5106
Election Fraud Michigan (media.patriots.win)
posted ago by mjwfour ago by mjwfour +5108 / -2
Comments (80)
sorted by:
83
mjwfour [S] 83 points ago +84 / -1

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 “accidentally” 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.

28
Imransgarage 28 points ago +28 / -0

Thanks to the based mod for stickying all of these.

20
V2021 20 points ago +21 / -1

Antrim is the smoking gun. They admitted votes were flipped because of software.

14
GlacialSpeed 14 points ago +14 / -0

^ This.

Antrim had a dominion machine audiedt and it showed the fraud operation exactly like the vote total analytics predicted.

13
TheDeSantis 13 points ago +13 / -0

I very much appreciate the work you do. It’s massive and appreciated.

One item you might want to consider is to separate Benfords law as a different item.

Benfords law won’t indicate the presence of illegal or modified ballots if they are part of the physical paperwork, instead it indicates the presence of modified data after the fact via software or human editing.

Illegal ballots wouldn’t change the Benford graph so I feel like it’s best to have that as a separate additional piece of independent evidence rather than lumping it in with ballot fraud.

Thanks so much again for the hard work.

2
dianabrown1 2 points ago +2 / -0

Imagine that. What a surprise.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
33
NPC11011110000 33 points ago +33 / -0

This was coordinated. The "Red Mirage" narrative was given to the media to stop them from calling states too early. Then the Dems could seal the steal with pallets of fake ballots.

10
Alloutwar 10 points ago +10 / -0

I think it goes back further.To the appointments on Foxs decision desk, to hiding Biden in the basement, to that story saying Trump disparaged the military ( in case they needed to steal the military vote).Someone very clever, who we have probably never heard of, planned the whole thing.

4
War_Hamster 4 points ago +4 / -0

I think this strategy goes back to even before Trump won in 2016.

They were already concocting the Russia Hoax back in 2015 (or earlier) and all of these efforts are all tied together. It's been a full court press from every angle to usurp power in this country.

It's all tied together, and it's the same actors masterminding the whole thing.

1
Vox_Dobad 1 point ago +1 / -0

I suspect the foundation of all this fraud goes back to at least 2000

1
War_Hamster 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, if we're going to play that game, I'd take you back to 1913.

But you're right about the modern active version of this grift; it really went into overdrive during Clinton's admin, and Bush and Obama just implemented their own spin on top of it.

2
Vox_Dobad 2 points ago +2 / -0

Agreed

1
substantialmajestic 1 point ago +1 / -0

Why did they kick it in to hyper drive?

1
Vox_Dobad 1 point ago +1 / -0

Without thinking too much about it, I'd posit a couple things.

One, they saw the legitimate grassroots groundswell of people pushing back against big government and globalism as evidenced by the Tea Party. While that movement kinda left the spotlight, the people were still out there, increasing in numbers and getting increasingly pissed/motivated, as evidenced by the support for Trump in '16. The elites had to nip it in the bud to usher in their utopia before too many people woke up. They failed in that election, and had to throw everything at the wall in '20 to "succeed".

Two, which is related to the first point, is that the "progressive" movement was so close to achieving the goals they'd been inching toward for 100 years, I think they figured it was now or never, due to the success and increasing support of Trump's policies. They couldn't let us turn the tide and shine the light on the truth of leftism.

1
basedvirginian 1 point ago +2 / -1

I saw so many NPCs on instagram posting about the Red Mirage in late October and then again during the day of Nov 4.

That’s when I knew we were fucked

27
Trilby 27 points ago +28 / -1

Michigan and all the swing states. Tragic.

13
PizzaDecorations 13 points ago +13 / -0

How convenient for Biden that all the swing states are iffy...

26
kornesque 26 points ago +26 / -0

Mods with the righteous sticky rampage!!!

8
dr_drumpf 8 points ago +8 / -0

Nothing better than force feeding facts that we live in a lawless society. People don't appreciate how we are at war. That's the benefit of Communism. People think it's good until they're lined up and shot.

4
WhoWasThatMaskedMan 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, and the foot soldiers who helped bring about the revolution are among the first lined up against the wall. Can't have rebellious types around.

3
dr_drumpf 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yep, the sad thing is they accually believed they'd bring about change and that's why they will be murdered.

15
TermLimits 15 points ago +15 / -0

And to this day nobody has been held accountable for obstructing republican poll watchers.

10
StartAgain 10 points ago +12 / -2

In any sane world, these screenshots would be enough for ranked officials to say, "yeah nope we're turning the states back to Trump"

25
Keiichi81 25 points ago +25 / -0

Maybe not enough to outright overturn the results, but in any sane world it would certainly be enough to warrant a serious audit and investigation. Instead, anyone raising concerns about fraud due to all the "election irregularities" was branded a "conspiracy theorist" and "dangerous insurrectionist", and de-platformed from social media.

5
StartAgain 5 points ago +5 / -0

Corruption at the highest order

3
DiscoverAFire 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yeah. There would be - at the very least - election officials and workers under-oath and being cross-examined in any state where the government wasn't complicit.

1
substantialmajestic 1 point ago +1 / -0

How do they keep this so TIGHTLY locked down?

6
America1stAndOnly 6 points ago +6 / -0

But there's no proof of election fraud! No evidence! What? No I won't look at or listen to any of your proof cause then the corrupt regime I support might not gain power and that's all that matters.

10
blownawayin5 10 points ago +10 / -0

Early on, I saw a post on Gateway Pundit that documented that 40,000 votes had been flipped in Kent County. County Clerk a.k.a. Sgt. Shutlz's audit found nothing amiss, whatsoever. Can Kent Co be added to the list to be investigated? Our State Rep and Senator are RINO cowards and totally useless....

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
8
1A2A 8 points ago +8 / -0

GOOD ADMINS

7
MythArcana 7 points ago +7 / -0

Hang 'em High.

6
NPC11011110000 6 points ago +6 / -0

This was coordinated. The "Red Mirage" narrative was given to the media to stop them from calling states too early. Then the Dems could seal the steal with pallets of fake ballots.

6
XERIPHYTE 6 points ago +6 / -0

Trump won bigly

4
America1stAndOnly 4 points ago +4 / -0

Watched all of this happen live. We all know what the actual results were. A coup occurred and this country died.

3
EredAmlug 3 points ago +3 / -0

And are we doing anything???????

3
dianabrown1 3 points ago +3 / -0

precisely.

2
duckduck 2 points ago +2 / -0

The bastards posting the cardboard up over the counting station windows is all you really need to see.

2
Kyle-Them-All 2 points ago +2 / -0

our country is a fucking joke. ammo up people

2
iaintgottimetobleed 2 points ago +2 / -0

But Benford's Law has been debunked!

2
AbrahamLincoln 2 points ago +2 / -0

DEBOOOONK

2
Schroeder09 2 points ago +2 / -0

thanks to whoever put all these nice visual summaries together.

2
someoldcoderguy 2 points ago +2 / -0

I may get flamed for this opinion; however, IDGAF.

Using analysis of numbers will rarely, if ever, prove fraud. However, what it can do is raise suspicion of fraud. THEN you investigate the possible fraud. In this case, the votes.

No one (in government) in these states wanted to even look to see if there was anything suspicious. When some serious fuckery was shown (from video), they just covered their eyes and said it doesn't exist. They refused to even look at the evidence being provided, and then claimed it didn't exist.

The sad thing is that they don't even care how this looks. The supposed news media is complicit. Big tech will ban you for even mentioning it. And the normies are too self-absorbed to care.

2
VenusDe 2 points ago +2 / -0

Trump won Michigan

2
CA445 2 points ago +2 / -0

I love this post! This is the right kind of energy. Keep it up. We need to keep bringing up the clear and irrefutable fraud everyday until Nov 5, 2024. Nicely done patriot!

1
mobgrazer 1 point ago +2 / -1

An election planning commission responsible for a given region designs precincts to service a certain number of voters based on drive time, access, logistics, volunteers, electronic equipment, etc. This adds significant structure to the vote count dataset.

Benford's law is only a valid indicator of fraud for an unstructured dataset that spans orders of magnitude. Given the intentional planning of precinct size the first digit of voter precinct vote counts may or may not follow Benford's law for a range of reasons and does not indicate fraud.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Shillyourself 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks for the reminder. I had $3000 on the Michigan electors at -250

Feels bad man.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
NateBedfordForrest 1 point ago +1 / -0

Hmmm. Yank shitholes, you don't say?

1
mobgrazer 1 point ago +2 / -1

Benford's law is not valid for this situation. Please remove it.

1
Nowsthetime 1 point ago +1 / -0

Thanks for this work you’ve put together! I’ve saved them - will help me to find something thorough to show people.

1
hillaryforprison 1 point ago +1 / -0

Can an admin sticky all these please?

1
stjimmy92 1 point ago +1 / -0

They were stickied this morning!

1
LtPatterson 1 point ago +1 / -0

And none of it mattered. Joe "won".

-1
Fuckoffyouguys -1 points ago +1 / -2

These fucking commies cheated on the camera and got away with it.

I don't know how we come back from this

-6
MaAzGrA -6 points ago +9 / -15

YOU CANNOT USE BENFORD’S LAW TO DETERMINE ELECTION FRAUD. Though it might highlight or give small indicators to fraud, it cannot be used as direct evidence. Shit like this is going to make us look stupid.

Edit: A short 17 min vid and a paper that addresses this very issue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=etx0k1nLn78

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-analysis/article/benfords-law-and-the-detection-of-election-fraud/3B1D64E822371C461AF3C61CE91AAF6D

7
kornesque 7 points ago +8 / -1

It's not used to determine anything. It's like black light making shit glow, doesn't tell you what it is, just shows something fucky to be looked into.

3
DexterM1776 3 points ago +3 / -0

Why can't we use benfords law?

2
MaAzGrA 2 points ago +6 / -4

https://youtu.be/etx0k1nLn78 . Watch this guy. He gives a pretty un biased and mathematical approach to why it should not be used. At least, you should be VERY careful before applying the law. It cannot be used as a blanket litmus test.

4
DexterM1776 4 points ago +4 / -0

Thanks for sharing.

2
Imransgarage 2 points ago +3 / -1

They will literally say that about every last shred of evidence.

Beyond a reasonable doubt is a good standard and if every single aspect looks like cheating like fuck then it is cheating like fuck beyond a reasonable doubt.

Stop being an apologist.

0
MaAzGrA 0 points ago +5 / -5

I'm not an apologist. Benford's law is not a tell-all and should not be used without looking at the individual data sets themselves. Its a good tool when used appropriately, but most people just apply it without knowing how the law works. Do some research.

Its just best to leave off of these info-graphics because you want these things to be factual and to the poiint.

-2
Imransgarage -2 points ago +1 / -3

You are worse than the left you fucking apologist.

2
MaAzGrA 2 points ago +4 / -2

Man, with all that mental masturbation going on, im surprised you havent rubbed your brain smooth.. maybe you have.

I bet you got the full stimulus, and didn't even have the ware-withal to not even use it, because that would make you no different than the neck beards screaming for UBI.

Go fuckyourself.

-1
Imransgarage -1 points ago +1 / -2

Oh no hope I don't loooook baaaaaad!!!!!

2
MICHIGANisRED 2 points ago +3 / -1

It shows there was one of two things: fraud or a statistical anomaly. Take your pick.

1
MaAzGrA 1 point ago +5 / -4

No, you have to be careful in which cases you use the law. It is not a blanket litmus test to fraud.

-1
SayItAintJoe -1 points ago +2 / -3

Right, he said fraud OR statistical anomaly. It's one of the two.

if it's just an anomaly, a weird distribution of numbers, ok. I can buy that. Seems odd that only Biden's line DOESN'T follow Benford's, but ok.

That's when you point to the rest of the infographic and say "well what about all that shit?"

4
viking65 4 points ago +4 / -0

Trumps also doesn't follow Benfords, just not in these counties. In 2016 too. For Trump and Hillary too.

1
R-A-T-S- 1 point ago +1 / -0

Its like this, if you are being put on trial for sexual misconduct, but you were with Bill Cosby, Bill Clinton at Bufflo Bill's house, would you really want to use them for your defense?

0
MaAzGrA 0 points ago +3 / -3

Did I ever say that the info-graphic is wrong because Benford's law is included? Including it makes us look dumb when you include erroneous "proof" and start spreading this thing far and wide. It is a bad tool to use when analyzing data sets for election fraud. Just stop using it as proof unless you know exactly where the data is coming from.

file:///C:/Users/92sag/AppData/Local/Temp/benfords-law-and-the-detection-of-election-fraud.pdf

0
Imransgarage 0 points ago +2 / -2

Lol maybe listen to what Guliani says constitutes evidence you fucking pedant.

-3
offsubject -3 points ago +1 / -4

If a package showed up to your house full of shit, the shit smell would be an indicator that the box is full of shit. You can't use the shit smell to prove the box is full of shit; you might have farted, sewer line, etc.

Benford's Law is an indicator to election fraud and it stinks.

3
3
offsubject 3 points ago +3 / -0

I see where you're coming from.

Massive amounts of election fraud still changed the results of the election.

1
MaAzGrA 1 point ago +2 / -1

Never said it didn’t. But BL is a bad test to use as some sort of leverage that fraud occurred is all my point is.