The Perpetrators Vote the “Non-Existent Voters” as Needed

As the voting proceeds, the criminal perpetrators start ensuring mail-in votes are requested by the hidden “non-existent voters.” Once requested, the fraudulent mail-in votes for the non-existent voters are printed and run through the vote tabulation machines. [Truthfully, the perpetrators requesting, voting, and tabulating of the fraudulent mail-in votes could accomplish their goals within the state board of elections’ mainframe computer, without ever printing or tabulating a physical mail-in ballot. The perpetrators may decide to print and tabulate a paper mail-in ballot if there were concerns that a recount may require a forensic examination of paper ballots.] Because the legitimate state voter ID of the “non-existent voter” matches the legitimate state voter ID of the fraudulent mail-in ballot, a certifiable vote has been cast (even though the voter is fabricated). Because there is no limit as to how many “non-existent voters” can be created by this criminal algorithm scheme, the perpetrators can “win” every election, fixing (i.e., “stealing”) it according to the outcome they or their superiors desire.

Even in a forensic recount, the perpetrators can remain relatively safe in assuming the state board of elections will never order a field audit sampling the mail-in votes to see if the voters exist, have correct addresses, and are qualified to vote. State boards of elections typically conduct recounts within state board of elections offices. Once a recount is completed, the state board of elections moves to certify the election. Once certified, elections are difficult to challenge. Most courts consider election challenges to be political. Hence, denial of standing is the most common judicial outcome of lawsuits that challenge elections. Those challenging certified elections face legal complications, including defamation actions, for raising issues of “election fraud” that cannot be proven at law to have happened.