A formula has been uncovered that predicts the level of turnout for voters across all age groups in Michigan with over 99% accuracy. That level of correlation suggests third party interference may have taken place in the November 3rd election.
The formula was discovered through analysis being conducted in a lawsuit brought by Michigan resident William Bailey who claims his vote was disenfranchised due to vote manipulation. The analysis centers on the vote totals of Antrim County, Michigan.
Bailey’s attorney Matt DePerno released the information in a brief this week which was filed in response to efforts brought by state officials in refusing to comply with subpoenas filed by DePerno for additional evidence discovery.
In the analysis, conducted by Dr. Douglas G. Frank, a PhD with 30 years’ experience in advanced science and mathematics, ballots cast in several Michigan counties are compared to population, registered voter and turnout data.
In the Antrim County analysis Dr. Frank first starts by graphing population data:
Then he layers registered voter data on top:
Then a graph of the predictive formula (known mathematically as a sixth degree polynomial):
Then data for the actual ballots cast in the Nov. 3 election:
What the analysis shows is that the line of the predictive formula (light blue line) tracks almost identically with the line of actual ballots cast (red line). The level of correlation is 99.3%. It is represented by the “R” value of 0.993. Correlations involving human behavior rarely have R values greater than 0.8, says Frank.
What is even more unusual however, is that the formula works to the same level of accuracy in every Michigan county.
More unusual still is that a second formula found in Ohio (based on Ohio’s demographic and population information) works similarly in all 88 counties there. Yet another formula works just as effectively in all 64 counties in Colorado. Another works just as well in 14 counties in Florida and still another in 14 counties in Pennsylvania.
These findings are virtually impossible to have taken place naturally and is a large indication that interreference in the election took place.
“This confirms, as seen in several other states, that ballots are being harvested at the precinct level, regulated at the county level, and determined at the state level,” Dr. Douglas G. Frank, PhD, found.
DePerno is seeking specific network and application log information from 8 additional Michigan counties that he says will provide vote total uploads that will verify the accuracy of reported vote totals in Antrim County. That information will help determine if Antrim County experienced unusual cyber activity and/or third party election interference, the court filing states.
A hearing on the motions for discovery and Michigan officials’ efforts to stop it is scheduled to take place Monday.