Andrew Paquette: Rigged! Mathematical Patterns Reveal Election Database Manipulation |646|

Painstaking analysis of algorithms designed to manage and obscure elections.

Subscribe: RSS

In Skeptiko episode 646 Dr. Andrew Paquette returns with overwhelming evidence of voter registration database manipulation across America. Through painstaking analysis, Andrew Paquette has uncovered evidence of sophisticated algorithms designed to manage and obscure irregular voter records across multiple states. His findings suggest something far more systematic than occasional duplicate registrations or clerical errors.

The Evidence Trail

1. Multiple States, Multiple Algorithms

Paquette has identified distinct algorithmic patterns in New York, New Jersey, Wisconsin, parts of Ohio and Texas, Pennsylvania, and Arizona. The complexity varies by state:

“New York has still the most sophisticated algorithm that I’ve seen… New Jersey has not terribly complex, but an extremely well hidden algorithm… Hawaii is the most obvious of all of them… Wisconsin has something, Ohio has something, Texas does. Texas and Ohio both are limited in range or scope… they seem to only affect a few counties as opposed to the whole state.”

2. Scale of the Issue

The numbers involved suggest systematic rather than incidental problems:

“The initial count was something like 700,000 of these [clone records]. After leaving the group I was working with and doing more research, I’ve raised that number. It’s closer to 2 million now… In some cases, it’s somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 to 20% of all records are fraudulent at this point.”

3. Sophisticated Concealment Methods

The algorithms appear specifically designed to hide irregular records while maintaining access:

“The way it’s joined is a piece of information that can be used to identify records… it’s completely invisible because it’s not altering the numbers at all… It’s just the way they’re associated with each other, which is a very clever thing to do… there’s really only one reason to do it is to obfuscate something.”

4. Legal Implications

The systems appear to violate existing election law requirements:

“This eliminates transparency. The whole purpose of these algorithms is obfuscation. So it does violate NVRA on that basis, and I believe HAVA, which is the Help America Vote Act as well.”

The Deeper Battle

On a deeper level, this investigation points to a fundamental battle between truth and deception in our electoral systems. As Paquette himself notes:

“The biggest problem plaguing society in the entire world and humanity actually is lies… when I pray these days, I figure, you know, the one prayer that covers basically everything is, I want truth to descend on this world.”

Why This Matters Now

The discovery of these algorithmic patterns isn’t just about past elections – it’s about the integrity of our entire democratic process moving forward. These aren’t simple duplicates or clerical errors that can be explained away by administrative oversight. They represent a sophisticated system of database manipulation that appears intentionally designed to evade detection.

While some might argue that identifying problems without proving specific instances of fraud isn’t helpful, this misses the point entirely. The mere existence of these algorithmic patterns in voter registration databases represents a violation of election law and transparency requirements. It’s like discovering a secret door in a bank vault – the mere presence of the door is a security breach, regardless of whether you can prove it’s been used for theft.

Transcript: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vQ_p2FQCNDlzZ7MeOxzy6tpadYVeJeOokSUHSbztyjvVWYnnbK0XBdm9QX0UEiQhaAMoJssT07QxXDE/pub

Youtube:

Rumble:

[box]