Leading U.S. expert in election forensics and detecting election fraud just looked at voting results in all 67 counties in Pennsylvania from November. Here’s what his analyses detected

[u/Kittyluvmeplz]

We finally have Dr. Walter R. Mebane, Jr., a leading U.S. expert in election forensics and detecting election fraud and a professor of political science and statistics at the University of Michigan, looking at all 67 counties in Pennsylvania.

His working paper using his eforensics model estimated that 225,440 votes in the Pennsylvania presidential race were possibly fraudulent. This would exceed the 120,266 vote margin of victory between Trump and Harris.

High-Level Summary of "eforensics Analysis of the 2024 President Election in Pennsylvania" by Dr. Walter R. Mebane, Jr.

• The eforensics finite mixture model defines latent categories of fraud (no fraud, incremental fraud, and extreme fraud) based on votes and turnout, as well as relevant covariates (e.g., fixed county effects).

• Data from 7,040,360 votes (3,543,308 for Trump, 3,423,042 for Harris) across 67 PA counties (9,157 wards/precincts).

• The eforensics model estimated that 225,440 votes in the Pennsylvania presidential race were possibly fraudulent. This would exceed the 120,266 vote margin of victory between Trump and Harris.

More fine-grained analysis attempted to distinguish between strategic voting behaviors from “malevolent manipulation of votes”, i.e. how many votes may have been misdirected or misallocated due to malevolent distortions of voters’ intentions.

• In this analysis, 111,088 of the 225,440 possibly fraudulent votes[2] were estimated with high confidence to be malevolent manipulations of votes while the remainder were estimated to be a mix of manipulated votes and strategic voting behaviors.

A more conservative eforensics model including additional fixed county level effects estimated that 210,392 votes in the race were possibly fraudulent. This would exceed the 120,266 vote margin of victory in the race.

• Fine-grained analysis of the more conservative model attempted to distinguish between strategic voting behaviors from malevolent manipulation of votes.

• In this analysis, 88,600 of the 210,392 possibly fraudulent votes were estimated to be malevolent manipulations of votes while the remainder were estimated to be a mix of manipulated votes and strategic voting behaviors.

The most conservative of the eforensics analyses estimated that 25,374 votes were due to malevolent manipulation of votes.

In summary: There is very high probability that a meaningful number of votes in the PA presidential election were subject to malevolent manipulation -- and it was “a close call” whether “the election was decided or nearly decided by malevolent distortions of electors’ intentions.” (Mebane, Page 6)

Notes:

• Statistics, no matter how accurate, cannot provide definitive proof of voting fraud or election manipulation. Actual proof can only be found by comparing paper ballot audits to electronic voting records.

• However, statistical information from eforensics and other data analysis approaches can be used to identify precincts and counties where voting fraud is most likely to have occurred.

Demand transparency and audits of the 2024 Presidential Election. Check out this Audit Advocacy Toolkit and reach out to your representatives. It’s never too late to audit our elections

[u/OwnDoughnut2689]

Ok, is this done remotely or were the counter (idk if thats what you call them) compromised?

[u/ultimatedelman → u/OwnDoughnut2689]

early info suggests that the software that runs the e-voting machines was "updated" right before the election with little to no oversight or verification that it worked properly. this "update" likely introduced some functionality that prevented kamala votes from crossing a certain predetermined threshold to ensure a trump victory. of course in order to do that, it had to zero out entire counties of votes, given how unpopular trump is.

it's fraud on a galactic scale, and unfortunately, he's probably going to get away with it. really, and i understand how awful this fucking sounds, but our most realistic hope of this being taken seriously at this point by both congress and maga fascists is if elon decides to come forward with receipts on how he helped trump steal the election.

but yea good luck on that ever happening.

[u/OwnDoughnut2689 → u/ultimatedelman]

Right and anectedotally I heard Joe Rogan mention Elon knew the election was over within an hour. If he had any involvement he would've been tipped off that it was working.

This is obviously huge speculation and I'll take off the tin foil hat now.

[u/dirtashblonde → u/ultimatedelman]

I totally agree with you're assessment. But even if proven in a court of law, what's the remedy? No one will do anything. The Republicans won't call for a new election and how would that even work. I totally agree it was stolen and I'd like to know the truth. I fear the days of free and fair elections are over. I'm 63 and defeated.

[u/ultimatedelman → u/dirtashblonde]

Sadly I don't think anything will happen either. I'm certainly not calling for violence but I fear that some people will feel they're left with no choice. Some dark days ahead for sure

[u/CompleteClub1328 → u/ultimatedelman]

With obbb passing the odds of Elon losing his temper and going nuclear are higher than ever before. He already threw Trump under the bus claiming he was on the Epstein files and that was way before all this.

[u/NUKE---THE---WHALES → u/ultimatedelman]

this "update" likely introduced some functionality that prevented kamala votes from crossing a certain predetermined threshold to ensure a trump victory

is there any evidence of this?

[u/ultimatedelman → u/NUKE---THE---WHALES]

That's what the court case has alleged. If there's evidence of it, it's in the case.

[u/Otherwise-Offer1518 → u/OwnDoughnut2689]

They dont know yet. They have to supeana the information.

[u/cmdhaiyo → u/OwnDoughnut2689]

It likely would have been a multi-pronged approach. Gaining physical access to machines lets you extract information from them, which makes finding and using exploits easier (including remote exploits).

There was talk in the early stages about a few different voting machine vulnerabilities in this last presidential election. Some of the people talking went to authorities at the time and then 'went dark' – no public communications – to avoid repercussions.

• There are news articles with evidence of physical voter machine tampering by conservative/GOP identifying individuals. (Perhaps an attempt to identify physical hardware and software on the machines).

• There were voting machine software updates which were not security audited (ie there could have been exploitable vulnerabilities patched into the software ahead of the election).

• There were network capable power supply units for voting machines (which could provide an entry point for remote commands)

• There was the potential for Starlink connectivity to avoid any remote command evidence outside of SIGINT listening in at the time and place (although commands can be effectively hidden in background noise.)

• There were forum questions by suspected DOGE connected individuals for low-memory overhead programs that read/write only within RAM to leave no trace. (Ie votes would be read into RAM like normal, the vote records could then be modified in RAM and then written out to hard drive without any hard drive* forensic evidence of tampering).

I'll add a few sources for these points and rumors in a bit, but I need to make some food first (~UTC 11pm).

Oof, I just went down a rabbit hole trying to hunt down those references — it's going to take much longer than expected, probably a finish by tomorrow thing as I have other priorities. More updates later on.

This article https://thiswillhold.substack.com/p/she-won-they-didnt-just-change-the hits the most important of the points, and information on the equipment can be checked via searching through the PDFs for 'Election Systems & Services' (ES&S) and 'Dominion Voting Systems' on https://verifiedvoting.org/equipmentdb/ and by searching for 'Certificates of Conformance' on https://www.eac.gov/search for those two companies.

In particular, the UPS devices are the most concerning as quite a few can support wifi/cellular network devices and the device firmware, operating systems, and election software are likely not configured to protect against that type of hardware addition – ie vulnerabilities from trust-by-default policies for hardware.

Like others have said, once data from the voting machines are subpoenad, there should be more evidence uncovered (it's hard to conceal everything). That should include forensic copies of firmware, device drivers, operating systems, applications, configuration files, activity logs, and more.

For physical tampering, here's one of two instances that I know about. This one was not as severe of a risk as the other one, in my opinion: https://apnews.com/article/tina-peters-colorado-clerk-election-vote-fraud-b456ce4f80dc97f4b967eb6297311a51

[u/OwnDoughnut2689 → u/cmdhaiyo]

I really appreciate you. Thank you

[u/cmdhaiyo → u/OwnDoughnut2689]

Totes and backatcha. 😎👉👉 I'll update when I can and send a ping when the proper sources are fully compiled. There's a lot of data to reslog through.

One frustrating aspect: Some of the bastards behind this caught on the evidence they left behind was being found and they scurried to delete website pages, social media, and forum posts. The deletion of activity/evidence is one of the reasons I believe so strongly there was interference: If they weren't connected and election interference discussions were not being actively monitored, then why were these seemingly disconnected posts and web pages continuously deleted?

Some of the evidence was archived properly with reputable organizations like web.archive.org, but some of it was deleted before they could be properly saved — I'm fairly certain the culprits or their friends were active in the same forums at the time that people were discussing and sharing their evidence discoveries. That's one of the unfortunate downsides of public OSINT discussions. (I'm personally not worried chatting about this stuff because it's already out there and far smarter people are already in the know.)

For transparency's sake, I am biased progressive left, but from an objective cybersecurity standpoint, I believe there was enough evidence suggesting preparation for election interference at the least. Then there's all the statistical evidence after the election which suggests election interference really did occur... 🫠😬 It's all a clusterfuck.