World Affairs Brief, February 26, 2021 Commentary and Insights on a Troubled World.

Copyright Joel Skousen. Partial quotations with attribution permitted. Cite source as Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief (http://www.worldaffairsbrief.com).

MORE EVIDENCE FOREIGN ELECTION INTERFERENCE “PROOF” WAS DISINFO

This week I received yet more analysis from a retired FBI computer forensics investigator and FBI whistleblower who reviewed the anonymous data given to Patrick Byrne and Mary Fanning claiming foreign election interference. His conclusion: it is likely fake.

My coverage of this information is not to be interpreted as denying massive election fraud or the sincerity of Mike Lindell or Patrick Byrne, but rather to expose a Deep State disinformation effort to shift blame away from the Deep State. The Deep State has been busy for months feeding good conservatives with false data shifting blame from the Deep State to China and others for this election manipulation, and conservatives have been naively accepting it uncritically.

Rick Kipes, PhD, is not claiming to be an insider, or to ever have worked with the dark side of the FBI. He has been open and forthright in his analysis and even testified before the Senate during a hearing on whistleblower suppression in federal agencies. See his testimony starting at minute 36. All the witnesses testimony that preceded his is also fascinating and sad.

Kipes blew the whistle while an instructor at the FBI Academy to expose waste, fraud, and abuse and was subsequently removed from Unit Chief position and demoted two GS (pay) levels for doing so. They tried to deny his whistleblower status because he had simply taken his complaints to the head of the FBI Academy (the appropriate place for resolution) instead of to the head of the local FBI Field Office, which the Bureau’s interpretation of the whistleblower statute required.

Director Comey had made a big issue in the FBI about its commitment to uphold integrity and honor of whistleblowers, but Comey never responded to his e-mail reminding Comey of the FBI’s “zero tolerance” for reprisal. He then appealed to Comey’s successor, Christopher Wray (who is also Deep state), where he said,

Wray’s response was polite “concern,” after which he sent my information to the FBI Office of General Counsel (OGC), who then punted it to DOJ OIG, where they declined to investigate.

This response was typical, as we learned by listening to the Senate hearings on Whistleblower reprisals. Witness after witness testified that the FBI either did nothing about whistleblower complaints or took 9 to 11 years to rule on the case, by which time all of the whistleblower agents had either retired or were no longer with the Bureau. The Senators politely listened and expressed “concern” and sympathy for whistleblowers but did nothing substantive to change things after the hearings.

Mr. Kipes had come across my World Affairs Brief and decided to look into what I had written about the alleged foreign hacks into county election computers likely being a forgery. He wrote (my emphasis added),

I always try to validate information that seems to support our perspective so after watching Mike Lindell’s “Absolute Truth” video I went hunting for the blockbuster spreadsheet that was featured at the end of the video [by Mary Fanning]. I found it on Patrick Byrne’s web site www.deepcapture.com, so I downloaded it for analysis. After verifying simple things like the registration information for the IP addresses of the alleged attackers, I noticed a couple of things about the data that bothered me:

1) None of the physical addresses (MAC addresses) of the machines I sampled came back to actual manufacturers. In other words, you can type in the MAC address of your desktop, laptop, and even your smartphone into a site like hwaddress.com and you can see the company who manufactured the MAC card. The manufacturer of a MAC card can lead us to the type of device into which it was installed (e.g., a Dominion voting machine)… However, after sampling several dozen such numbers from the spreadsheet, I couldn’t find a single legitimate MAC address.

Then he found something really unique: out of the computer IP addresses in the list of county hacking victims, there were several duplicate IP addresses to the computers that were supposedly hacked into. In at least one case the same IP address appeared for two separate County Election offices that were not even in the same state. That can’t happen in the real world since these separate counties in separate states can never be on the same internal computer network and share an internet protocol (IP) address. This is evidence that the list was faked. Here is what he wrote:

2) I searched for duplicates in the IP addresses and found that NONE of the attacking IP addresses were duplicated, while there were several duplicate IP addresses in the “Target IP” column. In fact, there were some IP addresses were associated with victims in separate counties and even in SEPARATE STATES. This is impossible, because all of the victim computers would need to be part of the same internal network to share the same IP address. It won’t happen across state lines.

The spreadsheet (which you can bring up on Excel) from the Deep Capture website shows a whopping 2646 separate hacks, with many duplicates from over 500 separate entities listed—with almost all IP addresses simply copied from foreign corporations in China and many other countries.

I wrote back to Mr. Kipes, “There’s no way that 500 separate entities around the world (I’m estimating based on the duplicates in the hacking list of 2646 separate instances) are hacking into local US county election computers in the US. At worst, I’ve only seen 3 or 4 dedicated actors who even try such a thing.”

Besides, the Deep State doesn’t need China or dozens of other countries to hack into systems that the Deep State can easily manipulate from home. This entire foreign election claim is a diversion tactic.

But not all the election data was fake. Mr. Kipes agreed with me when he turned his attention to the Edison Research Data, the reports from election night that were fed to news agencies as the results came in. I have previously reported about this as the most reliable and verifiable way to quantify vote switching and deleted votes from Trump. I was originally alerted to this information from a post by a statistician’s analysis of the Edison Data that was originally posted at theDonald.win but has since been taken down. Fortunately Kipes found an archived copy here.

He also provided me yet another video example of votes being switched from Trump to Biden in Pennsylvania.

At the start of the video the PA total votes are: Trump 1,690,589 and Biden 1,252,537. At the end of the video the totals on the screen are for PA are: Trump 1,670,631 (-19,958 votes) Biden 1,272,495 (+19,958). Notice the percentages also switched – Trump went from 56.6% to 56.0% and Biden went from 42.0% to 42.6%. Remember this 0.6% switch when we look at the Edison data.

He then pointed me to the specific place in the Edison data that showed this vote switch. That is the kind of quantitative evidence that was available before most of these legal challenges were filed by Rudy Giuliani on behalf of Trump. None of Trump’s lawyers went to the trouble to duplicate the analysis of fraud in the Edison Data, which would have given the courts real quantitative evidence that clearly did show sufficient fraud to overturn the election. Lawyers like Sidney Powell were diverted to the false issue of foreign election interference. …