(FBI)
Law enforcement needs to get involved with an apparent hack of the 2024 presidential election, in which Donald Trump was handed a "victory" that he likely did not earn at the ballot box -- with Democrat Kamala Harris being deprived of a presidency that she probably did earn. Why is law enforcement needed now? In a Substack post, one of the nation's foremost election-security experts, Stephen Spoonamore, explains. Under the headline "MORE people with $100+ checks from Musk's PAC please. NC Data," focusing on Elon Musk's peculiar activities heading into election day and noting that not just any old law-enforcement agency will do; it needs to be an outfit with "oomph," such as the FBI, Spoonamore writes:
Stephen Spoonamore
Dec 05, 2024I am not in law enforcement. At this point, someone in that space needs to get involved hard in an election that has been emitting foul smells for weeks now. I am drafting letters to appropriate state- level agencies with the following concerns:
(1) Hundreds of people have come forward with this claim;
(2) They never signed up for any of Elon Musk's contests or petitions;
(3) They got a check, thanking them for signing up.
If they are telling the truth, it means someone has committed -- at the bare minimum -- identity theft. If the person who committed the theft got paid a referral or finder's fee, they also committed a variety of possible financial crimes, including wire fraud.
Does this get to the actual reasons behind the fraud? Not yet. But when you find and question the people who entered these people into the system, and probably got a fee for it, you find out who they reported to, and you move up the ladder.
This probably is the most important story of our lifetimes, with the outcome likely to determine if the U.S. remains a democracy or comes under the thumb of an authoritarian regime, led by a wannabe dictator, Trump, who is grossly unfit to fill the job (see here and here.)
Can law enforcement make a difference in how this story turns out? Absolutely, Spoonamore writes:
This is the work of Law Enforcement. They would have the power to expand the scope and scale of this search beyond my citizen-driven and anecdotal collection process. They could demand records. That would be big. They could also automate or compel the process of matching up check-recipients with their status on the voter rolls. I am going to predict the proportion of mismatch is highest in PA, NV, NC, and AZ.
If Joe Biden would like to fire Chris Wray this week, rather than waiting for the incoming felon to do it, he could appoint someone who could use the FBI’s vast resources to get this done. I would free up my schedule if asked.
And why? The only compelling reason to put in the huge effort and spend millions of dollars to organize hundreds of thousands of people in swing states into a private version of a precinct poll books, including in many cases their digital signatures? Election Fraud.
I don’t know anyone who builds a weapon who doesn’t intend to use it.
While I have been chasing down who was unwillingly sucked into this duplicate ePollBook, a lot of smart people have continued digging through the comically fraudulent election data. In the past several days, I have had multiple insiders tell me Kamala herself even thinks something is wrong with the results.
And?
The final data now being certified in various states is going to be done, with (in most cases) ZERO checking against the actual hand-marked paper ballots. In some states, after the election is certified, they will do limited RLAs (Risk Limiting Audits) but I don’t know how many will actually look at the presidential race. Here in PA, the RLAs will be done only on the state treasurer’s race. If there is any mismatch between the will of the voters on the ballots for president, and the results the tabulation machines put out, it’s gonna be a fight to even know.
One of the many volunteer data crunchers (Thx DM) has taken the laughable NC data and run parallel curves of drop-offs/under votes/
bullet ballots based on if a precinct went for Trump or Harris and the AG response ratios down ballot. This result is not output from any human decision-making I have ever seen. This output is exactly the result I see frequently when a programmed algorithm is fighting to create a fixed result in a highly noisy set of actual human/natural responses. For those who love to run the numbers themselves. Here is a NC sheet of the raw data.
For those wondering why not just go down ballot to the governor's race . . . well, that race was so bonkers, with a normal Democrat up against a Trump-endorsed Nazi, porn fan with views so unorthodox it even turned off many GOP voters.
To find machine forced data differences between two different fields, you have to have some understanding of “Normal” data sets and then compare the suspect data sets.
In NC, the suspect data set is the Presidential Race. The AGs race seemingly is the most normal.
DM (and others) are running the same algorithms against neighboring states to NC. I bet the data.
Oh. Business note. I have been approached about writing a first-person book about my 25-year crusade against election hackers. Pending signing the deal, anyone who has an annual subscription to this Substack will get a signed first edition copy. I'm not sure what is supposed to be premium content, but that’s what I’ve come up with at the moment.
Come on Kamala. Get in the game.
No comments:
Post a Comment