As we've seen, proving election fraud is difficult.  Often, the data are in the hands of Democrat politicians and bureaucrats who refuse to make it available.  Additionally, computers mean that a lot of suspected changes take place invisibly, and even if the Democrat pols and bureaucrats allowed a deep dive into the computer systems, it can be impossible to track what happened.  However, the one thing that cannot be hidden is negative vote counts.  In a system that adds votes, irrefutable evidence that Trump kept having thousands of votes subtracted would prove that the system was being manipulated.

On January 3, I wrote about evidence during the hearing in Georgia from the Data Integrity Group, which is made up of scientists, engineers, and machine learning experts.  According to the group, aside from precincts with highly suspicious returns (e.g., Biden receiving more than 95% of the votes), the biggest tell that something funny was going on in Georgia was the fact that Trump lost votes during the vote count.

Voting should always be an additive process.  We cast our ballots for a candidate, not against one.  This means that every ballot cast should be a +1 for the candidate.

Put another way, in an honest electoral system, there is no such thing as a "-1 ballot" that would see Trump lose a vote every time this imaginary negative ballot was cast.  Likewise, there's no such thing as a "transfer ballot," which would effectively have the voter announce, "I want you to take one vote from Trump and give it to Biden."

What the Data Integrity Group revealed is that it looks as if the magic "-1 ballots" and "transfer ballots" were used in Georgia.  How else can we explain the still unrefuted claim that Trump's votes vanished or were magically transferred to Biden?

Scott Adams got excited about this negative trend.  In his January 3 Coffee with Scott Adams video, he asked, "Is there ever a reason that the cumulative vote count could turn negative under normal non-hacked conditions?"  As far as Adams was concerned, all of the other allegations about election fraud can take a back seat.  "Your Kraken isn't big.  Your Kraken is that simplification."

It turns out the Kraken simplification exists in Pennsylvania, too.  On Monday, The Epoch Times published an exclusive report and video from the Data Integrity Group showing that, once the data for all the Pennsylvania counties are considered, Trump lost over 432,000 votes.  The video and the article are behind a paywall, but I can certainly give you the gist.

The Data Integrity Group looked at the vote count for Donald Trump over the course of time.  In an honest system, what one would expect is that the number would constantly rise over time as votes came in.

The trend line might rise sharply if Trump received a lot of votes, or slowly if votes trickle in, or even flatline for a while if there was a gap in Trump votes.  The one thing the time-trend line should never do is drop, which would mean that votes are disappearing from Trump's tally.

That's exactly what happened.  In at least 15 counties, according to the Epoch Times story, Trump lost in-person votes, while he lost absentee votes in three other countries.  The total result was staggering:

At least 432,116 votes — 213,707 election day votes and 218,409 absentee votes — were removed in total.

"There were vote movements across all candidates. However, we did not see the same type of negative decrements to any of the [other] candidates that we saw with President Trump's tallies, and they happened repeatedly with no explanation," Lynda McLaughlin, a member of the group, told The Epoch Times.

Given that Biden is alleged to have won the state by 80,555 votes, if the above information is correct, it would swing the state to Trump.

As Scott Adams said in his commentary today about the reported vanishing votes in Pennsylvania, the beauty of this assertion lies in its simplicity.  Either the votes vanished (as the Data Integrity Group says they did) or they didn't (as no one has yet asserted).

This analysis does not require trying to extract information from recalcitrant Democrats, nor getting affidavits from witnesses to fraud, nor raiding servers overseas.  It's either correct or it's not, and if it's correct — and it seems to be a trend in other contested areas — then all those vanished votes go back to Trump.

Image: The Vanishing Vote by Andrea Widburg.