The original research in this video is made possible by generous contributions from supporters of the Dr.SHIVA Truth Freedom Health® movement. Please contribute so we may continue to bring you such original research, valuable education, and innovative solutions.
Key Points
- Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai, MIT PhD – Inventor of Email, Systems Scientist, engineer, educator – gives a presentation to Nevada Hearing on Election Systems Integrity.
- Dr. Shiva is launching the Election Systems Integrity Institute.
- It is important to have clear and transparent Standard Operating Procedures for elections. Such procedures do not currently exist; election processes are kept “squishy.”
- Examining anomalies are an important part of strengthening system processes.
- Multiple interesting anomalies discovered by ESII in Clark County Nevada which warrant further research and investigation.
SUMMARY KEYWORDS
people, ballot, called, election, real, maricopa, adjudicated, vote, voter, report, systems, precinct, issues, understand, fraud, trump, adjudication, provisional ballots, election integrity, clark county, early voting
Dr.SHIVA Ayyadurai: And so we’re in Reno, Nevada, right? And we’re gonna really talk about Election Integrity.
Host: Exactly. You got any data specific for Nevada that would be great.
Dr.SHIVA: Okay, good. So, to welcome everyone, what I wanted to do was I wanted to give everyone the agenda that I had put together. I wanted it to provide everyone a framework for looking at election integrity from what I call an Election Systems Integrity standpoint, the key word is going to be the word system.
I want to talk a little bit about that. We’re going to be shortly announcing the launch. And I can share with you a little bit of a preview such a big sneak preview, everything that’s going to get is the launch of our Election Systems Integrity Institute, which is going to be composed of some of the best minds in the world, to really take a non partisan Beyond Left & Right approach to really address fair and transparent elections.
I want to talk about that. And then I want to talk about philosophically what the approach is to look at Election Systems Integrity, if we really want to address it versus today, on the one side of the establishment, Republicans and Democrats want to deny there any issues with election systems, they want to just move along, nothing to see here. And then on the other side, you have two events taking place, some people are grifting, off Election Integrity and making money off of it.
And then there’s some real substantive issues. So I want to talk about what those substantive issues are. And then I want to end with some data that our institute has put together that we did, you know, we were the first ones starting as early as September of 2020.
Need for Resolve
In my own election, not only am I someone who wants to resolve this, but I was also a victim of this when I ran for United States Senate, when the Massachusetts GOP colluded with the Democrats in Massachusetts. So, it’s not that it’s Republicans versus Democrats, Democrats versus Republicans. In our own institute, for example, we brought together people who are coming from both wings of the establishment – meaning or both wings of left & right.
Tim Canova, for example, was a Democrat who ran against Debbie Wasserman Schultz. And he was cheated. And it was a major case that happened.
In fact, the election supervisor in Broward County actually deleted all the ballots during the midst of the lawsuit. So it’s Democrat, do this to Democrats, Democrats do this Republicans, Republicans do this to other Republicans, as we witnessed here in Massachusetts, I want to lay that out. So we have no illusions.
But I think the reality is that there’s a significant opportunity to take a Systems Approach to understand this. As a part of that, what I wanted to do was just share with people. And you can go look at this on your own at some point. But I wanted to share with people that we have launched the Election Systems Integrity Institute, and it will be formally launched tomorrow. But just to give you an idea, it’s the Election Systems Integrity Institute. And we are going to be looking at a number of issues.
Where It all Began
This is the first beta launch of the website, in fact that the the front page of the site goes all the way back to Pompeii. And that’s one of the oldest coins that was discovered, where people voted back then, you know, using little coins like these. And the article written by an esteemed researcher really talks about there was even voter fraud back then.
So, that’s sort of the starting picture on the Election Systems Integrity website, when people have a chance, you may want to go check it out. But the other piece of it is there’s four areas that our Institute’s gonna focus on.
Voter Rolls
The first area is voter rolls, the reality is many of these voter rolls are not kept up to date. The second is the signature verification process, which as you know, in Maricopa County, I was asked to do the Ballot Image analysis. And we discovered the fact that the signature verification process itself is unverifiable.
And in our recommendations, we said that we really need to really understand what is the signature verification process? How does it run, how does it work, etc. So that’s another one of the important areas that the Institute will be focused on. And that came out of our work.
Ballot Images
As many of you saw in the Arizona analysis of the envelope images. The other area that’s going to be important is Ballot Images themselves. According to 52 USC 20701.
states and counties are supposed to preserve Ballot Images, particularly for federal elections. What we discovered in Massachusetts is with great hubris, the state election director Michelle Tassinari said she deleted the Ballot Images, and for that matter, they didn’t have to save them. When I expose this, in my own election is September of 2020.
On Twitter – four email interactions, exposing the fact that state election director is admitting they deleted the Ballot Images, I was thrown off Twitter, that led into a series of lawsuits where we exposed that my being thrown off Twitter was not done by Big Tech, it was a government of Massachusetts, which has a VIP relationship with Big Tech and to throw off all American citizens if you call out state election officials as being corrupt.
And we demonstrated that, and the last piece of our Institute’s area is Standardized Operating Procedures, the state election directors seem to believe from our analysis the Institute has come across that they are perhaps above the law that they don’t need to be transparent and, and share all this.
Again, this is Left & Right. So I want to let everyone know we have a number of wonderful people who are joining our team from all different disciplines. People from computer science, law, technology, education, and this is just a few of those people, Tim Canova over here, what is a law professor now, but he was a Democrat who got screwed over by Democrats. So I wanted to give you a preview of this, we’ll be formally announcing this more.
Systems Approach
But that is one of the central features that I wanted to share with you. But one of the key things is our approach is to take what we saw right here is an engineering Systems Approach. So I want to take a little bit of time and talk about that.
And what we mean by that – what I mean by an engineering Systems Approach, because I think that’ll help all of you to understand why we need to take this kind of Systems Approach, if we’re going to be serious. So let me explain what I mean, what a Systems Approach is. So if you look at the world today, particularly in the 21st century, everything that we have today are systems.
Okay. So what is a system? Well, a system is something that is not just one part or two parts, but it’s an interconnected set of parts. So for example, in the old days, you know, you had your car, okay, it was an invention that was created or a lightbulb, right.
The 20th century was the era of innovating individual component inventions, the 21st century is where these individual components are integrated into large scale systems. So the airplane of today is not just an airplane by itself, but it’s interconnected to satellites interconnected to all sorts of subsystems. Your doctor today is no longer your family doctor who’s down the road in your neighborhood, he’s interconnected into this expansive system called the health care system.
Well, a Systems Approach is a very different set of scientific methodologies that are needed to really understand these complex systems. Okay, voting systems, unfortunately, have become very complex systems. And by the way, the healthcare system has also become a complex system.
And it doesn’t mean complexity is better. And this is one of the things engineering systems reveals, it may be better just to count votes by hand counted paper ballots, versus creating all this complex machinery, it may be better for you to have a personal one on one relationship with your family doctor, he looked at you talk to you and knew about you and your family, versus today, you go to a doctor, the doctor doesn’t even look at you anymore. Okay? They’re looking at the typewriter or the computer for 15-20 minutes, at best, you get to have an interaction with them.
So the concept of engineering Systems Approach says, We need to understand the entire process. So when we look at the voting systems, from an engineering Systems Approach, we’re not just saying, Oh, this is the issue, or this is this one issue. It’s just mail in ballots, or it’s just, you know, voter fraud, you know, it’s we have to understand that the complexity of this process, right, and the complexity of this process goes like this.
Voting Process
Human beings called voters typically register to vote, they have some type of registration process, and then they go vote. Well, today the voting process, so you have this system, and human beings are coming in, people. And the output should be V the number of votes and P is, let’s say, 10 people show up to your precinct vote. How many ballots should be cast? Well, it should be 10 ballots cast, right? If P is 10, the number of people, the vote should be 10.
When, in my own election in Massachusetts, when I got involved in this, and by the way, on September 1, of 2020, I never thought that election fraud took place in this country. But what I noticed was the observable phenomenon that we had 3000 volunteers on the ground. We had, we raised you know, over a million dollars to close $2 million in a primary race.
And we had 10,000 You know, bumper stickers. 20,000 lawn signs, our opponent which the Massachusetts GOP had put up against us purely to make sure an outsider wouldn’t win in that primary – he had no lawn signs wasn’t even around. And that is when it’s September one, we knew we had won by a landslide.
But we had won by 10 points in the only hand counted paper County in Massachusetts where everything was predominantly hand counted. But in every other county we lose, quote, unquote, lose 60/40 60/40 60/40. So that led into me really wanting to understand the system using all my degrees at MIT, my engineering Systems Approach.
And what we discovered was that, yes, 1000 people can come into a precinct and you would expect 1000 votes. Well, guess what we’ve found out in nearly every county, we audited ourselves, where we got the participating voters list, and the ballots cast. There were always typically more voters than ballots cast, that led into my starting to explore how these electronic voting machines work, because in the county that I won in, which is all hand counted paper ballots, we won by 10 points in every other county, we lose 60/40 60/40, which are all electronic machines.
Well, when a ballot comes in that ballot, first of all, it’s converted to what’s called a Ballot Image. And in my recent meeting with the President, I had to explain this to him, he was unaware what a Ballot Image was, it was quite interesting. And it was important for him to understand this because in Maricopa County, for example, and this came out in the press, it’s public information, the Ballot Images were not and yet to be audited. Which should have been one of the primary things that should have been done in the audit. The Ballot Images. Because paper comes in, the machines scan the paper, and they convert them into an image of that ballot.
That image is what is analyzed by those machines to calculate the vote count, let me repeat that, again, paper comes in, converted to a Ballot Image, the Ballot Image is what is analyzed by the machine through its quote unquote, AI to understand that Biden got a vote or Trump got a vote. Okay. So what is the ballot? Is it the paper ballot? Or is it the Ballot Image, it’s a Ballot Image, because a Ballot Image is what is counted.
So, it’s very unfortunate that in the Arizona audit, that the Ballot Images were never reviewed initially. And that’s in my view, that’s what should have been done first, before you even do the paper ballots. So, we were given the opportunity to look at the envelope images. What do we mean by that?
Various Ways of Voting
When you’re a voter, you can vote in various ways. You can vote early-voting, which means before the election takes place – where you’ll get a ballot, and you have to put the ballot in an envelope, and then you sign it and you send it in, you can vote in person. There’s also UOCAVA voting where people could be military people overseas. And there’s provisional ballots. So there’s various types of ballots.
But ultimately, in the case of Maricopa County, 92% of the ballots were through mail in, which means people put their ballot in an envelope and they signed on the cover of that envelope. Well, when those ballots come in, they are imaged, not the ballots. I’m sorry, the envelopes are imaged, okay, ballot isn’t an envelope, it’s image by one. As we understand, unless we get more information, one private company called Runbeck, those images are then presented or analyzed to figure out if the signature on that envelope matches a signature in the voter registration files.
And that methodology is still today’s a black art, it has not been fully revealed. And then anything that doesn’t quote unquote match is given to human beings to match. And many of these human beings are not trained forensic signature people.
Ultimately, a certain number of ballots are dismissed, but the majority of them are approved, okay. And when they’re approved, then the envelopes are open, and the ballots are scanned through those machines to create the Ballot Images, which are tabulated. Okay.
So you see, it’s a process. So by the time you count the ballots, that’s the end of the factory process. There are many other substantive things that can occur upfront in that process.
For example, were the signatures properly matched? In Maricopa County, we found out that only about 587 signatures were mismatched among 1.9 million. Now as someone who’s done handwriting recognition in other fields, I find that mismatch rate extremely low. In fact, that mismatch rate in 2020 was 50% less than the mismatch rate four years ago when the number of ballots mail-in ballots in Maricopa County was half.
So, you had less ballots coming by mail-in four years ago, you had double the mismatch rate and this year – in 2020, you had double the number or 50%, increased the number of mail-in ballots, and you had half the amount of mismatch rate.
Some very interesting anomalies. One of the things I want to present, I’m going to present with you some data today that we had done on Clark County in Nevada. But from a system standpoint and this is something very important too. Also I will end with this point from a philosophy standpoint – is in engineering systems.
And every state election director, if they’re listening to this, should listen to this carefully. Because in engineering systems, which is what a voting system is. Is you embrace criticism, you embrace anomalies. You don’t try to write it off and try to shove it under the rug, that’s when, you know, airplanes fall out of the sky or healthcare systems fail, or people get, you know, mistreated the wrong way.
Okay, in large scale systems, or you have potential errors in voting. But anomalies are those observations you make that are deviated from what you would expect. That’s what an anomaly is.
It’s not a claim, one of the writers who attack me from an organization called the Arizona mirror in, in Arizona, he doesn’t, he’s a journalist, but he doesn’t understand the difference between a claim and an anomaly. An anomaly is something that goes beyond what you would expect, okay, and we’re going to share with you one of those in Clark County. So anomalies are what engineers thrive on, we want anomalies, because when you discover anomalies, it’s an opportunity to fix the system and make it better.
When the O ring was brought up on the space shuttle on January 26th of 1986. Two engineers said, Hey, we shouldn’t fly this shuttle, this O ring has never been tested under these conditions. Well, Morton Thiokol and NASA decided to not listen to these engineers and we blew up the space shuttle.
And now we understand that the O rings are the things that connect the solid rocket boosters, and then we’re not connected properly, you’re going to get leakage, etc. Okay? So if signature verification is unverifiable, that’s an anomaly. If you have blanks and signatures, and they’re being stamped, that’s an anomaly.
If you have Ballot Images, which are according to 52, USC 20701, are to be preserved for federal elections, particularly for 22 months, and they’re not. And a lot of people who participate in elections don’t even know what Ballot Images are, I would argue that’s an anomaly.
So we need to understand that we have a significant opportunity that goes Beyond Left & Right. And as long as we focus on identifying alarm anomalies, which is what we do, if you’re an entrepreneur, if you’re a mother, right, you want to identify anomalies, or someone’s going to get sick. So you identify anomalies, and you go fix them, you don’t call people all sorts of names and try to, you know, denigrate them, as occurred, in my case, Massachusetts, as occurred to other people’s case.
That’s why we created the institute. The Institute is going to be an amazing place for systems thinkers, engineers, scientists, citizens to come together and really resolve this in a very meaningful way. So as a part of that, I want to share with everyone some data that we organized together, because we’re in Nevada, and we had some data that we wanted to share with you on Clark County, we’re going to share with you for the first time today, we haven’t shared this before, had we had more time, we could put together some deeper analysis, which we will do as a part of our institute.
Clark County, Nevada November 3, 2020 General Election
So let me bring up this presentation I put together for you, and then we’ll open it up to questions. Okay, so what I’m showing here is, we took Clark County. What’s really nice about when you take a very simple in pattern analysis, we look at what are called signals. Okay, we try to develop signals.
Mathematicians really don’t understand this. But pattern recognition, people are trying to look at a feature. So one of the very simple features we did here was along the x axis, we have developed a metric of the Republican percentage in each precinct. That’s the x axis. So every one of these dots here represents a precinct in Clark County.
Okay, so the x axis is what percentage of Republicans are in that county.
All right. So what we’re looking at here is, what percentage of this precincts are Republican. So this one, this precinct right here is about 95% Republican, this precinct right here, you could say is about 7%. Republican, this is around 38%. Republican, okay.
Then on the y axis, we’re plotting from the actual data for each precinct. And by the way, this takes quite a bit of effort because you have to sort the precincts, etc. We’re looking at the percentage of votes that in this case President Trump got in that precinct. Everyone clear? So you get what you would expect from this straight line and you notice the slope of this line is 96.7%.
What that means is a Trump is doing a little bit less, it’s not 100%, okay, which means this precinct, let’s say is 90%, Republican, you would expect Trump to get 90% of the vote, there’s actually a little bit less, it’s .96 of that. Okay, so that’s the slope of this line. All right.
So just keep that slope in mind. Next, we did Republican state, Senate RSS, we call them candidates in each precinct. Remember, you go to a voting booth.
And you can do one of two things, right? You can if you’re Republican, you’re gonna, hopefully, if you are most Republicans behaviorally or not, hopefully, I don’t want to take a side here. But theoretically, a Republican will say, Yes, I’m going to vote for my Republican state senator, I’m going to vote for the Republican presidential candidate.
In this case, it was Trump. So what you see here is this is the plotting, again, of the Republican precincts, on the percentage of votes that Republican state senators got in that precinct. Some precincts did not have a Republican running for office – So we excluded those. And what do you see here, the slope of this is 103 – means 103%.
Which means Republicans were doing – the Republican state Senate candidates were doing better, according to this line, then they’re Democrat opposition, but they’re doing equally or better. So if you have typically this means that every 90% of Republican precincts here 90% Plus, in fact, they also pulled votes from potentially independents and others voted for that Republican state Senate candidate.
So you would expect, you would expect that these two lines would have the same slope, but what you find is, they’re a little bit off. So the orange line is the Republican state senate, and they’re higher than Trump. Okay.
And so the net is – what this shows is Trump is gaining less votes than Republican state Senate candidates as the precincts become more Republican. Again, I would consider this an interesting phenomenon to explore. Okay, so as you get more Republican, the Republican state senators are doing equally or better than the percentage of Republicans, but Trump is gaining less, and that’s this delta.
So we decided to explore that delta. And so we did here was we plotted again, on the x axis. Bear with me, is the Republican percentage in the precinct, but the y axis is a difference of how much Trump got minus a Republican, State Senate. Senate candidates, okay. Now, you would think that this should be zero, right? Because, or, more or less, right? Or this, this is a measure of the relative percentage of votes Trump’s got relative to the Republican state Senate candidates. That’s a fascinating graph.
And it took us a while to really understand this. But when you look at this, so here, you’re going from zero to 10% 20%. You’re moving more and more Republicans which means, these are Democrat precincts. These are highly Republican precincts. And what do you see, remember, every dot here is a measure of the percentage Trump got minus the RSS. So you would think everything would be around the zero axis.
But you see this massive dip here. So what do you see going on? So if you look at the first part of this estrus, and you, you, you look at it from a conical area, all of these precincts fall within this cone here, okay. And that’s within zero to 30%.
And if you were to sort of take the trend line in that you get a line like that. So what do you see here, this is Trump minus RSS. It’s positive, which means Trump is doing better than the Republican state Senate candidates, and these are predominantly Democrat precincts.
Okay, I’ll repeat that again. Trump’s trendline is increasing in these precincts, which are predominantly Democrat precincts, and he’s doing better. Okay. So you would expect at least that trend line to keep going, however, when you see it around 30% Republican precincts, you see a very different phenomenon. So I’m going to keep this trendline here. And I’m going to look at this point here, what you see is it’s almost like a switch is turned on and things change.
So you see a very different cone here. And these are the precincts, again, measuring Trump percentage minus Republican state senate percentage, and you start seeing the trend go downward. So for some reason, which we need to do further research, again, we’re open. It’s a very interesting anomaly that you see, Trump actually, performance is better than the Republican state Senate candidates.
And then it literally flips. If you were to look at it like that ago, this and more dramatically, you see this. So I find this fascinating, because you would think things should hover around, you know, plus or minus zero, but you see a dramatic shift in the difference here.
For example, here’s a precinct that’s 85%. Republican, and Trump is doing negative 12, which means the Republican state Senate candidates are doing 12 points better than Trump. Okay. And, the trend is downward in these pricing. So it’s a very, very interesting anomaly, to say the least.
Future Research Questions
And so the questions we want to propose, and we can open this up to questions is, so what caused Trump to underperform relative to Republican state senators? Is it possible that Biden, in all of these districts, is suddenly more popular than Trump? But if that’s the case, would you not then expect it also, because then people would have voted more for the Democrats, State Senate candidates, but it looks like in these precincts, Trump is underperforming, but the Republican state Senate candidates are maintaining their level as they had here.
The second is, did voters favor a Republican Senate candidate over Trump in high Republican precincts? If so, why? Why would you suddenly precincts over here, start favoring Republican Senate candidates over Trump, so you’re going into the voting booth, and you are actively not voting for Trump? Choosing Biden, but you’re voting for the Republican state Senate candidate, somewhere here upwards of 12 point difference, okay.
In fact, here’s one almost 15 point difference in this precinct right here. 75%, Republican, and the Republican state Senate candidates are getting 15% more votes and Trump. Okay.
The other question is what caused that sudden switch at precincts greater than 25%. Republicans? What caused that sudden switch? Okay, and that switch we’re talking about is right around here. So Trump is doing better than the Republican state candidates.
And here, the switch takes place, what caused that switch. And then the areas we need to explore our voter rolls, right, where they kept up to date, you know, where, you know, we need to explore the mail in ballots and Ballot Images. So again, I just want you to look at these questions.
Again, we’re not accusing anyone. But this is a very, very significant anomaly, where the difference between Trump and the Republican standard candidates significantly changes directionally at around 25%. And there are some important questions that need to be answered.
Again, to those of you who just joined new, I want to let you know that we many of you are aware of the work that myself and our team has done since September of 2020. And we have formalized this into let me bring up the second share this with everyone into a formal Institute, that we are that we have called the Election Systems Integrity Institute. I think everyone can see this.
And if you go to ElectionSystemsIntegrity.org, it’ll be formally launched tomorrow. We did a soft launch back in 2020. But it’s going to be an institute that’s really dedicated to bringing some of the best minds in the world. Our team is just evolving and as you can see, we have myself, we have lawyers, we have computer scientists, we have development people, technology people, people who have been doing engineering, educational people, including a former candidate, and law professors.
And this institute is going to be dedicated to some very, very fundamental areas of research and education, voter rolls, signature verification ballot images, and as I mentioned, the standardized operating procedures. So I encourage everyone to support this. We’ll be giving you more news.
It’s time we move beyond the Left vs. Right, Republican vs. Democrat. It’s time YOU learn how to apply a systems approach to get the Truth Freedom Health you need and deserve. Become a Truth Freedom Health® Warrior.
Join the VASHIVA community – an integrated EDUCATIONAL, COMMUNICATIONS – independent of Big Tech -, and LOCAL ACTIVISM platform to empower YOU to actualize Truth Freedom Health in your local communities by employing a SYSTEMS APPROACH.
The platform we are building for Truth Freedom Health® provides the infrastructure to take on Big Tech, Big Pharma, and Big Academia. Many of you have asked how you can help. You can contribute whatever you can. Based on your level of commitment to get educated, I have also created some wonderful educational gifts to thank you for your contribution.
To get the education you need and deserve, join Dr.SHIVA on his Foundations of Systems course. This course will provide you three pillars of knowledge with the Foundation of Systems Thinking. The three pillars include: 1) The System Dynamics of Truth Freedom Health, 2) The Power of a Bottom’s Up Movement, and 3) The Not So Obvious Establishment. In this course, you will also learn fundamental principles of all systems including your body.
Course registration includes access to his LIVE Monday training, access to the Your Body, Your System tool, four (4) eBooks including the bestselling System and Revolution, access to the Systems Health portal and communications tools – independent of Big Tech – including a forum and social media for you to build community with other Truth Freedom Health Warriors.
This course is available online for you to study at your own pace.
It’s time to Get Educated, or Be Enslaved.
