Badlands Media - Why We Vote Ep. 173: Dr. Andrew Paquette on Voter Roll Algorithms and Fake Ballots

Episode Date: May 13, 2026

CannCon and Ashe in America welcome Dr. Andrew Paquette, known online as Zark Files, research director for New York Citizens Audit and one of the most technically rigorous voices in election integrity work. Dr. Paquette walks through five years of voter roll analysis across more than a dozen states, explaining how he reverse engineered four distinct algorithms embedded in New York's voter registration ID number system, discovered 1.5 million cloned records, and obtained photographically identical duplicate signatures from counties that should not have had any clones at all. He explains why the system is structurally designed to prevent anyone from linking a ballot to the fake voter who generated it, and why that means the question of how many races were affected may be permanently unanswerable. The conversation moves to Bexar County, Texas, where Dr. Paquette analyzed a check-in list showing over 4,000 fake voter check-ins injected after polls closed through a third-party cloud system called EPulse, which serves 29 states. He closes on the Save America Act, the limits of legislative fixes, and why he believes the entire election infrastructure needs to be scrapped and rebuilt.

The badlands, one of the badlands, explain those badlands. That's a hell of a name. All right, good evening. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to Why We Vote. I think this is now our third episode in our new time slot here on Tuesdays at 9 p.m. I'm enjoying it. I'm enjoying it. Are you enjoying it?

Are you enjoying your three-to-one lead over John's... Heck, yeah. I was on Culture of Change last night. It was really fun conversation with Matt Fair. We talked about his new project. no limbs, no limits, and kind of got into the power of storytelling and how, you know, how, how we can build parallel economies like we talk about all the time on Badlands, but specifically to media. And then I got off and I was like, oh, man, abs are playing. And I caught like the last seven minutes of the game, I think.

It was close. It was close. A couple empty notes. Close doesn't count. We're not playing horseshoes. Brian we're playing hockey and it's the only real sport and it's the avalanches league so let's go kind of the hurricanes there are eight and oh so far haven't lost the game yet but we'll see they usually choke in the eastern conference finals but guys let's get into our sponsors because we got a special guest and we want to get right to it so let's talk about the aliens over at my shroom vibe hey there earthlings I'm here on the streets of New York to tell you about something that's literally out of this world you know traveling between dimensions really takes it out of you, but I've found the perfect solution. My Shroom Vibe can now be your Shroom Vibe. Elevate your frequency, get microdose capsules, gummies, and chocolate bars at My ShroomVive.com.

Use code Badlands for 10% off your order. Trust me. Galaxy hopping demands balance, and ours comes from Mother Nature. Organic, not synthetic. It's the real deal. Si Lee, if you know what I mean, check it out. frequency will thank you. Visit my Shroom vibe.com. Organic goodness, not synthetic. Use code badlands. I talked to Matt Arrett today. I asked him for some help with something and watching

that ad made me remember his reaction to it. Do you remember that? No. When he first saw the ad, he was on the air with ghost and he was deeply disturbed. What do you think of the new soft disclosure ad? I don't know. I didn't show it to him. But it's I love the new soft disclosure ad. Greenstar's outdone himself. He is a genius and hydrate Jarrell Bose. All right. Let's go ahead and Ash, you want to tell our fine audience about our friends over at Van Man. Are you ready to upgrade your daily routine with truly clean natural products? No exceptions. Start in the kitchen with Van Man's pure cooking tallow, perfect for high heat cooking and added rich clean flavor. adding rich, clean flavor to your meals. For your daily cleanse, try their gentle tallow soap, the classic honey, pine tar, or coconut flavors.

These bars deliver a rich, natural lather that leaves your skin feeling clean, soft, and refreshed. Give your smile, real care with miracle tooth powder and flavors like mint bone, cinnabone, and original. Customers rave about whiter, stronger teeth and fresher breath with no harsh chemicals. Bamin also offers great products like hair care, eye cream, and more, all made with clean natural ingredients, no exceptions. Right now, enjoy free U.S. shipping on all orders over $40.

Head to badlandsmedia.tv slash van man. Today, that's badlandsmedia. dot TV slash van man. All right. So check out our fine sponsors and also badlandsmedia. TV slash shop. We've got a couple more. We'll get to a little bit later in the show.

But guys, I'm really excited to have our guest on this evening. He has been doing some incredible work. If you guys are over on the X-Sphere, follow his substest. I think it's zarkfiles.substack.com. Some incredible writing, some great work he's been doing lately on voter rolls, algorithms, and all things, election integrity and election fraud. And guys, I want to welcome to the show, Dr. Andrew Paquette. Howdy? How are you, sir?

I'm all right, thanks. It's good to see you. Very good to see you. I am excited to have you on the show. I've been following your work for quite some time on X. And then a good friend of mine, Neil Johnson, did an episode on his show. It wasn't an interview. It was a short form.

But I'm watching it. I'm like, man, I really got to interview this guy. And then Ash is like, oh, we're going to have art on. And I'm like, oh, okay, connect us. And then I realized it was you. And I was so excited. Yeah, well, when I was working as research director for New York Citizens Audit, we all had code names. And mine was Art Zark, which is a contraction of arts possessive

arc because I was thinking of the elections as something that had to be saved, right? So I'm an artist, so my arc becomes Arts Ark. So that's the name. Fantastic. Absolutely. So we've, we've had Marley Hornick over it, well, when she was with with them on many times explaining things. And from what I gather, a lot of the work that you've done was, you know, attributed to the New York citizens audit work that they did there. A lot to do with the voter rolls. And I'm curious, you know, I want to break that. And just just so you know, Dr. Piquette, like tonight I want to, I'm going to be asked a lot of questions to break this down at a fundamental level. Over the last week, I've been watching shows that you've been on, you know, reading your work, of course.

and I want to make sure that our listeners understand, because there's some things that I don't necessarily understand. So on that note, do you want to explain how you got into the election integrity and where you first cut your teeth up in New York? Yeah, well, I was actually just starting to create a business as a commercial photographer when the lockdown happened and left me with a lot of time on my hands. And meanwhile, the 2020 election looked out of the 2020 election looked, outrageously suspicious. And, you know, the thing is, I have made a living as an artist, a

CG artist for most of my life. And then later as a co-founder of a very successful game developer school in the Netherlands. But along the way, I got a PhD from King's College, London. And that gave me some knowledge of statistics. So when I was sitting up in bed at night on the evening of the 2020 election, looking at my iPad, trying to figure out who was going to win, I went to bed at three thinking there's no chance Biden wins. It's impossible because there were five states left to finish counting. The number of votes that had to be counted, the percentage that had already been counted, the lead that Trump had was unassailable.

It was mathematically, I saw no way for Biden to come in the winner, even if all of the remaining vote for him. They'd have to somehow increase the number of people voting for it to work. And then the next morning, that's what it said had happened. And I was like, well, I suppose at the bleeding edge of really strange coincidences that might have been possible, but it really seemed unlikely to me. So with nothing else to do, I was thinking, if I get an opportunity to look at data from any of these states, I will do that. Just for a little while, just to see what I can find. And Steve Bannon had something on his show about the U.S. audit.

it, but all the states were doing an individual audit of their elections for 2020. And he suggested people sign on to their individual states on Telegram. And I thought, hey, there's going to be a group. Let's just see what's there. And by the America first audits. Yes, that's it. Yeah, that's the line. I really didn't expect to find anything in New York.

I figured, and it's not because I trust Democrats, okay, it's because I figured as a, as a state that really is going to go Democrat no matter what, I figured, the risk-reward scenario really wasn't going to benefit someone committing fraud because the risk is much greater that they would be caught and they would win anyway than if they didn't do any fraud and they lost. I just didn't see that happening. So I thought, well, it's the only data I'm going to get access to, so I'll just do that. So I signed up and Marley called me a little later and asked me to be research director. I have a feeling it was because I was the only person who'd asked to sign on. that had a PhD, also because I was probably the 10th person to call something like that.

And I didn't want to, actually, because I know what it's like to be an art director and to, you know, be in charge, like basically be the chairman of my department at the school. And it's a lot of responsibility because suddenly everyone's going to be coming to you for everything. But I did want to look at the data. So I agreed to it. I told her it'll be a month and then I'm out of there because I have to make a living somehow. But somehow that never happened. And it is partly because the data was so interesting. Now, she was asking me, what do you want to see for data?

And I said, I want voter rolls because those are basically free. They're accessible. And they can't keep them from us. All the other kinds of data that other people were looking at, like Jeff O'Donnell, that was stuff you had to get subpoenas for. You had to have lawsuits and you have to win the lawsuits. Those were hard to get, you know, like the cast vote records and the ballots themselves, ballot envelopes, all that kind of thing.

So I was like, let's start with what's easy and see if there's anything to find there. And the funny thing is, is that one of the things that was easy was just a comparison of the precinct reports, how many people had voted in the precincts versus what the certified count was. And that didn't match. I was thinking, wait a minute. And then I found out really quickly, one of the other people in NYHCA had downloaded a different copy of the same document I was looking at, which was telling me what the certified results were. And they didn't agree?

And I was like, wait a minute. Didn't this election get certified nine or ten months ago? And we have different numbers in these two documents. And I was thinking if a bank did that, it doesn't matter how pointless the numbers might seem to be. It's a problem, right? So that kind of thing started getting me interested. And then it turned out because I'm old, as you can tell from my beard here and everything. I had, yeah.

Brian's old, too. Mine looked like that, too, except about a month and a half, ago, I had to go to Texas for a TV thing that I was doing, and the producer wanted me to trim my beer. I think she would have liked it better if I went completely clean shaven, but I wasn't prepared to go that far. So I lost half a foot. That was such a good T.F for a beard oil ad? Come on. All right, we're clipping it. You can do that. I like having a beard. But anyway, so the thing is, is that I'm looking at this

data and I'm thinking, okay, we have a problem. Let's get the rolls. The rolls were tough to get from the counties. A lot of them were refusing to hand them over. And I was thinking, what's up with that? They've got, I think it was five or seven days to do it in. And one guy in St. Lawrence was trying to be a clever guy. He was an attorney. And he was saying, I'll tell you what, we'll let you look at them, but you have to drive up here, five hour drive, by the way. You can look at them. You can't tell anybody what you see and you can't take any notes and you can only do it during like between lunchtime and three o'clock in the afternoon something like that and i was thinking what use is that if i'm going to find anything substantive i have to have them on my computer available to me 24 hours a day for weeks

so that i can see what's there um so that offer was ridiculous um unless i was like superman or something and could flash through those pages really fast and memorize every page but even if i could. That couldn't be used as evidence. So anyway, we eventually got the state rolls. And I was really shocked to find that initially it looked like there were about 700,000 cloned records. And by the way, I hate to say this, but some people don't like the term clone. Okay. In my opinion, it's exactly the right word. Okay. The difference is in the law, they use the word duplicate. But the thing is they use it to describe something that is different from what I call a clone as well as clones. And that means you can't differentiate them.

It's like if I called you and Ash humans, I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between what gender you are, right? So that's the same thing they were doing with the way they describe duplicate. So a duplicate is legal. So that's when you have the same personal identifying information and you also have the same ID number. A clone has a different ID number and everything else is the same. same. Okay. And the reason that one is illegal and the other isn't is a duplicate can't do anything on its own. It can be used to generate a ballot, but once that's done, that's in the record and you can't do it again. But with a clone, you can generate as many ballots as you have clones.

Okay. So that's why those things are illegal. So the guy I'd asked to to look into that, he came back with a number about 700,000 of those. And that seemed pretty high, especially for a system that by law can't have anywhere near that many. The error margin was something like 10 out of the whole state, right? And so I was pushing him and I suddenly realized that he was actually limiting his search in a couple of very important ways. It turned out there was more like a million and a half of them. It wasn't 700,000.

He was only looking for the clones that were active during the couple of weeks of the 2020 election. So it got worse and worse. And I was thinking, you know, when I was in the shower one day, I was like, You know, if you've got a million and a half cloned records in the database, that could be explained as amazingly sloppy management or somebody's doing something nefarious here, right? And it seemed to me one test for nefariousness would be if there was a way to separately track those records, right? Because it's like you're a pirate, let's say you're a pirate. And you've gone ahead and you've stolen all this gold from, you know, the whole coastline that you've been raiding, right? and you've got it all on your boat, but now the privateers are coming to take you down.

So what you do is you throw all your gold overboard, okay? That's fine. You can come back and get it later as long as you write down where you put it. But if you don't write down where you put it, it's lost in the trackless ocean. So the same thing goes for these cloned records. So if you go ahead and make them, they are available to you, provided you can find them again. But imagine election night you suddenly need 14,722 of these. how on earth are you going to find them again?

You have to have a way to find them. So I was thinking, I bet they've got a way to tag those somewhere. Okay. And if they don't, that actually would make me think it's slightly more likely that it's innocent, okay? Although that many, it's kind of hard to believe it's innocent. So anyway, so a few months later, after giving up any hope of finding it, right? Because the thing is, you need unique fields for this to work. and most of the fields aren't unique except for the ID numbers.

So I was thinking, you know, anything like this is there. It has to be in the ID numbers. But I've pretty much given up on it until a happy accident destroyed some data on my computer, which forced me to reload the database. And when I was halfway through, for whatever reason, I was looking at it, and I realized that I had luckily had my data filtered by a lightning bolt outside that had destroyed the exact half of the data that was making it hard to see the algorithm that could be used to track ID numbers.

And the reason is because it turned out that someone had partitioned the ID number space. This is the list of numbers that they used, so between number one and 100 million. And they had separated it into like a sandwich. So they had a lower layer, a middle layer, and then an upper layer. The upper layer was basically chaos, and the bottom layer was chaos. And the one in between was very, very well ordered, geometric precision, okay? And so when I was looking at that, I was thinking, okay, this is kind of interesting. Before you couldn't see the algorithm because if you looked at like a county's records,

you'd see all of the layers mixed in together, right? So it created noise like static and you wouldn't be able to see it. So I had to filter that stuff out. And so I spent a couple weeks manually like writing down all the numbers that I could see so I could find where the edges were of all the counties. And once I found those edges, I passed them off to one of the programs. at NYCA and I said, could you please confirm this? And he tailored a little bit, he fixed it a little bit,

but for the most part, my manual efforts were correct. And once I had that, I could look at each county separately without the confusing data. And I could start seeing the algorithm. It took two years to actually reverse engineer it, but now I can do it and I can predict it really well. And one of the things I can do with the algorithm, and this is just a side effect.

I seriously doubt this is the purpose of it, But I now know that they deleted about half a million cloned records. And I can restore those records with my knowledge of the algorithm. So these are literally records that don't exist anymore. And because I know that they were clones and I know which county ID number was supposed to be assigned to them, I can actually find their counterpart and restore all the data they took out. Find it where. Yeah, I was going to say, are you able to tell not just find it where,

but are you able to tell when this was deleted, you know, and stuff along those lines? There are some things I know and some things I can't, I don't know. And that's one of the ones I don't know. I don't know when they deleted this stuff. But I do have a pretty good idea approximately when they introduced this algorithm. And it turns out there's four algorithms running in New York. Okay. So I named them.

Yes? Yeah, just back to the records that have been deleted. When you say that you can go and find the counterpart, you're talking. about one of the other clones or the original, but how do you know, if you don't know when they were deleted? Like, are you, I guess what I'm asking is, are you actually finding something or are you, because you have the algorithm predicting what would have been there that's not there anymore? Is that okay? So the way it worked is, I wouldn't say this except for ancillary data. So I have multiple snapshots of the database. Okay, when you compare the snapshots, you can tell when

people were deleted. Okay. Okay. And so what I was able to determine using that sample is that there were about, I want to say, 10,000 records that were captured in the snapshots I have that were deleted. And in every single case, it was a clone. And when I checked them, every single one that had a clone ID that was assigned using the spiral algorithm, it was always a record that was missing. Okay. And then when I looked at the other data associated with it, I discovered that I could take the missing ID numbers, which I knew were missing because of how the algorithm worked, because it told me which ones were missing. And I could find the county ID that would have been associated with it if it had been present. And then I can go back to the earlier snapshot,

and I can see that indeed that state ID and county ID were linked to the name that is now presently assigned to a different state ID and county ID. So, and since, that worked for all of the thousands of ones that I checked, I am extrapolating that it would work for the ones that I can't check because they happen prior to those snapshots being created. Make sense? Yes. Yeah. And that's actually a pretty large sample that generalizes very well to the size of the database.

You know, it's kind of funny, but one of the things that Jeff O'Donnell talks about a lot is how as more votes accumulate, things should trend toward the middle, right? this is just how chance works. The more times you flip a coin, the more likely you're going to have less and less and less variety until basically it's 50-50 all the way across. And so because of this principle in statistics, it only takes like a few hundred samples to generalize very convincingly to a general sample of maybe a couple million. Okay. So if I've got thousands of samples, those generalized to 700,000 just fantastically well.

So it's very predicted. Anyway, but that one algorithm wasn't the whole story because it turned out that was, although complex and geometrically precise in a way that was really quite artful in a way, the ones that were most suspicious are different. So there's one called the Schengel algorithm, for instance, that appears to have been assigned only to people who were purged and almost all of whom are dead. And so, for instance, there's a string of 45,000 numbers or 42,000 numbers in a row, literally in a row. They're absolutely consecutive. Every single one of them is dead. There's no way that a string of 42,000 people went in to register to vote and all of them

happened to be dead at the same time. That's just impossible. So to me, what that says is they knew they were dead when they made those numbers. Now you could say, well, what if they were just segregating the dead people from the non-dead people so that they could put them in a cabinet because they don't have to worry about those when they introduced the new electronic voting systems? The thing that's peculiar about it is that they didn't assign all the dead people to using this algorithm.

There's like people who had died were assigned using the rest of the number space too. It's just that that particular algorithm was reserved only for people who are purged and for the most part dead. So it's kind of like a reserve flanks of dead voters that they can just activate if they want. And the other thing is about half of them are also clones. So if I look at a graph, right, so it's like this big and I've got a curve that goes up, well, heck, I can even show you. I actually have it open on my machine if you're curious. But what it is is that as you go up this arc showing all the ID numbers, from the halfway point up, 100% purged, I mean, and 100% cloned.

And on the other side, they're 100% purged also, but they're more like 15, 20% clon. So if it's at the halfway point or above, they're definitely a clone. I shouldn't be able to know that looking at an ID number. The ID numbers shouldn't contain that information, but they do. And this is one of the things that made me really. curious about these things and that's why I went and I started looking at other states. Is this, so in order to create a clone voter, you would, I mean, wouldn't you necessarily, wouldn't you have to have a registration pamphlet, you know, some sort of a paper trail on these

creations? Bingo, yes. That was another one of my shower moments. I was singing the exact same thing. And I thought, you know, I've got a guy with 11 registrations, for instance, okay? a guy in Brooklyn had an Israeli name and I thought, well, let's go ahead and canvas that guy. So the NYCA team sent somebody out, found out the guy doesn't exist at all. Okay. So it's not that they took a real guy and cloned his name 10 times for a total of

11. He doesn't exist at all. And he never lived there. Nobody by that name lives in the state of New York. So I thought, how on earth did this get created, right? Where's the registration paperwork? And I looked at the law on that. And in New York, the law says that the county has to have a physical signature on a piece of paper for every one of these registrations. And the reason is because the registration application form, unlike a lot of other forms that we might fill out, is an affidavit. You are attesting that, one, you are a U.S. citizen. Two, you are the age you say you are, and it is over the age of 18. and that you live where you say you live, right?

So all of these things are required for you to be a qualified voter. And so when you sign it, you're saying under penalty of perjury, these things are true. And if they're not true, I agree that I can go to prison for it. Okay, that's what a registration application is for, and that's why you need a signature. So I asked the FOIL team lead to go ahead and start looking for the registration applications for these people. Okay. Now, I had a lot of them to look for. I had a million and a half records that were all clones.

And she said to me, there's no chance that we're going to get all those because they're going to say it's too much work. They're going to charge us lots of money. New York Citizens Audit had $0 to give away back then. And they're going to say it's too much work. So why don't you tailor your request? So what I did was I picked a county that we thought was friendly, which was Herkimer County. and I selected only clones that had been generated within 10 days of each other. So that means clone A, clone B within the same 10-day period, preferably on the same day, which also happened.

So they had a few hundred clones in total, but I only wound up asking for 70, all right? And they gave them to us. And what did I find? The signatures on the forms were identical, not just in the sense that they're written by the same hand. I mean, they're photographically identical, down to specks of dust on the scanning bed. Okay. Wow. So these were digital duplicates of each other.

Now, we then asked for a few other counties, and we also asked in these small batches, just like the Herkimer one as a sample. And a lot of them came back looking exactly the same. Not all of them. Some of them refused to give us anything. St. Lawrence, the people who generously offered to let me drive five hours so I can look over somebody's shoulder for two. They did a really weird job of redaction, which by the way, it was complicated and must have taken somebody a lot of time because they actually not only redacted the information that the voter had written in, but they had also redacted parts of the form itself.

So like the word registration would be missing half of its letters, but in random ways, so it would be really hard to tell what it said. And so it was missing all sorts of parts of the form itself. So they were just playing games with us in a lot of cases, and many of them refused. So the counties that had the largest number of clones, like all of the New York counties, I mean, New York City counties, they all refused the request. So the guy in Brooklyn, I just mentioned to you, we never saw what his registration forms look like if they even existed. But with the other counties, quite a few of them had these photographically identical duplicates. And, you know, one of them I was really curious about because it was, oh, you're going to love this. they all had like these purge dates on.

They were like, oh, this is okay because you've got one active and this one's purged or these two are purged, right? And I'm thinking, yeah, but look at the purge date on all these. It was two days before you gave it to me. So these things were all simultaneously active for two or more years during multiple election cycles, during which you had no idea they existed. And then I send in my request and then you purge them two days before you give me the results. My opinion, sorry, that doesn't mean things are okay here.

And that certainly doesn't retroactively change what might have happened with those records in the past, which, by the way, is completely unknowable because there's no way to connect a physical ballot to a registration number. You can use a registration number to get a physical ballot, but once you use it, it's gone. That connection is severed permanently. There's no way to track it back. So they can do anything they want as long as they separate the ballot by putting it through a tabulator or putting it in accounting box. At that point, no way to link it back to where its origin was. So there is one gal I was really curious about, and I forget exactly why I was curious about this particular person, but she had three registrations in Herkimer, and they were all on the same two days.

It was February 7th and 8th of 2020. And so I asked someone to canvas her in particular as well as a few other people in the same area. And the story she told is kind of interesting because she said, number one, it is my signature, but I didn't sign it three times and I certainly didn't try to register three times, right? I didn't go to the County Board of Elections to register. I just went to the DMV. But then she was asked about the registration date, the February of 2020. And she said, you see that one-year-old boy in my living room there?

I was pregnant with him when I registered to vote. I wasn't pregnant in 2020. I was pregnant in 2021, and this is now 2022. He wouldn't be one years old if I was pregnant in 2020. He'd be two. They backdated her registrations by a year. And the interesting thing about that is it meant that her registrations were actually active for the 2020 election because of that, even though she hadn't even registered yet. Now, you might say, well, where is the benefit in that?

How does that help anyone? And quite frankly, I don't know, but I find so many irregularities like that all over the place where registration dates are backdated, not forward dated, by the way. People get their signatures duplicated. They get cloned. Their addresses are strangely off one way or another, or they don't exist. That as far as I'm concerned, there is a really high likelihood that there's something nefarious going on behind that. And I think it's a very fair question to ask. But what I can say, yeah? Well, I was just going to say it can pad the numbers in a way. that when you have a higher turnout, the more people you have on the voter roll, the more votes you

throw in to get a desired outcome, the more you have there, right? So if you only have 40,000 people and you need 10,000 votes, but 30,000 people have already cast a vote, if you throw that 10,000 in, nobody's going to believe 100% turnout. But if you have voter rolls that are bloated with an extra 40,000 people who you know are never going to vote because they're duplicates and clones, if you have to throw in that extra 10,000, it's like, okay, no big deal. Instead of 50% turnout, now we've got 58% turnout. So that's the only thing I can think of. Well, there is one other thing.

It could be that they registered her without her knowledge based on her DMV when she got her driver's license the year before. So they could have registered her to vote without her knowledge. And so it wasn't backdated at all. It was the day she didn't know she was registered. But the thing is is that when I look at the different snapshots, they're very revealing. By the way, the word snapshot when we're referring. referring to a database refers to a version of the database that is active at a certain date, right?

So in New York, I have, I think, seven snapshots, something like that. And when I look at them, I see that the number of people who voted in every election is different every single time you look at it. So none of the snapshots are consistent. And none of them match the certified count either, which, by the way, you know, the answer I get, when I mention this to anyone who's close to an official or who actually is an official, because I have spoken to a few county commissioners, is, well, we're not required to check

to see if the number of ballots equals the number of people who voted, right? By looking at the voter history field in the voter rolls, they figure out how many people voted by looking at how many ballots there are. And I'm thinking, wait a minute, why don't you check the voter roll? And they say, well, it's because when they check in

and we write in the voter history that they check in, we give them the ballot, the ballot becomes the proof of how many people voted. And I'm like, okay, but if the voter history says three or 400,000 fewer people checked in, how do you wind up with these three or 400,000 extra ballots? They're like, well, that's not what the law requires. And I'm thinking, okay, well, this is basically built to commit fraud as far as I'm concerned. because the voter roles and the voter history field in particular is like the best way to check to see if anything untoward occurred, right? And so the fact that they're not using it that way is really strange to me. But I think more so what you're saying is they're not using the identity information to determine who voted.

They're using the number of ballots. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. So they count the ballots. And let's say there's a million of them. They say a million people voted. And I say, okay, well, your voter roll says 750,000 voted. And they say, no, no, the ballots prove that you're wrong. And I'm like, what? Where do those ballots come from?

They're supposed to go from the voter history, right? And they're like, well, glitches. And the thing about grueless code, human error. Yeah. And look, I'm going to tell you something. I've got a friend who works at a Fortune 500 or Fortune 400 company. me rather. And I used to tell him all this stuff I was doing with the election research. And he said, my gosh, if we had seen anything like any of what you're finding, we would have unplugged our computers and like rented a warehouse, put them in there, hired a whole fleet of

detectives and investigators to figure out how it happened. And meanwhile, we'd replace all the systems. There's no chance we'd leave those things online. And well, yeah, that's because public trust in capital markets is so important that we have to make sure that we have to make sure that we have all of those safeguards in place and that we're able to take things offline. But when it comes to public trust in elections, those concerns just aren't there. Well, the funny thing about it is he works in an industry that's heavily regulated by the government, right? And in fact, his job, a great deal of it, has to do with making sure that his company is in

compliance with the government, right? And he says, literally, if we make the tiniest mistake, they could actually levy a fine against us in the tens of millions of dollars. and they won't hesitate to do it, okay? So they have to be absolutely sure everything's right. So he's horrified that the government's own systems they're so careless with, right, as far as the election systems are concerned. But on one occasion, I had been doing some work on this,

and I was like, hey, could you just check in your own database? If you look for clones in a certain way, what do you find, right? So I asked them to do it. And it's the same method I use. And I find hundreds or actually thousands on the low end to millions on the high end. And he found 11 in a database that was bigger than any two of the largest states in the United States. Okay. His database has almost 50 million people in it.

And New York has 21. Texas has close to 20, something like that. Those two together are smaller than his database. He found exactly 11 clones. Okay. 11, not thousands, not hundreds of thousands or millions. 11. And by the end of the next day, all of them were gone and all of them were being investigated.

And that's how it's supposed to work. And that's how it does work in business. And he actually told me later, he found out that, yes, they were bad and they had to do something about it, which they did. And they did it immediately. So it's really shocking to me how careless they are. But here's another thing is that, and this doesn't get talked about at all, but I think it's really important, is that the kind of things I find in the database could not. possibly happen if they were using normal data validation, right? So for instance, when you guys go to type in your credit card number on Amazon or something so that you can make an online

purchase the first time before it memorizes it, right? If you type in too few characters, it kicks it out. If you type in the wrong character, like a period instead of a number or something, it'll kick it out. If you type in a zip code that doesn't match any real zip code, it'll kick it out, right? And if you use a postal code that's from, Europe, which I had the problem with because that was my postal code when I lived out there, it kicks it out. That's data validation. And data validation, it's a default. It's usually turned on when you buy a system. Okay. So when you get a database, you've got data validation. It basically asks you, okay, so what do you want to check when somebody enters this information?

So the stuff I'm seeing could not possibly happen for the most part if they had simply had it turned on, which means to me somebody turned it off. And that's a decision, okay? And it's something that they have a responsibility to not do. Under the law, they're supposed to have an accurate database. And the best way to do that is ensure everything's good on the way in. So you don't have to go find it later, right? But the clones, those bother me a lot. And I want to get back to those signatures for a second because the excuse I was given by one Republican, by the way, a county commissioner in New York was, well, it's tough. You know, I know we have the clones.

I'm sure it's illegal. We know we're not supposed to have those things, but what can we do? It's just difficult because sometimes we get multiple registration applications from different sources, right? So we'll get it from the County Board of Elections, the DMV. Maybe somebody gets released from jail and he has his voting rights restored or something. And so they'll get a court order to restore the guy's registration. And he says, so we can have a lot of these.

And I was like, oh, really? He said, yeah. And I said, how many? And so, oh, three is easy. You could have three. And I said, how about four and five and six? I kept working up because I knew about the guy with 11. I actually know another guy with 25, but let's leave him along for a minute.

So I got to 10. And I said, so can you picture this happening? And he was like, oh, yeah. And I was like, really? Can you name the locations that all those registrations would have come from, right? And he was like, well, the DMV, the county board of elections, a court. I was like, okay, what else? He's like, can you give me a fourth?

He's like, a registration drive at a school. I'm like, okay, what about a fifth? He's like, registration drive at a different school. Okay, so you've got the same person going to all these different places. But here's the thing that totally destroys what you just said. Identical, photographically identical signatures on all the forms. You can't be in all those different places at the same time signing exactly the same way. Okay.

So there's software that's duplicating the signatures and basically creating the the cloned record. And my opinion, it's doing it on its own. I seriously doubt a clerk has to have anything to do with it. And I have actually one piece of anecdotal evidence that goes along with that. I had a voter contact me who had lived abroad for a while. She'd lived in Manhattan. She moved overseas. and then she returned to a different county.

So originally she was in New York County and then she was in, I think it was, I start with a W. Westchester, right? And she was suspicious that her other record was active. I forget why, but she was suspicious of it. So, oh, I know exactly why. Okay, so let me tell you what happens. So she goes to Westchester and she thinks she has to re-register to vote

because she's been out of the country and she no longer lives at the other address, right? And the clerk does exactly what the law says she's supposed to do. She sends the information to the state computer. This is all under the law. They have to do this, right? So every application you get at the county level goes straight to the state.

They check the state database to see if you're already there. So if they get a name match, a name and a date of birth match, they have to ask you for more information, right? And if it's still a match, they have to refuse your application because it's already there. And that's exactly what the lady did. She said, I'm sorry, you're already in our system. So I can't register you. What we can do is I can update your address,

on the other registration. That's what we're going to do. That's what the law says they have to do, right? So she went ahead and did that, push the button. As far as she's concerned, everything's cool, right? Except when I look at the voter roll database, it's not what happened. What actually happened is she got cloned and they changed her middle initial at the same time. So the Manhattan record was still active and as well as the one that they had just made for her in Westchester.

So I believe that that clerk probably had no idea. that had happened. My guess, based on what I'm seeing, is that they've got software that's running a resident on these computers that is basically taking a peek at all new applications. And when they've got a change order, like change the address or change my married name or my maiden name to a married name, that kind of thing, it's taking every 11th record or so, and it's duplicating it. That's what I think it's doing. And it's giving it a new ID number, which makes it accessible to people who want to do bad things with it. And by the way, one thing I'll mention to you about that. subject as well because some people ask me about this. They say, well, what would have, how would that work? You'd have somebody go into the polling station, right, to vote. And then what are they going to do? Have an imposter come in after him and say, you know, here's my name and date of birth and my address. And they're going to say, well, didn't you just come in here, right? And they're not going to tell them what their ID number is because nobody knows what their ID number is. They don't tell you, right? My feeling is that's basically a red herring.

That's not how it's going to work. They're going to ask for an absentee ballot, okay? And they're just going to mail it in. And they're going to mail it in probably after the person actually comes in to vote. So there's nothing to contest, okay? It's kind of like what I was finding in Bear County, Texas, is that the whole exploit there happened after everyone had checked in for the day. So the software that created all these fake records needed the genuine list in order to create the fake list. And that effectively created ballot authorizations in doing so because that's what the check-in list is.

Well, you don't even need the absentee ballot itself. You know, in the 2020 election with the COVID and the universal mail-in balloting and everything, funny enough this morning on Badlands Daily, I played a clip of Obama back in 2008 with the John Brennan, passport thing and the company he worked for when they hacked his passport. And at the very end, they're talking about the primary between Hillary and Obama. And at the very end of the CNN clip or whatever news outlet it was, they say Hillary Clinton is pushing for an all mail-in ballot primary down in Florida and Barack Obama is against it. And I was like, oh, there it is, you know, seating that back in 2008. But when you fast forward, Dr. Piquette to 2020 and you look at states like

Wisconsin, where you had Michael Spitzer Rubinstein at the National Vote at Home Institute, he was negotiating with the clerks there in order to get access in real time to the voter roles and get WISVote updates every single day, have updates to the API so he would know who votes. When you look at Michigan, the MCELA, Jen McCurnin, got money from C-E-I-R. That was Jocelyn Benson's organization, and they got access to real-time. Now, they do it under the guise of, we want to make sure we're not sending text messages to people and bothering them. But in reality, and I'm not saying this is what necessarily would happen, but there's a lot of evidence to suggest it is. In reality, at the end of the night, at the end of election night,

you already know who's voted because they've already checked in. Their votes already been processed. They're checked off, whatever the case might be. And then you have, you know, what Gateway Pundit uncovered in Michigan, where the van is pulling up and dropping off 64 boxes of ballots and they get slid under tables and scanned in later. Well, we know that the voter rolls are on these machines. We found that out in Michigan through some of the work that was done in the Bailey case. I would imagine that those ballots can be assigned voters as they're being run through. The whole process can take place on the back end of the election. So you don't even have to have a physical mail-in ballot that you actually send in.

And there's all over. Maricopa County with Runbeck right there. You've got millions of ballots that are, well, hundreds of thousands of ballots that have no chain of custody. In Georgia, they ordered over. 800,000 mail-in ballots that we don't know where the hell they went. They could have been filled out and used on the back end of the election. And so you don't even have to mail out the mail-in ballot. You just created at the end of the election and added into the system.

Well, the thing is, I actually for a long time had assumed that this was an all-digital form of fraud where they didn't require any paper at all, where it's handy if you have it, but it's not necessary because you can adjust the tabulator on one side and you can adjust the registrations on the other side. However, I am kind of changing my opinion on that. I think that that may happen when they're desperate, but if they can, they prefer to print the ballots because then they actually have something that they can use to defend the count, right?

Right. And in Fulton County, just to piggyback off what Brian was saying about the other states, wasn't it, Brian, that they were 16,000, they had 16,000, there were short 16,000 ballots in the recount in December of 2020? or they had 16,000 too many. So from machine count to hand count, they were short about 7,000 on the absentee ballots alone. They were short about 7,600.

And then going from the hand count to the final machine count, they were short about 17,000. Right. So Dr. Piquette, to your point, in that jurisdiction, got desperate, had to do something because it's election night. We have to stop counting. we have to fix this problem. And then we maybe weren't able to backfill it all the way with the paper,

but ended up 17,000 ballots short. Yeah, well, when I looked at the election on a state-by-state level, and I haven't checked all the states, I looked at, I think I looked at all of the swing states in quite a few other states that I just happened to fortuitously get access to. It seemed to me that whether they use physical ballots or not or the specific type of ballot fraud that they decided to use, had to do with how deeply embedded their fraud infrastructure was

to the normal municipal election infrastructure. So some places seem much more resistant than others. So New York, for instance, has the majority of all the clones in New York are in New York City, which all by itself tells me, demographically they may not be a blue city, which means it may not be a blue state, okay? Although I think to be a little bit more realistic, I think it's just that we're not an overwhelmingly blue state. I think it's more like we're slightly blue.

It's like we're 52 or 54%, something like that, not 80%, like they say. But other places like Texas were super resistant. So there are pockets where they just couldn't get their way in at all. And they were basically clean. And other places that were really dirty. Same thing goes for Ohio is like that. but then you have places like Wisconsin, Georgia, Arizona, they're horrible. In fact, if I had to rank these in terms of the worst fraud, it would be New York and Wisconsin

would be tied for first place. And Arizona and Georgia would be tied for second place. In Pennsylvania, I really want to stick in there somewhere, but I can't because my methods, you know, the kinds of things I'm looking for aren't what they did. It's obvious they did fraud. that whole business with Jesse, what's his name with the mail truck that went missing, that tells me they did a lot of fraud all on its own. I did find an algorithm in Pennsylvania. It's one of the less interesting ones, and I did find clones there, but I think that story is

a better one as far as showing fraud in Pennsylvania. But the reason I think is that Pennsylvania is a Republican state. And I think that they couldn't get access to the kind of digital tools that they had access to in places like Minnesota and Wisconsin and New York, which were basically thoroughly compromised. So they were forced to do something crazy. And I think they were planning on letting Trump win Pennsylvania, but because they expected to win Florida because they did have some cheap tools down there. But when they saw that Trump had won Florida, they were like, oh, no, we've got to cover our

tracks right now and we've got like eight hours to do it in. And I think that's the same thing that happened in Georgia and Arizona. So Georgia, Arizona, Wisconsin, in my opinion, that was them coming up with a plan at the last minute because the plan they had didn't work. And that's why it was so obvious in those places. Michigan, too, actually, now that I think of it. Let's pause right here and we'll pivot away from New York and start getting into some of the other states. We do have to talk about our great company soft disclosure. And to do so, let's bring in the one and only Zach Payne, which I think Dr. Piquette, you have been on Zach Payne's show, Red Pill 78.

This is a side of Zach Payne you've never seen before. Today we remember those who gave everything. And memory is never still. No, Tiji. We can't stop for sense. And we have to deliver all of these soft disclosure gift cards. The go by Zach Kay. The lotion detective.

Fighting over the beer breath. Okay, I'm going to have to tell him I saw that. No, he's very, he's very, proud of it. It is actually pretty cool. Have you seen my videos that I've been doing lately on the election? No, no. Okay.

Yeah, I did a few music videos, basically, based on my research findings, or at least some of them. And I've also brought some dreams to life, which are kind of, it's kind of a fun thing to do with AI. So anyway, yeah, that was pretty cool to see him as a great big, muscular, heavy metal, hard rock type of a guy swinging his hair around like that. He is the lotion detector and soft disclosure.com is where you can get the lotion or the tallow sticks or the lip bomb, the beard oil, the beard brush, the, uh, gwashaw, all, all the things. Softdisclosure.com promo code. Promo code. What is that promo code? Memorial 15, yeah. Memorial 15 is the promo code. And I, I, every time we drop a new soft disclosure ad, we are told it is the best soft disclosure ad. I think that might. actually be the best one though. Caleb said that he thought it was the best one. And I love the cameo of Asian Alpha in the front row of the concert. Oh, Green Star is an absolute genius. And

you never know. You never know what's coming next with soft disclosure except nutrition for your skin and supporting American small businesses. That's that's the soft. That's what we do with soft disclosure. So get yourself some lotion and use code memorial 15 softdisclosure.com. All right. So Dr. Piquette, let's get into some of your other. What would you say, you know, we could talk about Bear County. I know you've done a lot of work down in Bear County in the primary that they just had down there. What would you say is the one that maybe is the least talked about that you've, in terms of the interview circuit that you've done, that you would like to get into. Well, not so much the least talked about place, but least talked about issue.

Now, I've looked at, what is it, maybe 13, 14 states now at this point. And I find the same type of problems pretty much everywhere. You know, some of them are a little better than others or even a lot better. Oklahoma was actually pretty good compared to other places. Kansas was a lot better also. But it doesn't mean they were without problems. I mean, my Fortune 500 company friend would have had his outfit shut down if his records look like Kansas or Oklahoma. Okay. But compared to all the other states, you know, they actually look pretty clean in comparison. And I didn't see any algorithms in their ID numbers.

But the main thing I would say is that I'm looking at an election infrastructure that's not fit for use. So if you build a rocking chair and it won't rock, then you don't have a rocking chair. Okay, you have to basically throw it away and start over, okay? And that's what we have. We have an election infrastructure that doesn't work and can't be trusted. The whole point of having the system is so that we can trust it, right? That's what all the laws are for is it so we can trust this system. And the fact is, not only do a lot of people not trust it, they don't trust it for really excellent reasons.

You know, there's that old thing, you know, with people who are. on trial for murder. You have to convict, what is it? You can't have any reasonable doubt about whether they're guilty, right? This is way beyond having reasonable doubt. This is like super reasonable. It's what you should be doing is doubting what we're getting as results. And the reason is there are just too many holes in the system. It's just really broken. My opinion, it's not something that's fixable. I think it's something you basically have to throw the whole thing out and start over. And that's something people hate to hear me say, but that's my feeling about it. I think the whole thing is garbage, yes?

Oh, yeah, no, we totally agree with you on that. You're not going to offend us about that. But I want to ask the question. I saw you like three days ago. I think you wrote a substack post kind of that deals with the question I'm about to ask you because it's the question we always get asked whenever we point out that elections are effectively fake because the system is designed to defraud and you can't audit it. You can't check it, fake voters, fake bout, fake counts.

But Dr. Piquette, is there any evidence that all those holes were exploited and that, you know, there was, the outcome was overturned, the bad people voted, etc. Or the fake people voted, et cetera. That's actually a really hard question to answer. And there's a really good reason for that. It's because it's designed to make that question hard to answer. So like the thing I was telling you, yeah, the thing I was saying earlier with the, the voter history is never agreeing with the number of ballots they count, right? And so, you know,

they don't agree. I guess we better not use those as the way to reconcile our ballot count, right? So now we're just going to look at the ballot count and basically let it validate itself, right? Kind of circular there. They are making it impossible to know if what you just suggested it has occurred. Okay, you can't know because those ballots are separated from the voters. And that's the thing is that do they come from qualified voters or not? You don't know. You know that there are unqualified voters on the rolls. That, you know, for sure.

Okay. And we know that there's a lot of them. Okay. We know that ballots have been issued in the names of those fake voters. Okay. We don't know how many because they keep playing with the numbers all over the place. If the voter history is different from, you know, today and next week and the week after for elections that took place five years ago, I can't, I have no solid ground to stand on.

I can't say this one was accurate because the next one's different and the one before it was different as well. So it makes it impossible for anyone to know. In fact, the way I would say it, I would say this differently. Instead of saying that guy should have won instead of that guy because of fraud, I would say you don't know which one won and you can never know which one won. And I think that's a much, much bigger problem. As far as I'm concerned, we have a whole bunch of people who might or might, might, not have actually won their elections, but who are nevertheless sitting in office. Now, the stuff I'm seeing all started right after HAVA was implemented, so Help America Vote Act.

You know, when I've done some charts on this, if you've read my substack, you know this, but you have the NVRA, which is the National Voter Rights Act, and then you have HAVA. So the first one came in 1992, and the other was 10 years later in 2002, right? NBRA is known as the Motor Voter Act. Okay. Now, when I look at the number of clones per year, right? So how many registrations per year were clones before NBRA? It's effectively zero. It's like zero to 10. You know, some years are zero, some years or two, maybe a year to it's 10 and it's back to zero, something like that. As soon as you have the Motor Voter Act comes into play, all of a sudden it's like 1% of all registrations are clones. Okay. And that's not cumulative. That's on an every year basis, right? you're just checking the sample that registered that year. But when HAVA gets introduced, it more than doubles. Okay, now all of a sudden it's like 3.5, 3.6, 3.8, and it never goes down.

It just keeps on going up with spikes in all the presidential election years, right? So there was New York, last time I looked, I think it was around 17% of all new registrations are illegal clone registrations. And there was a county in Ohio. I forget the name of it, but it was 35% or 34% of all registrations for a recent year. It was like 2024 were all clones. And this, as far as I'm concerned, is directly linked to HABA. So whether HAVA was designed to do that or not, it certainly has been exploited in order to do this.

But as far as whether all these things have been exploited, some of them certainly have been, but being able to link them together in a chain that leads you to a specific fake ballot that has a vote for a specific person, that can't be done. That's just possible. Was it Defiance County, Ohio by chance? No. It was one of their big counties. That's a joke from the TV show scandal where they used Defiance County to steal a presidential election. I was going to say, defiance didn't even sound like a county name from Ohio.

Yeah, it's from the show's scandal where they. They've got to fill the election. It was, okay, so there's Dane County. There's Fulton, no, Montgomery, Lucas, Franklin, and it's the other one that's big. Mahoney. Cuyahoga. Yeah, I think it was Cuyahoga. That's it.

Oh, somebody in the chat said Mahoning. That's where I was going. But Cahogne, that works. But anyway, the thing is, though, that when I look at the stuff I found so far, the finding that bothers me the most is common to Bear County and Tuella County, Utah. And that one really scares me because they found a way to basically create ballots without touching the voter roll system at all. So what that means is that the government computers would have no trace that this had happened. So the way, and by the way, I'm talking about

something that is based on inference, based on what I know of the systems. It would take confirmation, which would mean somebody would have to go in and take hold of the software and see what's on it to be absolutely sure, just for various reasons. I want to be clear about that. But here's what it is. So in Bear County, Texas, which is spelled B-E-X-A-R, so the X is silent, just like the X in Mexico, right? And I actually have a feeling it's really pronounced Bayar, or actually I can't do that. Well, anyway, Bear County. So a candidate there, Weston Martinez, got the check-in list for the Republican primaries

for February 18th and 17th of the early voting check-in, right? And the only reason you can get this is because Texas just passed a law, I think it was last year, that they had to provide this check-in list every day, right? Now, what is a check-in list? A check-in list is what is created when the person at the polling station checks you in the vote, right?

Right. So if you two guys walk into the polling station and present yourselves as Brian at CanCon and Ash in America, they're going to check you off. And by doing that, they just push a button and that is your ballot authorization. So depending on what kind of a system they're using, they either hand you a ballot at that point or they give you a receipt that you can take to the computer that gives you permission to cast a ballot on their touch screen. Okay, or there's a third permutation to this. But basically, when you check in, you are given a ballot. That's really what it comes down to. Okay, now you could run outside and set it on fire if you wanted to, but that's not typical. So if your name appears in the check-in list, it generally means you voted.

Okay. So I got this list from a guy named Dr. Walter Doherty, who said, Andrew, this looks like an algorithm to me. how'd you like to take a crack at it, right? And so I took a look at it and reverse engineered. I don't know if I got all the way through, but pretty close, if not all the way. And I figured out how they were doing everything. And so what they did was on the 18th, they waited until all the voters had checked in, meaning they voted. So they now have a genuine check-in list, right? And at that point, somebody ran software. And I don't like to call it an algorithm because in this case, whoever did it had to make choices. So it's like you have an option. How many bad records do you want?

How many you want as a base number to take from? How many? There are a bunch of logical steps you had to go through. So I think it's more complex than just saying it's an algorithm. But they had to answer these questions basically. It's like when you get a, when you customize a computer at the computer store. It's like you're not this hard drive, that one or the other one. So you have to pick what it is that you want. So once they did that, it went ahead and processed the genuine records list and created a fake records list. Okay. Now, the reason I know it required the genuine records list is because it's based on the alphabetized grouping of names that you would only have after everyone had checked in. Okay. So it's the first 735 names in alphabetical order.

And then from that, they created 4,110 fake check-ins. Now, the thing is, I'm asking myself, why would anyone do this? This is very, very complicated to do. And it was injected after the polls had closed for the day, right? And then that list had to be sent because Weston Martinez had made the request. So he got it within hours of it's being made. And within another 24 hours, depending on who you believe, it was already erased. Okay. So he just got in there in that tiny little window when that data was available. So what the check-in record means is that they gave ballots to those people, right? So, but now you have two lists. You've got your genuine list and then you've got your fake list.

So you've got your 4,110 real voters who've now been displaced. They've been erased and replaced by these fake ones. So that indicates to me 8,220 ballots, not 4,110 were made, right? Actually, plus six because they deleted six that didn't fit the math of the algorithm. And then after they produced these ballots, they went ahead. and restore the original record, which erased their tracks, they thought, except they didn't know that somebody gave this file out to someone in the meantime. So the thing is, I don't see why you would do that unless you wanted physical ballots, because that's what the check and record is for. It's to,

its whole purpose is to say, give this guy a ballot. Okay. So what that's telling me is that after hours, after 6 p.m. or whenever their polls closed on that day, someone generated over 4,000, ballots and where they went, I don't know, how they printed them. I don't know, but I feel very strongly that something like that had to have happened. I can picture a few different ways it would work. So the first and most obvious one is they'd run it through the tabulator, but I don't think they would do that. Now, there is an argument that they could have anyway, and the reason is because at the end of the day, before that software was run, they do reconcile the tabulator count with the check-in count and they will match right and then you run the software that gives you another

4,110 votes and they're not going to check that because they've already certified it you see what I'm saying so that's one way to do it but I think a more likely way is that they would have distributed those ballots to a number of different polling stations and just slip them in in small numbers like 10 or 15 at each of like 100 different stations and just set them on top of the pile of mail and ballots there'd be no way to separate them and they just count them and at the end of the day they'd say well we're a little over that's not such a bad problem and guess what john coran won by how many votes it was 4,08 and these guys had 4,110 extra ballots so they're over by 108 it's very very close but the point is is that that's problematic so then i have to ask myself so how did this happen

where did the software come from because as i understand it the poll pads really are you just receiving information, right? They're not running software. Can I just pause you? Because what you described, there was an anecdotal. This is in Indiana. And, you know, got a call from a voter who went and on the pole pad. It was no ink pole pads that were being used.

And swiped the ID, like her driver's license. You know, they scanned it or whatever. Yeah. Just giving a ballot. The ballot has the correct address, wrong name, wrong voter ID. So I think that the folks that looked into that at the time, and this was a while ago, so I'm going from memory, but the folks that looked into it were theorizing that there was a second database,

that the login information needs that ID card swipe in some way or another, or maybe it doesn't, right? But the address was the same. So I think it's tied at least in some way. but that was that was really weird because it was the identity was different but the address was the thing is that yeah well they they uh let me get to toella county because it's it's related um okay so i was looking for how did that data get into that system right so first i have to trace back the the file i got so it got to me from walter doherty and he got it from a guy named laurie galiger

who got it from weston martinez who's a candidate and he got it from the republican precinct chair who gave it to him and she got it from the county itself, right? The Board of Elections there in Bear County. And they've effectively admitted that it is their file because they excused the problems he complained about as a glitch. So that, as far as I'm concerned, is an admission that it's really from them. So now I know where it comes from, but where did they get it, right? And it turns out they make a request of what's called the E-Pulse server, which is the

like a cloud-based server that gives data to the pole pads. And this is no ink also, okay? And then it's E-Pulse that writes it out for them, not the state voter roll records, okay? They're getting this information from E-Pulse. What's E-Pulse? It's a cloud-based server that runs on Amazon's AWS platform. So it's going on is that the way it works is that the state registration base

gets downloaded to E-Pulse, which is this server, okay, and that gets locked in on a certain date, okay? And then what happens is the poll pad checks all the identities as they come in against that copy of the database. And if they've already voted, they get a no signal, they can't get a ballot, right? That's basically how it works. And that database isn't supposed to change at all. And it never goes back to the original database. Okay, so the check-in records go to E-Pulse, and then the check-in information goes back based on the ID number. They don't send the whole database back. They don't overwrite the state database. At least it's not supposed to do that, right? So what I'm looking at is basically a closed loop between the pole pad and the E-Pulse system. Okay. And I'm thinking,

E-Pulse serves 29 different states. So this is not a Bex, a Bair County problem. It's not a Texas problem. It's a 29 state problem. If I've got software that's fabricating records on a third-party server that serves multiple states, I have to assume it's doing the same thing on all those other states, right? However, when I looked into it, I found Texas was the only state in the entire country that had a law requiring those early check-in records to be made available. And that was a new law. They just passed it last year.

So the file I got was basically the first opportunity to test that law. And it was in a primary, right? So I was thinking there's no chance I'm going to get anything else like this from any other county anywhere in the country because Texas is the only place it can happen. And then a couple months later, another candidate got in touch with me. And I don't think he wants his name used, so I'm not going to. But he's from a place called Tuella County in Utah. And in his case, he showed me the voter registration records, not the check-in records. And the funny thing is they had the same algorithm as or the same software.

was used there that was used in bear county now it was applied to different fields but it did all of the same things it all the math was basically the same slightly different inputs but it's all the same structure and so i was thinking all right so we've got essentially the same thing going on in two different places um how on earth is this going to happen independently it's not going to they have something in common right what do they have in common knowing um now they might have something else in common but at the moment that's the only thing I know of that is a common factor with those two places. So now as far as I'm concerned we've got something that shouldn't be happening that's creating illegal records. It's definitely created to create fake records.

I mean there's no way around that because it requires genuine records as the first step. Okay, so when you're taking genuine records and you're writing in information to change them, By definition, you're altering government records and you're falsifying them. That's a crime right there. So as far as I'm concerned, unless I am really misunderstanding something, that software was designed to commit crime and specifically election fraud. Now, the fact that I don't know exactly how they're managing to get something out of it doesn't really matter because falsifying government records is a crime in itself.

Putting malicious software on a government server is a crime in itself, allowing it to be used, designing it. All of those are crimes. on their own. So when I hear people talking about, can you link that registration to this bad vote? It's frustrating to me because I'm like, you can stick all these guys in jail right now without having to go that far. And by the way, they've designed it so you can't go that far anyway. So, you know, just give up on that. It's kind of like requiring that, let's say you've got bank robbers dead to rights that they robbed a bank, but until you can figure out exactly how

much money they stole, you can't arrest them. It's ridiculous. You know, if they buy a hot dog on the way home, with the stolen money, you're not going to be able to put them in jail, even though everybody knows they committed the crime, right? It's worse than that. It's worse than that because in this case, the bankers are saying we weren't robbed. Yeah. The bankers are literally telling you we weren't robbed. You're a conspiracy theorist.

We don't have money here, but we weren't robbed. Well, you know, I've talked to a couple politicians on this subject. So in New York and other states, one of these guys, I know for sure doesn't want me to use his name, but he was in the news all over the place a little while. ago. And I'm going to tell you, there's a couple of reasons for this. So generally speaking, when politicians hear about my research, they get very excited. They're like, I can use this against my opponent. Okay. So I've spoken with Democrat and Republican candidates, but more Republicans and Democrats. But the second they realize that what I'm talking about affects the

entire infrastructure, meaning them also, and it can be used against them. So if they complain about the Democrat, for instance, benefiting from this. Democrat can sling that same accusation against them. And that's because we don't know who actually won any of these elections, because we can't trust the election infrastructure. So as soon as they figure that out, they're like, I'm not interested. I don't want to touch this. But this other guy, he, I actually, it feels kind of strongly that he did win his election, even though supposedly he lost. But the way he put it, he was like, look, I'm getting death threats, not because I'm challenging. the results, but because other people on my behalf are challenging the results. And so my family

is being put in danger and I'm old and I'm retired. You know, I'd be willing to, you know, serve in this particular office, but I don't want to have, you know, all these people outside of myself who, you know, taking this risk. So I'm not going to challenge this. So that was his opinion on that. In fact, actually, just recently, I was asked to look at the voter rolls for a certain state by a candidate and he was willing to pay to you know the exorbitant fee they were they were going to charge for the role so I could have it but the thing is is that to get them to me would require me signing documents that I'm not willing to sign because as far as I'm concerned I don't know what the future is going to hold I don't know what I might want to say to someone on

purpose and what I might say accidentally to someone else and I don't want to get into any kind of trouble for that so I'm not going to do that and I it may it may made me and I don't really have to because I've got enough work to do without taking on extra work, right? And it seems to me there's got to be a lot of people in the same situation that and this makes it very difficult to investigate these types of crimes. And frankly, you know, this is going to be like when Trump went ahead and he cleaned out that reflecting pool in the Lincoln Memorial. I don't know if you guys, you guys probably saw this where he was on TV and he was being interviewed and some gal was asking him. So how can you go and do this frivolous thing while we've got the war in Iran? And he said, are you kidding?

There's 12 tons of sewage in this thing. Would you rather I leave it there? It's just disgusting. Somebody has to clean it. We want America to be beautiful. We want Washington, D.C. to be beautiful. And to do that, we have to take care of this stuff. So, and that's true.

But it does mean you have to get yourself dirty to get there. And the elections, as far as I'm concerned, are so third. compromised. It's going to take, what does that guy's name? Mike something who has the TV show, dirty jobs? Oh, Mike Ro. Mike Ro. Yeah, that guy's fantastic. You need someone like that who is willing to get his arms up to their armpits in the sludge to get this thing fixed. Yeah, me, you're basically saying that U.S. elections are like the sewage in the reflecting pool, and I think that we totally agree. Yeah. Me and Ash, dude, we get our, we get our elbows dirty every Tuesday at 9 p.m. Eastern. And all throughout the week because all shows are why we vote now.

Everybody, please hit the like button and drop a comment in the chat. If you're watching on Rumble, it helps us out with the unique chatters metric. But definitely smash the like button wherever you're watching. So Dr. Piquette, before we move on, because I have a couple more questions. But just real quick, and you had mentioned something about when you were talking about Texas. And there was a story that I broke back in 2022 about the poll pads in Dallas County. Did you see that story about the poll. If you're talking about how they were in a closed room and voters were being added to them while nobody was looking and so on.

And then they said that that was just because they're updating the poll pads. I can kind of buy that in isolation, but combined with all this other stuff, it, and look, I'm not telling you it's totally plausible. I'm just saying if I was in the mood to be generous to them, I could maybe say, okay, they got updated at night. but it's telling me that you're going two ways you've got the e-pulse system writing to your pole pads and back and forth and it's outside of the normal county system or the state system and that part I really don't like and I also don't like the fact that the people there don't know what's going on because that means they've given over their responsibility for it's like somebody hires you to babysit their kid and then you grab some stranger off the street and say you know why don't you do it I'm

going to sublet this babysitting job to you and I'm going to go to the moon movies with my girlfriend. At that point, in your mind, you've absolved yourself with responsibility for anything that happens to the kid because you found a replacement, even if that person's a depraved drug dealer and, you know, maniac of some kind. So that's what our counties and our states have done by hiring these third-party organizations, is they've abrogated their responsibilities. And the thing is, they shouldn't be able to transfer that authority. In fact, I don't think they can legally. But that's what they've done. You know, that's the whole point of taking the oath of office, is you're saying, I'm responsible, right?

But then when you hire somebody else and they don't let you see what they're doing, now all of a sudden they're responsible and anything they do, you actually should get in trouble for it, because it's as if you did it. Because you're the one who signed on the dotted line. You're the one who took the oath of office, not the other guy. So I'm sorry, I took this in a different direction, but that really bothers me when I think about that. Go ahead.

So real quick to that, when that story came out, I was the one that broke that story back in 2022 in Dallas County. And the video that was given to me, the one that you see of incrementing, I was, you know, I published that on both My Rumble and for the Gateway Pundit. And I interviewed the poll manager that was working there that night. And those were not the numbers. It was not the system updating. Those numbers were not in the precinct.

They were not indicative of the number of voters that came through that particular precinct. But they never got. answers. They followed up. And then it happened again a year later in another election. The same exact precinct, the same exact thing happened where 15 minutes before the poll closed. And again, I'm not very, I'm not a tech savvy person, but you and I have some mutual friends or mutual acquaintances that, you know, at the time that this was happening, I just threw out the idea, hey, this is one of the rare times in election is after daylight savings time. Is there any possibility that these machines were going to increment 45 minutes after the polls closed,

and they were done, you know, what do they call it, reconciling the poles with the machines and everything else. And then when they're on standby mode, you know, place in their boxes, they go off on their own. And that was actually an idea that was thrown around. I don't know if it ever went anywhere. But yeah, that was not something that was normal. It's not like it was just, you know, catching up with the day's activities. See, here's the benefit of letting the other guy finished what he's saying for talking thank you that was new information to me at least some of that was i can say it's it's it's a public i'd be interested i mean i only know about this because uh dr doherty um sent me a link to it and i read about it but i read the newspaper version and those guys

almost always get this stuff wrong especially when they're to the idea of election fraud they came out and they fact check me and i'm i'm i'm pissing vinegar man you fact check me i'll come right back at you I don't care. I will publish a whole other article destroying your fact check every single time. You know, I talk about New York a lot. And it's on my mind right now because now that I've discovered how to use X for the first time, I've decided I'm going to publish all the stuff that should have gotten attention before, but didn't. And since New York came first, I'm doing it first. But I'm going to go through all the other states also, right? But one of the things that happened there when I was working in New York was Marley and some of the other people in NYCA kept setting

me up with various officials, you know, sheriffs and district attorneys. We gave a talk to the legislature. We sat down with the state police, their special investigations unit, which is the equivalent of internal affairs, but for the whole state, and county commissioners and so on. And one of the things that happened was, well, we had one guy who looked at what I had found and he just basically went white like he'd seen a ghost when I showed him the spiral algorithm because he said, look, I'm a programmer. Before I did this, I was a programmer. And none of the other commissioners are going to know what this means, but I can tell you exactly what this means and it's really, really bad. And the same thing goes for some of the other things you found. But apart from him, the most common thing these guys did was.

was deflect. And what I did a couple times just because it annoyed me so much was I'd see, like for instance, one guy, he was a sheriff who happened to be married to, by the way, the lady who had been selling Dominion software to the county. And she had been the elections administrator there, right? So I gave my presentation, and he seemed like a perfectly decent, honorable, honest guy. And then he took it to their county board of elections and said, so is any of the stuff this guy saying true? And the lady, gave him an answer in an email, right? Basically, it was a one paragraph thing that, you know, his hand-waving is what it was. And then he sent that back to Marley, who sent it to me, and I'm looking

at it, and I'm thinking, this is complete baloney. And I've made this huge answer that, you know, ticked off all the boxes everywhere they were wrong and all the proof of it. And I gave the exact records that proved that everything she said was completely false. And so either she didn't look and just made this stuff up on the top of her head or she's outright line. I believe it's more likely that she was just making it up because she figured it would do as an answer. She doesn't have to do any research. But I spent hours on that thing. And then one of the other people who was working with the group, who is a candidate herself, said, no, no, no, you can't do that. We need that county for my campaign. You don't want to make the people who are running the election mad at me by calling them out

so vigorously on all of their faults. And that attitude really pervaded those conversations. Yes, go ahead. It's why we can't have real elections. That attitude is what we we cannot have real elections until we're honest about how fake they are. But every two years and, you know, every year really if we consider them the local elections and coordinated elections and things. But every two years, we go through this ritual where people, it happens November, like middle of November, every single year before going into the even numbered year. So odd number years, November.

all of a sudden people turn their brains off and they put their jerseys on and they join campaigns and we can't talk about election fraud and we can't dig into any of these processes and we certainly can't change anything because you're going to make us lose the midterms. What are we going to do? We're going to lose the midterms

if we actually address this underlying issue and it is this theater that we participate in over and over again and I'm so sick of it and you just described the attitude perfectly. Oh, thanks. Yeah, it's not that much different from a gambler. It's like he's lost pretty much everything,

and he realizes he's going to be in debtor's prison unless he makes another bet. He's even deeper in the hole. And that's where we're at with these elections. And, you know, one of the things I really love about this young man, Nick Shirley, is that he's doing the job that all these regulatory agencies should have been doing and exposing what sounds like trillions of dollars

or the fraud now. And that's all enabled by the election fraud that we're seeing. And it's something I never realized and just call me very naive and not very aware of things. But until recently was how stealing an election is like stealing everything. It steals your money. It steals your stuff. It steals your soul. And it steals your country.

It steals everything all at once. It's like there's nothing left when you steal an election. We do not. give our consent, doctor. We cannot, if elections are stolen, then they do not legitimately have our consent to be governed at all. Mm-hmm. And that is everything. The thing about that is it's really tough because somebody has to make the first move, right?

So, you know, it's like I remember when I was a kid, if you ever had to deal with a bully who's trying to steal your lunch money or something, at some point, you know, they're going to come up to you and say, give me your money and you're going to have to say, I'm sorry, no, you're not going to get my money this time. That's their way of making it seem voluntary, right? But until somebody's willing to basically do that, and I think President Trump is the person who's doing it right now and Elon Musk as well, you're not going to get anywhere. You're just going to keep on paying the protection. And the protection in this particular case is,

you know, this implied threat that if you do anything, you're going to be hurt, okay? And it's not actually that implied. I mean, if you look at Waco and Ruby Ridge and then J6, of course, you've got incidents that people can point to where someone went against the local government and really got hurt hard because of that. Neil Gorsuch wrote a book called Overruled the Human Toll of Too Much Law,

which is full of stories of people who dared to question or challenge or even just accidentally three felonies a day, right, where the system was weaponized and used together. them. Thankfully, with some of these decisions that are coming down, Loper Bright and others, the ability to weaponize the government in that way is maybe harder now. But that's certainly the way that it's been. We are just about out of time. Brian, I know you said you had a question. Yeah, I did real quick. And Dr. Piquette, we would love to get you back on because I think the conversation would go more than an hour and a half. And that's what we're kind of limited to. But

And when we get you back on, we'll unpack more of the work that you've done and the research you've done. But from what you've seen so far with the voter rolls and fake people and all this stuff, how much of an impact would the Save America Act have on this type of problem? I haven't read all of the details, but what I've seen of it, it would help a lot. I mean, for instance, by getting rid of the mail-in ballots. But ultimately, I think, as long as any part of the existing infrastructure remains, you've got a problem. It's basically like cancer.

I look at our election infrastructure is a gigantic cancerous tumor. If you let any part of it alone, you leave like a little tiny branch of it way off in Milwaukee somewhere, it can spread and grow back to the original size. So as far as I'm concerned, the Save America Act is something that can have a temporary beneficial effect, but it needs to be augmented by more. And we can talk about that later. But I would say that it has to pass. It is very, very important that it passes. Dr. Piquette, where can people follow you online first, your socials as well as your substack?

Well, on X, I'm at Zark files, Z-A-R-K files. and my substack is zarkfiles. com. And that's pretty much it. I'm only on X because of Elon Musk. And substack is just my way of getting this stuff out there because as far as I'm concerned, this information belongs to everybody.

And I don't like keeping it to myself. But please feel free to sign up to either one of them. I could use more subscribers in both places. All right. Thank you so much. Great conversation. Oh, wait a minute. My Kickstarter campaign is over in like 36 hours.

I made a, people keep on asking me to simplify my message, you know, simplify my research. So I made this card game called Dr. Zark's election game, and it's on Kickstarter. So if you look up Dr. Zark on Kickstarter, you'll see this pack of cards you can get if you back the project. But the idea is this is a way that you can play this game and learn what it's like to think like someone who's committing election fraud. And it's nonpartisan so you can do it with your Democrat family members. And I think you can do it without having too many arguments because of the way I did it. It's generally made to be very funny. So if you guys want to back that, please do.

You've got 36 hours to go. What's that link? Because I saw you talking about that on another show and I was like, I got to get that deck. I got to get that. Well, if you go to Kickstarter.com and then just look up my name, Dr. Zark, you'll find it. It's just called the election game. Okay. All right.

Dr. Piquette, thank you so much. And we'll get you back on here soon, hopefully. Thank you. Great. Okay. You're welcome. Have a good night.

You too. All right. We got two rants. Let's hit those real quick. As Bucon, interesting anagram for election results. When you rearrange the letter, lies. Let's recount. Love it.

Thank you for the rant. Appreciate that. Profit 60, I feel like an owe you to some back pay. Much appreciated it. Thank you so much. We definitely appreciate it. We do. We absolutely do.

So we're going to be in Gart next month. Yes, we are. We're going to be in Deadwood, South Dakota. It's going to be amazing. Do you want to tell everybody about it? June 25th through the 28th. We're headed back to Deadwoods for the 12th stop on the Great American Restaurant. tour, whether you're attending in person or virtually, a GART veteran or a Gart Virgin,

there's something for everyone. Early Bird prices for virtual tickets are available through May 15th, and merch packages are now also available both for in-person and virtual ticket holders. Get your Gart 12 tickets today at Badlandsmedia.tv slash events. You might get to see the girls doing some awful karaoke because they're going to lose. It's going to be excellent karaoke. Thank you very much. They're going to lose again.

And we're going to make them do humiliating karaoke. No, not possible. Christie and my karaoke is delightful always. Jackie's too. Myron, last minute rant. Thanks, guys. Great show. Thank you.

Thank you. Oh, Phil Scarborough was here. He didn't cause any trouble the whole time. Wow. Wow. It was his touch. We're going to raid everybody over to DefCon. Zero.

It is starting right now. And we'll be back here next week. at 9 p.m. Eastern on Tuesday for the next episode of Why We Vote. But if you want to hear from Brian and I, we'll be back here tomorrow at 10 a.m. Eastern time for Badlands Daily. All right. And let's let's let's let's let's get some Zach pill, a Zach pilled, some red pill again is our outro. We'll see you guys later. Thank you all so much. Bye guys. Today we remember those who gave everything.

And memory is never still. No, Chi G. We can't stop your snack. have to deliver all of the soft disclosure gift card. He goes by Zach Kaye. The lotion detector. Fighting over the beer breath. Thanks.