Proof of fraud may lie in vanishing Trump votes

The following story is brought to you courtesy of American Thinker. Click the link to visit their page and see more stories.

After watching footage from the Georgia hearings, Scott Adams, who always approaches information with a healthy degree of cynicism and with his BS meter set on high, actually got quite excited. According to him, if you ignore all the noise about internet connections, pallets of ballots, and counting shutdowns in the disputed states, there is one pivotally important piece of information: Votes were subtracted from Trump. If that happens, it inevitably means someone was playing with the vote counts.

On Wednesday, I wrote about some of the more interesting information that emerged from the Georgia hearing. This included eyewitness testimony about ballots being shredded and testimony explaining the shocking import of a Georgia official stating that 106,000 ballots, out of 113,130 ballots scanned, were manually adjudicated. That meant that 106,000 ballots were destroyed and replaced with whatever the adjudicators wanted.

The same witnesses who introduced this evidence about the adjudicated ballots were also responsible for evidence showing that the computers, instead of just adding votes as they came in for each candidate, were stripping votes from Trump. Sometimes the votes went to Biden; sometimes the votes just vanished. I’ve cued up the video to start with the testimony from the Data Integrity Group, but if that doesn’t work, go to 4:38:25:

I highly recommend watching all the testimony from the Data Integrity Group because it discusses the completely bizarre anomalies in the hard data. If you don’t have the time, fast forward to 4:47:45. There, you’ll see the data showing that Trump lost votes. As the video narration says, votes should only be incremental. As votes come in, they get added, not subtracted.

It was this data that got Scott Adams all fired up.

Adams explains that the engineers got involved in studying the data and that engineers tend to cut through the smoke and emotion and get to the heart of the matter. And for Adams those vanishing votes are the heart of the matter:

Here’s what they did — and you haven’t seen it yet but when I describe it, you’re actually going to feel something physically, so get ready for this. You’re going to feel this physically. They simplified. They simplified here. They brought it down to one question. Here’s the question: Is there ever a reason that the cumulative vote count could turn negative under normal non-hacked conditions? Because it did so, that’s the part that I think they’ll be able to show with no doubt about it.


You can see that the total the cumulative total went negative for Trump. [snip] By the way, so I’m not saying I saw it. This is the claim that exactly the same amount — not approximately but exactly the same number — that immediately went to Biden at the same time.


Now here’s the important part: They took the whole ball of allegations . . . down to one verifiable question. They did that. That’s your Kraken. Your Kraken isn’t big. Your Kraken is that simplification.

Adams’s point is a good one. While there’s every reason to believe that Biden could not possibly have won as he did, there are so many theories about how Biden got more votes than Trump did: Cemetery votes, imaginary voters, ballots repeatedly fed through scanners, adjudicated votes, votes shuttled through Germany and Rome, weighted votes, etc.

I’m certain all those theories are correct, but many are difficult to prove. Some are hard to prove because the Democrats refuse to release or have destroyed (and are still destroying) the evidence. Others are hard to prove because they leave no evidence (as with the adjudications that destroy the original ballots).

But vote subtraction is what is: If we accept that the Data Integrity Project people looked at the correct data and made the correct analyses, Trump lost votes. That’s impossible. Voters don’t cast negative votes; they cast only positive votes.

The only way to lose votes is if someone manually entered the computer databases and took them away from him. There’s your fraud, and it was fraud in numbers more than sufficient to ensure a “Biden victory” in Georgia. QED.

It’s becoming apparent that Trump, aware of the fact that the courts are cowards and the media will hide from Americans all evidence of election fraud, is planning to use the January 6 Congressional assembly to count Electoral College votes as his platform to make his case. Let’s hope that this irrefutable evidence of fraud is part of the case he makes.