<!–

–>

March 27, 2023

Sometimes fraud is so far beyond the pale, so egregious, that it is difficult to accept that it happened. But evidence can be too blatant to explain away, especially when two totally different sources of information confirm the existence of the very same fraudulent activity. Such a convergence of evidence occurred in the 2020 election.

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268089992-0’); }); }

An Anonymous Tip

An explosive allegation was made: In Pima County, thirty-five thousand (35,000) votes had been added to each Democratic candidate in the election, including Joe Biden. The allegation was made anonymously by someone claiming that he or she met with Democrat Pima County election officials on September 10, 2020, where a plan to rig the vote was hatched.

The tipster’s written words were described and posted at a meeting of the Arizona Senate on November 30, 2020. Retired Army Col. Phil Waldron told the Senate members,

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609270365559-0’); }); }

“[The tipster] wanted to remain anonymous, but had enough concern that he wanted to send this to the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice,” which he did. (Journalist Sarah Carter saw the email communication.) Here are some words from the email of the tipster, as posted by Waldron at the meeting:

When I [the tipster] asked how in the world will 35,000 votes be kept hidden from being discovered, it was stated that spread distribution will be embedded across the entire registered-voter range and will not exceed the registered-vote count, and the 35,000 was determined allowable in Pima County, based on our county registered-vote count [sic].

It was also stated that total voter turnout versus total registered voters determine how many votes we can embed.

Maricopa [county] embed total would be substantially higher than Pima’s due to embeds being based upon the total number of registered voters.

When I asked if this has been tested and how do we know it works, the answer was yes, and has shown success in Arizona judicial-retention elections since 2014, even undetectable in post-audits because no candidate will spend the kind of funds needed to audit and contact voters to verify votes in the full potential of total registered voters, which is more than 500,000 registered voters.

Confirmation With a “Fishtail”