At least, even if we didn’t like the results, we wouldn’t have to argue with each other if they were valid or not.
Election fraud is a crime. Given human nature, there always has and always will be attempts at election fraud when the stakes are so high.
The Heritage Foundation keeps a database of numerous cases of election fraud in which convictions have been made not accusations but convicted fraud, judicial findings, and such.(*1)
It deeply disturbed me right from the start when the mainstream media insisted there was “no evidence of widespread election fraud” in the 2020 presidential election. After a personal study, I can report: they were irresponsibly wrong or outright lying.
To their discredit, the media’s approach was like the little child who covers his/her eyes: if I can’t see it, it doesn’t exist.
It isn’t hard to find dozens even hundreds of credible sources that, even when not directly proving fraud, provide more evidence to raise even the most skeptical eyebrow.
As Peter Navarro points out, election fraud is accomplished not by a single “silver bullet” but by “a thousand cuts” on a wide scale.(*2)
With a little effort, I found that yes, Virginia, there is widespread evidence of fraud! Yes, including Virginia, as well as Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona, and unsurprisingly, Minnesota.
All things considered, there are four major areas of concern:
• sloppy voter rolls that make it practical for illegitimate votes
• mail-in and expanded absentee voting rules perhaps the easiest way to cheat
• the vulnerability of electronic voting equipment to manipulation (even easier?)
• worst of all: too many people in positions of power who won’t act to correct the problems, or will even enable further abuse
Of course, proving election fraud is more difficult than suspecting it. Like any crime, the goal is to get away with it. To prevent it, we need to understand how it happens.
There are many forms and places in which it can take place including false registrations, impersonation at the polls, illegal assistance or intimidation, ineligible voting, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee or mail-in voting, and buying or selling votes.(*3)
In a pre-election debate on KSTP-TV, Minnesota Secretary of State Steve Simon boasted about 16 individual cases of election fraud that were prosecuted. He was called out on that, since it was akin to celebrating that 16 people were arrested for DUI on a given night while everyone knows those are only the ones who got caught. It’s unrealistic that every crime of intoxicated driving or election fraud was identified and dealt with.
Mainstream media has been grossly negligent, both in what is presented as “reporting” and what is ignored. Instead of asking direct, hard questions like Dan Rather and Mike Wallace used to do, Big Media now functions as a promotional arm of government rather than a watchdog.
However, Dinesh D’Souza’s 2,000 Mules, with research by Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips of True the Vote, by itself has shown the 2020 presidential election was stolen.
Before ranting that Mules was debunked, one needs to read the book version which lays out in careful detail the method and math of how illegal ballots were used to flip the election in five key states. The book, which followed the original documentary film release, also shoots holes in the debunking attempts.
In case you’re not familiar, the term “mule” comes from drug trafficking where someone is paid to deliver an illegal product on behalf of someone else.
True the Vote used cell phone tracking data to identify the activity of people in Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania who made numerous visits to ballot drop boxes after having also visited “stash houses” to apparently pick up ballots. Many of the multiple drop box visits occurred in the middle of the night.
Right off the bat, the question arises why someone with a valid vote, even if he/she delivered it at 3 a.m., would have a purpose to go to several other drop boxes. This pattern of overnight drop box visits by the mules with handfuls of ballots was backed up by video confirmation where it was available. States were required to have video surveillance of the drop boxes, but it was sporadic at best.
The number 2,000 comes from the most active offenders; widening the criteria a bit identified at least 54,651 mules.
You need to read the book and view the film to appreciate the full details and impact.
Separately, Seth Keshel, a former Army captain of military intelligence, provides his own analysis identifying 74 mule rings, including two in Minnesota.(*4)
All of that is before we get to the censorship and financial influence of social media and Big Tech companies, which is another long, detailed story. The recently released “Twitter Files” showed everyone how the government and Big Tech conspired to influence the election, among other things. Mark Zuckerberg put millions into tainting the election process, and his Facebook/Meta manipulated search results and censored so-called “misinformation.”(*5) Other tech companies appear just as complicit.
There are so many weaknesses in our election process that come into view when one pays attention.
“Ballot harvesting” is when someone collects absentee or mail-in ballots from others and delivers them. This is legal in some states, including Minnesota where an agent is allowed to handle ballots for up to three other people, although that limit isn’t enforced.(*6)
“Ballot trafficking” is when there is payment involved, either for someone to vote for a specific candidate, or make deliveries of valid or phony ballots for a fee. It is NEVER allowed that any kind of payment can be involved in the voting process.
In many ballot trafficking situations, fraudsters prey on the most vulnerable: the poor, elderly, those whose primary language is not English, the homeless. Often some aid or assistance may be provided to them in exchange for a “Sign here, and we’ll take care of your ballot for you.”
Voting at home
The largest hole in election security is the early voting and mail-in methods. Across the nation, states used the cover of COVID fear to invoke emergency powers and turn our election processes into something never seen before.
When you vote in person at your precinct, there is a formal supervised process. You check in (even without ID), receive your ballot, proceed to a private booth and mark your choices, then turn in your completed ballot, and receive a red “I Voted” sticker. In this environment, there is little opportunity to be unduly influenced or do something illegal.
Contrast that with letting people vote in their homes in the name of making it “easy.”
This is like a teacher assigning a take-home test, and allowing anyone to return it for multiple students. Do you think there might be some cheating?
Even the witness signature requirement is weak. How valid is the signature verification process when hundreds of thousands of ballots must be processed on the receiving end?
In Michigan, Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson directed that deviations in signatures should be overlooked with doubts resolved in favor of inclusion and counting the ballots. That was later ruled invalid by a judge, but too late to affect the election results.(*7)
It’s also important to note, as Sebastian Gorka points out, that once phony or illegally handled ballots are placed into the stream with legitimate votes, there is no longer any way to identify or remove them. The outer envelopes carry confirming information, but ballots are anonymous.
Cheaters are skilled at identifying people who are on the voter rolls but unlikely to vote (possibly dead) and request absentee ballots of their behalf.
There are cases where people in nursing homes or dementia units had nearly 100 percent turnout, due to someone who “helped” them by making sure they were registered, received their ballot, and of course, voted.
Another tactic is “cloning” in which an additional voter registration is created at someone’s second property address. If you own a cabin, was a vote cast in your name there without you knowing it?
Even worse is when ballots are mailed to everyone on the list. For those who know where to look, such as college campuses where students have long moved away but their names and addresses remain on the rolls, collecting those ballots is easy picking.
Seth Keshel nicely describes the need for clean, accurate voter rolls in another piece.(*8)
To do it right would take starting over and having legal voters re-register. It would be a major undertaking, but how else can we remove the dead, illegal aliens, duplicates, and phantoms from being part of our elections process?
You have to make an appointment to see a doctor, a reservation to eat at certain restaurants, and buy a ticket to go to a ball game or concert. Why not confirm your intention for something as crucial as voting with validated registration?
Is this making it easy to vote? No.
Is it voter suppression? Heck, no!
Everyone who is eligible is encouraged to vote, but is also expected to put some effort into it.
Government doesn’t go out of its way to make any other tasks “easy.” Try getting a permit for something. So why should the all-important act of voting be sacrificed?
Remember that voting is a right but also a responsibility. The people we elect are given the power to make the rules we live by, to determine what we pay in taxes, and to operate (or abuse) the system our country runs on.
In American Thinker, Jay Valentine describes how an election manager can change the zip codes on thousands of voter records before mailing out ballots, which then are returned as undeliverable.(*9)
After they’re collected, the zip codes are restored. The National Change of Address Database doesn’t pick up the switch that quickly, and the affected citizens continued to receive all their other mail without knowing the difference.
Consider this: if you move even a few miles, you’re likely in a new precinct, but your name remains in the previous voter roll until corrected. If a ballot is mailed to your old address, it’s potentially available for someone to hijack.
Just in our family, I can think of a couple situations where it would have been simple to vote in two locations previous and current addresses. They didn’t, of course, but if they had, would anyone have bothered or been able to figure out it out?
There’s an argument about who originally said something to the effect of “Whoever counts the votes is who wins.” Regardless of who said it first, the truth of it stings.
Writing on Substack, Erik van Mechelen of Midwest Seeds goes into brilliant detail on the vulnerability of electronic voting equipment. His book [S]elections in Minnesota is a must-read.(*10)
It boils down to two gaping holes of concern when we feed our ballot into a machine: Internet connectivity and the programming of the tabulator.
It’s only common sense that any equipment that can be accessed remotely is vulnerable in these days of hacking. Such hacking could be by the big bad Russians, or more likely, it’s an intentional back door for those in the fraud business.
We’ll start in the hot spot of Antrim County, Michigan, where a 4G wireless modem was found in a vote tabulator.(*11)
By the way, van Mechelen reports that 65 Minnesota counties use that same model.
Antrim County is also famous for confirmed errors by the voting equipment(*12) as well as being the example engineer Jeff Lenberg used in demonstrating on video how easy it is for a programmer to flip votes from one candidate to another while making the machine’s vote reports match, even though the original paper ballots intended something else.(*13)
Next we go to Mesa County, Colorado, the center of the documentary [S]election Code.(*14) This film highlights Elections Clerk and Recorder Tina Peters who was certain she was running a flawless election process until . . .
the Grand Junction city council election of April 2021.
Grand Junction historically has been a two-thirds conservative community, so it was surprising, to say the least, when four challengers all were victorious over the conservative candidates.
The stunning moment of truth for Peters was when she realized that those underdogs knew they had won and even knew the margin of victory half an hour BEFORE the election officials had completed their work and announced results!
This began the exposing of how the machines are programmed. See the three Mesa County Reports.(*15)
As required by law, Peters had backed up election records, although she had to go beyond help from her own county IT department to do so. After a vendor installed a software update which was termed a “trusted build,” a comparison of the before and after records revealed the changes and deletions that the update made.
It’s naïve to think that could be the only place suspicious programming was used in electronic voting equipment. It’s just the best known one.
van Mechelen writes in depth about Cast Vote Records (CVR). Simply, these are image captures of each ballot that goes through a machine, which “allow the machines to tell on themselves,” he says. Of course, it would also allow them to prove their legitimacy, if used transparently.
That leads to several more curious questions.
First, he notes that machines have an on/off setting for recording the Cast Vote Records, as documented in an operator’s manual. Why would it ever be turned off, since that’s the function that can provide validation?
Next, try asking for the Cast Vote Records from your county elections department through a Freedom of Information (FOI) request. The typical responses, he explains, are: “we don’t have them, we don’t have to create them, and/or we don’t have to give them to you.”(*16)
This is consistent with the response to my FOI request for CVRs in Hennepin County for the November 2022 election: “Hennepin County did not produce a Cast Vote Record for the 2022 election. Ballots and therefore ballot images are not available for public inspection per Minnesota Statute 204B.40.”
Only a minuscule amount of CVRs have been publicly obtained in Minnesota so far, however, Rhode Island was able to produce CVRs for its entire state.(*17)
In a letter to Crow Wing County in early 2022, Steve Simon stated the system “worked as it was designed” while in effect advising the county not to follow through on requests for CVRs.(*18) Thus, in context, his message appears to be that the system is designed to keep details hidden from citizens. Why?
That leads to the fourth, and largest problem of all: those in positions of authority who refuse to act to clean up the system, or intentionally find ways to make it weaker.
This includes elected officials, appointed workers, judges, and law enforcement who use their power to advance their political leanings through actions or by not acting. Not everyone, of course, but enough to keep the systemic fraud going.
As shown in Mesa County, election workers can follow the book and unknowingly perpetuate fraud. Others may smell a rat but stay silent out of fear of retaliation.
Hans vans Spakovsky, former commissioner at the Federal Election Commission, explained the strategy of an activist group suing a complicit state official. Instead of defending the laws in place, the official agrees to a settlement waiving or changing election law requirements.
That certainly looks to be the situation in 2020 when Steve Simon settled two cases that removed witness requirements and extended deadlines.(*19)
If you’re not shaking your head in disgust yet, let’s look at some more statistical data.
• Wisconsin: in Madison, there were 341 registered voters at a 15-unit apartment building; 385 registered voters at a 184-bed care center; and 323 registered voters at an address at which the building was demolished in 2018.(*20)
• Colorado: 5,500 dead people and 25,000 non-residents voted.(*21)
• Michigan: census data shows 7.6 million residents of legal voting age, but the state has 8.1 million registered voters.(*22)
• Florida: a resident received three voter registration cards in the mail with names of people he didn’t know, two of which were dead.(*23)
• Pennsylvania: the number of ballots cast was 202,377 higher than the number of people who voted.(*24)
• Arizona: the cities of Topawa and Sells had ratios of voters to voting age population of 158% and 200% respectively.(*25)
• Arizona, 2022: from April to October, a net 225,171 “inactive” voters were added to the voter registration records.(*26)
• In the documentary Standing in the Gap, Joe Oltmann points out there were 166 million registered voters in 2020 and 155 million votes cast, a 93% turnout which he describes as a “probability next to zero.” For comparison, the last Super Bowl had 112 million viewers. Are that many people more interested in elections than football?
It goes on and on and . . .
The website www.2020electionirregularities.com describes many more cases of statistical anomalies, suspicious conduct, reports on voting machines and mail-in ballots, etc. Go see for yourself, but allow plenty of time.
Let’s highlight a Minnesota reference: in 2020, about 700,000 absentee ballots were not connected to a voter in the statewide voter registration system (SVRS) 25 days after the election, and five days AFTER the state canvassing board certified the results.(*27)
And in 2022 it happened again: two weeks after the election, only 317,372 of 657,575 accepted absentee ballots, 48%, were aligned with a voter in the SVRS.(*28)
Further, a citizen volunteer group of mathematicians, scientists, IT veterans, and engineers compiled a statistical vote analysis of the 2020 presidential election in 14 states, including Minnesota, specifically looking at the “vote dumps” instances in which one candidate received an abnormally large amount of votes in a short period.(*29)
In every case, the dumps favored Biden. Minnesota’s recorded a net advantage 113,755 votes for Biden, which they assessed to be a probability of 1 in 10-to-81st-power.
All 14 states studied had something similar, some of them multiple dumps. For reference, they determined a probability of 1 in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 (10-to-58th power) is equivalent of being dealt 10 royal flushes in a row.
Their report does not attempt to uncover the why or how these vote spikes occurred, but simply documents that they did.
Seth Keshel provides a 10-point plan for restoring true election integrity:(*30)
1. clean out the voter rolls
2. ban all electronic election equipment
3. voter ID with paper ballots only
4. ban mail-in voting (exception for overseas military and disabled)
5. ban early voting
6. drastically smaller precincts
7. ban ballot harvesting
8. election day is a holiday
9. new reporting requirements for transparency
10. heavy prison sentences for all who commit fraud
Keshel points out that a key piece is that four of them can realistically be dealt with at the county level. Given who is in charge in state offices and the unlikelihood of them making any meaningful improvements, citizens need to take up the fight at the COUNTY level, he advises.
Counties are responsible for certifying their election results, and have some say in how elections are conducted to make certain their results are valid.
The four tasks for counties are making the voter registration rolls accurate, eliminating machines, refusing drop boxes for harvesting, and opening the system for public inspection.(*31) For its 2022 primary election, Otero County, NM, removed drop boxes and machines and went to hand-counting ballots.(*32)
Keshel is developing an organization of citizens to work on restoring election integrity from the ground up. For more information to become involved, see the link in footnote 31.
Quoted in [S]elections in Minnesota, Jeffrey O’Donnell nails it: “If Americans’ votes are to be recorded and counted by machines, every aspect of those machines’ operation, configuration, and data must be recorded, immediately available at no cost or administrative burden to citizens and their independent examiners, and confirmed 100% accurate through that independent verification. The absence or shortfall of any of those three imperatives (recorded, available, and independently verified) should immediately cause the public to distrust both the purported results from those machines, and also anyone who insists that they accept those results.”
I support that standard for those in charge of elections: provide all the data, easily and promptly, and if it’s verifiable, all the “election deniers” will be quickly silenced. Anything less invites no, requires suspicion, deservedly so.
2. Peter Navarro, “The Immaculate Deception: Six Key Dimensions of Election Irregularities:” 3. https://www.scribd.com/document/488495896/Navarro-Report#
3. Dinesh D’Souza, 2,000 Mules (book version): 35-36
4. Seth Keshel, “74 Harvesting and Mule Rings: Where They Were, How They Did It, And The Impact - Our Work is Now Corroborated,” https://skeshel.substack.com/p/74-harvesting-and-mule-rings-where
5. 2,000 Mules: 10, 114
6. Newsweek, “What Project Veritas Is Claiming About Ilhan Omar and Illegal Ballot Harvesting,” https://www.newsweek.com/project-veritas-ilhan-omar-illegal-ballot-harvesting-1534555
7. 2,000 Mules: 94
8. Keshel, “Point One To True Election Integrity: Clean Out the Voter Rolls,” https://skeshel.substack.com/p/point-one-to-true-election-integrity
9. Jay Valentine, American Thinker, “Here’s How They Did it: Real-time Election Fraud,” https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/11/heres_how_they_did_it_realtime_election_fraud.html
10. Erik van Mechelen, [S]elections in Minnesota: an Introduction to How Machines Controlled 2020 and Why We Must Return to Hand Counting Paper Ballots, https://leanpub.com/sim2020/
11. [S]elections in Minnesota: 31
12. “Antrim Michigan Forensics Report,” https://www.depernolaw.com/uploads/2/7/0/2/27029178/antrim_michigan_forensics_report_%5B121320%5D_v2_%5Bredacted%5D.pdf
13. “Hacking Democracy Antrim County, MI Edition,” https://rumble.com/vgi89t-hacking-democracy-antrim-county-mi-edition.html
14. [S]election Code, https://selectioncode.com/
15. “Mesa County Reports 1, 2, and 3,” https://frankspeech.com/article/mesa-county-voting-system-forensic-examination-and-analysis-reports-1-2-and-3
16. van Mechelen, “How to Use Public Data Requests to Access Public Records for Better Decision Making (And to Help Government Where Current Processes Do Not Account for Fundamental Weaknesses in Overall Transparency),” https://erikvanmechelen.substack.com/p/how-to-use-public-data-requests-to
17. [S]elections in Minnesota: 73
18. van Mechelen, “Cast Vote Record Cover Up in Minnesota - Part 1,” https://erikvanmechelen.substack.com/p/cast-vote-record-cover-up-in-minnesota
19. Peter Callaghan on MinnPost, “Secretary of state agrees to deal on absentee ballots; Republicans cry foul,” https://www.minnpost.com/state-government/2020/06/secretary-of-state-agrees-to-deal-on-absentee-ballots-republicans-cry-foul/; and Willis Krumholz on Alpha News, “Steve Simon is attempting to turn Minnesota’s absentee ballots into mail in ballots,” https://alphanews.org/steve-simon-is-attempting-to-turn-minnesotas-absentee-ballots-into-mail-in-ballots/
20. Keshel, “Clean Out the Voter Rolls”
21. [S]election Code
22. “Suspicious Voter Registration Data,” https://2020electionirregularities.com/suspicious-conduct/suspicious-voter-registration-data/
23. Miami Herald, “Voter Fraud: Dead Republicans come back as Democrats,” https://www.gopusa.com/voter-fraud-dead-republicans-come-back-as-democrats/
24. State Lawmakers: “Pennsylvania Has 202,377 More Ballots Cast Than Voters Who Voted,” https://2020electionirregularities.com/statistical-anomalies/state-lawmakers-pennsylvania-has-202377-more-ballots-cast-than-voters-who-voted/
25. Palmieri Report, “Highlights From PIMA County Election Integrity Hearing,” https://thepalmierireport.com/highlights-from-pima-county-election-integrity-hearing/
26. World Tribune, “Maricopa lawsuit reveals injection of 225,171 ‘inactive’ voters just before midterms,” https://www.worldtribune.com/maricopa-lawsuit-reveals-injection-of-225171-inactive-voters-just-before-midterms/
27. [S]elections in Minnesota: 67
28. van Mechelen, “2022 MN Absentee Data Absent,” https://erikvanmechelen.substack.com/p/2022-mn-absentee-data-absent
29. The Thinking Conservative, “2020 Presidential Election Startling Vote Spikes,” https://www.thethinkingconservative.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Vote_Dumps_Report_1-6.pdf
30. Keshel, “The Ten Points to True Election Integrity: An Epilogue,” https://skeshel.substack.com/p/the-ten-points-to-true-election-integrity
31. Keshel, “Four for the Election Integrity Core: Phase I,” https://skeshel.substack.com/p/four-for-the-election-integrity-core
32. The Paper (ABQ News), “Otero County Commission Votes to Remove Voting Machines and Ballot Boxes,” https://abq.news/2022/06/otero-county-commission-votes-to-remove-voting-machines-and-ballot-boxes/
More places to learn about election/voter fraud:
Here is the Evidence
True the Vote
Midwest Swamp Watch
Tierney’s Real News Network
Other election fraud items
Christina Bobb's book: Stealing Your Vote - The Inside Story Of The 2020 Election And What It Means For 2024.
Interview with programmer who wrote vote-flipping script (start at 20:45)
Tierney News: Here's what you need to know about Mike Lindell's Truth Summit - he's been right all along!
Thomistic Thinker: Skeptical of Voter Fraud in 2020? Here’s Your Evidence.
Real Clear Investigations
Simple tests for the extent of vote fraud with absentee and provisional ballots in the 2020 US presidential election, by John R. Lott, Jr.,
Minnesota election fraud
Project Minnesota (free and paid updates available)
American Experiment: New report exposes weakness in Minnesota election law
How to Use Public Data Requests to Access Public Records for Better Decision Making (And to Help Government Where Current Processes Do Not Account for Fundamental Weaknesses in Overall Transparency)
Shortened link to this column: bit.ly/knowevidence