Smoking Guns? Part 2                     October 2021                        Kevin Jensen

This is part two of the report on Mike Lindell’s Cyber Symposium that was held in Sioux Falls, SD, August 10-12. If you have not had a chance to read part one, you can find it at the Link to the left on this page.

In Part 1, I outlined the first possible “smoking gun” of the 2020 election. In that article I reported on how the Lindell team offered evidence that many voting tabulators were in fact accessible to outside control through wireless cell phone networks, and a few were accessed via the internet. Before reading this story, please try to read part one because it leads up to this point. Please keep in mind that I attended that event because the Lindell team has never actually had a day in court to present their case. Much of this information has never been made public because the mainstream media is not reporting it.

In part one I alluded to the fact that more dead people voted than in previous ‘normal’ elections and more people have been identified as having voted in a state they no longer lived in than in any other election where that data is available. Just as frightening is a recent claim that some voters were registered the day AFTER the election. This information is easily obtained from the Secretary of State office since every state keeps detailed records of your voting history. These allegations are very disturbing; I believe we deserve a critical examination of the election.

The Lindell team indicated they have attained actual election data that they received from a source they did not name, but hinted that the data came from server systems in Germany that were collecting the data and from whistle blowers who were trapping data.  Exactly where they got the data is uncertain, but the trail certainly leads to these possibilities. If they divulged that information the source would likely be purged; it’s the world we live in.  The data they have does not align with the final vote tallies that decided the election. So how could all this be?

If you were awake and following the election night results you will remember that in the middle of the night many states all cross the country stopped counting at about the same time. Many of the reasons given for stopping the counting did not make any sense. This stoppage was unprecedented. In many locations they removed the poll watchers from the rooms or made them stand so far back they could not see the actual ballots. In yet another location they covered the windows to block the view of the observers. In another location they claimed a water line break which apparently turned out to be a leaking toilet. These are not normal actions during an election night and these incidents were widely reported by all the media.

Dr. Douglas Frank, a physicist from Pennsylvania, was asked to investigate how one Pennsylvania politician decisively won her election on election night only to find out the next morning that she lost. Dr. Frank was hired to examine the election data from that county and found a pattern that did not make sense. Based on the strange pattern of the graph he created from the election data he predicted a 30% irregularity in votes. To test his prediction, he assembled a team of volunteers and using the voter data from that district, they knocked on 1,600 doors to interview the residents. In 32% of those homes, the ‘voter’ either did not live there or did not vote. Then he compared the voting data county by county and found that the voting pattern by age was the same in every county. In some counties there were more votes cast than registered voters living there.  

Without getting into the weeds on the detail of the specific patterns I can tell you that as he compared election data from state to state the pattern was the same. What he found was a statistical impossibility, even in one state, let alone every state. The only way to have this pattern present in every state election there had to be a computer driven algorithm that used a common database to find voters that did not vote and then create votes for them.

By now you are starting to say to yourself, the guy writing this is nuts. Remember, I am just reporting what the Lindell team evidence indicates. This is evidence the mainstream media will never report. Keep in mind I am calling it evidence, not proof, because it has not been heard in court. So how is it possible they found a database that would provide this same voter information base in every state?

Prior to the election, Dr. Frank had recently taught a college class on census statistics and he saw a pattern in the census data that seemed to align with the voting pattern that he had just researched in Pennsylvania and Ohio. The patterns he found matched almost exactly the 2010 US Census data. This pattern being the same in two states was a statistical anomaly. He continued to compare state after state and the pattern was always the same; this is not possible. It matched the 2010 Census data almost perfectly – a statistical impossibility. Is this ‘smoking gun’ number two?

When he compared the Colorado voter registration and votes cast, Colorado had more votes than voters in many age groups. The vote data included dead people and people that have not lived in Colorado for many years. In Mineral and Broomfield Counties in Colorado, more people voted than actually lived there, a lot more! In one county over 150% of the people voted in the 2020 election. Go back and read that sentence again. Are you paying attention now?

If you are finding this hard to swallow please go to www.frankspeech.com and watch the video “Scientific Proof.” This video is 55 minutes long but if you take the time you will completely understand why I am part of the Election Integrity Caucus and why we are asking for an audit every state. Every concerned citizen should dedicate these 55 minutes for the sake of accurate elections. Remember, even if you are a democrat who is thrilled with Joe Biden there is no way to say this could not be used against your party in future elections. I am not a proponent of political correctness so I can say; if you do not take the time to listen to both sides, don’t offer your opinion because it is just that, an opinion. 

By now you are probably asking the question; if they changed the computer counts how did they come up with enough ballots to avoid detection? Audits in some counties around the US have turned up ballots that were determined to be photocopies. They were examined by experts and it was found that the marks on the page had no visible signs of pressure on the paper or saturation of ink in the fiber of the paper which would be impossible if a person had actually used a pen or marker to fill in the ‘bubble’ on the ballot. In some areas of the country mail in ballots were found to have no fold marks. When you fold paper the fibers in the paper are disrupted and it is easy to detect. There is video proof, and whistle blower claims, that on numerous occasions the same stack of ballots were run through the tabulator multiple times. In these instances there would be fewer ballots than votes, but without a physical count of paper ballots to compare to the tabulator total no one would ever know.

This would support the claims of many individuals saying they witnessed boxes of what they believed to be ballots being ‘wheeled’ into the back doors of the election centers. A shut down window of three to five hours would be plenty of time to ‘photocopy’ enough ballots to make up the lack of paper ballots to support the count in the machines. You may recall that Bernie Sanders, a week before the election said, "It could well be that, at 10 on election night, Trump is winning in Michigan, he's winning in Pennsylvania, he's winning in Wisconsin, and he gets on the television and says, 'Thank you Americans for re-electing me. It's all over, have a good day,'" he continued. "But then the next day and the day following, all those mail-in ballots start getting counted, and it turns out that Biden has won those states." Coincidence?

I have been told that in some areas of the country the voting machines and ballots are being protected by court order, making an audit impossible. WHY?  If there is nothing to hide, why are states and election officials refusing to want to perform random audits in precincts and counties that are in question? This could prove the election was in truth the “most secure election in our history” and put all of this behind us. Legislatures need to demand that the voting machines, tabulators, routers and physical ballots be made available for a bipartisan inspection and forensic audit.

With the exception of military ballots, no ballot should ever be accepted after the polls close on election night. NOT ONE. People had weeks and months ahead of time to vote. There are NO excuses for not voting on time. If your ballot is not going to make it in time through the mail – go in person. Furthermore, states should outlaw Internet capability and wireless communication devices in tabulators. This data can be entered into the state central system manually in a very short time period.

Famed liberal democrat attorney, Alan Dershowitz, appeared on a video link at the symposium and has publically announced his support for Lindell and volunteered to be the lead attorney to assist the team in getting this information in a court room – pro bono.  Dershowitz said, (paraphrasing) “this is not a partisan issue, this is a direct attack on the constitution, the first amendment and the election process of the United States.” So, if you think this is just disgruntled republicans challenging the election process, think again. Dershowitz is one of the most liberal attorneys in the country. He has heard this evidence and is eager to move it forward.

I will be considering a part 3 to this story, simply because the Election Integrity Caucus is forming and picking up steam.

If none of the claims turn out to be true, I will be the first to admit it. But we will never know unless we get to the bottom of it. As always, you can reach me at kevinj605@gmail.com.