Questo sito web ed i sui contenuti sono esenti da cookie, pubblicità invasiva, occulta, subdola, eticamente scorretta e pure da files geneticamente modificati:
per una libera informazione in un libero Stato. -
Niente Google, niente Facebook, nessun link a programmi spioni..
- No Malicious softwares, spam, coookies, phishings, trojans etc. No Annoying Popus - Zero Facebook, Zero Google, Zero "Suggestions" , Zero Snake'apps..
No WordPress - Joomla - PHP - WooCom - Drupal - Bootstrap.. etc.

ref:topbtw-2784.html/ 13 Novembre 2020/A

Mr. Joe "Glitch" for President !.

Nato il 20 Novembre dell'anno 1942, Joe Biden, avvocato, giusto giusto fra 7 giorni, compierà 78 anni..

E poi, assai probabilmente, a Gennaio, diverrà il prossimo Presidente USA il frutto di un enorme "glitch"..

Salvo sorpresine..

Non sarebbe assai "eticamente corretto" se poi un bel numero di voti apparisssero tutti manipolati a suo favore..

Hanno votato i morti, ( ma accadeva anche in Italia.. ) e poi in alcune contee hanno votato più elettori che residenti..
( in Italia non pare sia mai accaduto..)

Altrove si sono trovati sacchi di schede elettorali "pro Trump".. nella spazzatura..

In altri casi gli osservatori pro-Trump non sono stati ammessi a verificare i conteggi..

In altri casi ancora le macchinette per il voto elettronico si sono inceppate ..

Ed ora vi è la dimostrazione "scientifica" che è stato attuato il sistema del "glitch", ovvero dell' avvantaggiare Biden e svantaggiare Trump, esattamente come nei videogame..

Insomma gli USA, ancora una volta, pare che in fatto di brogli elettorali, abbiamo fatto progressi non indifferenti..

Ma allora ci si chiede, se dopo le doverose e puntiali verifiche, dovesse emergere una diffusa frode elettorale, che credibilità avrà mai il settantottenne Joe Biden, che avrebbe in mano le redini degli USA ad ottanta anni.. ed oltre ?

Il Presidente "Glitch" ?

A questo punto solo Putin ci puo' salvare dal Glitch-President..

Perché è molto meglio un nemico onesto che un amico glitch.. del quale non ti potrai mai fidare..

Certamente per Putin è meglio avere un nemico-amico irruente, molto cow-boy, ma che mantiene la parola data, che un alleato infido, creato con un "glich" e che certamente è solo l'esperessione di un manipolo di burattinai non tanto occulti..

Basta leggere la lista dei "donatori" che hanno riempito le casse della campagna elettorale di Mr. Glitch..

E Putin l'avrà ben letta...

MIT Scientists Analyze, Expose How Dominion Switched Thousands, Perhaps Millions Of Votes

Built-in machine “features” include “weighting” election for a candidate, giving “fractions” of a vote to a candidate!

Understand that when the media claims there is no evidence of wide-spread voter fraud, that is a lie… and the lie was carefully planned by global leftists.

The Dominion machines, at the heart of the controversy, are designed to rig elections… according to MIT scientists (one who is a democrat and the other, the man who invented email).

These men have exposed exactly how the machines transferred tens of thousands of votes to Joe Biden alone… and perhaps millions of votes across the country.

This is an excellent analysis of how "the glitch" worked by @va_shiva and team.


— TheSharpEdge (@TheSharpEdge1) November 11, 2020

This is an excellent analysis of how "the glitch" worked by @va_shiva and team.


— TheSharpEdge (@TheSharpEdge1) November 11, 2020

This is an excellent analysis of how "the glitch" worked by @va_shiva and team.


— TheSharpEdge (@TheSharpEdge1) November 11, 2020

Libertarian News explained and broke down the findings:

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai, who is a MIT trained data scientist and Fulbright Scholar, along with Bennie Smith a Democrat, who is a software engineer, data analyst and an election commissioner and Phil Evans, who is also a trained engineer and data analyst, discuss some very troubling findings after reviewing the election data coming out of Michigan.

Dr. Ayyadurai is a US Senate candidate in Massachusetts, which is a contributing factor as to why he began looking into the integrity of our voting systems.

Dr. Ayyadurai’s discovered through a series of FOIA requests related to his own election that ballot counting machines don’t directly count ballots.

Instead, they take an image of the ballot that is submitted to them, and then they tabulate the votes based on the ballot images collected.

Federal election statues dictate that all election records must be held for 22 months.

However, Dr. Ayyadurai discovered that many states do not retain the ballot images produced by the machines.

The default settings of the machines automatically store the ballot images, so this means election officials are manually disabling the image storage feature.

Because ballot images are not being retained in states like MA and MI, the election results cannot be meaningfully audited, leaving ambiguity as to the actual election outcome.

The only way to audit the results of an election without ballot images would be to manually count the ballots, which is very difficult to do.

Dr. Ayyadurai learned that in 2001, a weighted race feature was added to Global Election Systems (GEMS 1.18.1) voting systems.

This feature allows elections to be skewed to one candidate or another based on the settings of the software.

This is not a hack, but a built-in FEATURE of the software.

Why this feature exists in US ballot tabulation machines has never been explained.

Not only does the software allow for the weighting of election outcomes, but the way votes are stored and counted is also problematic.

The systems store the votes as fractional decimals instead of whole numbers.

This means the machines can be set to tabulate half a vote, which makes no sense at all, yet that’s how they were designed.

After voting “glitches” were reported in Michigan, Dr. Ayyadurai’s team decided to analyze the top four counties in MI for irregularities.

They looked at data from Oakland, Macomb, Kent and Wayne counties.

What they found was absolutely shocking.

Data analytics show, at a minimum, 69,000 votes were TRANSFERRED from Trump to Biden in these four counties, in a pattern that is consistent with algorithmic weighting of a race.

In Michigan, there are two different kinds of ballots a person can chose to vote on.

A person can chose to vote a straight party ticket or they can chose to vote for each individual candidate separately.

They cannot do both.

This means straight party ballots and individual selection ballots are tabulated in separate piles which produces two sets of data.

The fact that party ballots and individual ballots are separate in MI allowed the data scientists to compare the differences between how often people in a given precinct voted for Trump vs how often people voted for a straight Republican ticket.

For example, in this image, the bottom X axis percentage indicates how often people in a given precinct voted a straight Republican ticket.

The Y axis indicates how often people voted specifically for Trump on an individual ballot minus the percentage who voted a straight Republican ticket.

So if a given precinct had 50% of people vote a straight Republican ticket and 50% of them vote for Trump on an individual ballot, we would see a dot at 50% on X axis and at 0% Y axis.

Intuitively, we would expect most dots to fall along the 0% Y axis line.

In other words, if a given precinct tends to vote 60% straight Republican tickets, we would most likely expect to see about 60% of people in that precinct who vote on the individual ballots to chose Trump as well.

Instead, what the data shows is a clear linear relationship that starts at about the 20% X axis mark, where the more Republican a precinct is, based on straight party tickets, the less likely people who vote on individual ballots in that precinct are to vote for Trump.

Not only is this relationship inverted from what we would expect to see, the manner in which it displays itself is what really gives the fraud away.

Notice the linearity of the slope.

This linearity can only be the product of an algorithm.

The perfection of the slope and distribution is what gives the game away.

This same slope is observed in three of the counties that were analyzed.

It shows up in early voting data as well as election day data.

The pattern is consistent spatially as well as temporally.

There is absolutely no way this is the product of anything other than an algorithm.

Consider what this data is telling us.

This data is telling us that the more likely a precinct is to be Republican, the more likely it is the Republicans in that district voted for Biden over Trump, and they did so at a mathematically perfect rate.

This is an impossibility.
People are sent to jail in fraud cases with far less evidence than this.

If this was a legitimate election, we would expect to see a scatter distribution along the 0% Y axis where the red arrow is, with perhaps either a positive or negative bias along axis depending on how much people liked or hated Trump.

Here’s what Wayne county’s results look like where no algorithm was detected.

Wayne county is strongly Democratic, so its likely they didn’t bother rigging the votes here.

There could still be cheating going on here, but this what we would expect all the graphs to look like.

We can see voters here liked Trump a lot more than the Republican party.

Courtesy by Georgette

160- - 5 G DIFFUSION - - "300 Castelli" -- "300 Castelli" - Presentazione - Italiano - 2' 30" -

La nuova serie televisia: i 300 castelli Italiani La nouvelle série télévisée " 300 châteaux d'Italie"


- Torna alla Prima Pagina - Back to the Front Page -

Condividi su Facebook -

I nostri lettori: in oltre 77 Nazioni - Our readers: in over 77 Nations - Nos lecteurs: dans plus de 77 Nations

- Today' NEW contacts -

I lettori di questa pagina sono:

WOP!WEB Servizi per siti web... GRATIS!