Steve A. Stone
I can't swear to the percentages of votes described in the video below. I do understand the point, and it's the same point being made by Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell. They've both made statements to the effect that the statistical analysis of the voting patterns gives clear indication of fraud. My problem with the video is I don't have the independent evidence to run the numbers myself, so, even though I understand the case being made is valid, I can't independently verify it. Meanwhile, if I was on that legal team, I would be doing very in-depth analysis on the entire country to find every county that had dramatic undercounts (less than 50% of eligible voters) and overcounts (greater than 80% and analyze the voting from those counties. They will tell you where votes were either suppressed (or tossed) or added to in order to ensure the county totals reflected the "selected" winner. Rudy stated there were counties in MI that had as much as a 200% overcount. ANY overcount is evidence of fraud, so it's really about how many counties, how many ballots over their historical max percentage, and the win margins, assuming ALL were for Biden. Even that one metric is a tell—if all the overcounted counties in the country went for Biden that's indicative of fraud.
Statistics is not pure math, and it's not science. But it can certainly indicate behavior patterns. The dispersion charts on this election should tell us all we really need to understand about how and even when during the day the "steal" was executed. The questions that remain all pertain to whether or not the courts will entertain the lawsuits filed IN OUR BEHALF and what the judges will consider as evidence.
Did you catch the bulletin Friday regarding the reassignments of oversight by SCOTUS. I'm certain some of you don't know that the circuit courts of appeals are all overseen by SCOTUS—with each justice having cognizance and supervisory authority over at least one circuit. One of the responsibilities of the circuit court judges is to forward emergency cases to the Supreme Court. If a case comes to their attention that they believe has a strong constitutional basis and needs attention at the national level, they can forward it to their supervisory associate justice on the SCOTUS to get an emergency review. That is what was done in the case where Al Gore sued to have recounts in FL when he and GW Bush were battling over that state. When Associate Justice Ginsburg died, that left one circuit (1st, I think) with no justice to oversee it. Chief Justice Roberts assigned Associate Justice Bryer to pick up that circuit in addition to the one he already had. Associate Justice Sotomayer expressed interest in that district, since it includes her home town—NYC. The Chief Justice gave it to her and assigned Associate Justice Bryer the former district that Associate Justice Sotomayer had. Then, in a really interesting move, he reorganized assignments. Now the battleground states are all overseen by the four most conservative justices on the courts. I think it was a stroke of genius to put Associate Justice Thomas over the district that includes Georgia. Look on the SCOTUS web site and read about those assignments. It could be Chief Justice Roberts just threw America a lifeline.
Watch the video sent to me by Janet Traverna, a great patriot. It's interesting. These are interesting times, aren't they. We're about to go into that dark tunnel I spoke of in my last note to you all, but everything leading up to it is important to us all.
Steve A. Stone© Steve A. Stone
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.