PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, 2020 ELECTION DATA ANALYSIS, by Dr. Shiva Audit Team, based at MIT

INTRODUCTION

 

The main purpose of this article is to inform lay people regarding:

 

1) Some of the sordid details of the Arizona 2020 Election, as revealed by independent audits

2) Some of the many ways corrupt state election officials have been manipulating the results of all elections over the decades, and likely will continue to do so, if not outlawed.

3) Mail-in voting providing all sorts of fraud possibilities to election operatives

4) The need for a Personal Identity Card, machine-readable, for each person 16 years and older, as are used in all EU nations, etc.

 

Those issues are hardly mentioned/examined by the traditional Media.

Reporters of the Media know of, and have access to, these details, just by googling, and by reading the Arizona forensic audit reports.

 

Instead, these reporters write whatever wording, such as the frequently-used “no widespread voter fraud”, and “elections were free, fair and accurate”, and “baseless claims”, and “conspiracy theories”, would be approved by editors and publishers; a sad state of affairs.

Another Media strategy is to “give it no ink”, i.e., not cover it at all, as if it does not exist.

 

BTW, the audit proved, the voters had almost nothing to do with election frauds; they were, in fact, the victims of fraud.

 

My Election articles

 

I apply the same exacting standards to my election articles, as to my technical articles.

I am a sleuthing-type person, and research things to death, BEFORE I write anything.

 

There were vast details about managing elections, and about corrupting that process, I had not an inkling about, but I do now!! 

That level of corruption is likely more prevalent in the bigger cities, such as Chicago, Detroit, New York, Pennsylvania, etc., all controlled by the Democrat party. All those cities have long histories of corrupt elections.

 

Much of the election fraud took place MONTHS BEFORE the 2020 Election, before the US lay public, including myself, has any idea about the many ways corrupt Election officials in many states were able to conduct fraudulent elections.

If my articles “sow divisions”, it is only due to the unfortunate ignorance of others.

 

The Media

 

Media folks should read these articles, because, even though you cannot freely write about them without losing your jobs, these articles nevertheless will give you an improved education, as they did to me.

 

I support my statements with evidence from non-traditional Media, because the traditional Media, including the Vermont Media, do not properly cover the subject, as they have become:

 

1) Captives of the Democrat party, which rewards them “access”, etc., for “services rendered”

2) Weakened by economic trends

3) Vulnerable, due to competition from non-traditional news Media

 

The only way to properly read my articles is to also read the URLs.

 

Regarding my articles, be assured, I will write them, and revise them, as accurately as I can.

Unlike the Media, I do not have to sell TV programs, newspapers, magazines and ads to survive.

 

Scoring Illegal Votes

 

Democrats used several means to score illegal votes in several states, such as:

 

1) Counting ballots behind closed doors, especially during “adjudication” of ballots

2) Bringing in piles of ballots before and after elections

3) Locking official Republican observers out of the counting rooms, and blanking off windows with paper, etc.

4) Pulling boxes of ballots from under tables, after official observers were sent home, because of a fictitious water main leak (luckily all was recorded on video)

5) Having vanloads of ballots arrive at counting centers, in the early hours of the morning of November 4, after Joe Biden had fallen far behind.

 

Benefits of Forensic Audits

 

Forensic audits have virtues, because: 

 

1) They hang out dirty linen, in public 

2) They show how that linen got dirty in the first place 

3) They provide education to voters regarding how their Constitutional Right to Vote can, and has been, corrupted by in-the-know, partisan Secretaries of State and Election Officials for decades. Cities such as Chicago, Detroit, New York, Pennsylvania, etc., all controlled by the Democrat party, have long histories of corrupt elections.

 

Perpetrators of fraud ALWAYS are vehemently opposed to such audits, and do their best to delay, obstruct and sabotage them, as in Maricopa County.

 

BTW, the scandalous VT-EB-5 fraud, largest such fraud in the US, should have had such an audit.

NOTE: See how Germany conducts it elections in the Appendix

 

This article is part of a trilogy.

 

1) PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, 2020 ELECTION DATA ANALYSIS, by Dr. Shiva Audit Team, based at MIT

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/pima-county-election-d...

 

2) STATE SENATE HEARINGS OF PARTIAL FORENSIC AUDIT RESULTS OF ARIZONA 2020 ELECTION

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/state-senate-hearings-...

 

3) PREPARATION OF UP TO 288,000 MAIL-IN BALLOTS IN BETHPAGE, NY FOR USE IN PENNSYLVANIA MONTHS BEFORE THE ELECTION

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/preperation-of-288-000...

Here is No. 1 of the trilogy

 

PIMA COUNTY, ARIZONA, 2020 ELECTION DATA ANALYSIS, by Dr. Shiva Audit Team, based at MIT

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/pima-county-election-d...

PART 1

 

Maricopa County had thousands of people complaining about voting irregularities during the 2020 Election.

However, such complaints were not just in Maricopa, but also in Pima County. Here are some items:

 

Pima County had 1,043,433 people (April 1, 2020), of which 37.8% were Hispanic/Latino.

The population was 980,263 April 1, 2010, and 1,017,000 in 2016.

Registered voters were 638,355, in 2020, and 543,509, in 2016

 

Pima County has a 378-mile border with Mexico.

People 18 years and older were 79.7%, or 831,616 were theoretically eligible to vote, on April 1, 2020, per US census.

Arizona has 249 voting precincts. Tucson, its largest city, has about 100 precincts?

 

https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/...

https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=Pima+C...

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/pimacountyarizona/LND1...

https://tucson.com/news/local/border-wall-nearly-finished-in-arizon...

https://koordinates.com/layer/98273-pima-county-az-voter-precincts/

 

Table 1A	Population	Registered
2020	1,043,433	638,355
2016	1,017,000	543,509
Change, %	2.60	17.45

 

* Registered includes 35,000 fraud names. See Part 2

It is useful to analyze daily rates of voting from election to election, and during the phases of an election, because signals of irregularities are revealed by the flow of the numbers.

 

There are 3 categories of voting: 1) Mail-in, 2) In-person-early, 3) Election Day

Early vote = Mail-in-return vote + In-person-early vote

Arizona: In November 2, 2020, a day before the Election, 3,448,181 ballots had been requested and 2,471,577 ballots had been returned, or 71.7% return rate.

https://electproject.github.io/Early-Vote-2020G/AZ.html

 

Pima County Vote Status on Oct. 30

Early voting started on October 7.

As of October 30, 2020, more than 376,000 early votes had been counted, a rate of about 376,000/22 days = 17,091/day, from Oct. 7 to Oct. 30

At this point the preliminary Biden and Trump votes would be known, judgements could be made, and plans of action could be considered.

More than 72% of requested ballots had been returned, from Oct 7. to Oct. 30.

That is nearly the same percentage as for Arizona. So far everything appears normal

 

High Early Voting Rates 3 Days Before Election

 

Counted votes during the Oct. 31, Nov. 1, and Nov. 2 period were 459,880 - 376,000 = 83,880  

 

The average daily rate, from Oct. 7 to Oct. 30, had been 17,091/day, as above stated.

The average daily rate, during the Oct. 31, Nov. 1, and Nov. 2 period, was 27,960/day,

 

This is an abnormally large increase compared to 17,091/day!

Maybe there was some “augmentation”, that boosted the rate. See table 1 and Part 2

 

Pima County Vote Status at End of Nov. 3, Election Day

 

In 2016, counted votes were 373,195, of which 311,592 were mail-in-return, 12,441 in-person-early, and 49,162 Election Day, an early vote rate of 324,033/25 = 12,961/day. See table 1A and table 1

 

In 2020, counted votes were 495,989, of which 430,224 were mail-in-return, 29,656 in-person -early, and 36,109 Election Day, an early vote rate of 459,880/25 = 18,395/day. See table 1A and table 1

https://www.recorder.pima.gov/VoterStats/EarlyVotingStatistics

 

Comments on table 1

 

Why is there such an abnormally high increase in mail-in-return votes in 2020, of 38.1%, compared to 2016? See table 1

It cannot be explained by population growth (2.6%), or increased registered voters (17.45%).

 

Maybe it was voter enthusiasm.

Maybe there was some “augmentation”, that boosted the mail-in-return votes. See table 1 and Part 2

 

https://www.kold.com/2020/10/30/pima-county-breaks-record-returning...

http://www.tucsonsentinel.com/local/report/101521_trump_pima_vote/t...

Table 1	Counted	Mail-in-return	In-person-early	Election Day	Election Day, %
2020	495,989	430,224	29,656	36,109	7.3
2016	373,195	311,592	12,441	49,162	13.2
Change, %	32.9	38.1	138.4	-26.6

 

My Comment on Above Results

 

Initially, I thought the 32.9% increase in counted votes, from 2016 to 2020, looked suspiciously high. See table 1

I thought, gee, how can this be?

 

After a few days of thinking, I decided to do some sleuthing, aka googling, and came across websites describing the whistleblower situation.

 

Here are the relevant websites about the whistleblower.

 

https://www.theepochtimes.com/anonymous-email-from-arizona-tech-wor...

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/az-state-rep-mark-finchem-...

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/12/watch-az-state-rep-mark-fi...

 

PART 2

 

Anonymous Email from Arizona Tech Worker Says 35,000 Votes Given to Each Democrat Candidate

 

A tech support person, who refused to disclose his identity (likely for future job security reasons), or sign a sworn affidavit (which likely would be leaked), sent an email to the US DOJ, (which has done nothing to date about this pre-meditated federal crime), and to every Arizona Legislator (some of whom likely knew of the meeting, and other such meetings, during prior elections), that stated about 35,000 fictitious names had been added to registered voter lists.

 

The tech support person was either an employee of a private computer services company, hired to help out during the 2020 Election, or a government employee.

 

The tech support person likely had been invited to the meeting, because he would be entering the data in the proper places on spreadsheets of vote tallies.

 

The email stated, he went to a meeting with the Democrat Party in Pima County, on Sept. 10, (about 7 weeks before Election Day), that included a presentation about the “embedded” votes, adding that no phones and video recording devices were allowed

 

The email stated, “The fraud ballots were embedded with the (counted) preliminary “mail-in-return” totals, released at 8 PM, on November 3, 2020”.

The email did not say the time and date of the addition, but that could be obtained by forensic audit of the computer logs.

The email stated: “There were about 35,000 fraud votes added to each Democrat’s vote totals”.

https://skagitrepublicans.com/EmailFromArizonaTechWorkerAlleges3500...

 

Effect of Adding 35,000 Votes on Several Races

 

Here is a sample ballot listing the candidates for various offices in 2020. See URL

The top five are for President, one US Senator, and three US Representatives.

Each race had large turn-outs, so adding 35,000 votes to each Democrat candidate likely would not raise suspicions

https://webcms.pima.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server_6/File/Government/...

 

President	Biden (D)	1,672,143	Trump (R)	1,661,686	the 35,000 votes flipped the win to Biden
US Senator	Kelly (D)	1,716,467	Mc Sally (R)	1,637,661	the 35,000 votes merely increased Kelly’s big lead.
US House	O’Halleran (D)	188,469	Shedd (R)	176,709	the 35,000 votes flipped the win to a Democrat
US House	Kirkpatrick (D)	209,945	Martin (R)	170,975	the 35,000 votes significantly increased Kirkpatrick’s lead
US House	Grijalva (D)	174,243	Wood (R)	95,594	the 35,000 merely increased Grijalva’s big lead

See URLs for other races.

 

https://www.azcentral.com/elections/results/2020-11-03/state/arizona/

https://www.azcentral.com/elections/results/2020-11-03/us-house/

https://www.jacksonville.com/elections/results/race/2020-11-03-hous...

 

The Democrats, who were credited with the fraud votes, including Biden, may, or may not, have known about the secret meeting.

Secretary of State, Katie Hobbs stated: “There is no evidence to back this up, and it is not something, that we have experienced here”.

 

MY COMMENTS

 

Hobbs is based in Maricopa County, so “experienced here” likely means Maricopa County, and “we have experienced here”, likely means Maricopa does not have such fraud events. Yes, it does, per forensic audit. See Note.

She did not say the Pima County meeting on Sept. 10 did not happen, or that fictitious names were not added.

She may, or may not, have known about these events.

 

The email stated no phones and recording devices were allowed during the Sept. 10 meeting.

 

She said “there is no evidence”, which seems to imply we, i.e., Election officials and Democrats, can hold secret meetings, take proper precautions to ensure nothing leaks out, to fix the outcome of any election, by any available ways and means, to ensure OUR CHOSEN PEOPLE WIN.

 

NOTE: Hobbs statements were made well before the Maricopa forensic audit, which proved many illegal irregularities. See No.2 of trilogy articles.

 

NOTE: Are such secret/unrecorded meetings legal? The Democrat attendees, likely high-level people, were discussing the ways and means of fixing the Presidential Election, i.e., premeditating and committing a federal crime.

Where was the US DOJ in all this?

 

Based on the elaborate secrecy preparations, such meetings likely happened prior to other elections.

In fact, I venture to say, such election shenanigans, practiced by experienced election officials, have been common events, in many elections, in many states, for decades. See No. 3 of trilogy articles.

 

Any wrong-doings would be difficult to prove, except by multiple signed affidavits, court cases, subpoenas, and forensic audits.

The Arizona Senate would have to require and conduct such an audit, as it did in Maricopa County.

 

It would be well to remember, none of this would have been possible without:

 

1) The very easy addition of fictitious names to registered voter lists, plus

2) The timely appearance of the proper quantity of fictitious mail-in ballots, prepared prior to an election (in the Pima County case, the prep period was from Sep. 10 to Nov. 2), to swing any election to the Chosen Ones.

 

NOTE: In Germany,

 

1) Mail-in ballots is not allowed, even during COVID

2) The German CONSTITUTION forbids any voting machines and any computers.

3) All is performed, by hand, by many people, in a few days. See detailed description in Appendix.

Comments on table 2

 

It shows the 2020 result with the 35,000 fraud votes removed.

The increase in counted votes of 23.5%, from 2016 to 2020, appears to be much more plausible, than the suspiciously high 32.9%.

 

Table 2	Counted	Mail-in-return	In-person-early	Election Day	Election Day, %
2020	495,989	430,224	29,656	36,109	7.3
Fraud	35,000	35,000
2020, net	460,989	395,224	29,656	36,109	7.8
2016	373,195	311,592	12,441	49,162	13.2
	23.5	26.8	138.4

 

Adjudication of Ballots

 

The final vote tally may have been further “adjusted during adjudication”, during several days after the polls closed, to make sure to achieve a Biden win.

 

Vote processing machines can be set to reject ballots for different levels of accuracy. The more accurate, the greater the level of adjudicated ballots.

 

With an extreme Democrat partisan Secretary of State in charge of the Arizona 2020 Election, such as Katie Hobbs, many ballots would be sent to adjudication. She would oversee/determine who will perform the adjudicating, and under what circumstances it will be performed.

 

Adjudication means a ballot is looked at by pre-selected, partisan election operatives

Based on their biased judgment, voter intent is decided.

That process is subjective and not supervised by any independent observers, i.e., a perfect set-up for shenanigans.

PART 3

ANALYSIS OF PUBLISHED PIMA COUNTY VOTING DATA,  by the Dr. Shiva Audit Team, based at MIT

 

It appears, from looking at the below images, the Shiva team analyzed mail-in-ballot-return votes, not early votes.

 

Outlier-Precincts in Pima County

There were 2 precincts with more ballots returned than mailed out, which is possible, but would require incompetence/cheating.

There were 6 precincts with about equal ballots returned than mailed out, which is possible, but would require incompetence/cheating.

There were 40 precincts with greater than 97% mail-in return (yellow and red vertical bars), which is possible, but would require incompetence/cheating. See table 1

Average Mail-in-Return Rate

 

Pima County average mail-in-return rate of the 249 precincts was 87.6%, which was much higher than:

 

1) The 72% average return rate on October 30, just 3 days earlier

2) The Arizona average return rate of 71.7%

 

Why would Pima County have a huge increase average mail-in-return rate (equal to 83,880 ballots), in such a short time?

https://www.recorder.pima.gov/VoterStats/VoterTotalsByPrecinct

 

Incompetence, Malfeasance or Both

 

Such high return rates, in so many precincts, could happen by incompetence, but more likely by malfeasance by Election officials, similar to what was revealed by the forensic audit of Maricopa County.

 

Remember, career election officials have run many elections for decades. They are familiar with all the ins-and-outs of ballots and votes. They know how the system works from A-to-Z, and how it can be made to work.

 

1) Precincts with lower-than-average, mail-in-return rates (less than 87.6%), showed Trump outperforming Biden by up to +4% (red dots), and Biden underperforming Trump by up to -4% (blue dots)

 

2) Precincts with higher-than-average, mail-in-return rates (greater than 87.6%), showed Biden outperforming Trump by up to +6%, and Trump underperforming Biden by up to -6%

 

The Biden outperformance, in the high-return precincts, was likely due to:

 

1) High levels of Tucson Democrats turning out to vote

2) Malfeasance, such as:

 

1) With fictitious and duplicate ballots, etc.

2) By rejecting more Trump than Biden ballots during the unsupervised, partisan "adjudication" process, the equivalence of giving votes to Biden, and taking votes from Trump, all as part of the ins-and-outs of counting votes.

 

This would be similar to what was revealed by the partial forensic audit of Maricopa County, which Election officials opposed, obstructed and sabotaged to the maximum extend, likely because they had a lot to hide. See URL

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/state-senate-hearings-...

 

A full forensic audit of ballots, envelopes, computers, etc., of Pima County is a necessity to restore the people’s trust in voting. See image and URL.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2021/10/breaking-president-trump-r...

The below image shows the above image superimposed on the next image.

 

The Pima County “Mail-in ballots received versus Mail-in ballots mailed out, as %” is shown on the horizontal axis

The Pima County “Number of precincts, as % of all Precincts” is shown on the vertical axis.

For example: 5% of the Precincts had return rates of 69% (the left blue vertical bar).

 

Precincts with return rates less than 91% had relative short blue vertical bars; a percent of precincts were in that category.

Precincts with return rates greater than 91% had long yellow and red vertical bars; a percent of precincts were in that category

Return rates greater than 91%, likely indicates ballot box stuffing (yellow and red bars).

 

The total of the yellow and red bars represents about 264,000 votes in the very-high-return-rate counties (92 to 100+ percent), of which about 10,000 were fictitious (according to the Shiva team), which would be similar to the winning margin of Biden for Arizona (10,457). See image.

Table 1 shows:

 

There were 2 precincts with more ballots returned than mailed out, which is possible, but would require incompetence/cheating.

There were 6 precincts with about equal ballots returned than mailed out, which is possible, but would require incompetence/cheating.

There were 40 precincts with greater than 97% mail-in return (yellow and red vertical bars), which is possible, but would require incompetence/cheating.

 

“Mail-in ballots”, from whatever origin, may have increased the mail-in returns to very high percentages in at least 40 precincts, just before the Election, as part of the 83,880 ballot-in-rush, on October 31, November 1, and November 2.   

 

It appears, almost ALL of the precincts with high mail-in returns were located in the urban areas of Tucson

That means, any incompetence/cheating took place mostly in Democrat-controlled Tucson.

 

Total mail-in/early-vote return was 264,000 for the 92 to 100+ percent precincts (yellow and red vertical bars)

 

Table1/Mail-in return	Precinct
%	Qty
92	16
93	18
94	16
95	21
96	16
97	15
98	19
99	13
100	6
100+	2
Total	142
>97%	40

APPENDIX

 

NO CONCERNS OVER ELECTION FRAUD IN GERMANY  

https://www.dw.com/en/no-concerns-over-election-fraud-in-germany/a-...

 

The voting process in Germany is strictly regulated to rule out any possible election fraud. Even electronic voting machines, which could malfunction, have been banned by the country's Constitutional Court.

"Germany's election process is quite transparent," said Klaus Pötzsch of the electoral committee responsible for the organization and running of any federal or EU election in Germany. The committee is trying to make sure that nothing goes wrong. "For instance you could look at the situation in the polling stations. In each station we have eight to nine volunteers helping out."

 

Around 630,000 such volunteers will be at polling places for the federal elections on Sunday. Anyone 18 or older can volunteer, but local authorities might also recruit you to help - and you can only turn down their request if you have a very convincing reason.

 

Before polling stations open, the volunteers will check to ensure ballot boxes are indeed empty. During the election they'll make sure that everybody has an ID with them and can show the documents every citizen receives by mail proving that they are eligible to vote.

Germany says no to computers, worried they'd make the system vulnerable to fraud

 

From Polling Station to Electoral Committee 

 

The volunteers also take care that voters won't be influenced. If, for instance, members of one of the political parties were to try to campaign inside the polling stations, they'd have to be stopped.

 

The volunteers themselves also have to be impartial on election day - which doesn't mean they can't be members of a party. In fact, an intentional mix of volunteers from different political parties is often preferred in order to guarantee the impartiality of the team as a whole.

 

At 6 p.m. sharp, the polling stations close and the votes are counted according to a rigid system. "The result then will be passed on from the polling station to the local election authorities who will in turn pass it on to the next level until all the results trickle in at the federal electoral committee."

 

Problems With Postal Vote

 

This transparency is supposed to protect the election against fraud. Usually, it's something that works fine, though Pötzsch said he cannot rule out that there couldn't be small isolated instances where things don't work the way they should.

“Transparency is Key,” explains Klaus Pötzsch

 

Manipulation of absentee ballots, which are growing in popularity among Germans, could be easier than election fraud at the ballot box. In cities, as many as 30 percent of voters prefer to cast the ballot by mail rather than heading down to the polling places in person.

 

A care-taker in an elderly home might be doing the voting for one of his patients, a husband or wife might tick the box for their spouse. In 2002, local elections in Dachau were rigged when more than 400 postal votes had been manipulated. The fraud only came to light because the 400 ballots had been filled out with the exact same ballpoint pen.

 

Voting Machines Unconstitutional 

Germany has in the past used voting machines, as is done in the United States and Brazil. But in 2009, the country's highest court has banned computers from the voting process on the grounds that the process had to be public. The same goes for counting the votes: "Every single vote has to be read out loudly and noted in a public protocol. Transparency is key," said Pötzsch.

 

"Public" here means that anyone can attend the counting process. And should there be doubts about the results from a certain polling station, it has to be possible to recount the votes. This was, according to the court's ruling - not possible when voting machines were used.

 

German Identity Card

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_identity_card

 

The German Identity Card (German: Personalausweis) is issued to German citizens by local registration offices in Germany and diplomatic missions abroad, while they are produced at the Bundesdruckerei in Berlin.

 

Obligation of Identification

 

According to the German law of obligation of identification, it is compulsory for everyone in Germany age 16 or older to possess either an identity card or a passport.

 

While police officers and some other government officials have a right to demand to see one of these documents, the law does not stipulate that one is obliged to submit the document at that very moment.

 

Acceptance of other official documents (like driving licenses) as proof of identity is not guaranteed, especially for old driving licenses with less security. Driving licenses issued before 2013 are not replaced in Germany, so the same document is kept.

 

German citizens travelling inside Europe (except Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine) or to Egypt, Georgia, Montserrat (max.14 days),[2] Turkey, and on organized tours to Tunisia can use their ID card, which is a machine-readable travel document, instead of a passport.[3]

 

Just like German passports, German identity cards are valid for ten years (six years if the holder is under 24 on the date of issue).

 

The ID card currently costs 37€ (€22.80 if the holder is under 24 on the date of issue).