Scientific Proof 2020 Election Was Biggest Cyber Crime In History With Dr. Douglas Frank

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
16,454
21,017
1
2020evidence.org
The only way is from an algorithm. They explain this further in the video but Dr. Frank was able to predict the number of votes in different counties based on the algorithm "key" he found (based on age distribution) with incredible accuracy >>> R values of .998, .999, and 1.0 based on his "key." That's not possible unless the votes were being manipulated by a machine.

 

Ephrata Lion

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jun 19, 2001
2,963
1,235
1
The only way is from an algorithm. They explain this further in the video but Dr. Frank was able to predict the number of votes in different counties based on the algorithm "key" he found (based on age distribution) with incredible accuracy >>> R values of .998, .999, and 1.0 based on his "key." That's not possible unless the votes were being manipulated by a machine.


Bump....And more to come...

 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: GreggK and WeR0206

Jason1743

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 23, 2006
18,861
12,766
1
I was reading about this in The Onion last week. At the end of the video there’s a code to get $10 off your next My Pillow. A Mike Lindell production. @WeR0206 , how do you not laugh at yourself when you look in the mirror? This stuff is bat shit crazy.
 

LafayetteBear

Well-Known Member
Dec 1, 2009
43,704
18,975
1

Gorki26

Well-Known Member
May 7, 2020
5,228
5,295
1
Are we still on the crazy kick, lov'n it .

I love how these guys like Knoxie says the left is obsessed. It's over 4 moths past the election and these guys are still grasping at straws whining it wasn't fair. But the dems are the one's obsessed...LOL??
 
  • Like
Reactions: odshowtime

ChiTownLion

Well-Known Member
May 29, 2001
28,117
30,804
1
The only way is from an algorithm. They explain this further in the video but Dr. Frank was able to predict the number of votes in different counties based on the algorithm "key" he found (based on age distribution) with incredible accuracy >>> R values of .998, .999, and 1.0 based on his "key." That's not possible unless the votes were being manipulated by a machine.

"Dr. Frank’s investigation reveals that the 2010 national census data was used to manipulate the 2020 election rolls and to inject phantom votes into the election totals. His scientific investigation documented and proved that numerous states throughout America had more people voting than lived in many of the counties.

The injection of the 2010 national census data into the 2020 election rolls facilitated a crime that some experts are calling the largest cyber-crime in world history.

Dr. Frank explains that the 2010 census was used to actually cast votes for voters that had either passed away or no longer lived in the county or state.

In numerous documented cases, voters showed up to vote at their precinct only to be told they had already voted, when in fact, they had not voted."

- - - - -

I'm letting it go. The two main points, to my understanding, have already been explained.

1. The "more votes than registered voters" charge turned out to be based on registered voters from the prelims rather than the Presidential election, IIRC.

2. The "dead voters" charge was disproven almost immediately by the GA SoS.

I guess I'm still a little curious about the 400,000 absentee ballots in Georgia that have yet to be authenticated with chain of custody.

And I believe Arizona just approved an audit of votes.

Not getting my hopes up in either case.

- - - - -

Mostly I do believe that the DNC + MSM + Big Tech colluded together to prevent Donald Trump from winning re-election. Not to mention states unconstitutional changing their voting laws. We saw what these assholes did to Joe Paterno and now Donald Trump and I have no doubt that they are the enemy of the American people.
 

Fayette_LION

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 28, 2004
9,814
5,857
1
Are we still on the crazy kick, lov'n it .
Anyone who believes that Xiden received over 80 mil legal votes by staying and hiding in his basement needs to buy some great land in Florida that I have for sale. It is a real joke to believe that he received that many legal (LEGAL) votes while hiding in his basement. The odds are better that you will be struck by lightening twice today that Xiden actually getting that many legal votes. It was and is The Great Steal.
 

NewEra 2014

Well-Known Member
Jan 3, 2014
2,246
2,926
1
Dr Frank has done some good work on this and other topics. He has made some compelling points in his presentation. I don’t know if it will amount to anything, but I’m glad he is looking at the 2020 vote.
 

franklinman

Well-Known Member
Apr 5, 2011
23,888
5,204
1
78
Pa and Fl
Anyone who believes that Xiden received over 80 mil legal votes by staying and hiding in his basement needs to buy some great land in Florida that I have for sale. It is a real joke to believe that he received that many legal (LEGAL) votes while hiding in his basement. The odds are better that you will be struck by lightening twice today that Xiden actually getting that many legal votes. It was and is The Great Steal.
That should tell you what a great candidate Corrupt Filthy Don was, that an old man could kick his ass by over 5 million LEGAL votes and never campaign.
 
  • Like
Reactions: odshowtime

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
92,550
45,079
1
That should tell you what a great candidate Corrupt Filthy Don was, that an old man could kick his ass by over 5 million LEGAL votes and never campaign.

I know where you got lost Frank... At the word "scientific"....
 

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
92,550
45,079
1
I love how these guys like Knoxie says the left is obsessed. It's over 4 moths past the election and these guys are still grasping at straws whining it wasn't fair. But the dems are the one's obsessed...LOL??

The left is obsessed with Trump. 4+ years TRUMPS 4 months Gorki. C'mon man....... Think.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
16,454
21,017
1
2020evidence.org
The left is obsessed with Trump. 4+ years TRUMPS 4 months Gorki. C'mon man....... Think.
And their 4 yr obsession was based on unverified gossip from an ex British spook. By contrast we have hard statistical data showing the 2020 election was cooked and they don’t even bat an eye.
 
  • Like
Reactions: m.knox

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
16,454
21,017
1
2020evidence.org
"Dr. Frank’s investigation reveals that the 2010 national census data was used to manipulate the 2020 election rolls and to inject phantom votes into the election totals. His scientific investigation documented and proved that numerous states throughout America had more people voting than lived in many of the counties.

The injection of the 2010 national census data into the 2020 election rolls facilitated a crime that some experts are calling the largest cyber-crime in world history.

Dr. Frank explains that the 2010 census was used to actually cast votes for voters that had either passed away or no longer lived in the county or state.

In numerous documented cases, voters showed up to vote at their precinct only to be told they had already voted, when in fact, they had not voted."

- - - - -

I'm letting it go. The two main points, to my understanding, have already been explained.

1. The "more votes than registered voters" charge turned out to be based on registered voters from the prelims rather than the Presidential election, IIRC.

2. The "dead voters" charge was disproven almost immediately by the GA SoS.

I guess I'm still a little curious about the 400,000 absentee ballots in Georgia that have yet to be authenticated with chain of custody.

And I believe Arizona just approved an audit of votes.

Not getting my hopes up in either case.

- - - - -

Mostly I do believe that the DNC + MSM + Big Tech colluded together to prevent Donald Trump from winning re-election. Not to mention states unconstitutional changing their voting laws. We saw what these assholes did to Joe Paterno and now Donald Trump and I have no doubt that they are the enemy of the American people.
I feel like the damn is starting to break. The main thing he found was all the phantom voters based on old/inaccurate voter rolls. The longer a county went without cleaning up their rolls the more phantom voters the bad actors could work with. Also since he was able to predict the vote totals with R values of 1.000 and .999 it shows without a doubt the vote counts were generated by an algorithm.
 

m.knox

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Aug 20, 2003
92,550
45,079
1
And their 4 yr obsession was based on unverified gossip from an ex British spook. By contrast we have hard statistical data showing the 2020 election was cooked and they don’t even bat an eye.

Remember, they were so desperate for confirmation bias that they wanted to be lied to. WANTED. The begged Adam Schiff to lie to them. BEGGED.

Given the fact they are throwing a tantrum over GA election law that makes sure one person gets one vote, it certainly appears that cheating is acceptable with them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206

Obliviax

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2001
100,424
43,588
1
"Dr. Frank’s investigation reveals that the 2010 national census data was used to manipulate the 2020 election rolls and to inject phantom votes into the election totals. His scientific investigation documented and proved that numerous states throughout America had more people voting than lived in many of the counties.

The injection of the 2010 national census data into the 2020 election rolls facilitated a crime that some experts are calling the largest cyber-crime in world history.

Dr. Frank explains that the 2010 census was used to actually cast votes for voters that had either passed away or no longer lived in the county or state.

In numerous documented cases, voters showed up to vote at their precinct only to be told they had already voted, when in fact, they had not voted."

- - - - -

I'm letting it go. The two main points, to my understanding, have already been explained.

1. The "more votes than registered voters" charge turned out to be based on registered voters from the prelims rather than the Presidential election, IIRC.

2. The "dead voters" charge was disproven almost immediately by the GA SoS.

I guess I'm still a little curious about the 400,000 absentee ballots in Georgia that have yet to be authenticated with chain of custody.

And I believe Arizona just approved an audit of votes.

Not getting my hopes up in either case.

- - - - -

Mostly I do believe that the DNC + MSM + Big Tech colluded together to prevent Donald Trump from winning re-election. Not to mention states unconstitutional changing their voting laws. We saw what these assholes did to Joe Paterno and now Donald Trump and I have no doubt that they are the enemy of the American people.
I have a family member that spent several days in both Wisconsin and PA as an "observer". She had three issues:

  • There was no way to prove fraud in mail-in ballots because the chain of custody was destroyed in the mail-in process. Unless you hire tens of thousands of people and work for several months you cannot adequately go back to those individuals to see how they voted. You can only do a little and when you find something wrong it is considered "anecdotal" and immaterial to the overall vote result. This is why they use these words when stating the vote should stand "no material fraud of the magnitude to overthrow the election".
  • Several vote counters blocked the view of what they were doing. In one case, my family member said a woman lined up water bottles so you could not see the documents she was working on given the covid protocols (you were not allowed to get within 6 feet). The referee, also a Democrat, ruled that there were no rules about what could be on the desk and that 6 feet observance was a CDC-mandated requirement for the vote workers.
  • There were retirement homes that voted near 100% for biden with, strangely, no votes for anyone else on the ballot. This suggests that these ballots were filled out hastily. It also suggests that the mail in vote allows violation of coercion and intimidation that is protected at the voting booth. For example, you cannot be within X feet of the booth, you cannot broadcast party propaganda and you cannot give away anything (water, stickers, cars, money) within X feet of a voting booth. But if you are in a nursing home, if you want that serving of tapioca pudding, you need to sign a document with a box already checked.
 

Fayette_LION

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jan 28, 2004
9,814
5,857
1
That should tell you what a great candidate Corrupt Filthy Don was, that an old man could kick his ass by over 5 million LEGAL votes and never campaign.
They are not LEGAL unless you actually verify the votes. No one actually did that. Again, beware, your odds of getting stuck by lightening today twice are still better odds than a Xiden win was. Stay indoors!
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeR0206

WeR0206

Well-Known Member
Apr 9, 2014
16,454
21,017
1
2020evidence.org
They are not LEGAL unless you actually verify the votes. No one actually did that. Again, beware, your odds of getting stuck by lightening today twice are still better odds than a Xiden win was. Stay indoors!
Heck they wouldn't even let the ballots be examined. Why are they fighting tooth and nail in many of these swing states to allow examination of ballots and machines? If there's nothing to hide that behavior makes no sense. You don't quiet questions about election integrity by reducing transparency and shouting people down.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Fayette_LION

jim cummings

Well-Known Member
May 27, 2015
4,158
4,779
1
PA
I have a family member that spent several days in both Wisconsin and PA as an "observer". She had three issues:

  • There was no way to prove fraud in mail-in ballots because the chain of custody was destroyed in the mail-in process. Unless you hire tens of thousands of people and work for several months you cannot adequately go back to those individuals to see how they voted. You can only do a little and when you find something wrong it is considered "anecdotal" and immaterial to the overall vote result. This is why they use these words when stating the vote should stand "no material fraud of the magnitude to overthrow the election".
  • Several vote counters blocked the view of what they were doing. In one case, my family member said a woman lined up water bottles so you could not see the documents she was working on given the covid protocols (you were not allowed to get within 6 feet). The referee, also a Democrat, ruled that there were no rules about what could be on the desk and that 6 feet observance was a CDC-mandated requirement for the vote workers.
  • There were retirement homes that voted near 100% for biden with, strangely, no votes for anyone else on the ballot. This suggests that these ballots were filled out hastily. It also suggests that the mail in vote allows violation of coercion and intimidation that is protected at the voting booth. For example, you cannot be within X feet of the booth, you cannot broadcast party propaganda and you cannot give away anything (water, stickers, cars, money) within X feet of a voting booth. But if you are in a nursing home, if you want that serving of tapioca pudding, you need to sign a document with a box already checked.
Surely she took pictures or video, right?
 

Obliviax

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2001
100,424
43,588
1
Surely she took pictures or video, right?
no photos were allowed. Within a day or two, in both locations, it became clear it was an exercise in futility. Everything that was questionable was taken to a "non-partisan" referee. However, in both cases, the "referee" was a black American from the two cities. it was pretty clear they were anything but "non-partisan". The lining up the water bottles was a good case in point....it totally invalidated any value in observation. Yet, the ref said it was OK as there was no law against it. Other situations, where the signature didn't match or was unreadable, the ref said that it did allow for "questioning" of the validity but it did not prove it was wrong; which was the standard for identifying fraud. And they were "not about to invalidate somebody's vote without proof of fraud".