בכיר לשעבר בממשל טראמפ: אין ''שום מניפולציה של ההצבעה בצד ספירת המכונות''  

Our analysis finds that a few key vote updates in competitive states were unusually large in size and had an unusually high Biden-to-Trump ratio. We demonstrate the results differ enough from expected results to be cause for concern.

In particular, we are able to quantify the extent of compliance with this property and discover that, of the 8,954 vote updates used in the analysis, these four decisive updates were the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and 7th most anomalous updates in the entire data set.

Not only does each of these vote updates not follow the generally observed pattern, but the anomalous behavior of these updates is particularly extreme. That is, these vote updates are outliers of the outliers.

The four vote updates in question are:

I. An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump

II. An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump

III. Update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM ETime on Nov. 4th,2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump

IV. Update in Michigan listed at 3:50AM ETime on Nov. 4th,2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump

The report predicts what these updates would have looked like, had they followed the same pattern as the vast majority of the 8,950 others
We find that the extents of the respective anomalies here are more than the margin of victory in all 3 states- Mi,Wi,Ga- which collectively represent 42 electoral votes

Four updates four anomalies

Data analysis relies on recognizing and evaluating patterns in data
When we find anomalous data, that is often an indication of underlying differences
This is why in this report we focus on these four updates

There are a number of general intuitions upon which we draw to direct our research
In general, the larger the sample size, the smaller we expect the deviation from the population average to be.

While anomalous vote ratios may occur, the statistical chance of anomalous margins goes down as the size of the sample (or vote update) goes up.

The basic intuition is: big margins are one thing, and so are super-skewed results, but it’s weird to have them both at the same time, as they generally become inversely related as either value increases.
We will demonstrate below that the data overwhelmingly follow this intuition, but that four key vote updates identified by this report cut against this intuition.
We will show a very strong inverse relationship within vote updates, across all states & times, between the difference of votes for Biden & Trump (the “Biden-Trump margin”) and the the ratio of Biden’s votes to Trump’s votes (referred to as the “Biden:Trump ratio”)

One of these four updates is responsible for the extremely noticeable spike which nearly eliminated Trump’s lead in one shot. It arrived at 6:31am ET on November 4th, and went 141,258 for Biden to 5,968 for Trump-representing both the largest vote margin for Biden of any of the 502 updates

While also representing, by a factor of more than 2, the largest Biden:Trump ratio, at a whopping 23.67:1 (the log of which is 3.16). As we will see when comparing with other states, by our metric this is the single most anomalous point in the nation.

This update is the strongest direct evidence of fraud
Someone looking to fraudulently improve Biden’s margins is likely to be covering their tracks by keeping Biden’s share at a reasonable value
Ninety Five Percent seem plausible, but 99.9% is prima facie implausible to any honest observer