This Election Steal Runs So Deep, Credible Scientists Being Ignored If Their Data Shows Election Rigged

Written By BlabberBuzz | Friday, 01 January 2021 07:40

President Donald Trump on Wednesday touted a new study by economist John Lott, which calls into question Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden’s victory over Trump, purports to show that there were 289,000 “excess votes” across six battleground states, and alleges that differences in absentee votes between counties with alleged fraud and adjacent counties is “suspicious.”

Trump shared a link to Lott’s study on Twitter, “New Lott study estimates 11,350 absentee votes lost to Trump in Georgia. Another 289,000 ‘excess (fraudulent) votes’ across GA, AZ, MI, NV, PA, and WI.”

Lott’s study seeks to provide measures of vote fraud in the 2020 presidential election, including by comparing precincts in Georgia’s Fulton County that are adjacent to similar precincts in neighboring counties where there were no allegations of fraud.

RAND PAUL INVITES MANCHIN TO DEFECT FROM THE DARK SIDE

RAND PAUL INVITES MANCHIN TO DEFECT FROM THE DARK SIDE

“In layman’s terms, in precincts with alleged fraud, Trump’s proportion of absentee votes was depressed—even when such precincts had similar in-person Trump vote shares to their surrounding counties, Lott wrote in the study. He argues that it is “suspicious” that the shift happens only in absentee ballots, and only when a county line is crossed.

NO SCIENCE TO CALIFORNIA'S CRACKDOWN ON GAS

NO SCIENCE TO CALIFORNIA'S CRACKDOWN ON GAS

According to Lott, “the best estimate shows an unusual 7.81 [percent] drop in Trump’s percentage of the absentee ballots for Fulton County alone of 11,350 votes, or over 80 [percent] of Biden’s vote lead in Georgia.” Lott also wrote in an abstract to his study that he applied the same methodology to Allegheny County in Pennsylvania, claiming that “the estimated number of fraudulent votes from those two sources is about 55,270 votes.”

WATCH: CHICAGO'S EVIL MAYOR VILIFIES COPS ON CAMERA

WATCH: CHICAGO'S EVIL MAYOR VILIFIES COPS ON CAMERA

“The estimates here indicate that there were 70,000 to 79,000 ‘excess’ votes in Georgia and Pennsylvania,” he wrote in the study. “Adding Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin, the total increases to up to 289,000 excess votes.”

FACT: SUPPLY CHAIN CRISIS HURTING MOST AMERICANS

FACT: SUPPLY CHAIN CRISIS HURTING MOST AMERICANS

He then argues that precinct level estimates for Georgia and Pennsylvania “indicate that vote fraud may account for Biden’s win in both states,” claiming also that “the voter turnout rate data also indicates that there are significant excess votes in Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, and Wisconsin as well.”

Peter Navarro, who serves as an adviser to President Donald Trump, also touted Lott’s study in a recent tweet, in which he called for a postponement of Georgia’s Senate runoff election in light of the study’s findings.

DEMS QUIT USING IRS TO CRACK DOWN ON CITIZENS

DEMS QUIT USING IRS TO CRACK DOWN ON CITIZENS

Navarro recently released his own report on the integrity of the 2020 election, claiming that the allegations of irregularities are serious enough to warrant an urgent probe and substantial enough to potentially overturn the results.

The findings of the report released on Dec. 17 and titled “The Immaculate Deception,” support the claim that the election “may well have been stolen” from Trump.

Since Election Day, Trump and third-party groups have pursued legal challenges to the outcome of the election in the six battleground states.

State elections officials, the Department of Justice, and others have pushed back against claims of widespread voter fraud in the 2020 election, while the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency has named the November 3 election “the most secure in American history.”

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's

Start your own discussion or comment on someone else's