law" angle is a scam, doesn't in fact prove fraud and IMO just gives normies a reason to doubt the rest of our claims.
The real problem is that we have an election system where it's almost impossible to prove fraud even if it does occur. We can not have elections based on trust which we aren't even allowed to verify. That's not an election, that's a charade.
Do they not span multiple orders of magnitude? Just curious why the relationship would hold for Trump’s votes and historical candidates votes and Biden’s votes everywhere except 6 particular cities.
It depends where you're looking, but precincts are drawn up to be roughly equal, so they're usually the same order of magnitude (in the example of Chicago, there are a few with less than 100 votes and a few more than 1000, but the vast majority are 3 digits).
I haven't seen any analysis on historical votes, or Biden's votes anywhere else. In Chicago, there were enough small, super left leaning districts where Trump won 10-19 votes total to make it look like it followed the pattern. Could be the same case with the example of "Michigan" from the OP, the infographic data is so vague it's meaningless. And again, all mathematicians are in agreement that you can't use first digit analysis for election fraud (and even 2nd digit is controversial).
These infographics are specifically to inform those who don't know the specifics of the election fraud. There are lots of people who know there was something fishy about the election, but are unaware of the specifics due to censorship. These infographics are made for these kinds of people. The more people who become aware of the details of the fraud, the better our chances.
Save your venom. A lot of legitimate newbies here these days. Large infographics are always useful as you can dump them on others to redpill them. Even when we win, there will still be a lot of work to wake up millions of people.
Except Benford's Law is a rule that CAN apply but DOESN'T always, particularly when dealing with non-random numbers from the onset.
If you have an average of votes in precincts in, say, the 300s range then ya, 3 will be the guaranteed most common number and not 1. It doesn't need to be "fixed" for that. It is by no means enough to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt" as OP puts it.
We have more than enough evidence with other instances, the unwillingness for them to allow proper audits and recounts without at least huge delays and court challenges is also damning.
I literally ran through the statistical data myself comparing Trump to Biden. Not only Trump, but the other 2 candidates. The only candidates that did not match was Biden and write-ins (because most write-ins had literally 1 vote, and in that case if you sum them all together, then they ALSO follow Benford's Law).
Only one candidate did not follow statistics and that was Biden.
I believe Trump, but I only believe him because the messaging seems to be "nobody knows what I know". I believe him because "what everybody knows thus far" isn't doing him any favors.
The only evidence I've seen that would give any credence to election fraud is the data feed vote subtractions / irregularities, and the sworn testimonies from people alleging backroom / closed door adjudications. Neither of those things are actual evidence without further investigation.
These infographics are specifically to inform those who don't know the specifics of the election fraud. There are lots of people who know there was something fishy about the election, but are unaware of the specifics due to censorship. These infographics are made for these kinds of people. The more people who become aware of the details of the fraud, the better our chances.
1: Detroit: This is where there was a literal cover up of the absentee ballot counting process. Apparently there are 174,000 ballots that cannot be tracked to registered voters. The vote totals from Detroit Precincts fail to conform to Benford’s law. Dominion is used to count the votes in Wayne County (Detroit).
2: Shiawassee: This is where the zero was “accidently” added to Joe Biden’s total resulting in 153,710 votes for Biden. Once people realized this error, the additional 138,339 votes were subtracted from Biden’s total. However the 138,339 votes were added back to Biden’s total in the wee hours of the morning. Dominion is used to count the votes in Shiawassee.
Please for the love of God, let's stop talking about the Benford's Law. It makes us look stupid.
If you spend 5 minutes reading about it, you see that it only applies to quantities with multiple orders of magnitude.
The number of votes in different precincts do not fall into that category.
It's almost as bad as that idiocy of the quadrillion chance that they put in the Texas lawsuit.
It's almost as bad as that idiocy of the quadrillion chance that they put in the Texas lawsuit.
That was a big oof, not sure why they bothered since the claims in that case didn't really require it. I guess they got some good mileage on TV saying "a quadrillion! that's a 1 with 15 zeroes! ain't that a big number!!".
You did not watch the video. He accuses Trump of fraud based on Trump's secondary and tertiary digits following Benford's law, and Biden's not. Take a look at 14:11. Doesn't that seem something odd?
If we don't challenge their bullshit, we accept their bullshit.
Regardless, if your point is that it is balls and courage are needed to win, then I agree.
It's been known since around the time that Benford came up with the law that it doesn't work for things like precinct numbers. They aren't random and they aren't on a large scale.
Think about how they even try to split some precincts up into near equal voting total expectations. How is Benford's Law going to apply when you guess that 50000 votes will be cast and split that into 90 precincts? 100% chance 5 will be the most common number then.
If every ballot had a unique identifying number and they went and created fake ballots... you'd actually probably still get Benford's Law to apply there since no way they would manually create the unique ID for those fake ballots but simply generate it and take their chances of a duplicate.
According to Benfords Law, Trump cheated in California, Illinois and New Mexico.
Spend an hour doing your own research. Irregularities in the election data feed, and the injection of fraudulent ballots in the adjudication process is where the fraud is. This is the only thing we should be pushing.
Data feed vote tally subtractions.
Election Interference preventing adjudicated ballots from being properly vetted.
That's our proof. Anything else should be considered a red herring designed to discredit us.
He claims that because we are not dealing with several orders of magnitudes, Benford's law does not apply.
I see the point. Most results are in the hundreds. A few in the 10 and a few in the thousands. That is the precincts were created to all be of similar size.
But what about the second numbers and following?
But Benfords law applies to the second numbers and following digits as well. He mentions that himself.
And then at 14:11 he totally torches himself. Trumps last two digits are in line with Benford's Laws (I like how he acts like this is evidence of Trump's fraud lol) where are Biden's are similar to the random generated Pi digit pairs.
BUT AGAIN. I REPEAT. HE IS ACCUSING TRUMP OF FRAUD!
So why does your claimed source accuse Trump of election fraud? Do you still stand by this turkey? Or is this just part of some disinformation campaign you are running? I'd really like some answers. Do you think Trump committed election fraud? If so, why not just come out and say it. If not, then why are you linking to such bullshit artists?
Benford's law is a statement about the first digit, not the last two digits. At that point he's talking about a different "law" that has an even distribution given certain conditions.
He doesn't actually say Trump committed fraud, it's an act to showcase that an "anomalous" result given a certain "law" is NOT proof of fraud once you actually take a closer look and figure out the "law" is not applicable. I guess you closed the video before he explained why Trump's result is actually completely expected and not proof of any anomaly... which he did like a minute later.
I knew absolutely nothing of Benford's law before this post. I am just telling you he said subsequent digits followed the law as well. If he is wrong about that, then I retract my claim.
I clearly see the point that Benford's does not apply if you have all numbers only between 100-999. As it would make lotteries impossible. Or give premium to betting on numbers between 100-199.
Subsequent digits from the left may follow the law, but that doesn't mean it applies to the last two digits. I can see why you'd intuit that it should be applicable since if you keep going to through the subsequent digits, you eventually cover them all including the last two.
But the key insight you missed is that as the data crosses multiple orders of magnitude, the reading order (left to right) itself starts to matter. The second digit in 2319 is in the hundreds, while the second digit in 12319 is in the thousands. Meanwhile, if you were to look at the last digit instead, it doesn't change as you increase the orders of magnitude. It's always in the ones.
Indeed, the last digit is nine in both cases when looking at it from the right, but if you were to look at it from the left, it's the 4th digit in the first case and the 5th digit in the second case. That's why Benford's law would not be applicable to something that specifies "last digits" rather than "first digits".
Also realizing this is how "numbers rackets" worked. It was always the last digits of some publicly available data.. i.e, last three digits of the Dow Jones I think it one my dad help out on when he was a kid in the 50s. Before the states ran lotteries, number rackets were at every job site.
I can explain it. It is not complicated.
Benfords law just looks at the first digit of the numbers and then we expect to see a certain distribution of first digit numbers. This can be used in almost all situations of naturally occuring numbers.
The problem is that these are not naturally occuring numbers. These are precincts with around 500-1000 votes each.
Biden has an average of 500 votes in the precincts. This means that most votes will have 4, 5 and 6 as the first digit. This is expected when we know how the data looks. But Benfords law predicts that this shouldn't happen. This is because you can't use Benfords law on this dataset.
The reason Trump looks to be following BL is because his votes in these precincts are around 100, so he gets a lot of 1's, etc. as predicted by BL.
We have 10000s instances of fraud but this BL analysis is just not it. Seriously,
You can download 2016 MIT election data
Then you can go to my first submitted post and copy the python code
Then you can run it and you will see exactly what i am talking about
I see you've written words making a claim, but do you have a link which shows this data for every state verifying what you just said and weren't making it up?
Because I've only seen it applied to the swing states so far, so if you have a source which did it for every state, enabling you to make this claim, I'd love to see it.
Y'all have got to stop posting this stupid data analysis "proof". This is the type of stuff that makes us look idiotic and grasping at straws.
Data anomalies ARE NOT PROOF, you can not take this stuff to court and say "see, look this math thing says it is highly improbable for this to occur". Either fucking put up or shutup, proof is tangible, real occurrence that can be proven without a shadow of a doubt. Statistical analysis ain't the way.
Y'all need to learn introspection, this is some Bernie-bro level "PHONE BANK MATCH ME!!!!" cringe shit.
The main issue is that this particular dataset (voting results from precincts of very similar size) is not a valid candidate for BL analysis.
Financial data, which will have values over multiple orders of magnitude, is an excellent candidate. But even so, it's not proof. However, it can be a powerful indicator to justify a deeper dive.
Continuing to promote BL for precinct-level data just makes us look dumb and provides clickbait to the left.
Considering I actually have forensic accounting in my background.... no, that's not how it works.
You use anomalies to dig further and find proof. You have something like Benford's that highlights a problem. "Hey, look at this, something screwy". Then you start digging to find the anomalies, and audit from there. Audits are where the discovery comes from, and that is what allows you to find proof.
The key difference here is that, as said before, y'all are grasping at straws saying "LOOK AT THIS PROOF". This isn't proof, it is highlighting the need to do a deep dive and FIND proof. When you present data analysis alone as concrete evidence and it is then (expectedly, I might add) tossed in the garbage at court, y'all get all surprised Pikachu face, even though literally every lawyer with a podcast and YouTube channel knew it was coming.
Couldn't they have leveraged these analyses as probable cause to get subpoenas for further investigation? Always puzzled me why they didn't. Asking for the moon with just "data analyses" that haven't even been cross-examined was always going to go down in flames.
They have. Not every lawsuit was done improperly. You're launching a ton of lawsuits with basically the same complaint and they're including something that usually isn't in lawsuits but it makes sense for these cases. "We saw irregularities here, here, and here and therefore there is major doubt cast because if the irregularity/fraud existed there, then it could potentially exist in other similarly run areas (Dem dominated counties, Dominion software using counties). There's going to be a lot of copy paste used in filing these.
The courts had 0 intention of viewing these cases anyways. Take the Texas case for example. Not filed improperly and for a state with a grievance against another state, the actual precedent is obviously to head to federal court. But it was dismissed on lacking standing... besides the fact that standing is a pretty stupid thing that's now almost always applied to our legal system, Texas included why they had standing and were dismissed anyways without the court even allowing them to argue it.
It's utter stupidity to think an anomaly is proof positive enough for court. Insane. Anomalies are and always will be just enough to give cause to further investigate.
Law enforcement get warrants issued based on anomalies... they wouldn't just immediately charge the suspect and go to trial with just that base anomaly (unless they suck at their job).
There is “statistical” and “physical”evidence. It’s usually brought up in court that way as well. Hopefully the statistical let’s you get the physical via warrants.
For instance, say there was an accident. It’s “likely” if there were only two cars on the area in a given time, that one or both were involved. It’s so probable that we can get a warrant or at least reasonably investigate (given resource constraints).
If instead one million cars were on the area, we’d have to narrow the search region. It’s probably most cars were not involved.
In this real case related to voter fraud, the statistical evidence is extremely odd. Making it so unlikely, that everyone should do a manual hand recount of all the ballots
You need to see my other post, and not surprisingly the truth is downvoted to shit because it is a hard truth that nobody wants to hear.
Data analysis points to anomalies, NOBODY is arguing that. However, those anomalies should be taken to the local level and get an immediate injunction/audit approval by whoever the governing body is. Newsflash, that IS NOT the court system, it is city council/aldermen/municipal supervisors/etc.
And there lies the rub..... we don't have a chance in hell going through the system by the book because there isn't a single major municipal city run by Republicans. We have become so fucking complacent and lazy at the local government level over the last 40 years that the enemy has literally taken over every single level of politics in every major city.
Stop thinking the courts are going to solve this, they aren't.
And yet if this data is presented to a court system to show that it points to anomalies, the courts should make those municipalities follow through in the investigation that data is laying the ground for.
And you expect major cities to vote for anything sensible, and not just ratchets offering gimme dats? Why not try to lasso the moon down while you're at it?
Please, people in cities vote for "free shit" and gimme dats, they don't vote for anything actually beneficial to them. The past 60 years of the destruction of these cities due to the forced welfare/dependency state and identity politics shows the people voting in cities don't know what's good for them, and adding to that that the collective iq of the inner cities is less than 75, you think they would actually be capable of the first element, let alone the second?
Hence why you bring this to the courts, because people in cities for the most are too stupid to support anything that's actually for their own good, and as we've seen with examples like Kim in baltimore, even when you try to appeal to them and try to change at that local level in cities, they're too inept to follow through.
I think its simply the burden of proof requirement to show probable cause, but never enough on its own to prove beyond reasonable doubt. I would note that typically data analysis is used to show anomalies worth looking into, and then a proper investigation is conducted on everything involved. In this case, no such accompanying investigation has occurred, and I think we're quickly realizing there really is no proper remedy to find electoral fraud.
What I mean is simple: If there is fraud, who do you report this to? The same authorities that conducted said fraud? The Legislators, with split power and high incentive NOT to vote in favour of an investigation? The Courts? Even better, you have to typically file your lawsuit in the State Capitol, with the judges appointed by the State Legislature & Executive! The whole system is messed up, and we genuinely need to figure out a way to conduct independent verification of electoral results, without having to go through such conflicts of interests at least.
Ok, and how you gonna do that hot shot? Gonna start blasting away? Civil War isn't gonna happen and we aren't gonna avoid Biden. They stole it and they know the objection process won't work we need the HOUSE AND SENATE to agree to EACH objection. You know damn well the ONLY chance is the Senate, we don't have a majority in the House.
Senate's already lost unless quite a few Dems break ranks. Sasse, Romney, Toomey, Murkowski, Collins and Cassidy all made public statements saying they're gonna certify the results.
If after all this evidence of blatant fraud, constant attacks from leftist parasites, uniparty revealing itself more publically than ever, and the disaster that would come with pedo joe, you don't think people will break and fight back, you are in fact a doomer that already resigned yourself and any fight you had.
Who knows what will come with the 6th, but I see it as more of a catalyst than anything - no matter its shape, it'll be the starting point for more fighting back from the right, and yes even the prospect of civil conflict. If you think uniparty or oathbreakers will stop that inevitability, you're sorely mistaken.
that won't work. Inauguration is final. Nothing that happens after Noon Jan 20th matters and you can't pull a sworn in President out of office. Unless he does something like a Nixon and resigns, or croaks, if Biden takes the oath of office Jan 20th, it's all over and there's nothing we can do about it.
This “law” isn’t even relevant. How does financial auditing rules (which this law is essentially used to check) have anything to do with tracking a vote count?
All this post shows is a bunch of data points without explaining HOW it all connects.
This just seems like a BS karma post at this point. Anyone can post “XXX will go red!” And a bunch of screenshots - doesn’t make it true.
At this point people who post this might actually be doomers in disguise - make a post, let the infighting happen between those who will believe anything and those who can actually critically analyze the data set forth.
This "law" is not just used in accounting. It can be used to show fraud in many types of data. Benford's law proved the Iranian election was fraudulent.
The "law" is if you're picking random numbers, like accounting fraud. If all the ballot boxes were the same size, someone trashed all the votes, and someone had to manually assign what the turnout was at each of the boxes (and they had to do it enough times) then it would fail.
Type of shit you can't really prove in court.. The 'normal' person doesn't understand it. Try explaining this stuff to a judge, that's the person you need to clarify it to.
No it won't. Benford's only applies to systems where humans are directly selecting digits in a (futile) attempt to mimic a natural system.
Ballot counts, even fraudulent ones, is a process of enumeration. This being played like the global warming academic paper scam. Presume (don't prove) catastrophic warming and write pretty (but irrelevant) papers about what happens when temperatures rise.
In this case, skip over "Benfords doesn't apply" and go on to make pretty graphs of cherry picked data sets that just happen (coin toss) to make Trump's look more conformant.
This is like a time warp back to pre-Thanksgiving times. A compelling case has been made that Benfords law doesn’t apply here, given the nature of the data, but honestly, this always seemed like a weird long shot.
The thing is, if things happened how this post claims, then proving fraud is easy. We have 170k+ votes that can’t be tied to voters, yet when MI certified, the number of voters matched the number of ballots, which means 174k people just in Detroit must be marked as voted who didn’t vote. This is all public record. We haven’t found a single registered voter listed as participating in the election who didn’t. We should have been (should be) going door to door in Detroit finding these people. We aren’t bringing this to the level of individual fraud. The people who stole the election have done so. Why haven’t we found any of these .174k people?
And I’ll say this again about using the “time stamp” for when votes came in. This has very little to do with how votes were counted and isn’t a part of the official tally. Votes are updated in all kinds of different ways by different Precincts, and in the course of an evening that had hundreds of thousands of individual, human-entered updates to a database, there are going to be mistakes. It was always folly to be running around trying to show how this stuff, by itself, was proof of anything, a good place to start a real, systematic, search for provable fraud, but a bad place to draw conclusions from. News media auto-updating tallies are not part of the official process and are rife with real time errors that have no bearing on the official count, which is checked and rechecked multiple times after the initial rush to report things first, regardless of accuracy. Even election experts on our side who believe fraud could have happened have warned against this vein of analysis. Why are we still repeating this stuff? Practically, it got us no where, and fundamentally, it’s not the most compelling evidence we have.
I remember learning about this in college. Same thing happens with just conversation and it's easy to pick up lies. People usually pick the same numbers when they are lying.
Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
Mathematical "laws" and "theorems" don't matter to the left or people in these hearings. They will take the benefit of the doubt and say "well maybe this was that 1 in a quintillion chance". Models and graphs and trends and saying there's a one in a Googol-plex chance this ever happens without outright fraud, won't sway them. They would have to see each and every ballot with clear evidence the ballot was fraudulent and then even they will just say "i don't care, I don't like Trump"
Not to be a doomer, but these people have a vested interest in cheating Donald J. Trump. You could have 20,000 affidavits from the cheaters themselves explaining how they cheated and the people who have not already changed their minds would still remain intransigent. Otherwise the evidence already presented would have been enough to get them to understand the cheating and then work to correct the record.
1: Detroit: This is where there was a literal cover up of the absentee ballot counting process. Apparently there are 174,000 ballots that cannot be tracked to registered voters. The vote totals from Detroit Precincts fail to conform to Benford’s law. Dominion is used to count the votes in Wayne County (Detroit).
2: Shiawassee: This is where the zero was “accidently” added to Joe Biden’s total resulting in 153,710 votes for Biden. Once people realized this error, the additional 138,339 votes were subtracted from Biden’s total. However the 138,339 votes were added back to Biden’s total in the wee hours of the morning. Dominion is used to count the votes in Shiawassee.
Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
This is an updated version. Alot more people (normies) have become aware of the situation. Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
they arent worth investing in a forever box. I say just dump them all in some random hole, and instead of putting a memorial, put a urinal on top that just drains into the ground.
well if anyone was actually going to take this advice (personally I like it), it would be a pretty big hole. so you could probably fit more than one.
If you're going to do it, do it right.
I have to poop. May I?
Woodchipper. Blood makes our crops grow.
The Tree of Liberty sure looks a little parched.
Someone needs to bring a small dying potted tree in a wagon with a sign that says Tree of Liberty
Take a dead Christmas tree. There should be plenty right now.
Homemade blood and bone meal! It will be a rich harvest indeed.
Plenty of food to feed patriot families everywhere!
I hope someone is taking a shovel to DC
Or a Killdozer?
Dropping a massive basalt obelisk with "Sic semper fures Democratia" carved two inches deep on both sides atop the mass grave isn't exactly a memorial to them. It's a reminder for the future.
it was literally kind of a sick joke that meant to be offensive about pissing on their grave.
That might be more trouble than communists and traitors deserve. A simple outhouse would suffice.
This week is the last chance for this to get fixed without people getting hurt.
Good luck to us all patriots.
The key is making the traitors believe it. Up until this point I don't think they do. They think it will just be more small gatherings of people waving flags, yelling at empty buildings on a Saturday afternoon and then cleaning up after themselves.
People may well get hurt anyway.
Fuck that, bring out the woodchippers, save the heads to put on pikes around the congressional buildings
The fifth box.
100%. For the last 5 years we have been called deplorables, white nationalists and even terrorists. We have been taking in the chin day after day from these people. They openly stole the election right in front of our eyes and they are saying that there is no evidence of fraud, its like saying, we will do whatever that fuck we want and there is nothing you can do. I am tired of taking this abuse peacefully. The only solution is violence, specially before they decide to take our guns. Remember that the Founding Fathers were called Terrorists by the British Crown.
I heard one of them on the radio just say that. He said, "Hell yes, we stole this election. We were successful, and you lost! And you're going to lose the next one, and all of them after that! We will always win, because we can do what we want. We own the voting process!".
It was a blatant declaration. "We cheat, we win, you lose. Tough shit, you can't stop us!"
They don't have to outright say it. Their actions have declared exactly the same thing. Just because too many people are too moronic to notice it doesn't change that fact.
Most of them won't ever declare it openly because that would go against their nature since it would require telling the truth.
Holy crap these people are crazy out of control....and must be stopped !!!!
Only if we actually shoot them when they try.
Yeah, Benford's law can be used in like 30+ states, last I saw. But if the courts refuse to look at or listen to ANY evidence, then what good is a mountain of evidence? I pray Jan 6th will be the day we make them listen or hold them accountable.
Yup. If you think a pile of evidence is going to convince people who are IN ON THE SCAM to reverse it, you're either dreaming, on drugs, or both.
I just sensed a great deal of disappointment lol
You know the prodigal son is a bible story, right? Its been around for about 2000 years longer than the rolling stones song.
Gimme Shelter is the sht. Mary Clayton's vocals are just so fcking great..... Her voice crack in that is outta this world. Few can pull off what she did, man. It just conjures up so much emotion.
Your so right. I hope people realise this. Make the police choose whos side they are on in DC tomorrow amd Wednesday. Move them out of the way if necissary
This is all good work, but nothing will 'go red'. The fraud is blatant for all to see, but it is ignored
The deep state has reminded everyone that as long as men decide the truth, the only thing that really matters is loyalty. Power never changes.
People made posts like this 8 weeks ago and literally like within a week of the election. Nothing was done and nothing will be done. Just accept Biden's going to be an asterisk President unless Trump pulls a rabbit out of his hat and the GOP grows a spine.
This was posted 8 weeks ago, many times. It was never great. The "Benford's Law" angle is a scam, doesn't in fact prove fraud and IMO just gives normies a reason to doubt the rest of our claims.
The real problem is that we have an election system where it's almost impossible to prove fraud even if it does occur. We can not have elections based on trust which we aren't even allowed to verify. That's not an election, that's a charade.
How is it a scam?
It only works on number sets that span multiple orders of magnitude, so precinct votes, for example, don't work if they're mostly 3 digits.
There are a ton of YouTube videos and academic papers explaining in more detail if you're interested, but that's the short answer.
"The first-digit distribution has nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of election fraud."
That's a quote from the statisticien who uncovered election fraud in Iran.
Do they not span multiple orders of magnitude? Just curious why the relationship would hold for Trump’s votes and historical candidates votes and Biden’s votes everywhere except 6 particular cities.
It depends where you're looking, but precincts are drawn up to be roughly equal, so they're usually the same order of magnitude (in the example of Chicago, there are a few with less than 100 votes and a few more than 1000, but the vast majority are 3 digits).
I haven't seen any analysis on historical votes, or Biden's votes anywhere else. In Chicago, there were enough small, super left leaning districts where Trump won 10-19 votes total to make it look like it followed the pattern. Could be the same case with the example of "Michigan" from the OP, the infographic data is so vague it's meaningless. And again, all mathematicians are in agreement that you can't use first digit analysis for election fraud (and even 2nd digit is controversial).
These infographics are specifically to inform those who don't know the specifics of the election fraud. There are lots of people who know there was something fishy about the election, but are unaware of the specifics due to censorship. These infographics are made for these kinds of people. The more people who become aware of the details of the fraud, the better our chances.
I've just stopped talking to people about this. I've brought up benford's law before and was told I'm crazy
That’s what the 6th is for
I'm seeing red that I wasn't before. Maybe it's just my eyes and rage though.
No one is going to cancel an election with just Benford’s law.
Topple a company like Enron, well, yes, of course. But not an election.
This post is misleading:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf
Whitmer is a nazi and the sos is ccp, so they will never let the legislature over rule their fraud
Michigan is red. I'm quite certain.
Save your venom. A lot of legitimate newbies here these days. Large infographics are always useful as you can dump them on others to redpill them. Even when we win, there will still be a lot of work to wake up millions of people.
Except Benford's Law is a rule that CAN apply but DOESN'T always, particularly when dealing with non-random numbers from the onset.
If you have an average of votes in precincts in, say, the 300s range then ya, 3 will be the guaranteed most common number and not 1. It doesn't need to be "fixed" for that. It is by no means enough to prove it "beyond a reasonable doubt" as OP puts it.
We have more than enough evidence with other instances, the unwillingness for them to allow proper audits and recounts without at least huge delays and court challenges is also damning.
Then explain to me why Trump's data follows the pattern everywhere, but Biden's doesn't m this includes Pennsylvania and Georgia
I literally ran through the statistical data myself comparing Trump to Biden. Not only Trump, but the other 2 candidates. The only candidates that did not match was Biden and write-ins (because most write-ins had literally 1 vote, and in that case if you sum them all together, then they ALSO follow Benford's Law).
Only one candidate did not follow statistics and that was Biden.
Benford's LAW. You know the one that every other candidate follows except for Biden
Trolling it is.
Every single court has refused to see any evidence. Everyone here knows that, except for shills that pretend not to.
Maybe... but no. Not at all. Sorry, you're stupid.
Are you trolling, or just clueless?
Yep
Yea maybe the mods can perma sticky all the ACTUAL evidence, instead of letting normies come in here and gaslight all the disinfo.
Yeah, I remember this was a good mental exercise at the beginning, but now we have real evidence, we don't need this anymore.
100%. i'm already convinced and even i don't find this convincing
Why not?
There is evidence that is hearsay and evidence that is verified disinformation (this one). Which are you using to convince yourself?
I believe Trump, but I only believe him because the messaging seems to be "nobody knows what I know". I believe him because "what everybody knows thus far" isn't doing him any favors.
The only evidence I've seen that would give any credence to election fraud is the data feed vote subtractions / irregularities, and the sworn testimonies from people alleging backroom / closed door adjudications. Neither of those things are actual evidence without further investigation.
These infographics are specifically to inform those who don't know the specifics of the election fraud. There are lots of people who know there was something fishy about the election, but are unaware of the specifics due to censorship. These infographics are made for these kinds of people. The more people who become aware of the details of the fraud, the better our chances.
Michigan had two major incidents of voter fraud
1: Detroit: This is where there was a literal cover up of the absentee ballot counting process. Apparently there are 174,000 ballots that cannot be tracked to registered voters. The vote totals from Detroit Precincts fail to conform to Benford’s law. Dominion is used to count the votes in Wayne County (Detroit).
2: Shiawassee: This is where the zero was “accidently” added to Joe Biden’s total resulting in 153,710 votes for Biden. Once people realized this error, the additional 138,339 votes were subtracted from Biden’s total. However the 138,339 votes were added back to Biden’s total in the wee hours of the morning. Dominion is used to count the votes in Shiawassee.
Please for the love of God, let's stop talking about the Benford's Law. It makes us look stupid.
If you spend 5 minutes reading about it, you see that it only applies to quantities with multiple orders of magnitude. The number of votes in different precincts do not fall into that category.
It's almost as bad as that idiocy of the quadrillion chance that they put in the Texas lawsuit.
That was a big oof, not sure why they bothered since the claims in that case didn't really require it. I guess they got some good mileage on TV saying "a quadrillion! that's a 1 with 15 zeroes! ain't that a big number!!".
You did not watch the video. He accuses Trump of fraud based on Trump's secondary and tertiary digits following Benford's law, and Biden's not. Take a look at 14:11. Doesn't that seem something odd?
If we don't challenge their bullshit, we accept their bullshit.
Regardless, if your point is that it is balls and courage are needed to win, then I agree.
Yes, here is a professor that wrote a paper about why:
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~wmebane/inapB.pdf
It's been known since around the time that Benford came up with the law that it doesn't work for things like precinct numbers. They aren't random and they aren't on a large scale.
Think about how they even try to split some precincts up into near equal voting total expectations. How is Benford's Law going to apply when you guess that 50000 votes will be cast and split that into 90 precincts? 100% chance 5 will be the most common number then.
If every ballot had a unique identifying number and they went and created fake ballots... you'd actually probably still get Benford's Law to apply there since no way they would manually create the unique ID for those fake ballots but simply generate it and take their chances of a duplicate.
According to Benfords Law, Trump cheated in California, Illinois and New Mexico.
Spend an hour doing your own research. Irregularities in the election data feed, and the injection of fraudulent ballots in the adjudication process is where the fraud is. This is the only thing we should be pushing.
Data feed vote tally subtractions.
Election Interference preventing adjudicated ballots from being properly vetted.
That's our proof. Anything else should be considered a red herring designed to discredit us.
Oh boy! I sure trust a liberal professor from umich!
Benford's law is not a viable tool to review the election.
This dude is a regular on Numberphile, same channel shown in the image.
He claims that because we are not dealing with several orders of magnitudes, Benford's law does not apply.
I see the point. Most results are in the hundreds. A few in the 10 and a few in the thousands. That is the precincts were created to all be of similar size.
But what about the second numbers and following?
But Benfords law applies to the second numbers and following digits as well. He mentions that himself.
And then at 14:11 he totally torches himself. Trumps last two digits are in line with Benford's Laws (I like how he acts like this is evidence of Trump's fraud lol) where are Biden's are similar to the random generated Pi digit pairs.
BUT AGAIN. I REPEAT. HE IS ACCUSING TRUMP OF FRAUD!
So why does your claimed source accuse Trump of election fraud? Do you still stand by this turkey? Or is this just part of some disinformation campaign you are running? I'd really like some answers. Do you think Trump committed election fraud? If so, why not just come out and say it. If not, then why are you linking to such bullshit artists?
Benford's law is a statement about the first digit, not the last two digits. At that point he's talking about a different "law" that has an even distribution given certain conditions.
He doesn't actually say Trump committed fraud, it's an act to showcase that an "anomalous" result given a certain "law" is NOT proof of fraud once you actually take a closer look and figure out the "law" is not applicable. I guess you closed the video before he explained why Trump's result is actually completely expected and not proof of any anomaly... which he did like a minute later.
I knew absolutely nothing of Benford's law before this post. I am just telling you he said subsequent digits followed the law as well. If he is wrong about that, then I retract my claim.
I clearly see the point that Benford's does not apply if you have all numbers only between 100-999. As it would make lotteries impossible. Or give premium to betting on numbers between 100-199.
Subsequent digits from the left may follow the law, but that doesn't mean it applies to the last two digits. I can see why you'd intuit that it should be applicable since if you keep going to through the subsequent digits, you eventually cover them all including the last two.
But the key insight you missed is that as the data crosses multiple orders of magnitude, the reading order (left to right) itself starts to matter. The second digit in 2319 is in the hundreds, while the second digit in 12319 is in the thousands. Meanwhile, if you were to look at the last digit instead, it doesn't change as you increase the orders of magnitude. It's always in the ones.
Indeed, the last digit is nine in both cases when looking at it from the right, but if you were to look at it from the left, it's the 4th digit in the first case and the 5th digit in the second case. That's why Benford's law would not be applicable to something that specifies "last digits" rather than "first digits".
Thank you for the explanation.
Also realizing this is how "numbers rackets" worked. It was always the last digits of some publicly available data.. i.e, last three digits of the Dow Jones I think it one my dad help out on when he was a kid in the 50s. Before the states ran lotteries, number rackets were at every job site.
No prob!
I can explain it. It is not complicated.
Benfords law just looks at the first digit of the numbers and then we expect to see a certain distribution of first digit numbers. This can be used in almost all situations of naturally occuring numbers.
The problem is that these are not naturally occuring numbers. These are precincts with around 500-1000 votes each.
Biden has an average of 500 votes in the precincts. This means that most votes will have 4, 5 and 6 as the first digit. This is expected when we know how the data looks. But Benfords law predicts that this shouldn't happen. This is because you can't use Benfords law on this dataset.
The reason Trump looks to be following BL is because his votes in these precincts are around 100, so he gets a lot of 1's, etc. as predicted by BL.
We have 10000s instances of fraud but this BL analysis is just not it. Seriously,
lol
what's funny about that?
500 is a number. 5 is the first digit of said number.
people use second digits bro for election analysis
You can download 2016 MIT election data
Then you can go to my first submitted post and copy the python code
Then you can run it and you will see exactly what i am talking about
I see you've written words making a claim, but do you have a link which shows this data for every state verifying what you just said and weren't making it up?
Because I've only seen it applied to the swing states so far, so if you have a source which did it for every state, enabling you to make this claim, I'd love to see it.
You're in luck! This video explains it.
Y'all have got to stop posting this stupid data analysis "proof". This is the type of stuff that makes us look idiotic and grasping at straws.
Data anomalies ARE NOT PROOF, you can not take this stuff to court and say "see, look this math thing says it is highly improbable for this to occur". Either fucking put up or shutup, proof is tangible, real occurrence that can be proven without a shadow of a doubt. Statistical analysis ain't the way.
Y'all need to learn introspection, this is some Bernie-bro level "PHONE BANK MATCH ME!!!!" cringe shit.
If this were true then there wouldn't be people sitting in white collar prison for financial crimes you fucking moron.
Except anomalies are cause for further investigation, not the actual end proof of something nefarious -_-
The main issue is that this particular dataset (voting results from precincts of very similar size) is not a valid candidate for BL analysis. Financial data, which will have values over multiple orders of magnitude, is an excellent candidate. But even so, it's not proof. However, it can be a powerful indicator to justify a deeper dive.
Continuing to promote BL for precinct-level data just makes us look dumb and provides clickbait to the left.
Considering I actually have forensic accounting in my background.... no, that's not how it works.
You use anomalies to dig further and find proof. You have something like Benford's that highlights a problem. "Hey, look at this, something screwy". Then you start digging to find the anomalies, and audit from there. Audits are where the discovery comes from, and that is what allows you to find proof.
The key difference here is that, as said before, y'all are grasping at straws saying "LOOK AT THIS PROOF". This isn't proof, it is highlighting the need to do a deep dive and FIND proof. When you present data analysis alone as concrete evidence and it is then (expectedly, I might add) tossed in the garbage at court, y'all get all surprised Pikachu face, even though literally every lawyer with a podcast and YouTube channel knew it was coming.
Couldn't they have leveraged these analyses as probable cause to get subpoenas for further investigation? Always puzzled me why they didn't. Asking for the moon with just "data analyses" that haven't even been cross-examined was always going to go down in flames.
It's tough when the courts throw your case out without ever examining your evidence.
Get better lawyers that won't fumble procedural issues, and that don't sue in the wrong court.
They have. Not every lawsuit was done improperly. You're launching a ton of lawsuits with basically the same complaint and they're including something that usually isn't in lawsuits but it makes sense for these cases. "We saw irregularities here, here, and here and therefore there is major doubt cast because if the irregularity/fraud existed there, then it could potentially exist in other similarly run areas (Dem dominated counties, Dominion software using counties). There's going to be a lot of copy paste used in filing these.
The courts had 0 intention of viewing these cases anyways. Take the Texas case for example. Not filed improperly and for a state with a grievance against another state, the actual precedent is obviously to head to federal court. But it was dismissed on lacking standing... besides the fact that standing is a pretty stupid thing that's now almost always applied to our legal system, Texas included why they had standing and were dismissed anyways without the court even allowing them to argue it.
You're getting downvotes for being right.
It's utter stupidity to think an anomaly is proof positive enough for court. Insane. Anomalies are and always will be just enough to give cause to further investigate.
Law enforcement get warrants issued based on anomalies... they wouldn't just immediately charge the suspect and go to trial with just that base anomaly (unless they suck at their job).
Expert witnesses are used in virtually every court case in America.
I'm certain most will agree that any court would gain more knowledge from an expert witness, along with their analysis vs your evidentiary spaz fest.
There is “statistical” and “physical”evidence. It’s usually brought up in court that way as well. Hopefully the statistical let’s you get the physical via warrants.
For instance, say there was an accident. It’s “likely” if there were only two cars on the area in a given time, that one or both were involved. It’s so probable that we can get a warrant or at least reasonably investigate (given resource constraints).
If instead one million cars were on the area, we’d have to narrow the search region. It’s probably most cars were not involved.
In this real case related to voter fraud, the statistical evidence is extremely odd. Making it so unlikely, that everyone should do a manual hand recount of all the ballots
You need to see my other post, and not surprisingly the truth is downvoted to shit because it is a hard truth that nobody wants to hear.
Data analysis points to anomalies, NOBODY is arguing that. However, those anomalies should be taken to the local level and get an immediate injunction/audit approval by whoever the governing body is. Newsflash, that IS NOT the court system, it is city council/aldermen/municipal supervisors/etc.
And there lies the rub..... we don't have a chance in hell going through the system by the book because there isn't a single major municipal city run by Republicans. We have become so fucking complacent and lazy at the local government level over the last 40 years that the enemy has literally taken over every single level of politics in every major city.
Stop thinking the courts are going to solve this, they aren't.
Fucking THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And yet if this data is presented to a court system to show that it points to anomalies, the courts should make those municipalities follow through in the investigation that data is laying the ground for.
And you expect major cities to vote for anything sensible, and not just ratchets offering gimme dats? Why not try to lasso the moon down while you're at it?
Cities vote for shit that people cry about on their doorstep. They don't vote for shit because someone shared a spreadsheet in an echo chamber.
Please, people in cities vote for "free shit" and gimme dats, they don't vote for anything actually beneficial to them. The past 60 years of the destruction of these cities due to the forced welfare/dependency state and identity politics shows the people voting in cities don't know what's good for them, and adding to that that the collective iq of the inner cities is less than 75, you think they would actually be capable of the first element, let alone the second?
Hence why you bring this to the courts, because people in cities for the most are too stupid to support anything that's actually for their own good, and as we've seen with examples like Kim in baltimore, even when you try to appeal to them and try to change at that local level in cities, they're too inept to follow through.
I think its simply the burden of proof requirement to show probable cause, but never enough on its own to prove beyond reasonable doubt. I would note that typically data analysis is used to show anomalies worth looking into, and then a proper investigation is conducted on everything involved. In this case, no such accompanying investigation has occurred, and I think we're quickly realizing there really is no proper remedy to find electoral fraud.
What I mean is simple: If there is fraud, who do you report this to? The same authorities that conducted said fraud? The Legislators, with split power and high incentive NOT to vote in favour of an investigation? The Courts? Even better, you have to typically file your lawsuit in the State Capitol, with the judges appointed by the State Legislature & Executive! The whole system is messed up, and we genuinely need to figure out a way to conduct independent verification of electoral results, without having to go through such conflicts of interests at least.
Data is the proof. Anomalies is descriptor.
So when you say data anomalies are not proof do you realize how completely retarded you sound?
Georgia did 3 hand recounts. How do you correlate the data which you allege proves the fraud, with the data from the recounts?
Livonia looks bad
They wernt even going to certify the vote till those threats were made
Well really he did, and they did too.
Ok, and how you gonna do that hot shot? Gonna start blasting away? Civil War isn't gonna happen and we aren't gonna avoid Biden. They stole it and they know the objection process won't work we need the HOUSE AND SENATE to agree to EACH objection. You know damn well the ONLY chance is the Senate, we don't have a majority in the House.
Senate's already lost unless quite a few Dems break ranks. Sasse, Romney, Toomey, Murkowski, Collins and Cassidy all made public statements saying they're gonna certify the results.
If after all this evidence of blatant fraud, constant attacks from leftist parasites, uniparty revealing itself more publically than ever, and the disaster that would come with pedo joe, you don't think people will break and fight back, you are in fact a doomer that already resigned yourself and any fight you had.
Who knows what will come with the 6th, but I see it as more of a catalyst than anything - no matter its shape, it'll be the starting point for more fighting back from the right, and yes even the prospect of civil conflict. If you think uniparty or oathbreakers will stop that inevitability, you're sorely mistaken.
Being in denial doesn't make you some wonderful truther and believer. Makes you a passive sheep who is still waiting for someone else to save the day.
You won’t do anything in either situation because you’re a cuck. Apologize.
The hardcore Dems/Leftists:
How does one "force" this issue?
that won't work. Inauguration is final. Nothing that happens after Noon Jan 20th matters and you can't pull a sworn in President out of office. Unless he does something like a Nixon and resigns, or croaks, if Biden takes the oath of office Jan 20th, it's all over and there's nothing we can do about it.
Take the fight to the state and local levels from there. States like Texas will have to lead it.
I come looking for info about the next three days and I see shit from 2 months ago being stickied? WTH is going on in here
This “law” isn’t even relevant. How does financial auditing rules (which this law is essentially used to check) have anything to do with tracking a vote count?
All this post shows is a bunch of data points without explaining HOW it all connects.
This just seems like a BS karma post at this point. Anyone can post “XXX will go red!” And a bunch of screenshots - doesn’t make it true.
At this point people who post this might actually be doomers in disguise - make a post, let the infighting happen between those who will believe anything and those who can actually critically analyze the data set forth.
This "law" is not just used in accounting. It can be used to show fraud in many types of data. Benford's law proved the Iranian election was fraudulent.
The "law" is if you're picking random numbers, like accounting fraud. If all the ballot boxes were the same size, someone trashed all the votes, and someone had to manually assign what the turnout was at each of the boxes (and they had to do it enough times) then it would fail.
This bullshit lol.. No one cares. Benford's law was brought up right after the election.. 2 months ago.
Type of shit you can't really prove in court.. The 'normal' person doesn't understand it. Try explaining this stuff to a judge, that's the person you need to clarify it to.
This is correct. You can't expect Benford's law to apply to family size, for example, and counties are often similarly sized.
At this point does it even matter.
Except it doesn't.
Just for clarity, Benford's law cannot prove fraud in as of itself, it's an indicator of interesting places to look.
Matt Parker has a good video about it
No it won't. Benford's only applies to systems where humans are directly selecting digits in a (futile) attempt to mimic a natural system.
Ballot counts, even fraudulent ones, is a process of enumeration. This being played like the global warming academic paper scam. Presume (don't prove) catastrophic warming and write pretty (but irrelevant) papers about what happens when temperatures rise.
In this case, skip over "Benfords doesn't apply" and go on to make pretty graphs of cherry picked data sets that just happen (coin toss) to make Trump's look more conformant.
When will it go red? We need a win like yesterday.
The issue isn't about proving fraud, that has already happened, the issue is getting someone to do something about it.
We are in the stage right now that leaves us with the checks and balances not working.
Transitioning to other solutions.
https://thedonald.win/p/11Q8uoDqNV/leelanau-county-mi-the-math-does/c/
That pinky, leelanau should be Red! That state is RED!
https://thedonald.win/p/11RNodc2GC/340000-phantom-registered-voters/
3196 phantom voters in leelanau.
these are theories. you need solid facts. so its kinda worthless
Lmao facts don't matter. Force and action, that's all that's left at this point.
We’re back to this?
LIST OF MICHIGAN LEGISLATORS ! TELL THEM TO SAVE THE CONSTITUTION! IT IS THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL DUTY TO FIX THE FRAUD ! CALL SPECIAL SESSION!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1jbYwILWZvf-mjMubxaL8fTwgvDF8qshmxTEMkXAqNLI/edit#gid=0
Past time to 1776 that ass.
Bendford's law doesn't prove fraud. It indicates it. What proves fraud is the ballot dump 96% for Biden.
The evidence is known. We get it. The courts are corrupt. The legislator is corrupt. The states don't flip without blood.
Ok, cool. Now FLIP the state!
spread this infographic to your friends and family, it's a team effort
Isn’t it obvious so many are either in on the steal or know it occurred but are too cowardly to act?
Tell me it "will go red" when it does. Not believing hype beforehand because usually it never materializes
Benfords law was one of the first things people were talking about and now w are back to it. Safe to say the white flag is almost up
This is like a time warp back to pre-Thanksgiving times. A compelling case has been made that Benfords law doesn’t apply here, given the nature of the data, but honestly, this always seemed like a weird long shot.
The thing is, if things happened how this post claims, then proving fraud is easy. We have 170k+ votes that can’t be tied to voters, yet when MI certified, the number of voters matched the number of ballots, which means 174k people just in Detroit must be marked as voted who didn’t vote. This is all public record. We haven’t found a single registered voter listed as participating in the election who didn’t. We should have been (should be) going door to door in Detroit finding these people. We aren’t bringing this to the level of individual fraud. The people who stole the election have done so. Why haven’t we found any of these .174k people?
And I’ll say this again about using the “time stamp” for when votes came in. This has very little to do with how votes were counted and isn’t a part of the official tally. Votes are updated in all kinds of different ways by different Precincts, and in the course of an evening that had hundreds of thousands of individual, human-entered updates to a database, there are going to be mistakes. It was always folly to be running around trying to show how this stuff, by itself, was proof of anything, a good place to start a real, systematic, search for provable fraud, but a bad place to draw conclusions from. News media auto-updating tallies are not part of the official process and are rife with real time errors that have no bearing on the official count, which is checked and rechecked multiple times after the initial rush to report things first, regardless of accuracy. Even election experts on our side who believe fraud could have happened have warned against this vein of analysis. Why are we still repeating this stuff? Practically, it got us no where, and fundamentally, it’s not the most compelling evidence we have.
What's taken so long, we've known about benfords law since three days after the election
I remember learning about this in college. Same thing happens with just conversation and it's easy to pick up lies. People usually pick the same numbers when they are lying.
The MI Republican state legislators are out to lunch, and are sacrificing our country.
Oh boy more Benford's law bullshit.
Can we just get to the 6th already, see if Congress does it's job, and if not, then we do ours?
Benfords law doesn’t prove fraud. It only gives evidence that it may exist. Don’t mix up your statistical conclusions.
All 50 States!
Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
This is SO second week of November.
People that are part of the fraud ignore and deny evidence.
Mathematical "laws" and "theorems" don't matter to the left or people in these hearings. They will take the benefit of the doubt and say "well maybe this was that 1 in a quintillion chance". Models and graphs and trends and saying there's a one in a Googol-plex chance this ever happens without outright fraud, won't sway them. They would have to see each and every ballot with clear evidence the ballot was fraudulent and then even they will just say "i don't care, I don't like Trump"
Not to be a doomer, but these people have a vested interest in cheating Donald J. Trump. You could have 20,000 affidavits from the cheaters themselves explaining how they cheated and the people who have not already changed their minds would still remain intransigent. Otherwise the evidence already presented would have been enough to get them to understand the cheating and then work to correct the record.
Michigan has been corrupted by organized crime and big three money since before anyone alive today was born.
The only way to end it is to end Metro-Detroit. Sell it off to Canada.
There is no voter fraud. The obvious explanation for this is that Benford's law is incorrect. /s
It's sarcasm. Hence the /s.
Michigan had two major incidents of voter fraud
1: Detroit: This is where there was a literal cover up of the absentee ballot counting process. Apparently there are 174,000 ballots that cannot be tracked to registered voters. The vote totals from Detroit Precincts fail to conform to Benford’s law. Dominion is used to count the votes in Wayne County (Detroit).
2: Shiawassee: This is where the zero was “accidently” added to Joe Biden’s total resulting in 153,710 votes for Biden. Once people realized this error, the additional 138,339 votes were subtracted from Biden’s total. However the 138,339 votes were added back to Biden’s total in the wee hours of the morning. Dominion is used to count the votes in Shiawassee.
2 months and nothing. How are they able to suppress this info so effectively.
Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
BUT ITSS DISSPOOOOOOOTED!!!!
STUNNING DATA.....
WILL THE SYSTEM ACKNOWLEDGE 'FACTS'?
Oldie, but goodie.
*updated
I live in Michigan and aside from hhetto Detroit it's solid Trump country
Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
Haven't we known this since the 4th of November?
This is an updated version. Alot more people (normies) have become aware of the situation. Share this infographic with your friends and family. Then tell them to share it with their friends and so on and so forth. This is a team effort. Do your part.
Of course there is. You know how fucked up Detroit is?