A little over a month ago, I informed you about some new and persuasive evidence for widespread election fraud involving voting machines. While that evidence seemed to be a smoking gun for widespread election fraud, the data was too limited to determine whether or not the fraud was widespread enough to have actually changed the outcome of the election.

In that same post, I mentioned that Mike Lindell was going to release more documentaries in the near future presenting additional evidence of election fraud. He released another documentary not long after my post, titled Absolute Interference. The documentary did not present much in the way of new evidence. What it did do, however, is provide additional details regarding the key piece of evidence presented in his original documentary, Absolute Proof.

In the original documentary, Mary Fanning presented a partial log, purporting to show the specifics of how the voting machines were hacked and manipulated by foreign operatives. The log was said to contain data concerning the time at which each hack occurred, the IP address of the computer from which the hack was made, the latitude and longitude location of the computer from which the hack was made, the computer’s internet network, the IP address of the voting machine that was the target of the hack, and how many votes were flipped from Trump to Biden in each hack.

Fanning said the full report contained thousands of pages, detailing thousands of foreign intrusions into the election in 2,995 U.S. counties (spanning all 50 states). Sixty-six percent of the intrusions came from China, with other hacks coming from countries such as Iran. It was said that absent these hacks, Trump would have won the election by nearly 12 million votes (~80 million votes for Trump and ~68 million for Biden vs. the official count of ~74 million for Trump and ~81 million for Biden). If, indeed, this log genuinely documents foreign hacks into our voting machines, and if the vote manipulation counts are accurate, then this would be a smoking bazooka – not only of election fraud, but of a stolen election.

The problem I had with the presentation in Absolute Proof was the lack of details. How did we get this data? Who did it come from? All we were told in the documentary is that cyber security experts had collected this information both before, during, and after the election. Which cyber security experts? Private or government? What are their qualifications? How did they obtain this information? If it was a private organization, did they turn it over to the authorities? If not, why not? If they did, what did the authorities do with it? How could we, as random citizens, verify any of this? Due to these uncertainties, I remained skeptical of the claim.

In his newest documentary, Absolute Interference, Lindell attempts to shed a bit more light on the matter. On February 21, Lindell hired an individual with 15 years’ experience in cyber security, working in both the private and government sectors, to independently verify the data. His identity was hidden, but he is said to have the highest certifications in cyber security. Let’s call him John Doe. Doe displayed a picture of the encrypted data for the viewers to see, and attested to the fact that there were millions of rows of data that needed to be unencrypted. According to Doe, the data is a cyber footprint that is locked in time. It is not editable and cannot be manipulated. He validated the legitimacy of the data itself, affirming that it shows who hacked the voting machines, when they did so, and how many votes were changed during the hack.

Doe focused his attention on just 19 hacks (out of thousands), mostly from China. These 19 hacks were responsible for switching 518,617 votes in Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona, Michigan, and Wisconsin from Biden to Trump. Absent just these 19 attacks, Trump would have won all five of these swing states, and thus won the election. See the screenshot below, followed by an interpretation of the data:

The first two lines of data represent the official voting count for each candidate in each of the five swing states that Biden is purported to have won. The third line (“difference”) shows how many votes Biden officially won by in these five states. The “switch” line represents how many votes were switched from Trump to Biden in each of those states. The “Trump” and “Biden” lines in the lower half of the chart represent what the vote count would have been absent these 19 hacks. Finally, the bottom row indicates how many votes Trump actually won by in each state (just based on these 19 hacks – the actual numbers are higher when you consider all of the hacks).

Assuming this data is accurate, it serves as a smoking bazooka that Trump handily won the 2020 election and is the rightful president of the United States. The election was stolen by foreign interference via voting machines.

Notice I said “assuming this data is accurate.” A lot of unknowns remain. We still don’t know who was responsible for obtaining this data. We still don’t know who first validated it, nor the identity of this second cyber security expert. We still don’t know whether or not this data has been submitted to the authorities, and if so, what they have done with it. There is simply no way for the average citizen to verify that what Lindell is claiming and Doe is verifying to be true is actually true. It seems legit, but seeming legit is not good enough. It may very well be true, but if I am unable to personally verify it in some way, and if the federal government has not verified it, I am not going to stake any claim on it. At best, it remains possible evidence that, if true, is a smoking bazooka – not just of election fraud, but of a stolen election.

Where does this leave us? It leaves us with very good reasons to doubt that Joe Biden is the legitimate president, but not absolute proof that such is the case. However, even if this data cannot be verified, the data Dr. Frank presented in Scientific Proof can be. While I am not the person to do it, others can, but to my knowledge no one has done so, or if they have, they have not been able to demonstrate a flaw in his data or reasoning. If Dr. Frank’s data holds up, then at the very least it provides evidence of widespread election fraud via voting machines. And as I noted in that post, if he extends his analysis to other swing states such as Arizona and Georgia, and finds the same evidence of fraud that he found in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Colorado, then Dr. Frank’s evidence alone would be sufficient to demonstrate that the election was stolen.

Whatever the final analysis might be, we need to keep pressing this matter. A lot of Americans continue to believe that the election was stolen. Even if it turns out that this is not true, the concerns themselves are not unfounded. If we are going to have confidence restored in our election process, the government needs to do all they can to audit the machines and all purported cases of fraud. This isn’t about wanting “our guy” to win. It’s about election integrity. Our democracy depends on it.