A list of existing fraud claims from the 2020 US election, for use by members of the US Senate and House.
By John P. Hilt this page last updated 11/03/22
This website will address alleged machine electronic fraud and absentee ballot fraud from the 2020 federal election, for the purpose of enacting voting transparency reforms. The site will be expanded multiple times over the next months, until it covers the last two decades of voter machine usage. Of special interest is Chapter VI, which was added in the 10/08/22 update.
Purposes of this site: 1)to provide legislators with starting points from which to conduct their own research on various aspects of alleged fraud from the 2020 election. 2)to convince U.S. legislators to enact legislation that will force non-certification of disputed vote tallies from individual states, in federal elections. 3)to enable local activists to promote Voting Transparency to their county authorities. (i.e. each voter gets a barcode or serial number, with which the voter can physically view his/her completed ballot in the storage facility.)
Table of Contents: Ch.I Discover the Networks, Ch.II DOJ Investigations, Ch.III Tiger Project, Ch.IV CISA Report, Ch.V VoterGA, Ch.VI Historical Fraud Ch.VII Patrick Byrne & Scientists
Chapter I.)Research material taken from the April 2022 article “Fraud and the 2020 Presidential Election”, https://www.discoverthenetworks.org/organizations/the-2020-presidential-election-fraud?aff_id=1262
Note: the discoverthenetworks webpage is not searchable. In order to easily locate the sections described below, the researcher can select “print” on his/her computer, which will generate a PDF document onto your hard drive; the PDF will have page numbers one through forty-five. Then do your research using the PDF document. (either a printed version, or the PDF on your computer.)
Part A)Georgia page 15
Part A, Section 1) Data Integrity Group page 16
Research by Data Integrity Group shows electronic vote fraud of considerable size in Dougherty, Dodge and Putnam counties, in the 2020 election.
The Data Integrity Group researchers were Justin Mealy and David Lobue, data specialists each having 10+ years experience in the field. Lynda McLaughlin is communications director for the group. There is not a website. The group appears to have been hastily formed in response to the election; however, no one has disputed the qualifications of the data specialists. Link to 12/30/22 testimony to Georgia state senate subcommittee on elections: https://charliekirk.com/news/georgia-data-scientist-provide-clear-evidence-of-vote-manipulation-at-senate-hearing/
In an upcoming update, at this exact location there will be a chronological list of important sections from the video timeline of the Mealy-Logue testimony.
For now, here is a summary of the claims made in the Mealy-Logue testimony: 1)the analytical method used was “time series election data”. 2)Lobue said (paraphrasing) “at no point in an incremental process should the total number get smaller” 3)the team said the vote switches could have occurred during the Results Tally & Reporting process, at which time poll workers can reject or validate ballots. The above summary was taken from the following article : https://www.bizpacreview.com/2021/01/02/data-scientists-testified-nearly-18000-electronic-votes-in-georgia-switched-from-trump-to-biden-1011898/
Recommended items to research, regarding the Data Integrity Group data analysis results: 1)locate one or more data analysts to replicate and verify the work of Mealy and Lobue. It does not appear that anyone has done this verification, to date.
I did keyword searches looking for naysayers claiming to have debunked the work of Data Integrity Group. Snopes and FactChecker are silent on the matter. I did, however, locate one naysayer; a graduate student studying Climate Change and Migration, named Nick Depsky. Mr. Depsky claims to have tested the data used by Data Integrity Group, and says he arrived at results that show a clean Georgia election, rather than a fraudulent one. Depsky claims that Mealy-Logue are wrong when they say that in an incremental process, the total can never get smaller.
Here is his post: https://nickdepsky.medium.com/the-data-integrity-group-and-its-claims-of-election-fraud-debunked-c8307867667c
Update 9/19/22: another amateur naysayer located, claiming the ‘time series election data’ method, used by Mealy/Lobue, is flawed. Summary of naysayer’s claim: the data used was not output from voting machines, but was vote tally estimates inserted by newscasters. Article–> https://caucus99percent.com/content/election-fraud-lies-georgia-election-data-shows-17650-votes-switched-trump-biden
Part A, section 2) Edward Solomon page 17
Data enthusiast Edward Solomon analyzed the data and found that 200,000 votes had been transferred from Trump to Biden at the precinct level in Georgia.
Mr. Solomon is an amateur mathematician with no degree. My internet search turned up a multitude of naysayers, including factcheck.org. It is recommended that anyone researching this issue contact Mr. Solomon for first-hand information regarding his data analysis technique.
Among the articles that turned up in my research was this one, which has an intriguing post by PepeLePede near the top of the ‘comments’ section. https://www.mediamatters.org/one-america-news-network/oan-keeps-pushing-conspiracy-theory-computer-programs-changed-votes-2020
Mr. Solomon’s recorded testimony will be added to this section as soon as it’s located.
Part A, section 3) Jovan Pulitzer page 17
On December 30, 2020, Mr. Pulitzer testified to the Georgia Senate Judicial Subcommittee on Elections that his team were able to hack in to the Dominion machines in two Georgia counties… as voting was taking place… proving that the machines were connected to the internet, something that Dominion and Georgia state election officials had denied. Jovan Pulitzer testimony: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1EYcZMStEU a written chronology of the most important parts on the video timeline is pending and will be added at this exact location in PartA section3
Also on December 30, Pulitzer was authorized by the Georgia Senate Judicial Subcommittee on Elections, to audit Fulton County’s absentee ballots, by a method he had described during that day’s hearing. It is unclear whether on not this audit occurred. More info on the topic is pending.
On December 31, State Senator William Ligon phoned attorney general Pak to notify him about some truckloads of ballots that were being shredded, and asked him to investigate. Pak investigated, and said the ballots in question were old ballots from previous elections. Pulitzer has claimed the ballots in question were not old ballots, but were 2020 ballots that he had intended to audit. Another person testifying on the shredded ballots, Mary Grubb, said the Jim Miller building has never been used for storage of old ballots, and old ballots would not have been present on the date of the shredding. (Ms. Grubbs video testimony will be found in an upcoming Chapter.)
Anyone researching this topic should contact Mr. Pulitzer and Senator Ligon, for first-hand information regarding the shredding of ballots.
Video recording of Jovan Pulitzer’s testimony on 12/30/2020: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1EYcZMStEU (Note: on the video page, press “Show Transcript” in order to read along with the video.)
Soon, Part A section 3 will be expanded to include a list of the most important parts on the video timeline of Mr. Pulitzer’s testimony.
Suggested items to research: pending
——————————————————————————————
Chapter II.)DOJ Election Fraud Investigations and GA Senate Runoff (last update for Ch.II–> 11/03/22)
Research taken from:
1)https://www.justsecurity.org/79743/timeline-for-anniversary-of-january-5-doj-election-fraud-investigations-and-ga-senate-runoff/ (Jan. 2022 article)
2) https://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/mullins-national-republican-senatorial-committee-was-made-aware-o (10/07/22 article)
3)May 2021 book “The Deep Rig”, Patrick Byrne (more details Ch.VII)
4) https://thenewamerican.com/fraud-and-future-elections/
Part A section 1 last updated 10/26/22
Part A section 1 – AG Barr) On Dec. 21, 2020, attorney general Barr states that he will not appoint a special counsel to investigate election fraud allegations and that there is no basis to seize voting machines. (page 9, link #1above, justsecurity.org) Two days later, Barr resigned and his successor, Jeffrey Rosen became AG.
Six weeks earlier, on Nov. 9, Barr had ordered DOJ employees to investigate any credible claims of election fraud, and report back to him. Then, on Dec. 1, Barr had met with President Trump and informed him that the investigations had been conducted, and “all claims of election fraud are baseless”.
Suggested items to research from Part A section 1:
1)At the time of his announcement that no voting machines would be seized for forensic analysis, was AG Barr aware of the findings of independent researchers? If so, what was his rationale for not seizing and examining a machine?
At the time of Barr’s announcement, research on election machines by several independent scientists was partially complete. It’s a certainty that, although their research was only partially complete, the scientists already knew at least this much: a)the software in Dominion machines being used in Georgia was 10-15 years old, and was highly susceptible to penetration by malware. b)in order to obtain proof of illegal internet connections, active machines had been hacked by researchers… while 2020 voting was in progress!
2)At the time of AG Barr’s announcement that no voting machines would be seized for inspection, had he consulted with CISA, which had scheduled… or had possibly already begun… an analysis of Dominion machines?
In light of the fact that independent scientists already knew about the 10-15 year-old software installed in voting machines being used in Georgia, it is highly likely that CISA knew, as well.
(NOTE: the CISA inspection was completed – but not released to public for security reasons – two months after Barr’s December resignation, in February 2021. Results of inspection: Dominion machines highly susceptible to penetration in two different ways.)
3)At the time of his December 2020 decision to not seize and inspect voting machines, was Barr aware of the years-long work of Voting Machine Hacking Village, which began conducting hacking conventions in 2008?
A partial list of accomplishments by hackers at Voting Village conventions:
1)hack every machine at the convention in under two hours.
2)hack a voting machine with a mobile phone, and generate false votes.
3)download list of registered voters in an entire precinct.
4)penetrate a machine, generate massive number of false votes, then leave the machine and leave no trace of the penetration or any evidence of the false votes.
Source: https://thenewamerican.com/fraud-and-future-elections/
4)Was Barr aware of a 2018 Associated Press report citing experts who accused Dominion and its major competitors of having “long skimped on security in favor of convenience, making it more difficult to detect intrusions”?
Source: https://thenewamerican.com/fraud-and-future-elections/
5)During the months of Nov. and Dec. 2020, election fraud researchers were publicly spiteful of the reliability of each others methodology, creating a confusing situation. Media outlets called their testimony to the Georgia Senate subcommittee a joke.
Also, Barr had stated that the most important thing was to win the Georgia U.S. Senate run-off, and not to make Republican voters in Georgia sit out the election with talk of election cheating.
Given Barr’s mindset that winning Georgia might be jeopardized by investigating election fraud, the possibility should be investigated that Barr may have cherry-picked the weakest of the fraud research results to hold up as validation for his decision not to conduct an industrial-grade investigation into voting machines. In particular, he said the report that resulted from the Antrim County, MI report was “amateurish”. Did he make his mind up at that point, after reading one report, to not seize and inspect any machines?
Part A section 2 – AG Rosen) On December 23, 2020 Rosen took over as AG, from Barr. This was a time period in which several groups of scientists were completing their investigations into alleged November federal election fraud, and also expanding into monitoring of the upcoming Georgia Dec. 30 special election.
Suggested items to research:
1)To what extent did AG Rosen investigate claims of election fraud? In particular, what research did he do into the analyses of Mealy/Lobue, Jovan Pulitzer, Patrick Byrne, and VoterGA? The claims of these activists, scientists, and their groups included a)machine-produced counterfeit ballots in Fulton County Georgia, b)illegal ballot shredding in Fulton County, c)illegal internet-connected voting machines in Savannah and other Georgia locations, and d)the susceptibility to penetration of the 10-15 year-old software in Dominion machines throughout the entire state. (see Ch. VII for info on the last item)
2)Was AG Rosen complicit in the FBI’s interfering with, and forcing an end to, an investigation by local authorities into illegal ballot-shredding in Georgia, on 12/31/22?
Authorities in Fulton County were notified by activists of illegal ballot-shredding that was being conducted at a warehouse. The shredding operation was stopped, and several tons of ballots were confiscated and taken to the local police station. Several hours later FBI agents arrived, took the ballots and returned them to the shredding truck, and allowed the shredding operation to continue. It is not known who ordered the FBI to interfere. (for details see Ch.VII)
3)Was AG Rosen one of the advisors who talked V.P. Pence out of stopping the scheduled January 6th Senate vote, so that the fraud evidence of the scientists could be investigated?
Shortly before January 6th, V.P. Pence had become aware of the results of the investigation by the scientists associated with Pulitzer, Byrne, Mealy & Lobue, and VoterGA. He made the decision on Jan. 5 to halt the Jan. 6 Senate vote, while the election fraud evidence was investigated. A by-product of the V.P.’s decision was that the scientists were going to be allowed to present a brief summary of their findings to millions of Americans, via the television network’s coverage of the stage outside the Capitol building… which would have been monumental.
A few hours after his decision to halt the Senate vote, the V.P. was talked out of it by his advisor Marc Short, and probably several other advisors. (for details see Ch.VII)
Part B section 1 is part of an 10/08/22 update.
Part B section 1) During the December 2020 Georgia Senate runoffs, the National Republican Senatorial Committee had personnel observing illegal ballot stuffing at dropboxes, but did nothing at the time, nor at any time thereafter. On the timeline, watch from 1:40 to 4:20. https://teapartyorg.ning.com/forum/mullins-national-republican-senatorial-committee-was-made-aware-o
Suggested items to research: The head of the NRSC is Jackie Schutz Zeckman, who is the niece of Mitt Romney. This gives the appearance of a nefarious political reason for not acting on the ballot-stuffing evidence, and should be investigated.
this chapter will be expanded in the future.
—————————————————————————————-
Chapter III.)Research from post “Exposing LA County Elections”. https://patelpatriot.substack.com/p/exposing-la-county-elections
Necessary article for any serious researcher. It is an outline of a portion of the Tiger Project results. 48 pages. We recommend that the researcher print or convert the article to pdf, then research from pdf. (so that you’ll have page numbers while taking notes) Main points are made in pp. 1 through 32.
Summary: research by True the Vote’s “Tiger Project” has shown that election management systems, rather than individual voting machines, can be the main conduits of fraud. See also: https://marygracemedia.substack.com/p/show-notes-catherine-engelbrecht
Suggested items to research: pending
This chapter will be expanded.
—————————————————————————————–
Chapter IV.)6/3/2022 Release of the Cybersecurity & Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) report outlining vulnerabilities of Dominion voting machines. https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ics/advisories/icsa-22-154-01 This is the full-length version; see link below to short version.
Summary of report: Dominion voting machines can be penetrated in two ways by malware. This report was completed February 2021, but was withheld from the public for one-and-a-half years for security purposes. (so that the information would not be available to criminals who might take advantage of the deficiencies, before the deficiencies could be repaired)
Upon clicking the cisa.gov link in the heading of this chapter, a summary of the CISA report will appear. Clicking the various links below the summary will produce various sections that have a combined total 104 pages.
See also: https://www.cisa.gov/uscert/ncas/current-activity/2022/06/03/cisa-releases-security-advisory-dominion-voting-systems-democracy This is a short, one-page summary of the full-length CISA document.
Suggested item(s) to research: Did AG Rosen and former AG Barr know about the February 2021 findings of CISA regarding the penetrability of the Dominion machines? If so, what were their reasons for not supporting the opening of investigations, which could have been done without violating the classified status of the CISA report. (above paragraph is 9/19/22 update)
—————————————————————————————–
Chapter V.) Research from March 2022 posts by GeorgiaRecord.com and OneNewPage.com, regarding Fulton County election fraud analysis results of VoterGA. Note: Chapter V was added 9-24-22)
Part A.)https://www.georgiarecord.com/voterga-provides-conclusive-evidence-showing-fulton-2020-election-results-were-electronically-manipulated/ Below is a copy-and-paste of the 15-point summary of the VoterGA analysis, taken from the Georgia Record link:
- 17,724 final certified Fulton votes have no ballot images
- All 374,128 in-person ballot images for the original count are missing
- 132,284 mail-in ballot images are missing their authentication files
- 4,000+ tabulator images have impossible duplicate time stamps
- 104,994 image files in 1,096 batches have impossible, duplicate time stamps
- All ballot batches were improperly forced to adjudication to facilitate tampering
- 10 ballots were impossibly adjudicated in one minute by one user
- 941 Iiage files were backdated prior to adjudication
- All 16,034 mail-in image authentication files were added days after scanning
- Same 12 tabulators closed 148 early voting polls masking identity of scanning tabulator
- One tabulator serial# impossibly closed two polls in same overlapping times
- One tabulator was never closed and may have added many illegitimate votes
- Images in 288 batches have backfilled time stamps out of scanning chronological order
- 85 closing tapes for 12,024 Election Day ballots are unsigned or missing
- All but two tabulator closing tapes for early voting are unsigned
VoterGA emphasized that while one or two of these may be procedural issues, the electronic
tampering found so far is not limited to Fulton. Co-founder Garland Favorito said: “In fairness
to Fulton County, they did preserve enough of their ballot images to make some of our
research possible. Other counties, like Cobb, destroyed most or all of their original November
2020 images despite federal and state law. This tampering and destruction is proof positive
why Georgians cannot trust the 2020 election results. We desperately need an independent
multi-county audit immediately to secure our elections before 2022 primaries.”
PartB.)https://www.onenewspage.com/video/20220307/14469136/VoterGA-Press-Conference-March-7th.htm Below is a summary, compiled by Mr. Hilt, of the “history of Fulton County voting discrepancies” section of the video in the onenewspage.com link. (Note: the times listed in the summary below are approximate.)
10:11- History discussion starts
12:45- Single Point of Attack – a term describing the nature of the electronic voting system used in Georgia, and a description of its vulnerabilities, which allow the possibility of centrally-controlled fraud.
13:20- fraud uncovered in 2016-2017
13:55- servers wiped
15:40- how it should have been done
16:15- cover-up in 2017
16:20- new system installed
17:30- old flash drives inserted, corrupting the new system with malware from old system
17:55- first election using new system
21:00- end of history segment of video
The next update will include the results of a search for critics of the analytical methods used by VoterGA in their research.
——————————————————————————————–
Chapter VI, below, was added in an 10/08/22 update. The chapter will be expanded regularly for the next several months.
Chapter VI.) A collection of absentee ballot fraud cases from previous decades. This chapter is being included in order to give a historical perspective to the 2020 election… something that has been sorely lacking in all discussions of the election.
The media would like to let an uninformed public believe that major election fraud has been a rare thing in the nation’s past. Why? Because ignorance of election history makes it easier for the public to believe the media’s claim that the 2016-2020 period of political hand-to-hand combat, riots, arson, and murder, was followed by a clean, fraud-free national election… an election that was supposedly conducted by honest organizations, rather than nefarious organizations staffed by experienced perpetrators of election fraud.
As will be demonstrated during future updates of this chapter, election fraud techniques are, in fact, handed down from generation to generation, among the local politicians in many areas of the nation.
Part A.)Research from book Deliver the Vote: A History of Election Fraud, An American Political Tradition 1742-2004 by Tracy Campbell
P. 281 – In a 2001 report written by the Kentucky secretary of state, the magnitude of the problem was candidly expressed: “Absentee vote fraud in Kentucky is as serious a threat to legitimate elections as outdated punch cards are in Florida.”
P. 281 – One candidate for sheriff stated he could prove that votes were being bought, “if I wanted to get killed.”
Pp. 282-283 – In Dodge County, in south-central Georgia, a primary was held in July 1996 for an assortment of local offices…. both candidates, McCranie and Mullis, were convicted of… conspiracy to buy votes….
P. 285 – No state had gone as far as Oregon, where, beginning in 1996, all elections were conducted by mail… A study of the 2000 Oregon election showed that five percent of voters in one county acknowledged that others had marked their ballots and 2.4 percent admitted someone else had actually signed them.
Pp. 286-287 – On Election Day (Miami), November 4, 1997… “Once an absentee ballot (is) sent in the mail”, (David) Leahy admitted, “we lose control of it. That’s where the vote broker comes in. They can buy it, take it, or talk a vote out of someone who doesn’t know what to do with it.”
P. 288 – …a 1984 Florida Supreme Court ruling that stated courts could invalidate an election’s results if fraud could be proven to have permeated the balloting.
P. 289 – In February 1998, a (Florida) grand jury found that absentee-ballot brokers were essentially “thieves who steal democracy,” and concluded that fraud had tainted the election results.
P. 290 – On March 4, Judge (Thomas S.) Wilson (Jr.)… ordered a new election in two months. (Florida)
P. 291 – A study conducted by Caltech and MIT concluded: “The convenience that on-demand absentees (ballots) produce is bought at a significant cost to the real and perceived integrity of the voting process.”
P. 330 – By 2004, one of the largest manufacturers of touch-screen voting machines was Diebold, Inc., whose CEO, Walden O’Dell… boasted, “I am committed to helping Ohio deliver its electoral vote to the president.”
P. 330 – A Diebold vice president, Thomas Swidarski, dismissed charges that programmers could steal votes, and in a phrase eerily reminiscent of Boss Tweed, stated: “Programmers do not set up the elections, election officials do.”
Part B.)Research from article “A Brief History of Mail-In Vote Fraud”, by Dan O’Donnell, 05/28/20 https://newstalk1130.iheart.com/featured/common-sense-central/content/2020-05-28-a-brief-history-of-mail-in-vote-fraud/
1)1982 Illinois gubernatorial election, extensive fraud ring set up by Chicago Democratic party officials. Main fraud tool was absentee ballots. After extensive federal investigation, 63 convicted on vote fraud charges.
2)1994 in Greene County Alabama, 12 community leaders convicted of mass producing counterfeit absentee ballots.
3)1994 Hialeah, Florida, mayor’s race voided and rerun after mass production of counterfeit absentee ballots was discovered.
4)2003, East Chicago, Illinois, mayoral race voided and rerun due to extensive election fraud.
5)2008 activist group ACORN investigated for election fraud in 10 states, five members convicted.
6)2012 widespread intimidation of elderly and disabled voters in Martin, Kentucky. Absentee ballots involved. 90 months jail time for mayoral candidate Thomasine Robinson.
7)2017 Dallas City Council election, widespread mail-in ballot harvesting operation discovered.
8)2018 North Carolina, large-scale absentee ballot fraud operation by GOP congressional candidate Mark Harris.
9)2005 Commission on Federal Election Reform concludes that “Absentee ballots remain the largest source of potential voter fraud.”
—————————————————————————
Chapter VII.) Research by activist Patrick Byrne, as described in his book The Deep Rig. (This chapter added in 10/18/22 update.) https://www.amazon.com/Deep-Rig-Election-Fraud-Donald/dp/B093DWY992
Part A.)From Ch. 7 of the book. This chapter has 23 pages, that are not numbered. I’ve taken the liberty of numbering them myself. The chapter outlines the activities of Patrick Byrne and his scientists during the month of December 2021 and first week of January 2022. Important items are listed below.
Pg.2)How Byrne’s associate General Flynn became an ‘enemy of the state’.
Pg.4)How Byrne almost got the opportunity, in mid-December, to show Trump the results of his group’s research.
Pg.10)At an end-of-December meeting of Byrne and several of his scientists, it is disclosed that: 1)At a vote-counting location in Savannah, GA, an internet connection has been discovered between a wireless card inserted in a vote-counting machine, and a smart thermostat mounted on the wall. Someone from China Telecom had come through the internet onto the smart thermostat, in order to connect to the machine. 2)the software installed in all Georgia Dominion machines is ten to fifteen years old, and is highly susceptible to penetration.
Pp. 6 & 11-14)Byrne associate infiltrates Fulton County ballot warehouse, gets photographic evidence, which is relayed to Georgia State Senate. Senate then demands to inspect the warehouse. Shredder truck arrives shortly thereafter, loads several tons of ballots and begins illegally shredding. The shredding operation is stopped by local authorities. FBI arrives shortly thereafter, takes control, then orders shredding to continue.
Pp. 16-17)An end-of-December meeting is held. Byrne’s scientists present results of their research to a group of congressmen. Included in the group is delegate sent by V.P. Pence. The vice-president, upon hearing the evidence, says he will halt the U.S. Senate vote scheduled for January 6, while the evidence is investigated. Byrne and his scientists are given speaker’s badges, and are to be allowed to present the evidence to the American public on the January 6th event stage.
Pp. 19 & 21-23)At the last minute, V.P. Pence is convinced by advisor Marc Short, and possibly others, to discard his plan to postpone the U.S. Senate vote while fraud is investigated. Byrne and his scientists were prevented, on Jan 6, from speaking on-stage and presenting their fraud evidence to the American public. The group had been given speaker’s badges, and had been seated near the stage, but were not allowed on-stage.
Coming in next update: “Suggested things to research from Ch.VII”