Election Irregularities Project Update Colorado (Part 9)

I wrote a series of articles on election irregularities in Colorado where I somewhat belabored the ease with which modern computing technology, cloud analytics and modeling and simulation-real-time gaming engines-could do what was necessary to achieve a desired outcome with little difficulty that would be hard to detect. The recent Colorado 2022 primary election exhibited some of the very same strange and anomalous results that characterized both the 2018 and 2020 elections.

One of the issues that has been “unleashed” in Colorado over the past 8 years or so is the concept of unaffiliated voters, who have emerged as a force to be reckoned with in Colorado politics numbering some 600K voters in 2020. I registered as a conservative/independent in order to fight against republican squishes, but I now reflect in the unaffiliated pool. What that means for the primary is I receive both a democrat and republican ballot, expected to fill out one or the other, but not both. If you do the math, that means that each of the ~600K in the category received both ballots. I belabored to a fare thee well how those looking to do election shenanigans no longer need physical ballots, votes, or even voters, as in this case some 600K potential extra ballots are in the system. What could someone looking to do shenanigans do with such a store of ballots?

This article from the World Tribune chronicles odd results from the Colorado 2022 primary that include the candidate for Secretary of State-Tina Peters-the acknowledged and controversial GOP frontrunner with over 50% in the sentiment polling, finishing a distant second with only 28% of the vote. She will likely be third when all votes are counted-to Pam Anderson’s 43%, an executive on leave from the Zuckerbucks funded Center for Tech and Civic Life group linked to the expenditure of some ~400 million in the 2020 election, and absolute unknown and marginal candidate originally from Australia Mike O’Donnell, who received 170K votes-28%, despite raising no money or interest in a late breaking campaign where he remained unknown right up through election day. From the piece:

Peters outraised both of her opponents by 3 to 1 and was considered the frontrunner in the GOP primary.

According to Colorado Public Radio News, O’Donnell raised just $4,700 for his campaign three weeks before the primary.

So how does a candidate with no money and no name recognition get 28 percent in such a high-profile race, Robinson asked.

Robinson said she “went looking” for O’Donnell’s supporters but “didn’t find them.”

On Facebook, only 193 people were following his campaign page.

On Twitter, 560 were following his campaign. The day before the election, his last tweet managed to get 4 “likes.”

“That’s the most interaction that his campaign Twitter account got — ever,” Robinson noted.

O’Donnell sent out 1,306 tweets on his account and the vast majority of them got: 0 Likes — and 0 Retweets — and 0 Comments.

“There was no interaction on his Twitter account because nobody was voting for Mike O’Donnell,” Robinson wrote.

And yet O’Donnell actually managed to win 17 counties in Colorado in the GOP primary.

According to The New York Times, O’Donnell was the outright winner in Jackson County (43%) and Rio Blanco County (37%) and Conejos County (41%) and Fremont County (34%) and Las Animas County (36%) and Prowers County (37%) and Bent County (34%) and Otero County (40%) and Kiowa County (38%) and Lincoln County (39%) and Cheyenne County (40%) and Kit Carson County (42%) and Yuma County (43%) and Washington County (40%) and Morgan County (38%) and Phillips County (34%) and Sedgwick County (38%).

So either republican squishes came through bigly for an executive of the hated CTCL and an unknown, unheralded candidate in an action that split the vote, or unaffiliated voters decided to use the republican ballot in their packet to go against Peters, or a lot of those unused republican ballots from the packet were voted somehow within the system, or it is just Colorado Dominion Voting Systems magic at work again in 62 of 64 counties. We may find out-but I doubt it-as Peters raised enough money for a recount despite the results not being close enough to warrant one.

That wasn’t the strangest thing that happened primary night as reported by this Free Republic article. Lynda Zamora Wilson ran in the GOP primary race against state senator Paul Lundeen, the GOP minority whip and a known RINO/squish. Wilson is retired USAF with a PhD in economics, an MS in Mathematics and an MA in Education-also an F-22 Flight Test Analyst. She has been leading Lundeen in all polls leading up to the primary with over 50% of the vote. The race was called at 8:50 PM by a local affiliate primary night with Wilson at ~69% of the vote, leading 15, 833 to Lundeen’s 6,946. From the piece:

Then something very strange took place.

The election numbers were switched. Suddenly Lynda Zamora Wilson was behind in the race.

The machines flipped her lead to a loss.

The machines flipped the numbers back to the 8:15 totals — but Lundeen was now ahead!

Paul Lundeen was then miraculously declared the winner.

The good news according to this Colorado Newsline report is that both of the above candidates have been granted a recount, costing Peters $255, 913.33 (love that government faux accuracy to the cent) and Wilson $21,584.85 (ditto.) From the piece:

The notarized requests for recounts from Peters and Wilson also asked for specific election records to be provided in addition to the recount. The records include cast vote records, ballot drop box records, video surveillance, signature verification records, voter registration, voter history and electronic voting system logs concerning the candidates’ races. 

While all of the material requested is public record, the secretary of state can only provide voter registration and voting history records. Other records must be requested through individual county clerk offices. Requests for these records will require additional fees from the candidates. 

The bad news is the recount under Colorado rules must be done through the same process as was done to count the original tabulation and must be completed within 37 days of the election, which the Colorado SOS already certified: this will likely be counting the dollar bills at the bank problem.

Note the irony of the Colorado SOS directing candidates to contact county officials for specific information related to their request.

This Gateway Pundit article is following the recount effort-and in a word-it continues to be stinky. The recount in El Paso County is going to be telling because of the military presence there, who one would hope would be all in for Wilson. Concurrently this Pundit article covers the ongoing effort for Tina Peters, with a lawsuit filed to isolate and control the Dominion Voting Systems because the adjudication rate is currently above 60% of the supposedly settled ballots that could not pass the initial audit without being flagged for adjudication. Peters is punching back (from the piece):

Of interest in these articles is the presence of representatives of the Colorado SOS, no doubt being paid by the candidates required to fund the recount. Here is a real stinky story from little Elbert County, Colorado that played out recently. Note democrat operatives within the county rabble roused to get the Colorado SOS involved in County business where nothing was found amiss-and a little county with some 22K voters received a bill for the pleasure of being meddled upon of some 12K to fund the SOS spy to oversee the election.

More to follow on this story but also to chronicle the Wilson and Peters audit saga as well as the Peters sponsored audit of the Mesa County 2020 results-which was the original point of my update until the cheating became blatant.

Max Dribbler

30 July 2022

Maxdribbler77@gmail.com

LSMBTG: Lamestream media echo chamber (LMEC-L) social media (SM) big tech tyrants (BT) and government (G)

Follow AFNN

Facebook: https://m.facebook.com/afnnusa

Telegram: https://t.me/joinchat/2_-GAz…

Twitter: @AFNNUSA

GETTR: @AFNN_USA

CloutHub: @AFNN_USA

Patriot.Online: @AFNN

 

2 thoughts on “Election Irregularities Project Update Colorado (Part 9)”

  1. If there were election irregularities, and there were many, why would anyone not assume there will be the same irregularities if nothing was done in the 2020 election. When you let people off the hook for one thing, the tendency is to repeat what they got away with.

    Reply

Leave a Comment