Is it just me or do our elections resemble a “basketball” game between the Washington Generals and the Harlem Globetrotters? A squeaky victory always for the establishment..? Aww, better luck next time Generals.../
The only way we lose is if we quit! We all know! Great article! God Bless this man!
Would love to know more about the 2,000 person sting? James O’Keefe started selling cameras. They are a little pricey ($450). But hopefully we can get many in targeted counties for 24. March on!
Having proof afterwards is proving a pointless effort. The case either lacks standing, is ignored or slow walked repeatedly (aka Kari Lakes cases) all to ensure any discovery happens past the 2024 Primary & then wound be considered a moot point.
Their sole objective is to keep Trump off the ballot.
‘We can’t fight a war against guns with fists’
‘We need to fight fire with fire’
We need amazing white hackers to undo fraud in realtime.
If 85% of our elections can be saved by the power of the courts or legislation. Does this mean because Beadles is given relief that his cases can be used in other jurisdiction cases? Or does it mean that each state will be able to use Beadles vs. States. I'm just trying to understand how to apply this for our county and state. Thank you!
You can get remedy thru the State Courts against your County, that will get you 85% of the way there. Typically the county commissioners or supervisors have the power to clean up 85% but refuse to. This is a way to force them to if you have standing and proof they have failed their duties etc.
First of all, I wouldn't call Kari Lake's efforts unsuccessful......just yet. My money is still on her to prevail in the coming months. But this is a good summary of Mr Beadles' case. I first saw him on The Lindell Report, I believe, several months ago. This guy is smart, and a pit bull when it comes to correcting errant elections. He's gonna be a pain in the crooks' asses. That said, I'm not blaming the courts in general for our problems. SCOTUS was correct to reject TX v PA, largely because they were aware of the quo warranto statute, which is the proper way to challenge a federal election. The court (DC District Court) must take the case, and a jury trial ensues. Only a jury of DC citizens stands between Trump and the WH. Even if a libtard DC jury acquits Biden, the world would see the evidence laid out in one place at one time, and the jurors would be blamed afterwards, not Trump. Imagine how silly the defense lawyers would look trying to refute all of the evidence now available. And I believe that such a trial would convince nearly every American that Trump won easily in 2020, and that in itself might embolden local courts to look at local cases with a different eye. Trump is either unaware of quo warranto (I doubt that.....Pillow Man used to talk about quo warranto often, and he talks to Trump a lot), or.......Trump is still listening to idiot lawyers, which is a bad habit of his. Here's a quo warranto primer:
Will Reacher tell us how to solve for Alpha, with only g and h, without Lambda.
For context. Given four integers, A,B,C,D.
G=A/(A+D); H=C/(C+B),
Lambda=(A+D)/(A+B+C+D), which means, definition (1-Lambda)=(C+B)/(A+B+C+D).
Alpha=(A+C)/(A+B+C+D) = G(Lambda)+(1-Lambda)H.
This means you cannot solve for Alpha without Lambda.
Now let A,B,C and D be Trump's Early Vote, Biden's Early Vote, Trump's Mail-in Vote, and Biden's Mail-in Vote in each precinct.
Trump's total percentage of all those votes is Alpha=(A+C)/(A+B+C+D).
Now. I ask, why is there a uniform formula, with an R^2>0.999, that's allow me to solve for Alpha, knowing only G and H in each precinct, with no knowledge of Lambda at any precinct?
Has Reacher shown us all how to to solve for Alpha, without Lambda, knowing only G and H?
That is, has Reacher shown us how to solve the Fish Tank Paradox.
Show us. Don't tell us.
Show us how to solve for Alpha, without Lambda.
The only thing Reacher has shown is that if one simulates an election with flat plane of G,H onto A, that they result with flat a plane of G,H onto Alpha. Does that surprise you? All he did was simulate the parameters of rigged election, then said, therefore the election wasn't rigged.
What exactly did Reacher show?
Did show us how all the voters, in all the 1286 precincts, in Clark and Washoe Counties, on opposite sides of the State of Nevada, managed to collectively cast their ballots at a precinct level to a fit a statewide formula of G,H onto Alpha?
What Reacher shows is that R^2 > 0.99 for the Clark County precinct data is not unusual given the county-level summaries for A, B, C, and D. Simulating random Poisson data with the same means as the original data also produce a dimension-reducing flat manifold and R^2 > 0.99. Reacher agrees that there is likely substantial election fraud in Nevada, but it is not necessarily the result of a complex algorithm like you describe and is very probably at a much more mundane level, which Beadles also calls out: grossly inflated voter rolls which provide headroom for large-scale stuffing of fake mail-in ballots. The stuffing appears to have happened somewhat randomly and proportionally across the precincts in Washoe and Clark, and Reacher shows the properties of the precinct-level ratios you construct are statistically expected given the overall county-level counts.
By saying “All he did was simulate the parameters of rigged election” you appear to be conceding that his simulation is valid. If so, you’ve admitted that all of your math is unnecessary, since his simulation requires only the four means of the county data and a Poisson random number generator. In other words, what Reacher shows is that the entire mathematical edifice you have constructed proves very little with respect to fraud beyond the overall disproportionately high number of mail-ins for Biden. They are what make the real difference, not solving for Alpha without Lambda, not a (physically questionable) Fish Tank Paradox, nor any of the other elaborate math constructs you’ve tried to apply to this and previous data.
This is not to say your pure math research is invalid. The flaws lie in its application to this data and failure to compare a statistic like R^2 to a suitably relevant reference distribution. Valid examples would be to compare against similar counties that are non-fraudulent or against historical data like Captain K has so expertly done.
Yes, if you simulate the absurd condition that (A+D)/(A+B+C+D) = 63.5% in all 1286 precinct, with less than 3% standard deviation, then your simulations will return the same result.
A is Trump's Early Vote, B is Biden's Early Vote, C is Trump's Mail In Vote and D is Biden's Mail-in Vote.
That's what Reacher did. He simulated (A+D)/(A+B+C+D) = 63.5% with 3% variation
I pray for justice to prevail in this case. Thanks for sharing and breaking it down into an understandable case. One person can make a difference! God bless!
Being 6' tall looks really short next to Captain K, AKA Captain America....
Thank you for all you're doing!!
It's up to God and us, we all just have to do our parts. God bless ya.
From NE:
https://robertjborer.substack.com/p/the-republican-party-a-house-divided
Is it just me or do our elections resemble a “basketball” game between the Washington Generals and the Harlem Globetrotters? A squeaky victory always for the establishment..? Aww, better luck next time Generals.../
Ha! My husband used this exact analogy last night when we were discussing this topic. Great minds think alike 😊.
Smart man!👍🏻🇺🇸💥
The only way we lose is if we quit! We all know! Great article! God Bless this man!
Would love to know more about the 2,000 person sting? James O’Keefe started selling cameras. They are a little pricey ($450). But hopefully we can get many in targeted counties for 24. March on!
Having proof afterwards is proving a pointless effort. The case either lacks standing, is ignored or slow walked repeatedly (aka Kari Lakes cases) all to ensure any discovery happens past the 2024 Primary & then wound be considered a moot point.
Their sole objective is to keep Trump off the ballot.
‘We can’t fight a war against guns with fists’
‘We need to fight fire with fire’
We need amazing white hackers to undo fraud in realtime.
Captain K,
If 85% of our elections can be saved by the power of the courts or legislation. Does this mean because Beadles is given relief that his cases can be used in other jurisdiction cases? Or does it mean that each state will be able to use Beadles vs. States. I'm just trying to understand how to apply this for our county and state. Thank you!
You can get remedy thru the State Courts against your County, that will get you 85% of the way there. Typically the county commissioners or supervisors have the power to clean up 85% but refuse to. This is a way to force them to if you have standing and proof they have failed their duties etc.
First of all, I wouldn't call Kari Lake's efforts unsuccessful......just yet. My money is still on her to prevail in the coming months. But this is a good summary of Mr Beadles' case. I first saw him on The Lindell Report, I believe, several months ago. This guy is smart, and a pit bull when it comes to correcting errant elections. He's gonna be a pain in the crooks' asses. That said, I'm not blaming the courts in general for our problems. SCOTUS was correct to reject TX v PA, largely because they were aware of the quo warranto statute, which is the proper way to challenge a federal election. The court (DC District Court) must take the case, and a jury trial ensues. Only a jury of DC citizens stands between Trump and the WH. Even if a libtard DC jury acquits Biden, the world would see the evidence laid out in one place at one time, and the jurors would be blamed afterwards, not Trump. Imagine how silly the defense lawyers would look trying to refute all of the evidence now available. And I believe that such a trial would convince nearly every American that Trump won easily in 2020, and that in itself might embolden local courts to look at local cases with a different eye. Trump is either unaware of quo warranto (I doubt that.....Pillow Man used to talk about quo warranto often, and he talks to Trump a lot), or.......Trump is still listening to idiot lawyers, which is a bad habit of his. Here's a quo warranto primer:
https://www.naturalnews.com/2021-01-22-important-legal-pathway-trump-reclaim-presidency.html
Thanks for the great summary! fyi, Solomon's analysis is severely flawed. See https://patriots.win/p/16c28ju6ZI/fish-tank-paradox-a-simple-expla/ and search for refutation by user "reacher". The rest of the case looks strong and Godspeed to Beadles.
Has Reacher attempted to acquire his $80,000?
Will Reacher confront us in the courtroom?
Will Reacher tell us how to solve for Alpha, with only g and h, without Lambda.
For context. Given four integers, A,B,C,D.
G=A/(A+D); H=C/(C+B),
Lambda=(A+D)/(A+B+C+D), which means, definition (1-Lambda)=(C+B)/(A+B+C+D).
Alpha=(A+C)/(A+B+C+D) = G(Lambda)+(1-Lambda)H.
This means you cannot solve for Alpha without Lambda.
Now let A,B,C and D be Trump's Early Vote, Biden's Early Vote, Trump's Mail-in Vote, and Biden's Mail-in Vote in each precinct.
Trump's total percentage of all those votes is Alpha=(A+C)/(A+B+C+D).
Now. I ask, why is there a uniform formula, with an R^2>0.999, that's allow me to solve for Alpha, knowing only G and H in each precinct, with no knowledge of Lambda at any precinct?
Has Reacher shown us all how to to solve for Alpha, without Lambda, knowing only G and H?
That is, has Reacher shown us how to solve the Fish Tank Paradox.
Show us. Don't tell us.
Show us how to solve for Alpha, without Lambda.
The only thing Reacher has shown is that if one simulates an election with flat plane of G,H onto A, that they result with flat a plane of G,H onto Alpha. Does that surprise you? All he did was simulate the parameters of rigged election, then said, therefore the election wasn't rigged.
What exactly did Reacher show?
Did show us how all the voters, in all the 1286 precincts, in Clark and Washoe Counties, on opposite sides of the State of Nevada, managed to collectively cast their ballots at a precinct level to a fit a statewide formula of G,H onto Alpha?
What Reacher shows is that R^2 > 0.99 for the Clark County precinct data is not unusual given the county-level summaries for A, B, C, and D. Simulating random Poisson data with the same means as the original data also produce a dimension-reducing flat manifold and R^2 > 0.99. Reacher agrees that there is likely substantial election fraud in Nevada, but it is not necessarily the result of a complex algorithm like you describe and is very probably at a much more mundane level, which Beadles also calls out: grossly inflated voter rolls which provide headroom for large-scale stuffing of fake mail-in ballots. The stuffing appears to have happened somewhat randomly and proportionally across the precincts in Washoe and Clark, and Reacher shows the properties of the precinct-level ratios you construct are statistically expected given the overall county-level counts.
By saying “All he did was simulate the parameters of rigged election” you appear to be conceding that his simulation is valid. If so, you’ve admitted that all of your math is unnecessary, since his simulation requires only the four means of the county data and a Poisson random number generator. In other words, what Reacher shows is that the entire mathematical edifice you have constructed proves very little with respect to fraud beyond the overall disproportionately high number of mail-ins for Biden. They are what make the real difference, not solving for Alpha without Lambda, not a (physically questionable) Fish Tank Paradox, nor any of the other elaborate math constructs you’ve tried to apply to this and previous data.
This is not to say your pure math research is invalid. The flaws lie in its application to this data and failure to compare a statistic like R^2 to a suitably relevant reference distribution. Valid examples would be to compare against similar counties that are non-fraudulent or against historical data like Captain K has so expertly done.
As second reply. Why doesn't this happen in any Nevada election prior to 2020?
Yes, if you simulate the absurd condition that (A+D)/(A+B+C+D) = 63.5% in all 1286 precinct, with less than 3% standard deviation, then your simulations will return the same result.
A is Trump's Early Vote, B is Biden's Early Vote, C is Trump's Mail In Vote and D is Biden's Mail-in Vote.
That's what Reacher did. He simulated (A+D)/(A+B+C+D) = 63.5% with 3% variation
I pray for justice to prevail in this case. Thanks for sharing and breaking it down into an understandable case. One person can make a difference! God bless!
Operation Sunlight...roger that! For info on one of the most corrupt states. Great share!