If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go with others.

We need each other in this fight. It's not a battle to be won alone. We are not racing against each other. We are racing against tyranny and corruption.

Surround yourself with those who share your goals. Even if you don't always agree. In order for a theory to be proven, it must first be challenged.

Accuracy is key. Even if it doesn't fit the story you want to tell. Credibility is more valuable than popularity.

The only way we win is together. Lift each other up and educate one another. If you know where the missing piece of someone's puzzle is, point them in the right direction. They win, you win. Got it? There is no time for selfishness.

Cause of America has an extensive library for your research and informational needs. There are currently over 5,000 documents in our library and growing. Just go to causeofamerica.org and click the library tab. 🇺🇸

#ElectionIntegrity #Elections #Research #CoA #CauseofAmerica #Voting #VotersRights #FixOurElections #ElectionEducation #Ballots #Lawsuits #FOIA

Risk Limiting Audits create MORE risk of overlooking errors and possible fraud.

Report for Individual Contribution Oversight
Compliments of @Chris_Arsenault

The following process provides indicators of suspicious "smurf" activity.

Due to FEC reporting rules and regulations, the actual number of individual contributions, final transaction amounts etc. often requires additional, increasingly complex work.

There are 3 major characteristics to be gleaned from an exploratory investigation:

1) Frequency & count of donation transactions
2) An estimated general amount of donations
3) Distribution of funds through earmarked transactions to candidate committees.

The process focuses on developing a useful report to discuss with individuals identified in the investigation.

Most "smurf"-like activities are through WinRed or ActBlue as these two PACs dominate the total number of transactions by a wide-margin.

Having data for a 2 year election cycle is also critical to obtaining more accurate results. (Funds can be donated from prior years)

Start with a fresh .csv file for a individual contributor obtained from the FEC website.

After importing into your spreadsheet app, sort ascending on contribution_receipt_date.

Next Group/Categorize your data based on these fields: filing_form column then committee_id column. Keep that order.

You'll see 2-3 Form #s as categories and any number of committees.

F3X = Conduit Committees
F3 = Campaign Committees for Congress
F3P = Campaigns Committees for President.

WinRed and ActBlue are Conduits -> F3X. The DCCC and NRSC, etc. are all Conduits.

Any committee that doesn't uniquely identify a single candidate is a conduit committee.

All F3 & F3P committees are campaigns, which allow $$$ to be spent on media, comms, electioneering etc. These are "authorized" for external spending.

Earmarked funds must always move from an F3X conduit to an F3 or F3P campaign committee.

Therefore, these forms must always refer to each other in FEC Filings.

All F3X forms identify the F3 campaign they are "contributing" to in the contributor_id field and the unused_contbr_id field.

Almost all F3 forms will identify where they got earmarked funds back to the conduit committee using the contributor_id field and the unused_contbr_id.

F3 forms indicate earmarks with receipt_type 15E -> indirect from contributor_id
F3 forms use receipt_type 15 -> direct from individual to committee if contributor_id == blank.

receipt_type can contain other earmark indicators such as a 15J, 10, etc.
Just remember, we're not conducting an audit.

The contributor_id fields might be empty if the donation total for an individual is below $200. (So the campaign committee is reducing paperwork)

When contributor_id fields are filled in - they indicate an F3X committee is moving funds from their accounts to the F3 campaigns. You may see the F3X transaction as a 24T, but not always.

The X in the memo_code field for an F3X committee indicates a % cut of the donation from the earmarked funds (like a fractional "operations" fee to process the donation)
The X in the memo_code field for an F3 committee usually indicates a direct earmark from the donor.

To see Frequency & count of donation transactions, an approximation, sum all transactions for WinRed or ActBlue.

Since the F3X conduit is tracking the total, you can compare the summed contribution_receipt_amount against the largest value found in the contributor_aggregate_ytd column.

But since contributions aggregate for up to 2 years for election cycles, and may not show prior year donations or donation amounts less than the $200.00 threshold, the best you can say is that it's an estimated value.

If the donations exceed the $200.00 threshold, the F3 or F3P committees must show the money and where it came from.

Yes, it's complicated.

HOW-TO VIDEOS COMING SOON!

Signature "verification" does not protect your mail in ballot. It is not a substitute or equivalent to establishing a voter's identity. The only way to do that is in person, with an ID.

Just offering some rebuttals to the common misconceptions about election security.

When you vote early, you make it easy for them to calculate how many more ballots they need to win!

I know what you are thinking.... Maricopa County.

They did that in Maricopa to try and teach us a lesson. "Vote early, because that's easier for us!"

And it was obvious. If those people voted early, we wouldn't know for a fact it was stolen, like we do now.

We have a lot of ground to cover for 2024. The only way we can keep our eye on all these things is to work together.

But WE CAN handle it!

Ballot adjudication or resolution is more common in hand marked paper ballots than ballots marked by a machine. No adjudication should be required for ballots marked by machines.

On the other hand, adjudication rates on hand marked paper ballots, such as mail in ballots, have a high adjudication rate. Often times too high, which is a big concern.

We are not suggesting either option is more preferrable than the other. We all know the only way is to go back to hand counting paper ballots.

Sooooo many opportunities for fraud when you vote by mail!

(If this looks familiar, it's because it was one of the first ones we shared, but we just updated it!)

Don’t just stand there and observe as the world is crashing down around you. If there was nothing you could do to change it, what would be the purpose of your presence?

Snap out of the shock & disbelief and get a move on it! Have you not seen enough already?

Everything we have seen over the last several years is all about power/control and election interference is their strategy.

One page explanation of the Mesa County reports by Jeff O'Donnell and Dr. D. https://t.me/ALoneRaccoon/7348

This channel will NEVER send you any messages. If someone contacts you from this channel, it will be from their personal account and will not have this channel's name or photo. Please report or block and delete.

If you do not know about Bev Harris, she has been election fraud hunting for years! This is a great video about fraction magic!👇 She has other resources as well at blackboxvoting.org and a few things on youtube still, but I'm sure much of her work has been scrubbed from the internet or is victim to the algorithms. Watch!🇺🇸

Unbelievable! We have been battling with proving clear vote 2.1 was not properly certified but was still used in 2020 and 2022 in 8 counties, including King Co, our problem child. Eventually I got it in writing that the 2.1 system was not certified by the EAC.

But then they changed their interpretation of the law to mean we require testing from an independent laboratory approved by the eac, and not actual eac certification.

They also ignored the fact that the vendor stated it was nearing the end of its eac testing, but never received certification.

Anyway, now I know why the EAC wouldn't certify the system. The system can tabulate ballots and accept them from ballots which are for a different election.

No wonder we could never get the numbers to add up! We thought we could narrow it down to ballots issued in the election we were looking at, but that is not the case.

We would have to consider prior elections as well when calculating ballots and cross referencing records.

We are excited to share with you:

📚 How to Audit an Election Through Public Records Requests 📚

This is part 1 of a short series explaining how you can perform an audit of the elections through public records requests. This is the introduction video which will give you ideas of what records you can request and how to use them in a meaningful way. Future tutorials will go more in depth with certain records, explain analysis reason and techniques, how to understand the results, and what to do with the information you find.