Read on Twitter
This is the 2nd instance where I have seen evidence of voter fraud (1st was the bubble ballots)
Excellent analysis and the switching of absentee ballots for in-day ballots they demonstrate is crazy: their datapoint in bold
But I found something else!
1
https://www.revolver.news/2020/11/explosive-new-data-from-rigorous-statistical-analysis-points-to-voter-fraud-in-montgomery-county-pa/
Excellent analysis and the switching of absentee ballots for in-day ballots they demonstrate is crazy: their datapoint in bold
But I found something else!
1
https://www.revolver.news/2020/11/explosive-new-data-from-rigorous-statistical-analysis-points-to-voter-fraud-in-montgomery-county-pa/
One of the things that bothered me was why the data they stream only comes with %'s for each candidate and total votes cast
It's strange because why not just broadcast votes for each candidate?
Notice how innocent the data point seems?
9,534 new votes counted...no big deal
2
It's strange because why not just broadcast votes for each candidate?
Notice how innocent the data point seems?
9,534 new votes counted...no big deal
2
Plus, Montgomery is the largest of the Dominion counties in Pennsylvania
Biden received 25% more votes than Hillary did in 2016
3
Biden received 25% more votes than Hillary did in 2016
3
What I found just above the data point they analyze, is a major anomaly
Trump's % of the vote drops by 0.2% which is very uncommon given that only 20K votes were cast
0.1% can represent a shift of 6,000 votes
3
Trump's % of the vote drops by 0.2% which is very uncommon given that only 20K votes were cast
0.1% can represent a shift of 6,000 votes
3
Looking at the two data points, we see that each can have a lower and upper limit because we only get data to the .1% range
For the numbers to fit, the initial Trump vote count must have been close to the lower limit of A and then finished close to the upper limit of B
4
For the numbers to fit, the initial Trump vote count must have been close to the lower limit of A and then finished close to the upper limit of B
4
This is unlikely because 28,860 new votes were cast between Trump at 50.8% to 50.7%
Then an additional 11,743 were cast over the next three reports
Then 20,683 to go to 50.5%
Trump would only have gotten ~10% of the vote for this to happen...that can't happen, right?
5
Then an additional 11,743 were cast over the next three reports
Then 20,683 to go to 50.5%
Trump would only have gotten ~10% of the vote for this to happen...that can't happen, right?
5
Unfortunately, it can and does
When they stopped reporting at 3:13 AM Nov 4th 5,258,096 had been counted for either Trump or Biden
After they started reporting at 5:54 AM, of the remaining 1,576,714 votes counted for either Trump of Biden, Biden won 74% of them
6
When they stopped reporting at 3:13 AM Nov 4th 5,258,096 had been counted for either Trump or Biden
After they started reporting at 5:54 AM, of the remaining 1,576,714 votes counted for either Trump of Biden, Biden won 74% of them
6
Finally, going back to the initial subject of the revolver analysis, I just want to point out that all of this starts happening after a long pause in reporting
Z means Zulu time so Eastern Time + 5 hours
They stop at 11:09 PM and restart at 8:54 AM
7
Z means Zulu time so Eastern Time + 5 hours
They stop at 11:09 PM and restart at 8:54 AM
7
What does this all mean?
I don't know, but I think these things should be explained
And not like the MSM like to explain with broad brush strokes, but with detailed explanations to reporters with the background necessary to evaluate the information
8
I don't know, but I think these things should be explained
And not like the MSM like to explain with broad brush strokes, but with detailed explanations to reporters with the background necessary to evaluate the information
8
The evidence I start the thread on is the revolver article
Unfortunately the first tweet didn’t display a thumbnail
The evidence is not my analysis
My observations are inconclusive, but indicate suspicious stuff
This is the article you need to read
9 https://www.revolver.news/2020/11/explosive-new-data-from-rigorous-statistical-analysis-points-to-voter-fraud-in-montgomery-county-pa/
Unfortunately the first tweet didn’t display a thumbnail
The evidence is not my analysis
My observations are inconclusive, but indicate suspicious stuff
This is the article you need to read
9 https://www.revolver.news/2020/11/explosive-new-data-from-rigorous-statistical-analysis-points-to-voter-fraud-in-montgomery-county-pa/
This was the first evidence I found
#bubblegate
10 https://twitter.com/gummibear737/status/1330251517719420933
#bubblegate
10 https://twitter.com/gummibear737/status/1330251517719420933
