Sept. 25, 2024 - The Truth Central - Dr. Jerome Corsi
53:19
Suspicious Algorithms in Several States’ Voter Rolls: How Did They Get There and Why? - with Tony Shaffer
LTC (Ret) Tony Shaffer, former Intelligence Officer, President of Project Sentinel and Trump 2020 National Security Advisor joins Dr. Jerome Corsi on The Truth Central to explore and break down how suspicious algorithms have been inserted into several U.S. states' voter roll databases and why they are there. Are intelligence agencies setting up for control of election outcomes? Who might have had them inserted within? What would such code be used for? How much of a threat could these algorithms be to our national security?LTC Shaffer and Dr. Jerome Corsi take a deep dive into these and more questions about the corrupt algorithms on The Truth CentralIf you would like to donate to help Dr. Corsi's and Andrew Paquette's efforts to seek out and expose corrupt algorithms in states' voter databases, visit https://www.godsfivestones.comIf you like what we are doing, please support our Sponsors:Get RX Meds Now: https://www.getrxmedsnow.comMyVitalC https://www.thetruthcentral.com/myvitalc-ess60-in-organic-olive-oil/Swiss America: https://www.swissamerica.com/offer/CorsiRMP.phpGet Dr. Corsi's new book, The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis: Forensic Analysis of the JFK Autopsy X-Rays Proves Two Headshots from the Right Front and One from the Rear, here: https://www.amazon.com/Assassination-President-John-Kennedy-Headshots/dp/B0CXLN1PX1/ref=sr_1_1?crid=20W8UDU55IGJJ&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.ymVX8y9V--_ztRoswluApKEN-WlqxoqrowcQP34CE3HdXRudvQJnTLmYKMMfv0gMYwaTTk_Ne3ssid8YroEAFg.e8i1TLonh9QRzDTIJSmDqJHrmMTVKBhCL7iTARroSzQ&dib_tag=se&keywords=jerome+r.+corsi+%2B+jfk&qid=1710126183&sprefix=%2Caps%2C275&sr=8-1Join Dr. Jerome Corsi on Substack: https://jeromecorsiphd.substack.com/Visit The Truth Central website: https://www.thetruthcentral.comGet your FREE copy of Dr. Corsi's new book with Swiss America CEO Dean Heskin, How the Coming Global Crash Will Create a Historic Gold Rush by calling: 800-519-6268Follow Dr. Jerome Corsi on X: @corsijerome1Our link to where to get the Marco Polo 650-Page Book on the Hunter Biden laptop & Biden family crimes free online:https://www.thetruthcentral.com/marco-polo-publishes-650-page-book-on-hunter-biden-laptop-biden-family-crimes-available-free-online/Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-truth-central-with-dr-jerome-corsi--5810661/support.
This is Dr. Jerome Corse and today it's Wednesday, September 25, 2024.
Thank you for joining us on TheTrueCentral.com.
We're doing podcasts every weekday.
You can view me on X at CorsiJerome1 and on Substack JeromeCorsiPhD.substack.com.
We're very fortunate to have today as our guest, Tony Schaffer.
Tony, welcome.
Hey, Jerry.
Good to be here with you.
Thank you for having me.
Tony and I have had a long association in Washington with the London Center, which Herb London founded, a great, great gentleman, and Tony has carried on that heritage.
Tony has a distinguished career.
Tony, why don't you give some of the highlights of your career, especially with emphasis on Intelligence characteristics, because we're going to talk about the algorithms in the state databases, and one of the points I want to make is, given your qualifications, you can validate, you know, certify that what we're talking about is reality.
Yeah, well, people can Google my career, so Representative Walter Jones, God rest his soul, In September of 2011 read my entire career into the congressional record.
So there's a tribute to Tony Schaefer out there.
People can Google it.
Federation of American scientists reposted it and I don't want to go through.
It was 30 and a half years before I retired.
And I'm retired as both Lieutenant Colonel and a GS 14.
I get two retirements just because Wikipedia doesn't say that they say I was fires like no, I'm retired.
Sorry.
Uh, and during that 30 and a half years, I did a variety of things.
Most pertinent to our conversation today was the development of, uh, of weaponized technology.
Weaponized technology is, uh, everything from algorithms, which modify programs on the internet to pagers that blow up, just say it.
Uh, so that's, you know, we did that.
We not, I'm not saying that we.
Did it at the scale of the Israelis, but yeah, back in the 90s, we figured this stuff out and Stratos Ivy.
Was the task force special mission task force, which did that.
And again, that's acknowledged in my congressional.
Uh, tribute my bio, so, uh, within the context of that Jerry, I worked with NSA and CIA and other organizations, which.
At the time, the 90s, we're starting to recognize the potential for, uh.
How software, hardware, information could all be combined, modified, or utilized for purposes of obtaining specific operational outcomes.
That is to say that they were able to figure out how to create a system of systems which would be used on call, in my case, militarily.
I'm a military guy, a military operative.
Our operations were tied to war plans.
I actually had to brief George Tenet, director of CIA, and some of the things we were doing every six months because we were doing things that We didn't want all of CI to know about.
We would give them a summary because we could do things like that.
But we were doing things in such a way that NSA was our partner and we were running some very advanced, very advanced technology initiatives that are still classified even to this very day.
So that's, that's what I think is pertinent of my background, my 30 and a half years to our conversation today.
It's very pertinent.
I mean, NSA, of course, the National Security Agency, has enormous capabilities for intercepting conversations, intercepting virtually all information.
Oh, yeah.
Integrating it into a... Edward Snowden has probably been one of the more severe critics of the effort and has disclosed more publicly about how it works.
And it's actually very frightening, their intelligence capabilities.
And having been through the Mueller investigation, the investigation where they were looking to me having a contact with Julian Assange, I can tell you how extensive capabilities of the NSA are.
They had a book on me that was like about that thick of all my emails and everything I had done.
They knew more about me than I knew about myself because they had studied it, had downloaded it, had memories of it, had worked it over.
These are all my Text messages, all my phone conversations.
They had virtually everything.
Very little that was not captured by the NSA and recorded into the FBI Department of Justice investigation as to whether or not I had a tie with Julian Assange, which I did not have.
They couldn't find one frustrated them.
They thought I had done some... Oh, I'm surprised they didn't make it up, Jerry, because they do that.
Just saying.
I mean, they make it up.
Oh, yeah.
They do make it up.
Okay, now let's get into, let's go to God's Five Stones, and Chris, if you'll show it at the bottom of the screen, I want to point out a couple of documents here.
So God's Five Stones, this is the, and it's for those listening, it's G-O-D, there's no apostrophe in the gods, G-O-D-S, five, you spell out five, F-I-V-E, and stones is plural, S-T-O-N-E-S, dot com.
This is our 501c3 for information.
And we are trying to expose how these algorithms, which are coded mathematical manipulations of data, are in the state board of election voter registration roles.
And they're there to facilitate, I believe, the use, the creation of non-existent voters That yet are able to get legitimate state voter IDs can be hidden in the voter database and used by the criminals who do mail-in ballots as needed that will certify because the number of the fake voter, the non-existent person, who has a legitimate state ID, which will match the voting of the mail-in ballot with that same state ID.
It's a very ingenious scheme.
Now, the article that I have today posted is a question about whether the intelligence agencies are running our elections, have started running our elections.
And I think, Tony, the background to this is that the CIA in particular has been running elections and interfering in elections worldwide since the 1950s.
Can you validate that?
Well, let me be clear on what my knowledge is versus what I think the government does.
Now, I was trained by CIA.
That's my bio.
But once we're done with the training, we go back.
I'm a DOD guy.
Most of my work was focused on DOD operations and objectives.
Our objectives are not CIA objectives.
CIA does their own thing.
And I've argued publicly several times that CIA is redundant.
They don't need to exist because often they become a tool of political aspirations of the ruling class rather than collection of intelligence.
I think you'd agree with me on that.
I agree.
And so, aspirationally, yeah, I think they've engaged in efforts to conduct what we would call coup d'etat.
The most obvious is the Maidan revolution of 2014.
I think that, by all accounts, was a CIA operation where they used something called the color revolution to insinuate themselves into a political process.
I would argue CIA and Obama are at the root of the current war in Ukraine because of what they did.
And the technology which was used to influence things was also present in Venezuela, back in Chavez's company.
Had used some of the software we're talking about or it was used to benefit him.
I think that was willingly.
I think they folks there used it to benefit him.
And I think some of this stuff, remember Jerry, technology is ambivalent to the user.
So, if some other person other than the CI figures it out, they could use it.
I mean, it's like a gun.
A gun is not good or bad.
It's a gun.
You know, A good guy can pick up a gun, a bad guy can pick up a gun.
The same with this technology.
But I think what you're asking me, is there an effort by intelligence officers within the deep state to use this technology to influence domestic politics?
And I would say absolutely.
There were a number of folks I was friends with and worked with on Capitol Hill, one of them is Louie Gohmert.
Louie Gohmert, I've made protected disclosures to Louie Gohmert regarding of what I observed to be abuses of technology by the Deep State.
And Louis, at one point, during one of my disclosures, he said, Tony, how did you all develop this technology and not think it was going to be used back on the American people?
And the answer was, because I thought we were working with people with integrity, that we would be only focusing on foreign threats and foreign issues.
That sadly is not true.
And I think there are people like John Brennan, like Jim Clapper, like General Alexander,
Keith Alexander, that is, and all of those who signed that 700 person
bureaucratic nightmare of a document saying that they support Kamala Harris,
they're all part of that.
And not a person on that group would be unwilling to do things to devastate or destroy
the Republic based on their knowledge of things.
And I think they are part of the problem.
So anybody on that list, I think, would gladly do what you're talking about doing here,
is undermine our election process.
Well, it's frightening.
And the paper, if, Chris, if I'll just enlarge it a little bit,
I want to highlight that first section.
I'll go down a little bit right there that there's a methodology here and the methodology is similar to a card marking scheme.
If we take an analogy, let's look at votes like cards, like playing cards.
Yeah.
And so therefore, our goal is to mark some cards that we know where they are in the deck and we can use them.
And that means we can pull out a card to win a hand whenever we want to do it.
And we want to be able to win all the hands we want to win.
And so therefore, the person we're playing against has no idea and will not be able to tell that the cards are marked.
Right.
Now, the first step And there's a methodology to this, and we'll show it with some of the papers in the States.
We've found these algorithms now in three states that Andrew Paquette has validated.
He's the computer genius who has actually done the work.
And his papers are up on the site, so you can look at them on gods5stones.com.
First step is you've got to shuffle the cards.
Because when you get a deck of cards from the manufacturer, they're in cellophane.
That's supposed to show that they have not been opened.
Then you open the cardboard box that they're in, and they come ordered from the highest suit to the highest card in the highest suit, to the lowest card in the lowest suit.
And if you just put your marked cards in that deck randomly, it'd be obvious which were the marked cards, because they would be the ones out of order.
So, you've got to shuffle the cards as your first step before you can start inserting marked cards.
Would you agree with that, Tony?
I would.
So, part of the challenge, obviously, is to do this in a way that's... This is going to sound contradictory, but it's not.
It's got to be hidden in plain sight with all our other activities, but to be done clandestinely.
Yes.
You have to do both.
You have to make it appear like normal.
It's like, oh, nothing to see here.
But still, you're doing something that's completely So you gotta do it like, oh yeah, we're just doing maintenance, or we're building this for people to use.
And yet there's a hidden agenda, or hidden capability, which they're hiding.
So yes, I think you're describing accurately what I think has to be done in addition to get this in there.
Okay now, Chris, if you'll go from this paper to, if you'll get out of there and go to the upper right-hand corner of the website, God's Five Stones, You'll see it says state voter rolls.
If you click that down, we have all the Ohio, New York and the New York.
In the New York, if you'll just do the Andrew Pickett paper.
Right there in New York, then the Andrew Pickett paper.
There it is.
And again, enlarge it.
And let me see if this is the right one.
Yeah, this is it.
Go down to about page... There's a chart here I want you to get to.
Just keep scrolling and we'll get to it.
Not that one.
It'll come up in a few minutes here because this is a key.
Not that one.
You can see how complicated this is, what it takes to break these codes, which is not easy by any means.
Right there.
Go back.
Enlarge that one if you would.
Even more.
OK, and then go back.
OK, the middle column where it says the CID sort, which is the county ID sort.
So these are in order from their data registration in a particular county.
And if you look at number 8 and number 9 and just increase it a little bit, we're looking at the center column.
I want people to see the center column really clearly.
Okay, there we go.
So you would think that the center column would be such that the numbers would increment by one, because if they're in order for voter number by one, then the next one should be instead of, it's hard for me to read that, I'll bring up my own copy here where I can read it a little bit better on my own computer, but they're not incrementing by one, they're incrementing by 1,111.
So the difference between the two entries that are consecutive, You know, they both say registered the same day within a few hours of each other.
Instead of getting the numbers 101 and 102, they get 101 suddenly becomes 1112, because they are adding 1111 to the record.
they get 101, suddenly becomes 1,112, because they are adding 1111 to the record.
And that means that there's room now for 1,111 records between two that were registered consecutively.
Now, what this, in terms of data management means is that you've erased the date of registration
as a independent variable, which determines your voter ID number,
which is the dependent variable.
So voter ID is no longer a function of voter ID, of registration date.
So it doesn't matter when you write that.
Now we've got a bunch, let's say we have three million voting records in here.
And they're all free floating.
It's untethered.
That's right.
Yes.
Untethered.
Exactly what you're saying.
Yeah.
It's untethered.
Okay.
So now when we... Unstructured.
Unstructured.
So we thought, so just to the point, Jerry, we used to deal with unstructured data as part of data mining and data acquisition and amalgamation.
And unstructured data is always the most difficult to deal with.
And that's what they're doing here.
They're creating unstructured data so that it makes it nearly impossible to be able to track some of the variables you're mentioning.
And see, what's so important about this discussion, and what Tony just said, is that those people who do this professionally, who are dealing with database management and database obstruction, in other words, changing how databases function in order to accomplish some nefarious or intelligence agency objective, understand that this Untethering data from a natural progression, natural order, is the fundamental first step before you impose your scheme, your way you want the data to work.
These programs that are used on voter registration come with software that increment by one each subsequent registrant.
So in other words, it's not really hard for a county to just order its voters by when they registered.
And this means that if they registered in 1993, they're going to be having a lower number than someone who registered in 2003 or 2023.
they're going to be having a lower number than someone who registered in 2003 or 2023.
That's a correctly ordered database, which is a natural order. But now if you erase
the registration date and you're just dealing with the numbers themselves,
you can impose your order on them, which means that they're going to get scrambled according to
your algorithm, correct?
Or assembled to the order you want.
Assembled to the order you want.
Yes, exactly.
Without being able to understand that the data was originally structured a certain way.
You removed the structure of the original data for purposes of reorganizing it, which is a fraudulent process.
That's right.
It's out and out fraud, and it would violate every law that you could think of in terms of how legitimate voter records need to be maintained.
Absolutely.
I agree 110%.
There is there's no legitimate reason for doing this.
Can you think of a legitimate reason?
No, no, no, no, Jerry.
No, no data.
The whole objective of transparency is not only to have access is to actually make sure that you understand origins of data and how it's tagged.
I mean, I've had some experience in this because part of our challenge with AbleDanger is that we would go out and look at terabytes of information.
Again, I'm not saying anything has not been disclosed.
We would look at terabytes of information from a variety of sources.
One of the most difficult challenges we had was unstructured data.
So, basically, unstructured data does not have time, location, or the actual link to other things.
If you don't have it structured, like Al-Qaeda blew up the building at the corner of Walk and Don't Walk.
Oh, OK.
Well, when did they do that?
Well, we don't know.
Well, is it in the article?
No.
Do you know when the article was submitted, put on the internet?
No.
Do you know who put it on there?
Is there something in the metadata that does it?
No.
So unstructured data is very dangerous, Gary, because if it's not structured, if you don't have those basic interrogatories of who, what, when, where, how, you can use it for whatever you want in this case.
So it's a very dangerous thing.
Thank you.
And Chris, if you'll kind of shift so we can see the A column and make it as big as you can.
It's a little bit hard to read, but it's on the internet.
People can go look at it.
The first three, there we go, first three rows here.
What this does is it allows the data to be such that, and it's very hard to see these numbers, I'll just describe it.
That what you've got when you order them according to the renumbered sequence, you've got every number being used.
So in other words, they're all filled in, and they all fall in sequence, except that the dates of the registration do not track chronologically.
Because you're pulling some voters from this period of time, and that period of time, and this period of time, and you're mixing them in with the ones who are registered today.
So you've got a mismatch.
And it's like saying, I developed, and you can quit showing that now, Chris, because it's hard to read, and people can go to the paper on the website and see that chart precisely.
You know, people order their children by saying, I've got, my first child was, and everybody knows who the first child was in a marriage, and our third child was the one who was musically inclined.
You know who you're talking about with your wife when you're talking about your third child, because you're not confused as to which one was third.
Right.
But now you come to the state and the state says, well, I'm sorry, but Mr. Schaefer, your first child is number one.
Your second child is 12.
Your third child is 23.
Fourth child is 34, fifth child is 45, and your sixth child is 56.
You say, wait a minute, we don't have 56 kids.
No, that's not possible.
We don't have... Well, if you're Puff Daddy Combs, maybe, but... Just saying, right?
Right.
Just saying.
Just saying.
So, look, the state says, well, there's 56 in your record, there's 56 kids.
And there are kids that are number 2 through 11, they just don't happen to be yours.
And by the way, child number 3 and child number 7, we made up.
They're not real children, they don't exist.
We made them up.
But see, Since they're now in an order where there's no natural order here.
In other words, the voters are just, the only order is the algorithm or assigned order.
That's what establishes the sequence is my algorithm.
Okay.
And so therefore, a record where I make up a child and, you know, give it an address and all the rest of this stuff, it's just fictional.
When you look at that record, it looks okay.
Because it's the way a record should look.
And you don't know that that's not a person unless you actually went and tried to find that person with a field search.
And nobody's gonna do that.
So now we've created, and Chris, you can just quit sharing the paper.
So now we've created false records that we are inserting into the deck.
With real numbers.
The first goal here is that now my child number three and number seven, who don't exist, just got a state ID, voter ID.
They just got a number because they were in the sequence.
As those numbers were being signed, they got one.
Okay, so now that's number one.
Now, number two, and the original paper, back on the website, continues down, and so, Chris, I know this is kind of cumbersome, but go back to the paper that's on the front page, the home page of the God's Five Stones, and we'll just track down into that paper a little more deeply.
Let's just scroll down and enlarge it, thank you.
So, after we've done that, now the next step right there, is that we created non-existent clones and ghost voters.
So clones are a record that we copy, and we maybe use the name and the birth date, but we change the address.
So that becomes like a new voter that could get another, that could get two mail-in ballots, or could vote twice under those two identities.
That's clone.
A ghost voter is we just make up somebody and put them at an address, and that person doesn't live at that address.
That person may never have existed.
That's just a made-up voter.
Okay, so continue down on the paper, the methodology.
Chris, we just continue scrolling down.
What we do next is that, right there, now we've basically got to take these non-existent records, And we are going to now have to reinsert them into the voter rolls so that we as the perpetrators of the scheme know where they are and no one else does.
And so this is where we use things like the Caesar cipher.
There are various ciphers that deal with reordering things again.
And hiding things in positions where you could say at this position in the database, and it's a very complicated formula because it involves first dividing the state records that are available by a power of 10 and then deciding where you're going to place them and how the Caesar cipher works.
I mean, this is, this requires sophisticated actors to design the system.
Oh yeah.
And to implement the system.
Because the mathematics are complicated, right, Tony?
I mean, these are not easy mathematics.
So again, so technology is ambivalent to the user, but one of the things that I think you and I would agree upon, developed technology takes a lot of money.
I mean, someone's got to invest a lot of time, a lot of technical time.
A lot of money.
Yeah, so to do something like this requires a huge bureaucracy.
I wonder who has those.
And people who are motivated to take and use this in a way that was not necessarily intended.
To do this.
So, you know, it's like what we call placement and access who has placement and access to actually conduct the development of the software and then develop all on that software.
keys and encryptions that allow them unique and continuous access and control of it. Well,
that's the US intelligence community. So I'm not accusing anybody, I'm just saying that,
you know, this is like a game of, what was that game we used to play as kids? It was Colonel
Mustard in a museum. Oh yeah, Clue. Clue. So I'm just saying, if you're playing a game of Clue,
you start seeing things which add up. So that's right. And okay, so the whole idea here,
that the intelligence agency, first of all, this could be, I envision, a psychological
operation unit created to do voter fraud.
In other words, the CIA could have constituted a special unit of people whose mission was to create these algorithms and get them placed in the state.
Because this is going to require not only the development of the technology, the development of the mathematics, The figuring out how to get back into the voter database and then getting someone with access in each state.
This is a complicated process.
This is not just a couple of guys in a garage.
No, this is not or some kid with his dad gets dad's computer.
This is and because you've got to get an agent inside the operation.
So somebody has to get hired at the state Bureau of a board of Well, look, Jerry, you and I have spoken about this.
I've said it.
Look, this isn't the Kraken.
We agree.
This is not the Kraken.
And I was critical of the Kraken, just saying, at the time, because they were saying and doing things without regard to the fact that I don't necessarily doubt it, but you don't have anybody on the inside who matches the profile who's willing to come out and talk about this directly.
So, again, Jerry, you're not accusing anybody.
I'm not accusing anybody.
We're just recognizing there's certain points of access and individuals who have to have that access that would be necessary to make this work.
Is that what we're basically talking about?
Yes, this is just re-engineering, reverse engineering.
Now that we've seen the algorithms, we can prove that they're in the database because they order They order the voter ID units, and they do it in a way that is not natural order, doesn't reflect the registration date.
So it's the algorithm is determining the order of the voters.
We've seen how that works.
Now we're saying you've got to get someone inside the state board of elections, and they either can do this themselves if they have access to the mainframe, or they can open up a back door To the mainframe, to the unit at the CIA or NSA, the intelligence unit who's really running the operation.
But this algorithm has to be embedded in the state software for it to work.
Yeah, so let me address that point real quick.
So part of the challenge, Jerry, with intelligence operations and what we're implying here, is that to be able to do clandestine things, you have to have a certain level of integrity.
And it may sound odd.
A guy like me who basically was taught to lie, cheat, steal, murder, you know, whatever you want to say.
Like Pompeo said, the CIA holds classes on these issues.
Yeah, we do.
But the question becomes, what do you do with those skills once you've left?
And I think that's the issue here.
I can tell you for a fact, and you know me pretty well.
I think a number of us have chosen to step into the light, to use what skills we have only for what I would consider good causes.
I'm a recovering alcoholic, so I turn my day over to God every day when I get up.
It's like, you know, I turn it over to God to let God kind of guide me.
But others, I don't think, are so predisposed.
So that's what I think we're getting at here, is that you could have units in CIA and other places which essentially go rogue and decide what they're going to do, what they want to do, or they pretend to go rogue and they're directed.
I don't know which is which, but based on the spooky skills, since, you know, spooky skills are kind of what we're talking about here, you could have people who are trained to do Dangerous things against other countries that actually jeopardize our own security by the fact that could be used against the American people.
And you cannot discount the fact that a intelligence agency may itself go rogue because deciding that we need to kill President Kennedy is a decision that apparently was made.
And we've proved that in other books, but the point is here.
That you've got a A rogue operation that requires sophistication, funding, knowledge, and clandestine skills.
And now once we've got, and so we relocate these fake non-existent voters back into the voter database in locations where they are identified by an algorithm locator.
And we control the algorithm locator.
Okay, so if we continue down with this paper, one, go back up above that, just go back to the paper in the last part there, highlight that.
Okay, so now what we can do is that— go up one more above that.
So the point of this scheme is that whomever is running this, essentially, you can vote these voters in the database.
So I'm watching an election as an operative.
I know the algorithm's there, and I'm seeing that Kamal is not doing particularly well.
And I decided I'm going to pull some of my non-existent voters that I have seeded away, and they're going to start requesting mail-in votes.
I'm going to make sure they got mail-in votes.
I'm going to make sure those mail-in votes got run through the tabulating machines.
So now I've got one of my legitimate state ID numbers that requested a bail and ballot, and a legitimate ballot was printed with that number.
I've got a certifiable vote because those two numbers match.
Right, exactly.
Even though the voter is non-existent.
Yep.
Okay, and now I can have...
300,000 of those, and I can use them as I want to use them throughout the day or after the election's over to produce the result I want to produce.
Yeah.
Well, Jerry, like your original analogy of having the card deck, having the cards marked, you don't only have the cards marked, you can control exactly when, what card is dealt and have it in the number appropriate to what you need.
It makes it essentially A scalable heat, if you will, based on what we're talking about.
Right, and so I think this shows certain patterns that we've seen in elections where, again, you're relying on the fact that no one's ever going to go out and check to see whether that voter existed.
And it's going to look legitimate.
The key, in 2020, when I was watching the election, I thought for sure this would not certify because you see these trucks in the middle of the night delivering ballots and all the rest.
But what I didn't realize until I saw Paquette's work was that the scheme had been created where you could get a certifiable non-existent person to cast a mail-in ballot.
And the truth is, you wouldn't even have to print the paper ballot out itself.
You just run it through the machine electronically.
The only reason you print it out is if you thought the recount or the challenge to the election might go to a forensic level where they would want to see the outer envelopes of these mail-in ballots and somehow validate that they were real.
Which they did in Georgia, to a certain extent in Pennsylvania, but still those were not as forensic as they should have been.
No, in fact, mostly the history of this is that at the end of the election when they're doing the recount, They say, well, we lost some of the cover sheets.
We can't find them all.
Or they've gotten mixed in.
Or, you know, we don't have the manpower to determine whether the signatures are really the person's signature.
And we certainly don't have the resources to send people out in the community to find out whether or not these are real people at these real addresses with a legitimate right to vote.
Those things are never checked in mail-in balloting.
If the numbers match, you've got a good enough vote.
And so therefore, if I were the perpetrator and I had this scheme, being a political scientist, And I go back to the 1960s when I was an undergraduate, Case Western Reserve, and they used to, my professors in political science would get called by the television stations to come and, you know, on election night to call the elections, who was going to win, who was going to lose.
And I was asked as an undergraduate to come with the professor to work the math and to Actually work the numbers to give the professor the answer and I could do it because I knew that this voter was a who this person was running for the office and how many votes they had to get out of this precinct or they were in trouble.
I knew where their votes were, how they had to perform on election night, whether they were exceeding or falling behind expectations, and I could call whether the election was going to be won by that person, lost by that person, or close.
Now, if I can do that as an undergraduate with 1960s technology, if I had this program, I could profile the entire election.
in advance and run a simulation of it.
Or I could say to you, first I'd say to you, do you want Kamala Harris to win by 1%, 3% or 5%?
Do you want her to be ahead throughout the day or to surge later in the day?
Do you want me to have to stop the vote count so that we can produce the votes in the morning?
What's my game plan?
And you'd say, I want her to win by 3% and I want her to surge in the afternoon.
Well, I could run a simulation, make that happen.
Right.
And I could use my non-existent mail-in votes at the right time, as I saw it, if I was doing it during the election, I could play that, like, you've just given me the piano score, and now I'm going to play the tune.
Yeah.
I know how... Well, you don't want to do it where you make it obvious, where you have this straight up thing, just saying, but yes, I know what you're saying.
Yeah.
And that was pretty obvious.
And in fact, if we go one more step, I can just run a simulation of the election, and if you go vote, I can throw your votes away, and I can make my simulation the official record.
And it would be hard for you to tell the difference.
Well, that's the thing, without a forensic audit, yeah, because you basically, you run You run the tapes, Jerry.
You get it all done.
And then you have that as a pristine artifact, you know, a program, but an artifact.
And you can swap the real artifact for the other.
That's right.
You do the transfer over.
And so it would make voting a Truman show.
In other words, you thought you were voting.
You thought you were making an impact.
You thought we have to get out to vote.
But really, the people running the election don't care if you voted or not.
Now, we're not quite at that point yet.
And I think there are some remedies here.
First, the first hurdle that we're going to have, Tony, at gods5stones.com is to get people to understand that these algorithms are real.
That they're there.
This isn't fantasy.
And they can't be denied, because the math is there.
Secondly, I can't prove that these have been used, and I'm not claiming that the elections—and that's for an important reason, because I'm not challenging a certified election, which is very difficult to do.
Okay, because all the presumption is against me.
And I'm trying to overturn potentially, you know, I've got defamation cases, I could be charged with laws that undermine the confidence in elections.
There's a lot of reasons not to do it.
And Chris is just showing you how complicated these things are.
And going through some of the papers, this one I believe is Ohio, to show you how complicated these number schemes are.
Now, the point is that there are some solutions to this.
Number one, that we pointed this out and made it clear to people it exists, it becomes harder to get away with the fraud.
Because it's like a magic trick.
Magic trick depends upon deception, misdirection.
And as soon as you see the misdirection, you see the deception, it's hard to be fooled by the trick.
Secondly, there are some limits to this.
In other words, if Trump is ahead by 5% and we've got to do 5% made up through non-existent mail-in voters, we can probably get away with it.
11%, 12%, 13% may become obvious what we're doing.
Yeah.
I can't do it after a certain point.
It doesn't work.
It doesn't work.
It becomes impossible.
And so therefore it does make a difference to have a massive in-person surge on voting day.
Absolutely.
This is not an argument that since it's fixed, your vote doesn't matter.
Don't do it.
No, it's because it's fixed.
Let's get out in huge numbers to make it impossible to steal without being recognized.
Exactly.
And number three is I would demand that some of the people who are appointed to be poll watchers while the election is going on also have the ability to challenge mail-in votes and to go out into the community for a forensic physical examination to see whether that person exists or not.
And to sample mail-in votes to see how many, what percentage are fraudulent.
Okay, now that way you can have a check to disqualify mail-in votes based upon a forensic challenge.
Enough people that are willing to go out into the community, you could say, you know, 50% of these, there's nobody there.
And so we want to disqualify 50% or more of the mail-in ballots.
And these are ways, the fundamental fraud here involves mail-in ballots.
And if you can get rid of that, or go back to a tight situation of people with absentee ballots that have to register for them and go through all kinds of proofs of identity and numbers are checked, et cetera, that can be legitimate.
But this massive mail-in balloting is not legitimate.
So, yeah, and that's a key absentee is not mailing.
It's different and the left always wants to.
Commingle the 2 and they're not related.
They're, they're separate.
And a dear friend of mine, and I think, you know, she is, is Sheree Curry from the runaway.
Sheree has told me that she's gotten multiple ballots with her name on it coming to her house.
Mail-in ballots, which she did not ask for.
That's interesting because it shows the left is out there trying to mail these things out without regard to do people want them or not, at least in California.
And obviously that creates a situation where, well, we've mailed the ballots out.
So, you know, the presumption is they can justify getting ballots back without having the artifact back in many races.
Well, there's no honesty factor here because the scheme is designed to steal.
And it begins with a presumption that we don't need these elections.
We certainly don't want to lose one.
Well, if you mail it out, who's to say it didn't come back?
You know, it's like we mailed them all out, so I guess, you know, so that gives them that built-in Especially if they mail them in to people who've moved out of state, or they know.
It gives them a ready reservoir, Jerry, to use the algorithm and build it in.
I see what you're doing.
I see what you're saying.
You could actually vote them, print them if you wanted to, never mail them, because they're not going to be checked as to whether they were folded or whether the signature was really there.
All these things are not going to be checked.
It's insidious.
It's insidious.
Okay, so the point here is that, and the reason to have Tony on is to get someone who's been on the inside of intelligence operations, that has come on the outside to work legitimately and honestly, which involves a conscious decision.
Tony made it clear that's a decision, that I'm going to be a white hat.
Well, they make decisions too, the other side.
They're going to be evil, and they just pretend that they don't know they're evil.
Jim Clapper knows that he's evil.
John Brennan knows they're evil.
But they have decided that their personal ambitions and their vision for utopia overwhelms any sense of loyalty to the Constitution of the world.
I feel, you know, my oath means something to me, and the Constitution is important.
Just saying.
Well, those are important points.
And the fact is that what we're doing here is exposing something that could be in every single state.
Yeah.
Because there's no reason why intelligence agents would put it just selectively in a few states.
And it doesn't have to be in every county or precinct, because Some counties or precincts are either so small they don't matter or so red that a blue surge would be too obvious.
And so you can just put the algorithm into counties that have a larger population or have urban affiliation.
And again, the fact that these exist and are being able to be figured out,
I wanna emphasize that what Andrew Paquette has done has been almost a miracle,
that he has actually figured out the mathematical code.
Now, having studied cryptography, I'm not a cryptographer, but having studied it,
you know that there's a code because you can't read the message
or there's a pattern you see here it.
So you say, well, how does it... There's a key that will solve it and allow you to make sense of it.
Because a code has to be able to be read on the other side when it gets there.
So it has to be reversible.
You have to be able to have a code book to read the code.
Now, the problem is that codes are issued without a code book.
You don't want the other side to read it.
You don't want the other side to know it's there.
You don't want to be discovered.
And so therefore, to recognize there's a pattern in the voter ID arrangement of the individual records, and to find the mathematical formula that produces that pattern, is almost an act of genius.
I mean, it is an act of genius.
It requires, if you'll take a look at all the work he's done, In every state, in order to find these patterns and prove them out.
And as remarkable as it seems, and most states are going to start by saying they couldn't.
We've really studied our database.
We know there's no pattern here.
Well, when you start out by showing them the scatter plots of their different counties, And it does not track in a line, you know, because if you've got the registration date as your y-axis, your independent variable, and your voter ID number as your dependent variable, that should just be a straight line coming out at a 45 degree angle from the origin of the two cross bars of the chart.
But when it's just scattered in one section, or some here, some there, you know there's mathematical alteration going on.
Because people were registering in this period over the entire period of time.
It's just that when you erase that data and reassign the numbers, you get these strange clusters in the scattergrams that are indicative of mathematical alteration.
And the last point I want to make is that just whether these are used or not, the fact that the algorithms exist and were imposed into the state databases is itself prima facie evidence of malfeasance.
And we don't even have to prove they were used.
These algorithms shouldn't be there.
And we're raising questions.
We're asking for investigation.
We're not pointing fingers at and saying this election was stolen or that election was stolen.
We're not making those kinds of claims.
We're saying, why are we able to show algorithms in all these different states, Tony?
So, well, no, I think that's the issue is that this has to be an exercise in continued vigilance and.
Uh, reconnaissance.
Uh, the things we've talked about today exist.
They actually exist.
They are here.
The question becomes why and who and how.
And those are the things that need to be resolved next before any allegations.
I think just the simple discussion and knowledge.
These things exist to help people to understand to question things.
Don't accept things at face value, especially now when you we've seen the results of feeding 2020 was stolen.
I don't want to hear people saying, oh, oh, you're an election denier.
No, no, no, no.
I'm someone who witnessed firsthand the fraud who got yelled at by Bill Barr for investing the fraud, investigating the fraud and recognize that this time we have to be smarter and we have to recognize that there are people, deep state, whatever you want to call it, permanent bureaucracy.
Uh, uh...
People who sign that, you know, the public faces are on that list of 700, but there's many more who are committed to the destruction of the Republic by using their skills for purposes of personal benefit and political advancement.
That's what they're doing.
And we have to be vigilant of that.
So I think, Jerry, thank you for educating folks and getting this out here.
Again, we're not accusing anybody, but we're telling people you need to be vigilant and continue the investigation.
Thanks, Tony.
We really appreciate your time and your expertise, and we'll be doing more of this.
This is Dr. Jerome Corsi with Gods5stones.com is our website, our 501c3.
This is TheTruthCentral.com.
We're doing podcasts every weekday.
In the end, God's going to win.
God created this world.
Absolutely.
God's sovereign.
Satan does not win.
These people do not succeed.
But it's imperative upon us to do our part and encourage everybody in the spirit of 2 Chronicles 7-14 to get on our knees and ask God to forgive us for letting the country get to the point where we've Murdered so many babies, slaughtered them in the womb since Roe v. Wade, that we've taken God out of the schools, out of our marriages, out of our hearts since the 1940s.
And let's restore to the United States the values that made this country great.
And I'm confident that with the assistance of God, there'll be a judgment of God.
It will not be pleasant.
But I'm convinced that this evil will disappear from our land, provided that we get involved, are resolute on this, take the time to understand it, and say, no, we're not playing in a crooked game.
