Writes Jesse’s Newsletter10 min ago·edited 6 min ago
A republican primary was recently challenged in court on the basis of algorithm/machine manipulation.
The plaintiff, Joey Gilbert alleged through mathematical analysis that the election had been rigged.
What the analysis showed was that knowing the election day vote % for each candidate and knowing the mail in vote % for each candidate you can determine the total vote % for each candidate without knowing the ratio between election day votes and mail in votes. That's completely impossible in a non-rigged election. You simple do not have enough information to make those calculations. It's only possible to see this result if a math function is employed, an algorithm that governs the distribution.
That's the only way.
In court during oral arguments for a motion to dismiss, the court denied allowing testimony from 3 math experts. One mathematics Phd from Harvard, one from Max Planck Institute and one from Texas. The original math was discovered by an "un qualified" person so 3 experts were brought in to confirm his work. All of them confirmed the math function described above. Instead of denying the motion to dismiss, the judge granted the motion on the basis that it could not be determined how many votes were flipped. Let me repeat, the judge said he can't do anything about this rig because it's impossible to determine what the outcome would have been and how many votes were flipped. It would be impossible to know that. The same function is found in every single precinct in Maricopa County AZ. What is plainly obvious to anyone with a brain is that when you find algorithmic manipulation it is to rig the result in favor of a pre-determined winner. We're in trouble folks.
Sep 20, 2022·edited Sep 20, 2022Liked by Jimychanga
My understanding is, barring some exceptions, we are all, in a sense, lessees because of Eminent Domain in the Fifth Amendment. Seems to me that we will always have rules to play by.
Jesse Morgan
Writes Jesse’s Newsletter10 min ago·edited 6 min ago
A republican primary was recently challenged in court on the basis of algorithm/machine manipulation.
The plaintiff, Joey Gilbert alleged through mathematical analysis that the election had been rigged.
What the analysis showed was that knowing the election day vote % for each candidate and knowing the mail in vote % for each candidate you can determine the total vote % for each candidate without knowing the ratio between election day votes and mail in votes. That's completely impossible in a non-rigged election. You simple do not have enough information to make those calculations. It's only possible to see this result if a math function is employed, an algorithm that governs the distribution.
That's the only way.
In court during oral arguments for a motion to dismiss, the court denied allowing testimony from 3 math experts. One mathematics Phd from Harvard, one from Max Planck Institute and one from Texas. The original math was discovered by an "un qualified" person so 3 experts were brought in to confirm his work. All of them confirmed the math function described above. Instead of denying the motion to dismiss, the judge granted the motion on the basis that it could not be determined how many votes were flipped. Let me repeat, the judge said he can't do anything about this rig because it's impossible to determine what the outcome would have been and how many votes were flipped. It would be impossible to know that. The same function is found in every single precinct in Maricopa County AZ. What is plainly obvious to anyone with a brain is that when you find algorithmic manipulation it is to rig the result in favor of a pre-determined winner. We're in trouble folks.
Love to hear any math savants opinion on this.
Here is the court hearing video: https://operationsunlight.com/2022/08/10/unbelievable-the-contest-was-denied/
At 15:45 Gilbert's attorney argues that each of his math experts can determine the votes in 900 precincts with only the information I mention above.
Here is the math and explanations of counter claims: https://operationsunlight.com/shorter-version-contest
My understanding is, barring some exceptions, we are all, in a sense, lessees because of Eminent Domain in the Fifth Amendment. Seems to me that we will always have rules to play by.
Do you want Killdozers? Because that's how you end up with Killdozers.