Another Bogus Fact Check: Liberal Leaning “Fact-Checker” Claims Hundreds of Thousands of Ballots Dumped on Election Night for Biden and Ratio Reporting After That Were Completely Normal

Source: Joe Hoft

If you don’t know that ‘fact checkers’ are used by the left and Big Tech to slander and censor conservative messages then you just aren’t up to speed.  That’s their mission.

We get this every day because we are successful and trustworthy in our reporting and the communist Democrats hate it.  They hate it when their lies and corrupt acts are spelled out in print or in the Big Media.  Cheaters, liars, and thieves always hate getting caught.

In November we reported on a situation in multiple states where late on Election Night, in the early morning hours, hundreds of thousands of ballots were dropped for Joe Biden.  Then after that point, nearly every reporting of the election results were reported at the same ratio.  We created a short video to make this point.

Of course, the Democrats couldn’t let it stand so they came out with bogus articles and arguments trying to justify the obvious questionable acts right in front of us.

One such entity was factcheck.org.  They posted an article where they addressed the drop and roll along with other reported potential election fraud events.

Hundreds of thousands of votes dropped for Biden Election Night

After arguing that states routinely stop counting like was done on Election Night (which was nonsense to suggest what was done this election in swing states was normal), the fact-checker next claimed the following about the large ballot drops that occurred for Biden Election Night:

Claim: “Statistically abnormal vote counts were the new normal when counting resumed. They were unusually large in size (hundreds of thousands) and had an unusually high (90 percent and above) Biden-to-Trump ratio.”

Facts: This vague claim could either be suggesting that votes were switched (a conspiracy theory we’ve repeatedly debunked and the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has said is false) or that the mail-in ballots counted after Election Day were illegitimate.

Neither is true.

Since we’ve already addressed the vote-switching conspiracy theories, we’ll focus on the ballot-box stuffing suggestion.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, some states made voting by mail easier in 2020. Most states normally don’t start counting mail-in ballots until Election Day, and mail-in ballots tend to favor Democrats in presidential elections. Also, in the run-up to the election, President Donald Trump repeatedly discouraged their use.

So there’s nothing unusual about post-Election Day votes favoring Biden.

The Spectator story might have oversold the degree to which those votes favored Biden, though.

In two swing states that keep track of the type of ballot cast for each candidate, Biden garnered more mail-in votes than Trump, but he didn’t win 90% of them. In Pennsylvania, Biden won 76% of the mail-in vote. In Georgia, he won 65% of the absentee mail-in vote.

Also, CISA has weighed in on two types of ballot-box stuffing claims, explaining that states have a variety of measures to protect against the submission of counterfeit mail-in ballots and that the number of overseas military ballots is so small — fewer than 1,000 in most states — that an influx would be easily detectable.

TGP rebuttal:

This is perhaps the weakest response to an issue ever made by a fake fact-checker, and here’s why:

  1. We addressed the issue of votes being switched by pointing out that Dominion voting machines have a ‘weighted race’ feature.  We reported on the ‘weighted race feature’ embedded in Dominion machines and received no answer from Dominion.  Most likely they haven’t debunked this issue.  We also won’t address here their claims that the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency is an agency that can be trusted or that mail-in ballots received after election day were legitimate.  These too are major issues to be addressed separately.
  2. When the fact-checker finally addresses the issue of the hundreds of thousands of votes dropping early in the morning after Election night they state that there were many more absentee ballots due to COVID.  We really don’t know that.  There was no study that we know of where they prove this argument.  They don’t cite their source.  Maybe there were more votes due to cheating by Democrats, isn’t that just as plausible?
  3. But their overall argument is silly.  They are attempting to say all the ballots that were dropped early in the morning of November 4th were all related to absentee ballots.  We really don’t know that.  How do they know that?  We only know that hundreds of thousands of votes were reported early the next morning.  These votes were nearly all for Biden.  In Virginia, there were 330,000 votes dropped three times and two were reversed (which again makes no sense) but the fact-checker says “So there’s nothing unusual about post-Election Day votes favoring Biden.”  What garbage!
  4. Next, the fact-checker says some things about absentee ballots and the CISA.  That was it!  There was no argument that ballots were dropped in large amounts.  There was no rationale for how this makes sense in such massive quantities for Biden.  This is because it doesn’t make sense and is, therefore, likely election fraud.

After the vote drops the remaining votes come in patterns all giving Biden the same percentage of votes always higher than President Trump

Later the ‘fact checker’ made this claim about the ‘roll’ part of the ‘drop and roll’:

Claim: “Statistical anomalies. In Georgia, Biden overtook Trump with 89 percent of the votes counted. For the next 53 batches of votes counted, Biden led Trump by the same exact 50.05 to 49.95 percent margin in every single batch. It is particularly perplexing that all statistical anomalies and tabulation abnormalities were in Biden’s favor. Whether the cause was simply human error or nefarious activity, or a combination, clearly something peculiar happened.”

Facts: There was no anomaly.

The claim appears to be based on a post from the Gateway Pundit, a partisan website, which published data it characterized as “inconceivable” and indicative of “fraud.”

The data showed that, as the Spectator story says, Biden maintained a lead with 50.05% of the vote while Trump held 49.95% over the course of about an hour of ballot counting in Georgia.

But that’s to be expected, Charleen Adams, a research fellow at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, told FactCheck.org in an interview.

“What they’re calling an anomaly is statistically normal,” Adams said. She examined similar claims that misinterpreted the same type of data about other states.

In the Georgia example, the data — for which Gateway Pundit didn’t disclose the source — shows information for batches of ballots counted on the night of Nov. 6.

That’s three days after the election, when most of the counting was complete. With cumulative data like this, it’s normal to see small differences in the percent shares of votes between candidates at that late point in the process, Adams explained.

In contrast to the earlier days of counting — when there are relatively few votes included in the total and there can be wide fluctuations in the lead or deficit held by a certain candidate as new batches of ballots are counted — the later days show the cumulative, almost complete vote total when the margins between the candidates have tightened and each new batch of ballots has a shrinking impact on the total balance.

The Gateway Pundit data shows tallies from one of the later days, when 89% of Georgia’s ballots had been counted and each new batch of votes did little to shift the already established balance.

“So, there’s not an anomaly in the data,” Adams said. “They’ve misinterpreted cumulative data.”

TGP rebuttal:

The entire rebuttal for this case comes from a fellow at Harvard, Ms. Adams.  Her response shows why parents should never send their children to institutions like Harvard. Here’s why:

Ms. Adams’ overriding assumption is that there is no fraud and therefore these numbers are “normal”.  But what she doesn’t consider is what if there is fraud?  If there is fraud then the same activities would not be considered normal.

Ms. Adams doesn’t address the fact that votes aren’t reported as individual votes (integers) but as percents when being supplied to the media.  This method is used across the country for reporting.  This allows for vote manipulation.

The percents of votes for each candidate and total votes are the only values provided in the reporting data.  Therefore, to determine the number of votes for each candidate you have to multiply the total number of votes by the candidate’s percentage of votes.  To determine the number of votes in each reporting period for each candidate you must subtract the total number of calculated votes for each candidate from the prior reporting period from the current reporting period and the difference is the change in votes. This entire method provides for vote manipulation.  This major key point is not addressed by Ms. Adams.  Why are we reporting votes in a national election as percents rather than as whole numbers? 

Here is an example we provided from Virginia:

Below is what was reported for Virginia on election night through the New York Times/Edison election data feed.  Total Votes and %Trump and %Biden are basically all that were provided.  President Trump was way ahead until the middle of the night when three 300,000 ballot dumps for Biden occurred with two dumps being reversed.  (There is no logical reason for these entries – they appear to be fraudulent activities of providing Biden the lead).  Overall 851,000 votes were added to Biden’s totals and only 318,000 were awarded to President Trump between 11:14 pm (Eastern) on November 3rd and 5:00 am November 4th. This resulted in over half a million more votes net and 73% of the votes going to Biden during this timeframe.

After these crazy entries, Biden was given the lead.  After that point, nearly every vote recorded was at the same percent as noted below:

Here’s where Ms. Adams is wrong.  She never even considers that recording and reporting votes by percentages is reasonable!  She ignores this and claims, “So, there’s not an anomaly in the data,” Adams said. “They’ve misinterpreted cumulative data.”  Why are we using this method in the first place?

It’s also highly suspect that the votes recorded after the large ballot drop in Virginia of half a million votes net for Biden were at the same ratio.  Three entries were negative votes for both candidates, but mostly for President Trump. The only way this could happen would be if voters returned to their precincts and asked to change their votes and this just doesn’t happen in the real world.  By reporting all the votes at the same percentage late in the counting, the result is not normal and the real counts are hidden in the manipulated percent of votes recorded.

The most obvious observation of the way the votes are recorded is not related to the ‘cumulative data’ method, it’s why the hell are we doing this in the first place?

Unfortunately, we have to rate this fact-check as fake – again.

Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Nwo Report


This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://nworeport.me and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.

Visit our Discussion Forum at Libertati.com.

Follow us:
USSA News | The Tea Party's Front Page
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com