Senate Hearings on Election Fraud

Thanks, I appreciate that. It is true that a lot of the lawsuits were thrown out due to procedural issues. Specifically, standing has come up a lot. Although it is also true that in many of those cases, the opinions further examine the merits, entertaining the idea that "even if we were to find standing", the case would have failed on the merits as well.

The specific allegation you are citing is related to the error rate of the voting machines composed in a forensic audit of the machines by Allied Security Operations Group. You can find the full audit where this allegation is made here: https://www.9and10news.com/content/...higan_Forensics_Report_121320_v2_REDACTED.pdf

The claim in the report is on page 2, entry 6 to 8:

So let me step through this. I am examining each piece as I go. I have not delved deeply into this claim before.

1) The allowable election error rate established by the Federal Election Commission guidelines is of 1 in 250,000 ballots

ASOG makes it clear where they are getting this info with a url near the bottom of page 17:

Following the link, in section 4.1.1 (page 79, or 87 of the PDF file), you can find the below explanation (emphasis added):

Upon inspection, there are immediately a few problems with the statement:

1. The guidelines come from EAC, not the FEC.
   
2. The rate is 1 of 125,000, not 1 of 250,000.
   
3. The the error rate is referring to votes, not ballots.

To understand the distinction between ballots and votes, you need to understand what they mean by ballot position. It is defined in the appendix:

From this information, it is very clear that when the guidelines refer to a single "vote", they are talking about a marking in a specific contest, with the number of expected approximate votes to ballot positions being ¼. For example, if you voted only for the POTUS election, this should be counted as one vote. If you voted in POTUS and Senate, that is two votes - each that need to be evaluated for accuracy.

Back to evaluating the claim. I'm not sure where they get FEC or the 250,000 number from, but they have a link to EAC and the 125,000 figure further down. However, they never appear to clarify the figure is for votes, and importantly, how a single vote is not the same as a single ballot.

I have to determine this statement as being flagrantly wrong.


2) We observed an error rate of 68.05%.

ASOG clearly indicates this error rate is in violation of the "1 in 250,000 ballots" guidelines they previously stated. For the purposes of examining this, I will assume they intended "1 in 125,000 votes" and compare it to that. ASOG describes how they arrive at this number in the previously quoted section:

So, they counted up the number of individual events, total number of events that were errors, and divided errors by total events. If you turn to page 17 again, they cite specific events they included:

The document they linked earlier spells out how to determine an error rate, which is in that same 4.1.1 section (below emphasis added):

From this information, it's very clear that the way in which you calculate an error is very different from the way ASOG did. Section 4.1.1 is titled Accuracy Requirements. All of this information is talking about how accurate was the final tabulation? In laymans terms, it seeks to answer the question, how far off were the reported results from the correct ones?

ASOG's methodology of taking an event log, and dividing the total number of events by the number of events that were marked as errors, does not follow the guidelines one bit. There is no numeric vote data for "Ballot's size exceeds maximum expected ballot size." In particular, there is no vote evaluated because the ballot is rejected. Therefore, accuracy reading the vote has not come into play yet.

Further, there is nowhere in the ASOG forensic report that even uses the terms "report item", "overvote", "ballot count", or "undervote". ASOG does not mention the "reports" that section 4.1.1 is talking about. I am not going to speculate why the methodology ASOG uses is so very off from the section they specifically cite this maximum allowable error rate from, but their error rate is very clearly not comparable to the report total error rate they cite as being violated.

Therefore, I must find this claim false in its entirety.​

 

Why didn't anyone look into potential voter fraud that benefited Trump/
States like Texas, Florida, Ohio, or Utah?
I mean, if mail in ballots is tantamount to voter fraud. What the heck is going on in Utah?

Romney counters Trump: 90 percent of 'very Republican' Utah votes by mail

 

Trump and his coterie of legal geniuses have not been able to produce any evidence of voter fraud in court such that they have lost every case brought on that issue. Why waste time having hearings in the Senate for a non-existent issue? Face the fact: Trump and his criminal minions tried to cheat in every conceivable way and still lost by over 7 MILLION VOTES. He and his coterie of legal geniuses have lost over 60 legal cases. He and his conspiracy theory followers need to go away so the adults can try to fix some of the damage Trump has done.

 

By now it should be clear to everyone that our corrupt bipartisan ruling political class will never allow the election officials, workers and observers who participated in this massive election fraud to ever testify publicly under oath about the counting of the ballots.

The fix is in.

 

The RP committees who have conducted hearings should have ordered election officials, workers and observers to appear and testify under oath.
The fact that this has not happened is very telling.

 

Unless one Senator and one Congressmen (we have 1 refuse to accept the electors. Then we have a vote in the House. One State, One vote.

 

That kind of thing would not be necessary if our corrupt political class would just stop rigging elections.

"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." Mark Twain

 

Adults like the ones who were burning up cities? Those adults?

 

I call it a duty. A word that is scarcely used these days.

 

How about some details and evidence of this massive fraud?? The words are tossed around as if they were a hard fact........yet, the proof is severely lacking.
Just because Trump makes these claims , without evidence , and without credibly .......is not an argument anymore. What is evident is that Trump's conduct is undermining democracy . He just wants to hang onto POWER for Power's sake . His multiple lawsuits proved that the system is solid and working. It is a good day for democracy and not so much for a dysfunctional "leader"

 

There is an old saying of how can you trust juries consisting of people not smart enough to be able get out of jury duty.

 

Easy. Say you believe in the death penalty for parking tickets, or swing the other way and say all police are craven liars. I've used both.

 

No matter how many times you and others post it - it is just more of the never ending inaccurate info, lies, propaganda, etc

The Senator/Congressperson lodge an objection. If it is deemed "votable" then the House and the Senate retire to their chambers and can debate for up to two hours. Then they vote. ONE vote per PERSON not one vote state by state delegation

Both the House & Senate would have to support the objection. Zero chance that the House does; highly unlikely that it survives the Senate

Maybe Trump and his followers will find a way to complete their coup as you and the other "patriots" cheer it on. It just won't happen that way.

 

You could get a sense of what was coming when they started campaigning against voter I.D.

 

Attempted Coup......we know when the last one was. Composed mostly of unidentified whistle blowers and Russian paid for Dossiers.
This won't be a coup. This is about saving the Democracy. You can't have a President when 74,000,000 know it was fraud. We have affidavits and evidence. Just need a hearing.

 

I See the Republican senator from Alabama wants to put his fellow Republicans between a rock and a hard place. Either vote to get rid of democracy or risk incurring the wrath of the authoritarian base.

 

So multiple republican lead states governments interfered in recounts to ensure Binden's victory? (Including Texas which tried to reach into the electoral processes of other States via its Supreme Court bid BTW !!!) Then those same republican lead governments pressured their State Courts into rejecting all of Trumps multiple legal appeals, and the all the judicial authorities in each of those court cases willingly bowed to this pressure?

Meanwhile all those republican members of the Senate and Congress who came in support of Trumps initial demands for recounts and his allegations of fraud and who demanded proper investigations into those claims were actually all the while plotting to secretly undermine him? As were his Attorney General, the heads of the FBI and Homeland Security, all employees of those agencies tasked with monitoring the legitimacy of the investigation or investigating vote tampering allegations together with all republican appointed State electoral officials and republican leaning members of the State law enforcement in States where Binden won?

And your evidence is?

 

The only way out is if they dismiss the jury for some court reason and consider it time served.

 

Actually, all you have to do is during jury questioning in the selection process is state you have a prejudice of some kind concerning the parties - really pro or anti police or if civil you have a prejudice against the company, something about the party, hate insurance companies etc.
A judge I know had to reset a trial because too many potential jurors admitted they have a strong prejudice against Latinos even giving reasons; sister raped by a Latino, terrorized by a Latino gang, had a rotten Latino girlfriend, thinks Latinos come from illegal immigrants so all should be sent to Mexico etc.

 

Trump did not lose by 7 million votes. As much as you may hate the electoral college, in fact that is how presidential elections work.
I think most Democrats know there was massive election fraud because that is the ONLY reason to oppose investigating the election - having zero confidence the investigation would confirm the election outcome legality and accuracy.

 

It's mazing how one man with courage can inspire.

 

I'm saying that if nothing was stolen it doesn't matter how loud you shout "stop thief". Gaslighting doesn't work if there are several million witnesses to your lie.

 

That's my State too, and most other States I know of

 

We all know that I am a doom and gloom political cynic and so this will come as absolutey no shock to anyone when I proclaim this to be just another dog and pony show aimed at appeasing the VERY ANGRY Right without actually finding any meaningful voting fraud but while giving the corrupt DNC a free 'stolen' ride into the Oval Office with spineless GOPer politicians essentially endorsing the open theft.

Meh . . . but it would be cool if for once the 'system' were to prove me wrong.

 

Yep . . . for years I wondered what juicy piece of blackmail the DNC was using to keep jerking Robert's chain and get him to rule like a radical leftist hater of the Constitution on key decisions and now I do think that it was all about the Epstein connection after all. Ironically . . . it has surfaced anyway with at least one photo circulating with him in a very nearly intimate positioning with Eptein's madam.