Machine Manipulation of Michigan Absentee Ballots

By Stu Cvrk

As reported in a previous UncoverDC article, a technical team consisting of five statistics experts was formed at the request of the President’s campaign to conduct a statistical analysis of certain voter data in key states in order to determine whether there were any significant anomalies evident and, if so, which counties were most suspect. The team’s express purpose was to help assure that all legal votes—and only legal votes—would be counted. In the previous report, which focused on Pennsylvania, the team examined: voter registration lists; votes tabulated over time for President Trump and Joe Biden; excess Democrat votes Biden received in 10 Pennsylvania counties far and above prior election years; and a Benford’s law analysis of votes received.

The anomalies found by the team were summarized in the article linked above. What was not examined in that previous report was the widely suspected machine manipulation of ballots by Dominion Systems and other ballot marking devices. The team subsequently examined Michigan absentee ballot data sets for nine counties to conduct such an analysis. The following are some bombshell details from the Ingham County and Oakland County data sets:

The plot below is the percentage of absentee ballots received by each 2016 presidential candidate in Ingham County (Michigan), by precinct (Red = R and Blue = D). Note the irregularities that occur: some precincts are higher for R, some are higher for D. More important, the difference between the two (R minus D) varies widely from plus to minus. In other words, neither the red line nor the blue line has a discernible pattern. Here is an example of what a normal result looks like:

Compare that to the 2020 percentages of absentee voters in Ingham County, as depicted in the report:

Note that the percentage of Democrat absentee voters exceeds the percentage of Republican absentee voters in every single precinct except for one outlier (No. 3). What is the statistical probability of that happening? Somewhere approaching zero. But what is even more incredible is that the curves track each other almost completely. These are independent variables that are supposedly being plotted. (Neither plot should be dependent on or linked to the other by any mathematical means.) This is yet another statistical impossibility—unless the data were manipulated by machine algorithm.

There were nine problematic Michigan counties identified by the team that exhibited the same statistical anomalies as shown above for Ingham County. For additional comparison purposes, here are the 2016 and 2020 plots from the report for Oakland County, which has four times the number of voters than Ingham County.

Once again, the 2016 plot looks normal while the 2020 Biden and Trump plots track at almost exactly the same proportionality—a statistical impossibility without direct data manipulation. In addition, the proportionality between the red and blue plots is maintained across the graph. This simply cannot happen without manipulation.

The team also plotted the absentee ballot data using two additional methodologies for comparison of 2020 results versus 2016: the percentage of Democrat and Republican absentee ballots versus precinct and the ratio of Democrat-to-Republican absentee ballots per precinct. The results for Ingham County using these two methodologies:

Note that the 2016 plots look normal while the 2020 results appear to be artificial. All three methodologies used by the team delivered the same anomalies indicating data manipulation.

Here is the conclusion from the report:

This is very strong evidence that the absentee voting counts in some counties in Michigan have likely been manipulated by a computer algorithm. The comparison of the 2020 results to the normal 2016 election data is dramatic. If no other plausible explanation can be made for these unexpected findings, it appears that this computer software was installed sometime after the 2016 Presidential election. On the surface, it would seem that the tabulating equipment in infected precincts has been programmed to shift a percentage of absentee votes from Trump to Biden. An accurate hand-count of absentee ballots from a sampling of precincts might be helpful.

The real bottom line is this: Michigan absentee ballots were almost certainly machine-manipulated in favor of Joe Biden. This involved subtracting Trump votes and adding them to Biden totals. Given that Dominion systems were widely used in many states across the U.S. this year, the widely reported “74 million Trump votes” are considerably under-counted by perhaps millions of votes while Biden’s total is over-counted by millions. It would explain why absentee candidate Biden’s supposed 80 million total, which has been endlessly repeated by the gaslighting legacy media, eclipsed the totals achieved by Barack Obama (twice) and Hillary Clinton. A large and to-be-determined number of Biden’s votes were fraudulent. It is the only explanation that makes sense. This is a developing story.


Stu Cvrk served 30 years in the US Navy in a variety of active and reserve capacities, with considerable operational experience in the Middle East and the Western Pacific. An oceanographer and systems analyst through education and experience, Stu is a graduate of the US Naval Academy, where he received a classical liberal education. This functions as the key foundation for his political commentary. He threads daily on Twitter on a wide range of political topics, such as the military, foreign policy, government, economics, and world affairs.

Twitter: @STUinSD



Get the latest news delivered daily!

We will send you breaking news right to your inbox

© 2024