Hotspots on US Electoral Fraud: the Data Analysis Approach By Chris Knight

High quality material continues to be published on various aspects of the 2020 stolen election, the greatest electoral fraud covered in US history. But, for all we know, this corruption has probably been going on for much of a century. The following material from The American Thinker, a tremendous conservative blog for … well … thinkers, goes to the basics of fraud investigation, as seen in other areas such as insurance fraud, taking a data analysis approach. The results are astonishing, at least for normies who might still believe that the system is not totally corrupt.


“The more our team looked at the 2020 election fraud from publicly available records, the more it appeared to have similar characteristics to property casualty insurance fraud.

Beginning in November, like many citizens, we witnessed election fraud possibilities any sentient person would investigate.  Having backgrounds in fraud detection, particularly in the property casualty insurance business, Medicaid fraud, and cyber fraud, gave us a curiosity that never dissipated.

Our interest is 100% in data analysis.  That means looking at the actual votes, the addresses, the information about ballots reported to Secretaries of State.  While there are all kinds of other fraud, the best way to light it up is with data analysis.

Not just the statistical stuff with the graphs and Greek symbols, but old fashioned rows and columns.  Nothing illegal, just the same public data Google uses to profile someone for new running shoes.

If Jesse Morgan did drive a tractor trailer truck with 100,000 ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, how can we find out?  Chris Wray and our hardy pals at the FBI may not want to open that truck’s back door, but we do – with database analysis.

very one of those ballots has a person’s name and address.  The ballot is cast, illegally for sure, and counted.  The local government is involved as well as the U.S. Postal Service officials at that particular location.  That makes this sovereign, industrial election fraud.

They can hide the truck.  They can claim it never happened.  They cannot hide the record of the ballot. 

Imagine yourself trying to fake 100,000 ballots.  Even with some of your pals, lots of them, sitting around tables with pizza and Cokes and #2 pencils, it’s daunting.  Every ballot needs to tie to an address.  Each ties to a name.  This is fraud infrastructure. 

While you and your friends are filling out 100,000 ballots with Biden circles, do you think you took the time to use a different, real address for every one of them?  Or, more likely, did you use a small group of addresses over and over?  You get the picture.

If you filled out birth dates, did you use a different one every time you thought about it?  How about those surnames?  They are tied to real people and they better live in Pennsylvania.

We are getting reports some Secretaries of State are modifying mail-in ballot data to hide the tens of thousands of ballots received before they were sent.

This is a very bad idea.

Fraud data is like the world’s messiest crime scene. 

Think of your worst nightmare crime scene with blood, bullet casings, broken furniture, spatterings, and that is how complex a fraud database is.  If a criminal alters a crime scene, they always make things worse for themselves.  They leave traces of who they were.  More troublesome, they leave traces of what they are trying to hide.

We are thrilled people are trying to alter data after the fact.  They are leaving tracks like a dinosaur walking through a field of peanut butter for database tracking.

Citizen election fraud investigators are coalescing across multiple states sharing information, fraud profiles and actual data.  We are helping with fraud investigative expertise and search technology beyond anything commercially available.

Our thesis is that 70% of all 2020 election fraud will be tied to 10% of the records.  Like insurance fraud, election fraud has cultural affinities.  It also has geographic patterns and links to a small number of people who deliver the overwhelming amount of fraud.

Cultural affinities?

We broke a major insurance fraud ring showing a group of Somali immigrants, living in the same building, driving the same car, had scammed a major insurance company.  Sure they did, they knew each other.  This happens all the time; the data show it.

Election fraud is no different.  People who hang out together may have similar world views.  If they are aggressive enough to join in an election fraud conspiracy, they don’t bring in strangers, they bring in friends and family.  This kind of relationship shows up as a hot spot in data visualization.

Data visualization shows hotspots – like red wine stains on a white tablecloth.

Isn’t it interesting that 634 people with the same birthday, including the year, live at these seven addresses?  Digging deeper, look, the address is not a physical location, it is a UPS store with mailboxes.  That’s a crowded P.O. Box!

Look here, different family members live in different mailboxes with the same surname.  The mailboxes are consecutive numbers, too!  That’s so convenient for Thanksgiving dinner!

This is what industrial fraud starts to look like and there are plenty of data from December Secretary of State data files to prove this. 

In fraud analysis, connections count big time.  Industrial fraud is by definition a connected enterprise with a few actors driving lots of transactions.  As we build a likely fraud database, think more of rather than those rows and columns. allows you to build a family tree.  As you build it, your family connects to other families.  Those families add their long lost relatives you did not know existed enriching the tree.  Connections count.

That is what an organic election fraud database starts to look like.  Here, let’s do one!

Billy X has 239 people living in his one-bedroom Pennsylvania house and they all voted.  All public information.  Billy should be proud of his diligence.

We connect Billy via 100 social media posts floating on the internet using a web crawler.  Look, Billy is a steward for the local trade union.  He hates Trump.

Data visualization indicates Billy corresponds with Sally B. and Mortimer W.  They live in Virginia.  They too, hate Trump; so says social media.  Our new friends in Virginia interested in election fraud start adding their data about Sally and Mort.  Here are two addresses for Sally and they tie to over 600 registered voters.  Mort has over 150 living in his one bedroom flat.

This is how it looks, folks. This is just the surface of what can be found from current, available, public records, social media and internet communication.  We can go hundreds of layers deeper and it is delivered in the blink of an eye.

So when you freak out about H.R. 1, which is terrible, remember, they may have Marc Elias in their corner but the Patriots have data, technology, and adversaries who leave dinosaur tracks.”

So, what about the Supreme Court of the United States, why didn’t it rush to supply justice, where instead, the majority of judges did not want to even hear the evidence? How can something like this occur? It is one thing to hear the evidence and argue against it, but to not even hear evidence advanced by an entire state like Texas, smacks of nothing short of a failure of duty. To decide that the state of Texas has no standing to put a case is so appalling that martial law should have been declared then, if Trump had any guts, or was not compromised, for clearly the rule of law had totally failed at that point. The speculation continues at this post in The American Thinker:

“They appear to be cowards or crooks or compromised.  Cowards, crooks, or compromised seems to be the only way to explain the decision-making of the United States Supreme Court.  The Court's unwillingness to make any decisions regarding the presidential election of 2020 is a historic failure.  These last twelve months have seen the Court refuse to do its duty.  The Court refused to be a co-equal branch of the federal government.

With the Bush v. Gore of 2000, there is legal precedent.  Just twenty short years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court took Bush v. Gore, a presidential election case, so the precedent was there.  Over this last year, the Supreme Court had the opportunity to address election law questions before the election last summer, right before the election, right after the election, and even prior to the inauguration in January.  On all these occasions, the majority of the Supreme Court judges refused to hear any case dealing with the presidential election.  They stuck their heads in the sand and acted as if they had no role.

One could argue, successfully, that January 6 on the Washington Mall happened because of the lack of integrity and guts in the Supreme Court.  Because of their blatant disassociation with being a coequal branch with the presidency and Congress, the Court has lost enormous respect from half of America.  This is dangerous to a democratic republic.  One must ask, why would they be willing to do this?  Are they cowards, crooks, compromised, or something else?  Can these be the only answers to this seemingly impotent Supreme Court?

Are the Supreme Court members simply cowards?  Did they get scared so much by the violence last summer, that they felt for their own and their family members' safety?  Did the violence, looting, burning, assaults, and even deaths that occurred during the Antifa and BLM insurrections last summer simply scare individual members of the Court?  Were they simply frightened from hearing any cases dealing with the 2020 presidential election?  Did they not want BLM/Antifa showing up as a mob on their front doorsteps in Georgetown?  Did they not want Deep State operatives casing their children's or grandchildren's school or college?  These mobs have done this before, so there is a precedent.  Mobs showed up at Tucker Carlson's home last summer when Tucker was on the air and forced Tucker's wife to hide in the closet until police arrived.  It has been reported that Chief Justice Roberts even referred to the violence last summer as a reason for not accepting cases involving the 2020 election.  Whether these reports were accurate, we don't know.  So maybe as individuals, parents, and grandparents, the majority of the Court did not want to hear any election cases based solely on fear.  Were they frightened from doing their constitutional duty?   

Are the majority of the Supreme Court just obviously crooks?  Are they taking bribes from Deep State operatives?  Are they getting kickbacks or financial gain from Progressive billionaires by refusing to hear legitimate  election questions?  This one seems the most doubtful...I hope.  However, we have learned so many awful things the last six years, and especially during Trump's presidency, that nothing should surprise us anymore.  The Progressive movement along with the Deep State criminals in D.C. has shocked us with how far it will go against their political enemies.  Progressives, unlike RINOs,  know that it is a political war, and they fight to win.  From the five to six purple battleground states, there were obviously enough questions, doubts, and sworn witnesses to at least hear the evidence in the cases.  There was so much smoke out there in terms of possible election irregularities that the Supreme Court had ample reason and cause to see if there was in fact a roaring blaze.  But yet a majority of the Court refused to hear it.  Was crookedness the reason?  Why did they stick their heads in the sand?


 Were members of the Supreme Court being compromised?  Were they being blackmailed?  Did the Progressive movement and Deep State figures have "the goods" on enough justices?  This one is interesting and not so far-fetched.  Roberts did flip his vote on Obamacare at the last minute, which allowed Obamacare to become law by a 5-4 vote.  Maybe enough justices got caught doing the wrong thing that they just could not act according to their legal conscience but had to cave to compromise.  Possibly it was not the justices' behavior at all, but their children's or grandchildren's.  If one of the justices has a son or grandson whose behavior resembles that of Hunter Biden, that could become a blackmailable issue.  We just don't know.  But something must explain why at least six justices on the Supreme Court refused to even hear the plethora of evidence.  Only four justices are needed for a case to come before them, and a question about presidential election laws was not important enough for the Court to hear it?  Very doubtful.  Just does not pass the constitutional smell test.   

Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch wanted to hear the cases concerning presidential election integrity.  They especially wanted to hear cases involving state election laws being over ridden by Democrat D.C. lawyers and Deep State operatives.  An example of this was Pennsylvania.  State legislatures decide state election laws; they cannot be overridden by outside lobbyists and people who intimate from the D.C. Beltway.  But there must be four members of the Court who want to hear the case.  Even Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett refused to hear the evidence.

President Trump and MAGA nation were shocked by Kavanaugh's and Barrett's silence.  Kavanaugh and Barrett appear to have been "frozen" at the free throw line.  It is noteworthy to mention that Kavanaugh and Barrett have the youngest children, and maybe they were frightened for their safety.  Maybe.  It is just so extremely odd that this multitude of legitimate cases from these multitude of battleground states with this multitude of  evidence did not get enough Supreme Court members even to want to see what happened.  They should, if for no other reason than to correct it so it will not happen again in 2022 or 2024.

Maybe the Supreme Court was worried what the evidence might show, and therefore that they might have to make a tough decision.  And maybe they knew that half of America, along with the Progressives, and the Deep State in D.C., would simply ignore their verdict.  Maybe they were worried that if they had to make a historic decision, the decision would be ignored.  So they decided it best to do nothing.  Maybe.

This is not as much an indictment of a political party, a business, the Progressives, or the Deep State.  It is the Supreme Court who ultimately failed in a historic way.  Why the justices failed, we just do not know at this time.

History and historians will in the future write whether the Court's lack of decision-making and lack of courage were as bad as the Dred Scott and Korematsu decisions.  History will decide, but only if those historians are balanced and fair-minded.  Those decisions ruined the Court's credibility for a long time and even created future events that were far worse.  Only time will tell if it will again be that disastrous.  But over half of the 50 individual states are now rewriting state election laws so the 2020 election abuses will not happen again.  The state of Georgia has already signed its own rewrite into law.  States such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, Florida, and Wisconsin are soon to follow.

There will certainly be court challenges to these impending state laws that tighten up election procedures so fraud will not happen...again.  Without question, without uncertainty, these upcoming cases (especially in the purple battleground states) will once again end up in the lap of the United States Supreme Court.  Justice Thomas said this would happen, and it has happened.

Nobility and courage will shine the next time the Supreme Court gets a chance to do the right thing by at least hearing the evidence — at the very least, reviewing the evidence.  If they refuse once again, things will get even worse — for half of the American population and most certainly worse for the credibility of the United States Supreme Court.”

No, I see SCOTUs, like all our institutions, as taken over by the Left and Deep State. The actual reason, be it fear or individual corruption, does not matter, since SCOTUS has failed so dramatically that it cannot be trusted. Only by abandoning the totally rotten US of A, can Euro-Americans survive, it has come to that. Time for us to adopt identity politics too, and give Them a taste of their own medicine. But that’s tribalism! Ok, then we just die then; make your choice, you have seen what can be done in 2020.



No comments made yet. Be the first to submit a comment
Already Registered? Login Here
Friday, 19 August 2022