https://noqreport.com/2020/12/30/anyone-who-reads-doj-researcher-john-lotts-paper-and-still-denies-voter-fraud-is-a-fool/An academic analysis and report written by a Department of Justice researcher may be the clearest indication that massive voter fraud took place. It’s not that it presents additional evidence, but instead dives into the numbers in a way that makes it crystal clear voter fraud was the only viable explanation for surges in votes that were isolated to key counties in swing states. What makes his analysis different from others is that it quantifies the likely voter fraud scope in a way that makes clear it was sufficient to change the results of the election. According to the abstract of his 25-page report:
This study provides measures of vote fraud in the 2020 presidential election. It first compares Fulton county’s precincts that are adjacent to similar precincts in neighboring counties that had no allegations of fraud to isolate the impact of Fulton county’s vote-counting process (including potential fraud). In measuring the difference in President Trump’s vote share of the absentee ballots for these adjacent precincts, we account for the difference in his vote share of the in-person voting and the difference in registered voters’ demographics. The best estimate shows an unusual 7.81% drop in Trump’s percentage of the absentee ballots for Fulton County alone of 11,350 votes, or over 80% of Biden’s vote lead in Georgia. The same approach is applied to Allegheny County in Pennsylvania for both absentee and provisional ballots. The estimated number of fraudulent votes from those two sources is about 55,270 votes.
Second, vote fraud can increase voter turnout rate. Increased fraud can take many forms: higher rates of filling out absentee ballots for people who hadn’t voted, dead people voting, ineligible people voting, or even payments to legally registered people for their votes. However, the increase might not be as large as the fraud if votes for opposing candidates are either lost, destroyed, or replaced with ballots filled out for the other candidate. The estimates here indicate that there were 70,000 to 79,000 “excess” votes in Georgia and Pennsylvania. Adding Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, the total increases to up to 289,000 excess votes.
The data Lott analyzes and subsequently explains is inexplicable without the presence of massive voter fraud. But it’s bigger than that. The coordination between states becomes apparent when we realize the same process that were used in one county were also applied to others. There are differences in the way the cheaters went about their normal business of cheating before and on election night, but the post-election night injections of ballots were uniform. In other words, they cheated stealthily at first but when it was clear they had still lost, they went with the clumsier, more easily noticeable wholesale fraud attempts.
Unfortunately, all of the so-called “arbiters of truth” have declined to cover any of this, just as they’ve covered up the entire process from the start. Mainstream media and Big Tech in particular are complicit in this cover-up to the point that they often do not even try to debunk reports like Lott’s. They simply announce that the election is over and there’s nothing more to be said about it. But the details of Lott’s report are not only worth reading, but definitely worth spreading to the masses. If mainstream media won’t cover it, we will. If Big Tech will try to suppress it, we’ll continue to share anyway.
