RSS

Category Archives: Uncategorized

2020 Cyber Symposium (CPACS) vs. Recorded vote

Richard Charnin July 3, 2022

2020 Cyber Symposium (CPACS) vs. Recorded vote

There was a constant 4.1% discrepancy in Trumps symposium vs. reported votes in nearly all states. This indicates that the Cyber electronic vote counts likely used the same algorithm. The Cyber vote does not include stuffed ballots after closing (see “2000 Mules”) and other fraud factors, so that Trump may have won by nearly 14 million votes.

Mike Lindell Reveals REAL Election Results During Cyber Symposium

“On August 11, 2020 Mike Lindell counted off most every State with their true election results after the electronic fraud has been removed. All 50 States were affected by the hacking of our voting systems. He used the actual packet captures to obtain the results. He also stated, the 74,000,000 votes for Biden may have an additional 16,000,000 removed by forensic audits for what will be determined to be human fraud. All 50 States were affected to some degree. This must be addressed by Americans who seek the truth”.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yh0YkXBVctdJwt0_XHrpCC6f7K30oEz0Vr13MiU5qT4/edit?fbclid=IwAR0EJG579_bnPFv35sDndHcX2K1ztrNWqulPmVA-NEIU-8yC3Xub6MAy9tQ#gid=584196755

2020 Cyber symposium Recorded

TOTAL TRUMP BIDEN TRUMP BIDEN Diff

Votes 80,746 74,611 74,284 81,253 6,135

Share 51.0% 47.1% 46.9% 51.3% 4.08%

TRUMP BIDEN TRUMP BIDEN Diff

AK 57.0% 38.7% 52.8% 42.8% 4.19%

AL 66.2% 32.4% 62.0% 37.1% 4.13%

AR 66.4% 30.7% 62.4% 35.8% 4.04%

AZ 53.2% 45.2% 49.1% 50.2% 4.11%

CA 38.4% 59.4% 34.3% 64.9% 4.11%

CO 46.0% 51.3% 41.9% 56.9% 4.06%

CT 43.3% 55.1% 39.2% 60.2% 4.09%

DC 9.3% 88.0% 5.4% 94.5% 3.89%

DE 43.8% 54.5% 39.8% 59.6% 4.05%

FL 55.4% 43.7% 51.2% 48.3% 4.16%

GA 53.4% 45.3% 49.2% 50.1% 4.14%

HI 38.3% 59.5% 34 .3% 65.0% 4.03%

IA 57.2% 40.7% 53.1% 45.8% 4.10%

ID 67.9% 28.9% 63.8% 34.1% 4.02%

IL 44.6% 53.5% 40.6% 58.7% 4.07%

IN 61.1% 36.8% 57.0% 41.8% 4.11%

KS 60.3% 37.4% 56.2% 42.5% 4.05%

KY 66.2% 32.0% 62.1% 36.8% 4.08%

LA 62.6% 35.7% 58.5% 40.5% 4.11%

MA 36.2% 61.5% 32.1% 67.1% 4.10%

MD 36.2% 61.2% 32.2% 67.0% 4.07%

ME 48.0% 49.1% 44.0% 54.7% 3.94%

MI 52.0% 46.5% 47.8% 51.4% 4.13%

MN 49.4% 48.3% 45.3% 53.6% 4.09%

MO 61.3% 38.1% 56.8% 42.2% 4.50%

MT 60.6% 36.2% 56.9% 41.6% 3.71%

MS 62.1% 36.8% 57.6% 41.6% 4.51%

NC 54.1% 44.4% 49.9% 49.3% 4.14%

ND 69.1% 27.6% 65.1% 32.8% 3.99%

NE 62.2% 35.0% 58.2% 40.2% 3.99%

NH 49.4% 48.5% 45.4% 53.8% 4.01%

NJ 45.5% 53.2% 41.4% 58.1% 4.14%

NM 47.5% 50.1% 43.5% 55.5% 4.01%

NV 47.6% 45.9% 47.7% 51.2% -0.07%

NY 41.9% 56.7% 37.8% 61.7% 4.16%

OH 57.4% 41.1% 53.3% 45.9% 4.14%

OK 69.5% 28.1% 65.4% 33.1% 4.09%

OR 44.4% 52.4% 40.4% 58.3% 4.06%

PA 53.0% 45.8% 48.8% 50.6% 4.16%

RI 42.7% 55.2% 38.6% 60.6% 4.07%

SC 59.2% 39.3% 55.1% 44.1% 4.13%

SD 65.8% 31.5% 61.8% 36.6% 4.01%

TN 64.8% 31.4% 60.7% 38.2% 4.11%

TX 56.2% 42.3% 52.1% 47.2% 4.14%

UT 70.1% 37.6% 58.1% 39.3% 11.95%

VA 48.1% 50.0% 44.0% 55.2% 4.11%

VT 34.6% 61.8% 30.7% 68.3% 3.89%

WA 42.8% 53.9% 38.8% 59.9% 4.04%

WI 52.9% 45.3% 48.8% 50.3% 4.12%

WV 65.2% 25.5% 68.6% 30.2% -3.44%

WY 73.7% 22.4% 69.9% 27.5% 3.77%

https://rumble.com/vl1o3j-true-2020-election-results-provided-by-cyber-symposium.html

#truethevote #cyber symposium #DonaldTrump #MikeLindell

 
2 Comments

Posted by on July 3, 2022 in Uncategorized

 

2020 Election Unmasked – Statistical Anomalies

ThanQ Patriot https://t.me/KanekoaTheGreat

Video source, Anonymous https://www.bitchute.com/video/WNLxq4A2Oo1z/

1. “President Trump received more votes than any previous incumbent seeking reelection. He got 11 million more votes than in 2016, the third largest rise in support ever for an incumbent.”

2. “Trump’s vote increased so much because, according to exit polls, he performed far better with many key demographic groups. Ninety-five percent of Republicans voted for him.”

3. “He earned the highest share of all minority votes for a Republican since 1960. Trump grew his support among black voters by 50 percent over 2016… Joe Biden’s black support fell well below 90 percent, the level below which Democratic presidential candidates usually lose.”

4. “Trump increased his share of the national Hispanic vote to 35 percent. With 60 percent or less of the national Hispanic vote, it is arithmetically impossible for a Democratic presidential candidate to win Florida, Arizona, Nevada, and New Mexico.”

5. “Bellwether states swung further in Trump’s direction than in 2016. Florida, Ohio and Iowa each defied America’s media polls with huge wins for Trump. Since 1852, only Richard Nixon has lost the electoral college after winning this trio”…

6. “Midwestern states Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin always swing in the same direction as Ohio and Iowa, their regional peers. Ohio likewise swings with Florida. Current tallies show that, outside of a few cities, the Rust Belt swung in Trump’s direction.”

7. “Yet, Biden leads in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin because of an apparent avalanche of black votes in Detroit, Philadelphia, and Milwaukee. Biden’s ‘winning’ margin was derived almost entirely from such voters in these cities”…

8. “… as coincidentally his black vote spiked only in exactly the locations necessary to secure victory. He did not receive comparable levels of support among comparable demographic groups in comparable states, which is highly unusual for the presidential victor.”

9. “We are told that Biden won more votes nationally than any presidential candidate in history. But he won a record low of 17 percent of counties; he only won 524 counties, as opposed to the 873 counties Obama won in 2008. Yet, Biden somehow outdid Obama in total votes.”

10. “Victorious presidential candidates, especially challengers, usually have down-ballot coattails; Biden did not. The Republicans held the Senate and enjoyed a ‘red wave’ in the House, where they gained a large number of seats while winning all 27 toss-up contests.”

11. “Trump’s party did not lose a single state legislature and actually made gains at the state level.”

12. “Another anomaly is found in the comparison between the polls and non-polling metrics. The latter include: party registrations trends; candidates’ respective primary votes; candidate enthusiasm; social media followings; broadcast and digital media ratings; online searches”…

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on May 22, 2022 in Uncategorized

 

Probability that Covid-19 would spread among several dozen leading Democrats and Biden officials

Richard Charnin – 4/28/22

What is the probability P that Covid-19 would spread among several dozen leading Democrats and Biden officials after a dinner hosted by the Gridiron Club, where PROOF OF VACCINE WAS REQUIRED?

P= 1/trillion*trillion*trillion*trillion*trillion

Assume N=100 at dinner, n= 24 infected, R= 2% infection rate, T=1 week= .019 year

P = poisson (n, N*R*T, false)

P=1.70E-58 = (1/trillion}^5

Assuming N=2000, P= 1.38E-27 = 1/trillion^2

NnProb
100241.70E-58
500248.70E-42
1,000241.20E-34
1,500241.67E-30
2,000241.38E-27
5,000241.54E-18

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/08/covid-19-spreads-democrats-biden-officials?fbclid=IwAR3qV91ScVhVB6Ls6H1BXOZxqtTx5GsKETRotuWfnjvo1_zuyi__jAnIX2I

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on April 28, 2022 in Uncategorized

 

Major reversal: Why the recent sharp percentage drop in Covid-19 cases compared to the decline in deaths?

Feb. 15, 2022

Richard Charnin

Why the recent sharp percentage drop in Covid-19 cases compared to the decline in deaths?

On Jan. 25, the 7-day moving average of Cov-19 cases was 640,000. On Feb. 15 it dropped 78% to 142,000.

On Jan 25, the 7-day moving average of Cov-19 deaths was 2200. On Feb. 15 it dropped just 9% to 2000.

How many of the latest 7-day cases were already vaxxed? How many were unvaxxed?

How many deaths were of people previously vaxxed? How many were unvaxxed?

How many deaths included comorbidities?

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on February 16, 2022 in Uncategorized

 

Why is there a rapidly declining Covid-19 mortality rate vs. the sharp rise in cases?

Richard Charnin Jan. 1, 2022

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

On Dec.1, 2021, the 7-day average of number of cases was 52,000 and the 7-day average mortality rate (total deaths/total cases) was 1.1%.

As of Dec. 31, the corresponding averages were 367,000 and 0.31%. The number of daily cases has increased by 7X while the number of daily deaths is nearly constant (1100). Did you hear this on CNN, MSNBC or FOX? Of course not. Ask yourself why.

Are the cases inflated by Omicron (which has virtually zero mortality) and/or false positive tests? How many of the deaths were vaccinated? Does the declining death rate reflect herd immunity and/or the use of Ivermectin, Regeneron and HCQ?

This is the biggest con-job in history. The unvaccinated are not spreading Covid. The problem is vaccinated taking boosters with spiked protein affecting their DNA and possibly spreading Covid to the unvaccinated. https://docs.google.com/…/1Jbfznj3c27kKvF7Vpo9pWIe…/edit

 
2 Comments

Posted by on January 1, 2022 in Uncategorized

 

CNN Biden 12/16 approval is 49%, but is 34% when calculated using poll respondents political affiliation and vote shares

Richard Charnin 12/16/21

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

CNN misleads on Biden Approval (49%). But it is just 34% based on their own internal polling numbers (calculations below). Of course, do you really expect the truth from the MSM?

“The 12/16 poll finds roughly two-thirds (66%) have doubts and reservations about Biden’s leadership, including 92% of Republicans, 75% of independents and 36% of Democrats. Still, Biden’s overall approval holds about even at 49% approve to 51% disapprove. Those approval ratings are similar to recent polls from AP-NORC and Reuters/Ipsos”.

But the ratings conflict with the actual poll calculation which shows that Biden has 34% approval. And this assumes that Biden’s vote shares are legitimate and were not inflated. If they were, his True approval is even lower than 34%. Biden has 33% approval if the 2020 National Exit poll party-ID weights are used.

View the Reuters poll below: Biden 48% approve; 46% disapprove? Sure, and I have a bridge in Brooklyn for you. But at least Reuters bogus Party-ID and vote shares agree with the rating.

The Civiqs poll (36% approval) makes sense. It agrees with the 34.8% calculation using NEP weights.

Biden approval 1CNNApproveDisapprove
Democrat36%64%36%
Republican28%8%92%
Independent36%25%75%
CALCULATED100%34%66%
Biden Approval 2NEPApproveDisapprove
Democrat36%64%36%
Republican36%8%92%
Independent28%25%75%
CALCULATED100%33%67%

Sensitivity Analysis – Biden total approval for 15 scenarios: 60,64,68% Democratic approval, 19,23,27% Independent and 8% Republican

Republican 8%
Democrat
Independent60%64%68%
27%32.0%33.5%34.9%
25%31.5%32.9%34.4%
23%30.9%32.4%33.8%
21%30.4%31.8%33.2%
19%29.8%31.2%32.7%
ReutersParty-IDApproveDisapprove
Democrat45.7%81%19%
Republican40.6%17%83%
Independent13.7%39%61%
Calculated100%49.3%50.7%
Actual48%46%

Real Clear Politics Biden approval trend: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president-biden-job-approval-7320.html

CNN Poll: https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/15/politics/cnn-poll-economy/index.html https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/21154775-rel8a-biden-economy?responsive=1&title=1

CiviqsNEP Party IDApproveDisapproveNo opinion
Democrat36%76%10%14%
Republican36%2%96%2%
Independent28%24%55%21%
CALCULATED100%34.8%53.6%11.6%
Actual36%55%9%
 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 17, 2021 in Uncategorized

 

The 2020 election math anomaly that proves fraud

Richard Charnin Dec. 2, 2021

The single 2020 election anomaly that proves fraud.

In Georgia, 96,800 ballots were cast for just the president and no other office on the ballot. A total of 96,000 voted just for Biden and 800 just for Trump. What is the probability of such a wide difference? We would expect approximately 48,000 for each. It is just as likely for a Biden voter to do this as it is for a Trump voter.

In Georgia, Biden won 99% of ballots that only voted for President and no other races.
The number of votes: Trump: 818; Biden: 95,801.

Calc 1: binomial distribution function:
P = BINOMDIST(8,968,0.5,true)
P = 7.51E-273 (0)

Calc 2: factorial function (!):
For example, 8! = 8*7*6*5*4*3*2*1.
P = 968!/(8!*960!)*(0.5^8)*(0.5^960)
P = (0.5^8)*(0.5^960)
P = 0.5^968
P= 4.01E-292 =0

This is absolute proof of massive election fraud!

https://publicinterestlegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/Mail-Voting-2012_2020-1P-GA.pdf?fbclid=IwAR1hxnNLzIFMVjmz-SCoAs7k22XGy21t_HB2WNj3RyXod0i78BfNG3Y23Zg

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 2, 2021 in Uncategorized

 

Wisconsin 2020 election fraud: 82,766 mail ballots missing or undeliverable

Richard Charnin Dec. 1, 2021

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

The Public Interest Legal Foundation (PILF) said on Friday that 82,766 mail ballots sent to voters in Wisconsin’s November 2020 presidential election “went missing or undeliverable,” a number more than four times greater than Joe Biden’s 20,682 vote certified margin of victory in the state.

The report showed that, unlike the results of the 2012 and 2016 elections, the number of “missing or undeliverable” mail ballots in 2020 exceeded the margin of victory for the state’s ten electoral college votes.

In 2016, 158,846 ballots were mailed to Wisconsin voters, just 11 percent of the 1.4 million votes cast in that election. Of these ballots, 11,138 were classified as “unknown” and 1,846 were “undeliverable.” Combining the two classifications, the 12,984 mail ballots were only 47 percent of Donald Trump’s certified 27,257 vote margin of victory in WI over Hillary Clinton.

In 2020, 1.4 million ballots were mailed to Wisconsin voters (86 percent of the 1.6 million mail in votes cast). Nationwide, of 90.6 million ballots sent, 1.1 million were undeliverable, 560,814 rejected and 14.7 million “unknown”.

PILF President J. Christian Adams: “These figures detail how the 2020 push to mail voting needs to be a one-year experiment. Bills like H.R. 1/S.1 risk inflating these numbers even further, pushing our election system toward error, disenfranchisement and ultimately widespread doubt about election outcomes. Some of the counties with the least experience in administering mail voting rejected the most ballots nationwide. If continued, 2020-style chaos will become the norm”.

Biden “won” Wisconsin by 20,682 votes, but Trump led by 127,000 votes (52.4-47.6%) with just 701,000 (18%) of 3.3 million remaining to be counted. The probability that Biden would tie Trump by winning 59.1% of the remaining votes when he had just 47.6% of the votes counted is

P= 1 in 15,421 (assuming a 1.0% MoE): P=normdist(E30,0.5,0.01/1.96, false)

https://publicinterestlegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Mail-Voting-2012_2020-1P-WI.pdf

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 1, 2021 in Uncategorized

 

Probability analysis: 24 Unadjusted state exit polls vs. recorded vote vs. Cyber Symposium PCAPS.

Richard Charnin Nov. 29,2021

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

Probability analysis: 24 Unadjusted state exit polls vs. recorded vote vs. Cyber Symposium PCAPS.

The deviations are far beyond the state exit poll margin of error. They cannot be explained as being due to chance. Trust the Cyber symposium votes. The unadjusted exit poll and recorded votes are bogus.

N= number of the 24 states exit polled in which the margin of error was exceeded (only 1-2 would be expected at the 95% confidence level)

Vote discrepancy: n=Number of states; Probability P=poisson (n,0.025*24,false)

Exit vs recorded: n=8; P= 1 in 4.4 million

Cyber vs recorded: n=14; P= 1 in 202 trillion

Exit v Cyber: n=15; P= 1 in 5000 trillion

Exit Poll flip: n=24; P = 1 in 16.8 million; P=binomdist (24,24,0.5,false)

Trump had 44.9% in the 24 state exit poll weighted average and 50.3% in the corresponding Cyber average. The probability of the deviation assuming a 1.5% margin of error is P= 1 in 264 million.

P=normdist ( 0.449,0.503,0.0155/1.96,false) =1/264 million

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yh0YkXBVctdJwt0_XHrpCC6f7K30oEz0Vr13MiU5qT4/edit#gid=584196755

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 29, 2021 in Uncategorized

 

Introducing the 2020 Race Sensitivity Analysis Model

Richard Charnin Nov. 19,2021

LINKS TO  BLOG POSTS

Check out the 2020 election state race analysis model.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yh0YkXBVctdJwt0_XHrpCC6f7K30oEz0Vr13MiU5qT4/edit#gid=1465733498

Trump’s racial shares are forced to match the Cyber Symposium PCAPS using the 2020 Census state votes for each racial group. The sensitivity analysis consists of 25 scenarios over a range of Trump shares of white and black voters.

For example, to match the AZ Cyber Symposium vote, Trump had 61% of whites, 13% of blacks, 44% of Hispanics, 34% of Asians and 41% of Others and had a 270,000 base case vote margin. The worst case margin is 79,000. The best case is 460,000. Biden “won” the rigged AZ election by 10,500 votes.

Race CensusWhiteBlackHispanicAsianOther
U.S. Share71.0%12.2%10.6%4.5%1.6%
AZ Vote2,385179814107164
AZ Share65.4%4.9%22.3%2.9%4.5%
Trump share61.0%13.0%44.0%34.0%41.0%
Biden share37.0%87.0%55.0%61.0%55.0%
Other share2.0%1.0%1.0%5.0%4.0%
ARIZONATrumpBidenOtherTotalMargin
Cyber votes1,8021,532533,387270
Reported votes1,6621,672533,387-10.5
Cyber share53.2%45.2%1.6%100%8.0%
Reported share49.1%49.4%1.6%100%-0.3%
% HispanicAZTrump% White
44.0%57%59%61%63%65%
% BlackMargin
17%106194283371460
15%99188276365453
13%92181270358447
11%86174263351440
9%79168256345433
Trump
17%50.8%52.1%53.4%54.7%56.0%
15%50.7%52.0%53.3%54.6%55.9%
13%50.6%51.9%53.2%54.5%55.8%
11%50.5%51.8%53.1%54.4%55.7%
9%50.4%51.7%53.0%54.3%55.6%
Biden
17%47.7%46.3%45.0%43.7%42.4%
15%47.8%46.4%45.1%43.8%42.5%
13%47.8%46.5%45.2%43.9%42.6%
11%47.9%46.6%45.3%44.0%42.7%
9%48.0%46.7%45.4%44.1%42.8%
Trump
17%1,7201,7641,8081,8531,897
15%1,7171,7611,8051,8491,894
13%1,7131,7581,8021,8461,890
11%1,7101,7541,7981,8431,887
9%1,7071,7511,7951,8391,884
Biden
17%1,6141,5701,5261,4811,437
15%1,6171,5731,5291,4851,440
13%1,6211,5761,5321,4881,444
11%1,6241,5801,5361,4911,447
9%1,6271,5831,5391,4951,450

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on November 19, 2021 in Uncategorized