Jeff O’Donnell has compiled and evaluated upwards of 1,000 CVRs across the nation. Thus far, he has found signs of manipulation in all CVRs he has reviewed which has convinced him more than ever that there is an algorithm at play in these machines. According to this most recent interview with Brannon Howse he shows that 43 out of 64 counties in Colorado have the same pattern of the trajectory of the vote count. In fact, based on this pattern he can predict what the final vote count will be if given the halfway-mark count. This should not occur in a random vote done by humans.
This pattern was observed in other counties with literally the same formula able to predict the final outcome of a race knowing just the midway result.
In addition, rather than showing a progression of votes that tapers off over time to a stable end point which you would expect to see as the number of cumulative votes come in, there is a large change in votes that occurs over time. This is not statistically possible.
Jeff considers this a huge breakthrough.
Why won’t law enforcement officials look into this? Well, they haven’t been willing to investigate this election malfeasance during the past 2+ years so why now?
Jeff opines that we are observing statistically impossible results and the presence of an algorithm that indicates that our elections are being manipulated and our republic is threatened. This should concern everyone. By the way, this same pattern was seen in 2022 as well. How can we trust these machines? Why aren’t these machine companies such as ES&S, Dominion, and Hart Intercivic under more scrutiny? This appears to be a RICO (racketeering) issue that should be investigated to the fullest extent.
Is this why SC Safe Elections is being stonewalled (and countersued) by the South Carolina Election Commission regarding our fight to gain access to the cast vote records? These records might show irregularities. We need more transparency not less in our elections for the people to trust our system again. If there is nothing to hide then why can’t we have access to records that 27 other states have access to?
Please support our battle to gain access to the cast vote records. We humbly ask for your financial support so that we can pay legal fees and experts to travel to Columbia to testify. If all the SC citizens and people across the nation can give a little to this battle we can and will win! Below is our give send go link.
This letter was sent to one of our team members/followers. She lays it out well to Governor McMaster. In every one of my presentations I ask people if they trust our system is counting their votes accurately. Only 1 or 2 hands normally are raised. Let’s go back to paper ballots and give power back to the people at the local precincts and counties!
Let’s bring confidence back to our elections in SC!
In this amazing and must see video one of our expert witnesses in our CVR lawsuit, Dr. Daugherity, describes what a CVR is and how it is a great tool to provide transparency to our elections.
Here is volunteer Tara P’s account of her Second Berkeley BOE hearing re: challenging voters on voter rolls
At the hearing on October 13, 2022 I turned in a new list of 200 voters based on a canvass of 2021. I received a letter on December 2, 2022 notifying me that the hearing was scheduled for January 11, 2023.
To prepare for January 10, I did a deep dive on each of the 200 names. I found eight names that were ok to vote in the 2020 GE due to early voting, but still needed to be removed from the voter roll as they had moved. There were seven names that should never have made the list. I even recanvassed them to be sure. Three had been 20 y/o’s on the walk book sheets (children of mothers who remarried and home ownership changed to new surname.) The other four were reasons we wouldn’t have known/realized/recognized at the time. I verified all the names on a newer version of the voter roll from after June 2022 and found only six had been removed and only four had been updated to new address…of these all four had also voted 6/14/22. Two that should be removed voted 11/3/2020 and 6/14/2022. In the end there were still 185 still on the 2022 voter roll that had also voted in the 2020 GE. That is +/- 92% of a small sample.
The procedure of the hearing on January 10 was the same as October 13. I asked a few questions to start…When a voter goes in to vote and they do not live at the address they are registered…what happens? If the change of address happened greater that 30 days before start of voting, were they allowed to vote? If in any of these cases they were given a provisional ballot would that be updated on the voter roll?
I was informed by the lawyer that I am not allowed to ask questions of the board.
I explained to the lawyer and the board that I was only bring up these questions to ensure we are aligned regarding who can and cannot vote. I also explained that these names had been submitted to the SEC in February 2021 and yet they still remain on the June 2022 roll. I tried to focus on how it should be important for our county BOE to have clean voter rolls especially if the SEC is not going to act. I explained I want to work with them to raise awareness and clean things up and hoping they can be the voice of the concerned citizens of Berkeley County before the SEC.
There were four people that showed up to challenge. The roll had been updated since our June 2022 version because letters were sent to their new residence, so that caused confusion and irritation by voters. Updates in latter 2022 of address changes that should have happened in 2019. Another woman stated she had been back and forth between her home and her elderly parents, but was not residing at her registered address during 2020 GE.
After all is presented the Board, BOE Director and BOE Lawyer retire to a closed room to deliberate. When they returned they advised me that these hearings are not productive and that they believe I should just sit down and share with them my findings/evidence for them to compare with the infromation they have. They also asked to sit down to discuss, so I did with a friend that was sitting in the audience. He turned on his phone to record, the lawyer asked him if he was recording? My friend responded that he was. I asked the lawyer why it would matter beacuse he wasnt going to be saying anything incriminating, was he?
During that conversation it dawned on me why they considered these hearings non productive…because there were six people in the audience (there to support me) but that was not known by the BOE and each of them was recording the hearing. Not a good look for them.
Meeting with BOE Director
On January 24th I (with a person from our Berkeley team who sound recorded the entire meeting) went to meet with the BOE Director regarding the evidence(signed affidavits) I had that supported my challenge of the ineligible voters for the 2020 general election. I was sent three date/time options for this meeting. The director invited me.
We were shown to the conference room, a small room with a large table and eight chairs. A worker started bringing in more chairs because “the board was going to attend”. Wait!-What? Well that turned out to be misinformation. It was only the two of us, the director and two election office clerks. The director walked in with a pad of paper and pen and sat down. I was a bit confused because how was she going to verify my evidence with a pad of paper? I asked the director what was going on and she answered, “I dont know you are the one who wanted this meeting.” Wait!-What? I reminded her that the lawyer suggested that we sit down for me to share my evidence and that she sent me the invite. After a bit of back and forth I realized that we were not going to go through my evidence, they did not have laptops and she couldn’t look people up with me present because I was not allowed to see private data.
I quickly changed my strategy to try and still gain something out of the meeting, so I started telling them about ERIC…which they knew nothing about. From there we moved on to voter roll sort by age and showed them screenshot printouts of the oldest people on the roll. 118/117 year olds registering to vote in 2020.
Deceased voters
A 113 year old that died in 1999 that voted 11/3/2020. I showed them a comparison of the August 2021 copy I had with the June 2022 copy. Some of the numerous deceased that I had found had been removed but the three noted above were still on the roll. I showed them two women that had the same voter registration number. I showed them one woman having two different voter registration numbers. Each time one of the clerks would run back to her desk and look up the situation. Some had valid clerical error explanations and she submitted requests to the SEC to have them marked inactive. Note: all three used the term “inactive” and not “removed”. Even being valid clerical errors, I pointed out that the process for cleaning things up, if there is one, was not working. I asked them if they were familiar with the term ballot stuffing and explained voter roll stuffing is similar and how it is done and how all this opens the door for those “ineligible registered voters” to be used fraudulently.
We learned how the numbering process works for voter registration numbers, which we did not know before. Up until 2012, a person’s voter registration number started with a number which identified the county they first registered to vote in. 1 for Abbyville and 46 for York. That number stays with the person no matter where they move within the state. After 2012 it was centralized and all new registrants received 47 as the first digits of their number.
We listened to their testimonies and frustration with the SEC in trying to do their job. Both clerks had worked there for many years and took their job very seriously. We also learned about their heavy workload and how they are understaffed and not paid overtime for any work outside of regular hours.
They are currently working on updating all the returned new voter registration cards(thousands) that were sent out before November 2022 elections due to restructuring. Each case has to be investigated and a process followed. They are not just able to send a request to the SEC to have them marked “inactive”.
Up until 2020 a person’s ssn was used to verify a registered voter. During 2020 it was changed to only the last four digits of the ssn, all in the name of private information. But that caused a lot of confusion and errors as many people may have the same last four digits. This was either done intentionally or someone didn’t think it through very well.
In the end I believe we were able to build a relationship with them and we gained information we did not have before.
At the end of our meeting I handed them another list of 80 names of ineligible voters from the 2020 general election telling them I don’t agree with what the lawyer said about these hearings not being productive. I feel they have been very productive.
Here is a great interview by Palmetto State Watch’s VP Alaina Moore who talks to Laura Scharr from SC Safe Elections about the Cast Vote Record lawsuit and why it is important for transparency of elections in our state.
We are like frogs in a pot of boiling water, will you jump out or stay and meet your fate?
Most people don’t understand that we are at war. It isn’t kinetic. It’s a silent, hidden, insidious psychological war. This cognitive we are experiencing both domestically and globally is an existential threat.
We are like frogs in the proverbial pot of water. The heat is being raised every so slightly over time and eventually we will need to either jump out or remain in the pot to accept our fate. Slowly our constitutional rights are being whittled away:
Deadly fentanyl made in China is making its way into the country killing thousands of our teens and young adults.
Our economy is flailing due to the failed economic policies of this regime; inflation is soaring making gas, food, and rent unaffordable. Stocks and bonds plummeted last year (they are still overvalued) and people are losing their jobs.
Drag queens are in our elementary school twerking and reading to our kids. Totally inappropriate books are in these libraries and school officials refuse to remove them.
Millions of illegal immigrants have infiltrated our borders 80% of which are military aged men, well equipped with cash. What other things are they bringing over the border? This border infiltration propagates drug, sex, and human trafficking.
The “powers that be” from the World Economic Forum state that we will own nothing and be happy about it. We will eat crickets and live in 15-minute cities where everything we need is within a 15-minute walk and we need permission or will be penalized if they move outside that area. This is being done in Canada and the UK and it is causing a ruckus. This is similar to the social credit score system in China where people lose rights if they use too much energy or eat too much or eat the wrong things. All this is done in the name of “climate change.” It is all a ruse to CONTROL our lives.
Are you awake yet? Ready to jump out of the pot?
All of the above issues tie back to elections. Elections have consequences and are key to a strong republic.
No one is coming to rescue us. We are the solution. It is up to us and the constitution.
SC Safe Elections is focused restoring confidence to our elections by returning control back to the local level. We are accomplishing this by the following:
A legal challenge to gain access to valuable audit tools such as the cast vote record.
Drafting and supporting legislation that tightens up our election laws and provides more accessibility and transparency to the election process in SC.
Analyzing our state election data and voter rolls for anomalies and suggest opportunities for better quality control
Educating SC citizens and legislators regarding how we can improve the election process
How can you help?
1. Contact your legislators (call or snail mail) and ask them to support election integrity bills
a. Closed primaries
b. Voter Access and Transparency Act
c. 1 day of voting with hand counted paper ballots
d. Explain that you don’t trust the current electronic system
4. Consider using your God given talents to contribute to our group; perhaps be a coordinator for your county or help us with social media, analysis or marketing
I decided to volunteer with South Carolina Safe Elections in the spring of 2021. I was not political, but still felt I could add some value. I grew up in a family grocery business, studied abroad, lived abroad 16 years, worked in corporate America with a global company in the law department and am a green belt in Lean Six Sigma continuous improvement…Our state election system has a lot of things that need improvement.
I started canvassing Charleston county with people from eight different counties in October 2021 and after two weeks moved on to Berkeley County from November 2021 – January 2022. As the Data /captain, I also entered all the canvassing data for Berkeley County. After conducting a data sort of the oldest people on the Berkeley voter roll I found people born as long ago as 1903. Of the 578 active registered voters that were 92+, I found 204 obituaries, having past as long ago as 1977, 1987, 1995 & 1999.
After the public reveal of our canvass findings in February 2022, I started working on planning and hosting voter awareness meetings in my area and supporting others in Berkeley County that were doing the same. I mailed or hand delivered 5000 invites to these events. This was another form of canvassing especially as the post cards started returning “undeliverable.” I also knocked on countless doors and the person that was listed as living there on my list no longer did. This opened my eyes to the inaccuracy of the rolls. I wanted to do more about it.
After our reveal our findings were sent to the SEC and SLED, but they didn’t seem interested in doing anything with them. So the people in the counties we canvassed decided to submit the names of voters that were deceased, had voted but didn’t live at the registered address before or after the 2020 general election. From the 5% that we canvassed of Berkeley County we have about 500 of those. I initially sent a letter with 42 names stating that we were challenging the qualifications of these registered electors to vote based upon their residency status. This letter went out April 6, 2022. I received a response September 9, 2022 scheduling the hearing September 29, but then we had a hurricane…so it was rescheduled for October 13, 2022.
It is important that people understand that during this time we studied the South Carolina Election Laws. We took our guidance from them and abided by them in all that we did. For your reference I am attaching the section with reference to challenging voters on voter rolls.
SECTION 75-230.- Legal qualifications; challenges; proof of residency or domicile; appeals. (A) The county boards of voter registration and elections to be appointed under Section 75-10 shall be the judges of the legal qualifications of all applicants for registration. The board is empowered to require proof of these qualifications as it considers necessary.- Once a person is registered, challenges of the qualifications of any elector, except for challenges issued at the polls pursuant to Sections 713-810, 7-13-820, and 7-15-420 -must be made in writing to the county board of voter registration and elections in the county of registration. The board must, within ten days following the challenge and after first giving notice to the elector and the challenger, hold a hearing, accept evidence, and rule upon whether the elector meets or fails to meet the qualifications set forth in Section 75-120.- (B) When a challenge is made regarding the residence or domicile of an elector, the board must consider the provisions of Section 71-25(D).- (C) Any person denied registration or restoration of his name on the registration books shall have the right of appeal from the decision of the county board of voter registration and elections denying him registration or such restoration to the court of common pleas of the county or any judge thereof and subsequently to the Supreme Court.
The experience was a bit surreal. The first hearing on October 13, 2022 regarding 42 names I submitted back in April 2022, I had no idea what to expect. I, for sure, was not expecting to be attacked the way I was. The board stated it was not my place to suggest that people who voted in the GE 2020 should have their votes questioned. To clarify, we are challenging the qualifications of these registered electors to vote based upon their residency status “pursuant to Article 7, Chapter 5, Section 230.”
Each time individuals on the BOE questioned me I referred to the SC Election Law, the board would then look to their lawyer…IMO to either back them up or verify that what I was saying was correct. Each time he would read what the law stated it supported what I said. One board member even questioned if there wasn’t a statute of limitations on challenges, but yet we had gotten to the hearing per law so why make this question? To discredit me?
There were two electors that did appear to prove their residency. To these two gentlemen I apologized for any human error(one was renting residence during 2020GE and purchased the same in February of 2021 but under wife’s maiden name) and inconvenience it may have caused them. But even the two electors that appeared questioned the BOE on updates to the voter rolls and they were referred to the state (SEC). Apparently changes to the rolls were not being done in a timely fashion.
After the hearing I received in the mail a letter stating that certified mail was returned “undeliverable” from 39 of the 42 voters and these names would be submitted to the SEC to be placed in a status of Inactive-Moved. To note: of the 39 to be placed on inactive status 4 have been updated to new address, 2 were removed and 33 remain on voter roll as of 6/30/2022. Why is this even possible?
At that hearing on October 13 I turned in a new list of 200 voters to be removed based on the canvass of 2021. This is not what I would choose to do. It’s not fun. I do it because I feel it is important for two reasons: One is to have tangible evidence of the corruption in our elections on the voter rolls that I can share with residents of Berkeley county and elsewhere. I am sure you have heard by now the saying, “You cannot tell them, you have to show them”. Second is that I believe we, at the grassroots level, are tasked to expose the corruption at the lower levels.
On January 18th, we filed a motion to compel the defendants to provide proof that they have preserved the data from the 2020 election as well as to provide proper answers to our Discovery questions. Up to this point, they are playing games and stalling. Their responses were not fully adequate nor provided all the information we requested. This is an example of egregious lawfare.
For example, they claim they don’t know the definition of a Cast Vote Record or what Personally Identifiable Information is…..Really? Some counties didn’t even respond. Furthermore, they accuse us of being part of some national conspiracy that is trying to just take up their time regarding FOIA requests. Unfortunately, they don’t see that the people don’t trust their elections and just want transparency and answers. Rather than try to intimidate those who want to better understand their election management systems and waste our time and money, they should do their civic duty and instill more trust by being more polite, transparent and willing to work with the people. After all, our governmental agencies work for us. We pay their salaries through our tax dollars.
Below we share our expert affidavits as well as the Motion to Compel. These are compelling affidavits that show the reality of the situation for our case regarding these important audit tools. I encourage you to read these in full as they are very interesting and informative and written by some of the best experts in ES&S as well as CVR analysis and computer technology. These demonstrate that we have a very strong case and why over half the states in the US allow access to CVRs.
