Kari’s attorney Kurt Olsen: “Maricopa’s log file data shows that 11 of these signature verification workers approved 170K signatures at a rate of between 0 and 2.99 seconds with a 99.97% approval rating. That’s not signature review, Your Honor.” 💥

If we wind up with a miraculous remedy to any of our election procedures in the near future, we must never forget the determination shown by Kari Lake and her legal team to keep this pursuit going. It has been over 6 months since "Election" Day and Maricopa is squirming to cover its tracks and praying to their magicians and sorcerers that this judge doesn't find a conscience.

Give these crooks enough to cover up, and they'll eventually hang themselves.

Whistleblower says 298,000 signatures were verified in 36 hours when it should have taken 4-5 days.

“That just doesn’t add up.”

Maricopa’s attorney Thomas Liddy and Election Administrator Ray Valenzuela contradicted themselves so many times today.

First, they say the guy in the 90 second video was fired for approving signatures too quickly and not adhering to his duties.

Then Valenzuela says they've NEVER fired anyone from the signature verification process.

Then Valenzuela said that the video was taken out of context and that the guy was just doing exactly as he was trained to do.

And finally Valenzuela says the guy in the video was moved to a different job for approving signatures too quickly.

Holy hell. I hope the judge is picking up on this!

Welp… Now we know what the prize is for delivering GA for Biden via massive selection fraud. Stacy Abrahms is on the invite list.

So what exactly IS the Sage Group thingie where she’s the CEO? A spin-off of her Happy People staffing org that delivered the boots on the ground in voting centers across GA counties?

Or is it a new food tech company that’s developed lab-grown ballots?

https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/05/18/read-list-of-attendees-of-shadowy-bilderberg-meeting-this-week/
READ: List of Attendees of Shadowy Bilderberg Meeting This Week.

Campaign Money Laundering Part 1 of 2: Our super IT team developed a custom software program where the daily transactions from the FEC are graphed of the Smurfs (campaign money laundering).

Best to view it on a large screen. Red lines are the dollar amounts, green lines are the contributions in numbers. It will be interactive on our website in about a wk. O​ne high peak shows 421 contributions in one day. No one sits down and makes 421 contributions in one day; 32,439 contributions in total. From our chart shown, I wrote down some sequential days, showing no. of contributions to political PACS/campaigns for each of those days: 157​​, 139, 176, 215, 172, 181, 189, 239, 202, 216, 196, 237, 222, 240, 256, 249, 288, 256, 249, 288, 213, 264, 8, 15, 5, 3, 6, 8, 12, 9, 15, 11, 24, 7, 24, 4, 10, 12, 17....eventually going back up in the hundreds again repeating the spiking pattern.​

~ Peter Bernegger

Campaign Money Laundering Part 2 of 2: Remember, this is of one elderly, retired gentleman. ​He didn't make these contributions; some evil bad guys did using his name and address w/o his knowledge. I​t clearly shows an automated ramp-up of contributions. It is a computerized algorithm. Patterns like this show up for Smurf after Smurf.

For new followers, see my earlier posts on the whole political campaign money laundering scheme we uncovered. And speaking of followers, please help out, all these informations and research need to get to all the media and news outlets & we need your help to spread the word. Thank you.

~ Peter Bernegger

👆👆👆

"The testing referenced in the Lake v. Hobbs election contest was actually not testing at all, but rather the installation of new memory cards into the tabulator, which had previously been certified..." - Maricopa County

Wow, just wow.

Not only do they admit to installing new memory cards and see no problem with it. (I.e. Secure chains of custody anyone? If they really see no problem with this then manipulating BDFs would totally go unnoticed. Just sayin')

If it's not testing, why would they then process a handful of paper ballots afterwards?

And why is it, that when 50% of them failed to process properly, no one did anything about it? Is a 50% failure rate normal?

Kevin has the receipts. See the second image in the Tweet. 🔥

KN

Since the break, things have heated up tremendously. Forensic expert Erich Speckin testified that in his expert opinion, it is impossible to verify a signature in under 3 seconds. Speckin also alleged that approving a signature takes longer than rejecting a signature.

We have 70,000 ballots approved in under 2 seconds with a rate of 99.87% approval. This is obviously impossible.

The county in cross examination did not even dispute the assertions above. Instead, they spent almost an hour trying to discredit the witness.

I smell panic.

One problem I see for Lake is that she is ALSO tasked with proving that a total lack of signature verification would have altered the outcome of the election by a competent mathematical basis.

Even if it is proven that no signature verification occurred, we still have to prove that the outcome would have been different. A further inspection is needed, which the judge has not granted.

This “collapse” of the voting machine infrastructure is planned. The voting machines will only stay in place long enough for the transition to blockchain voting. Blockchain voting is a horrible substitution for voting machines.
Blockchain voting testing is already in the works… do not be fooled!

Poulos believes that regardless of the recent Fox News defamation victory, which saw the news outlet pay Dominion $787.5 million, the public outcry against the company will result in contractors opting to go elsewhere for their voting systems in the future.

He believes: “Whenever the next time a customer chooses to buy a new system—because every eight years or so, you replace your voting system for obsolescence and for certification issues—they’ll just say, ‘Man, it’s just not worth going through the hassle just to buy Dominion.’”

https://thenationalpulse.com/2023/05/21/dominion-ceo-says-company-will-soon-collapse-were-not-worth-the-hassle/

Your vote is sacred.

It's sickening to see Maricopa County water it down like this.

"You are about to see 90 seconds of the signature verification process where one person is verifying signatures as fast as they can load. Compared to the person sitting next to him."

Subscribe and share👉 @KariLakeAZ

Per AZ Rep Jones:

This morning, all 15 AZ counties received a letter from Senator Borrelli informing them that they cannot use machines in the upcoming 2024 presidential election. The legislature has plenary power over federal elections according to the US Constitution. SCR1037 is already in play.

(My input: tees up the next big court battle in AZ, and a perfect time to put this out with it hitting the fan in the Lake case).

Arizona's legislature just fired a shot heard 'round the elections world that will certainly be challenged in court - here are five key takeaways as this is conducted in the midst of Maricopa burning.

Thank you for reading!

https://skeshel.substack.com/p/five-key-takeaways-from-arizonas

Breaking down the American Thinker article of how algo's are in the voter registration systems:
1. The author discovers an algorithm hidden in New York's voter rolls.
2. The algorithm links county voter identification (county voter identification) and State Board of Elections identification (State Board of Elections identification) numbers to create a third ID number.
3. Four algorithms in New York's voter rolls are identified and named: Spiral, Metronome, Tartan, and Shingle.
4. The Spiral algorithm is solved, meaning it can be completely reversed, and its effects can be predicted. It can predict 40% of the voter IDs (codes) from just one ID – proving its validity.
5. The Metronome algorithm remains unsolved but appears to be based on a random seed for number randomization.
6. The Tartan algorithm accomplishes a similar purpose as the Metronome but uses a different approach.
7. The Shingle algorithm is closely associated with suspicious records.
8. The algorithms in the voter rolls are well-hidden using multiple obfuscation techniques.
9. County voter identification numbers are further segregated by county, and any alphabetical characters are stripped out.
10. A decimal point is added to the left of the county voter identification numbers.
11. The decimal points are removed from the numbers, effectively hiding their previous existence.
12. The algorithm performs a series of calculations to determine how many times the number of voters in each partition can be divided by specific repunit numbers.
13. Based on the repunits and the number of State Board of Elections identification numbers that can fit in each group, the algorithm calculates State Board of Elections identification numbers.
14. The algorithm cuts each group of numbers, similar to shuffling a deck of cards, placing the top half (lower numbers) below the bottom half (higher numbers).
15. The algorithm interlaces the numbers belonging to each repunit, creating the equivalent of a stacked deck.
16. After these transformations, the scrambled list of county voter identification numbers is attached to the scrambled list of State Board of Elections identification numbers.
17. The resulting numbers appear randomly assigned to a casual observer but are deterministic and fully reversible.
18. The Spiral algorithm can be used to clandestinely tag records and identify cloned State Board of Elections identification numbers.
19. Records with numbers assigned by the Shingle algorithm are almost entirely purged, and a significant number of these purged records are clones distributed in a distinctive pattern.
20. The Spiral algorithm can be used to identify cloned State Board of Elections identification numbers that were assigned and later deleted, as well as identify voters originally attached to now-deleted State Board of Elections identification numbers.
21. The purpose of the algorithms in the voter rolls remains unknown.
22. The algorithms likely do not serve a clear security function, as the voter rolls are public and the data is not masked.
23. The algorithms may not be designed to optimize database performance, as they potentially hinder performance.
24. County officials are unaware of the algorithms' existence, as they do not have direct access to State Board of Elections identification numbers and cannot detect the presence of the algorithms with the data available to them.
25. Evidence suggests the deletion of State Board of Elections identification numbers belonging to clones in large numbers, which is invisible to county officials, creating an opportunity for election fraud.
26. A third voter ID is created, or cloned.
27. Total voter registrations increase – but not due to real people registering to vote – due to algo’s cloning them. Rolls inflate.
28. Steps are taken to hide everything.
29. To get a ballot cast 4 things are needed: name, address, voter ID and in the system.
30. This explains in part where the fraudulent votes are coming from. Joe Biden never got 81 million legitimate votes.

~ Peter Bernegger