Volunteer Data

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

@PatrickByrne @EmeraldRobinson Even though the Serbian data center was taken down, concerning 2024 voting results data suggests a different source still might have been electronically manipulating votes. Investigation needed. See below:

https://t.co/Sh8FVpZhTd

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

🚨PENNSYLVANIA🚨 - HIGH POPULATION COUNTIES CHESTER AND BUCKS HAVE A PATTERN SUSPICIOUS FOR VOTE SWAPPING/FLIPPING IN THE 2024 GENERAL ELECTION. IF ALLEGED "INTERFERENCE" IN A SERBIA CONNECTION STOPPED THE STEAL ENOUGH FOR TRUMP TO WIN HIS RACE, COULD OTHER BAD ACTORS STILL HAVE BEEN ELECTRONICALLY MANIPULATING VOTES IN PA? WHILE THE PATTERN IS REDUCED FROM 2020, IT IS STILL WIDELY PRESENT IN THESE COUNTIES AND POSSIBLY OTHERS). @EmeraldRobinson @PatrickByrne @PeterTicktin

Recently Peter Ticktin and Patrick Byrne announced on Emerald Robinson's show @AbsoluteWithE a very surprising revelation about the 2024 General Election. Some type of "interference" occurred in a connection with an office in the country of Serbia that may have prevented the steal of President Trump's race at the end of election night. To learn the details, watch Ticktin and Byrne's segments here (Byrne gives specific details at time mark 45:11):
https://t.co/9d4npiu01t Also see here another explosive interview with Byrne here: https://t.co/43pRMnNO5m

Chester and Bucks are Philadelphia collar counties. They both showed a pattern suspicious for vote flipping in their publicly posted 2016 and 2020 precinct reports (see data in previous posts). The pattern was seen affecting the Presidential race in both years, negatively affecting President Trump both times. The number of precincts affected increased in 2020 vs. 2016.

THE SUSPICIOUS PATTERN EXPLAINED: Think of it this way - if you had groups of Republican and Democratic candidates running for multiple different races each election, they would all bring in a varied number of votes for their results in each precinct/municipality. If a bad actor decided they wanted to manipulate the President race for example, by taking many votes off the Republican Presidential candidate in each precinct, and adding them on to the Democratic Presidential candidate in each precinct, this could cause the Republican Presidential candidate's number of votes to go LOWER than all the other Republican candidates' vote totals in that precinct. It could also cause the Democratic Presidential candidate's vote total to go HIGHER than the remaining Democratic candidates' vote totals in that precinct.

THIS EXACT SCENARIO of a specific Republican candidate getting the lowest votes of all Republican candidates and their opposing Democratic candidate getting the highest votes of all Democratic candidates happens throughout the majority of Chester and Bucks County precincts again in 2024!

However, the number of precincts affected by the pattern in 2024 are actually less than they were in 2020 for both counties. Especially for the Presidential race. This might be signaling there was indeed some kind of interference that stopped possible end-of-night manipulation to make Trump lose his race. However, the large number of precincts that still have the pattern is very concerning. Did other electronic manipulation from a different source occur?

Starting with Chester County's mail-in ballot votes, see the comparisons below:

2020:

*87% of precincts give Trump the lowest votes of all Republican candidates
*84% of precincts have a pattern suspicious for vote flipping in Trump’s race
*89% of precincts have a pattern suspicious for vote flipping in total (includes other races)

2024:

*52% of precincts give Trump the lowest votes of all Republican candidates (35% decrease)
*40% of precincts have a pattern suspicious for vote flipping in Trump’s race (44% decrease)
*66% (2/3) of precincts have a pattern suspicious for vote flipping in total (includes other races; 23% decrease)

Other interesting things of note:

*Exactly 50 precincts show the pattern affecting congress or state representative races.
-Of which 30 affect the Congress 6th race
-Of which 20 affect state representative races

Were voting machines still being manipulated in these counties? If they were, who was doing it?

See the precincts with the pattern in the mail-in ballot votes for 2024 in Chester County below. See Chester County's 2024 precinct reports here: https://t.co/3YybYRdZdo The next posts will give remaining data from both counties. Stay tuned!

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

https://t.co/6P8DSS8wf6

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

🚨Chester County needs an in-depth investigation. It is important to study their history when thinking about what just happened this recent election, where 75,000 third party voters were left off the initial poll books.

Some examples of issues:

In the 2025 Primary Election, the Prothonotary race was somehow mistakenly left off the ballot: https://t.co/c1GDzZLwsA

In early 2025, this important presentation was made to the Board of Elections regarding Chester County Voter Services Staff members ringing the alarm bells:
https://t.co/0nFdgGn1kR

In the 2024 Presidential Election, a pattern suspicious for vote flipping was found throughout the majority of precincts in the in-person and mail-in votes:
https://t.co/hrJoB3zBDF
https://t.co/BU9wLHD27g

In the 2022 General Election, the two Democrat Commissioners/majority Board of Elections certified the election while recount petitions were pending. Election law expressly states that boards of elections may not certify while recount petitions are pending.
The board certified the election despite Commissioner Michelle Kichline’s vehement dissent out of concern that it would be a violation of election law. https://t.co/yssoyKhMeJ

In the 2021 General Election numerous serious election issues caused the Republican Committee of Chester County to request a full forensic audit. See the attached photo of the serious issues:

In 2020, a pattern suspicious for vote flipping occurred in the in-person and mail in ballot votes in the majority of precincts in Chester County:
https://t.co/4jf6hnJOFn
https://t.co/IFRrugi5Bg

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

Here is an example of a Chester County precinct report from 2015 showing the pattern suspicious for vote flipping in both the state and county races.

To see this Chester County precinct report, click here:https://t.co/TF1FcSJe5Q

Our notes are added in red and blue.

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

🚨PENNSYLVANIA 🚨 - A PATTERN SUSPICIOUS FOR VOTE FLIPPING HAS BEEN FOUND IN THE 2025 GENERAL PRELIMINARY ELECTION RESULTS - IN THE STATE RACES - IN "RED" LEBANON AND BEAVER COUNTIES! THIS INCLUDES IN THE SUPREME COURT RETENTION VOTES! MANY OTHER PA COUNTIES MAY HAVE THIS PATTERN! RESEARCHERS ARE CONCERNED PA STATE AND COUNTY RACES MIGHT BE MANIPULATED SEPARATELY BY TWO DIFFERENT ALGORITHMS. THIS IS DUE TO A DECADE OF DATA FROM CHESTER COUNTY, PA SHOWING THE PATTERN APPEARING IN MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS WHEN YOU SEPARATE STATE AND COUNTY CANDIDATES INTO THE TWO GROUPS. 🧵🧵

IS MACHINE MANIPULATION HAPPENING SEPARATELY IN STATE AND COUNTY RACES IN PA MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS? IF SO, WHO IS DOING IT?

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN AND READ ALL 4 POSTS IN THIS THREAD:

A pattern suspicious for vote flipping was found from volunteers observing the preliminary precinct election results reported in Lebanon and Beaver counties in PA. The pattern is being observed in the Election Day votes, the Mail-in votes and the Total Votes categories in the state races. County races have not been analyzed yet.

High population PA counties that researchers typically do data analysis on have all *conveniently* changed their election reporting so that the typical, easy to read precinct report is no longer available for public view. Counties where reporting changes have occurred include Chester, Bucks, Northampton and Lehigh counties. Why would counties with simplistic, easy to read election precinct reports suddenly change their election reporting documents/website?

With Chester County leaving 75,000 third party voters off their original poll books in this election, the fact that they also suddenly made their election results reports harder to read for the same election is concerning.

All four of the high population counties moved their results to the https://t.co/WwODID7fPN website. The documents given on the website are much harder for the public to analyze. Comparing candidates' vote totals to all the other candidates in their same precinct is very difficult and time consuming. This is very suspicious. Why wouldn't counties want to be as transparent as possible to their voters? Delaware and Montgomery counties are also harder to read.

Back to "red" Lebanon and Beaver counties...

THE SUSPICIOUS PATTERN EXPLAINED: Think of it this way - if you had groups of Republican and Democratic candidates running for multiple different races each election, they would all bring in a varied number of votes for their results in each precinct/municipality. If a bad actor decided they wanted to manipulate the President race for example, by taking many votes off the Republican Presidential candidate in each precinct, and adding them on to the Democratic Presidential candidate in each precinct, this could cause the Republican Presidential candidate's number of votes to go LOWER than all the other Republican candidates' vote totals in that precinct. It could also cause the Democratic Presidential candidate's vote total to go HIGHER than the remaining Democratic candidates' vote totals in that precinct.

This scenario is seen happening repeatedly throughout the 2025 preliminary unofficial precinct reports of Lebanon and Beaver counties in the state races. Voters need to look through their precinct reports to see how often it is happening and alert their GOP for investigation prior to certification.

State races for this election include the Judge of the Superior Court, Judge of the Commonwealth Court, and five state judge retention questions that include the three PA Supreme Court judges.

For the state judge retention questions on the ballot, researchers considered the "NO" vote as being the Republican candidate, and the "YES" vote as being the Democratic candidate. If the "NO" vote number for, let's say the Supreme Court Retention of Christine Donohue gets the lowest number of votes of all the state candidate votes, and the "YES" votes for Donohue are the highest of all the state candidate votes, this would be suspicious of a swap or vote flip.

See examples of the pattern happening in
Lebanon and Beaver counties in the continued thread, along with examples from Chester County going back in time.

To see the Lebanon County preliminary unofficial precinct reports, click here: https://t.co/HN4LUwAhec

To see the Beaver County preliminary unofficial precinct reports, click here: https://t.co/hCNq4baVj4

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

Here is an example of a Chester County precinct report from 2017 showing the pattern suspicious for vote flipping in both the state and county races.

To see this Chester County precinct report, click here: https://t.co/Gt8d9zkgIH

Our notes are added in red and blue.

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

Correction, the remaining precincts with the pattern suspicious for vote swapping in the state races affected the Superior and Commonwealth Judge Retentions, along with the Judge of the Superior and Commonwealth Court races. The area corrected is the area in gray.

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

🚨CHESTER COUNTY, PA🚨 - RED FLAGS APPEAR ACROSS PRELIMINARY ELECTION RESULTS! SUSPICIOUS VOTE OUTCOMES IN PA SUPREME COURT RETENTIONS! PATTERN SUSPICIOUS FOR VOTE FLIPPING FOUND IN STATE AND COUNTY RACES! CONCERNS MOUNT OVER COURT OF COMMON PLEAS AND SCHOOL DIRECTOR VOTE TOTALS! COUNTY USING NEW CONFUSING REPORTING DOCUMENTS! FURTHER INVESTIGATION NEEDED @WallyZimolong @AAGDhillon !! 🧵🧵

November 4, 2025 election results found on the Chester County election reporting website shows several unexpected outcomes, leaving researchers concerned something is wrong! The results/data were obtained the morning after the election (November 5th) from the CSV file precinct results posted at this link: https://t.co/O67yNR2uT6 . ***Since this time, the files/documents at this link posted by the county have been updated with additional mail-in votes and provisional votes that we can observe. The data in the following thread comes from the initial data that was posted by the county, downloaded on November 5th, without these additions.***

1. When looking at the number of votes each Republican candidate and the NO retentions received, it was observed that the NO votes for retentions on the PA Supreme Court were lower than almost all remaining Republican candidates' vote numbers on the ballot in each precinct. Why would the NO votes for Supreme Court retention receive the some of the lowest numbers of votes across the majority of precincts? Especially when this issue to vote "NO" was the most advertised issue to vote on for Republicans?

In contrast, the "YES" retention questions got some of the highest numbers of votes compared to all the Democratic candidates.

How does this make sense? Democrats overwhelmingly vote Yes for the judge retentions, but Republicans forget to vote No? Chester County Republicans, did you forget to vote NO?? SPOILER ALERT: Lancaster County's preliminary data had the same outcome!! Lancaster County Republicans, did you forget to vote NO?? https://t.co/7NJVwYfzCQ

It appears for the most part that NO votes for ALL the retention questions got some of the lowest numbers of votes compared to the remaining Republican candidates across the majority of precincts. And of course for the Democrats, all retention questions got the opposite outcome - receiving some of the highest votes compared to other Democratic candidates.

While not every precinct's outcome was identical, you can see a pattern where judges (specifically BOTH Court of Common Pleas candidates) , school directors, and NO retention votes tend to fall at the bottom for votes for the Republicans, while judges, school directors and YES retentions often were at the top for votes from the Democrats. In addition, while not shown below, there were many precincts that showed the Democrat Judge of Elections candidates sharing some of the highest votes with the judge retentions. This has not been seen previously. Why would this occur? Precincts in Lancaster County also had this.)

It should be noted that one of the two Democratic Judge of the Court of Common Pleas candidates was found with the lowest votes often , but not BOTH.

How is this explained? Here are some examples of data from the precincts:

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

What could have caused this outcome in Chester County? Did vote flipping occur? Where votes were taken off the NO's and added to the YES's? Or was this natural?

2.🚨PATTERN SUSPICIOUS FOR VOTE FLIPPING HAS BEEN FOUND IN CHESTER COUNTY, PA PRELIMINARY ELECTION RESULTS IN THE STATE RACES! 🚨

Patterns suspicious for vote flipping are present in the 2025 state races. These patterns were found from volunteers analyzing the preliminary election results reported on the county's new website. The results/data were obtained the morning after the election (November 5th) from the CSV file precinct results posted at this link: https://t.co/O67yNR2uT6 ***Since this time, the files/documents at this link posted by the county have been updated with additional mail-in votes and provisional votes that we can observe. The data in the following thread comes from the initial data that was posted by the county, downloaded on November 5th, without these additions.***

111 of 230 precincts in Chester County have a pattern suspicious for vote flipping in the state races. Of these precincts, 55 precincts (about 50%) show the pattern negatively affecting the "NO" votes for the PA Supreme Court Retention questions. The remaining 50% of precincts negatively affect the "NO" votes for the Superior Court retention and Commonwealth Court retention candidates. Were votes taken off the "NO's" and added on to the "YES's" to cause the pattern?

An investigation going back to 2013 in Chester County revealed that the suspicious pattern that has been found in the 2016, 2020 and 2024 Federal Presidential Elections also are in the Municipal Elections. However, in order to see them, you have to separate the state and county candidates from one another. When you group all the state candidates together and analyze their results, the pattern appears. Same for county candidates.

Are state and county races being manipulated to cause these suspicious patterns? Are two separate groups or entities doing manipulation? Differences in the outcomes across the precincts cause one to ponder these questions.

THE SUSPICIOUS PATTERN EXPLAINED: Think of it this way - if you had groups of Republican and Democratic candidates running for multiple different races each election, they would all bring in a varied number of votes for their results in each precinct/municipality. If a bad actor decided they wanted to manipulate the President race for example, by taking many votes off the Republican Presidential candidate in each precinct, and adding them on to the Democratic Presidential candidate in each precinct, this could cause the Republican Presidential candidate's number of votes to go LOWER than all the other Republican candidates' vote totals in that precinct. It could also cause the Democratic Presidential candidate's vote total to go HIGHER than the remaining Democratic candidates' vote totals in that precinct.

This same scenario is applied to the "NO" and "YES" votes for the state judge retention questions on the ballot in Chester County. Think of a "NO" vote as being the Republican candidate, and the "YES" vote as being the Democratic candidate. If the "NO" vote number for, let's say the Supreme Court Retention of Christine Donohue gets the lowest number of votes of all the state retention votes, and the "YES" votes for Donohue are the highest of all the "YES" retention votes, this would be suspicious of a swap.

Look at how many times this occurrence happened in the Chester County precincts!

(Additional note, volunteers observed about 90% of precincts showed the NO retention vote numbers to be lower than the other state candidates on the ballot. In contrast, about 83% of precincts show the YES retention vote numbers to be higher than the Democratic Commonwealth and Superior Court candidates.)

See the attached photos for the pattern suspicious for vote flipping in the state races (includes state retentions).

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

🚨Chester County needs an in-depth investigation. It is important to study their history when thinking about what just happened this recent election, where 75,000 third party voters were left off the initial poll books.

Some examples of issues:

In the 2025 Primary Election, the Prothonotary race was somehow mistakenly left off the ballot: https://t.co/c1GDzZLwsA

In early 2025, this important presentation was made to the Board of Elections regarding Chester County Voter Services Staff members ringing the alarm bells:
https://t.co/0nFdgGn1kR

In the 2024 Presidential Election, a pattern suspicious for vote flipping was found throughout the majority of precincts in the in-person and mail-in votes:
https://t.co/hrJoB3zBDF
https://t.co/BU9wLHD27g

In the 2022 General Election, the two Democrat Commissioners/majority Board of Elections certified the election while recount petitions were pending. Election law expressly states that boards of elections may not certify while recount petitions are pending.
The board certified the election despite Commissioner Michelle Kichline’s vehement dissent out of concern that it would be a violation of election law. https://t.co/yssoyKhMeJ

In the 2021 General Election numerous serious election issues caused the Republican Committee of Chester County to request a full forensic audit. See the attached photo of the serious issues:

In 2020, a pattern suspicious for vote flipping occurred in the in-person and mail in ballot votes in the majority of precincts in Chester County:
https://t.co/4jf6hnJOFn
https://t.co/IFRrugi5Bg

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

🚨CHESTER COUNTY, PA🚨- AN *IDENTICAL* NUMBER OF PRECINCTS IN 2016 AND 2020 HAVE A PATTERN SUSPICIOUS FOR VOTE SWAPPING IN THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE. 118 PRECINCTS IN THE 2016 TOTAL VOTES (BEFORE MAIL-IN BALLOTS) HAD THE PATTERN AFFECT THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE. 118 PRECINCTS IN THE 2020 "ELECTION DAY" IN-PERSON VOTES HAD THE PATTERN AFFECT THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE. IF AN ALGORITHM CAUSED THE PATTERN, WAS THE SAME ALGORITHM THAT WAS USED IN 2016 ALSO USED IN 2020 ON THE PRESIDENTIAL RACE FOR THE IN-PERSON VOTES? OR IS THIS A NATURAL OUTCOME FOR BOTH ELECTIONS?

In 2016 in Chester County, almost all voting was in person on election day, except for absentee ballots. 118 of 228 precincts (51.75%) had a pattern suspicious for vote swapping found in the Presidential race. This pattern affected Trump negatively and his Democrat opponent positively. It occurred in just over half of all precincts in the county.
See the data from this election here: https://t.co/VEBlwHSkMi

The 2020 in-person "Election Day" votes in Chester County showed 118 of 230 precincts with a pattern suspicious for vote swapping in the Presidential race (51.3%). This pattern affected Trump negatively and his Democrat opponent positively. It occurred in just over half of all precincts in the county.

Despite each election having 118 precincts with the pattern in the Presidential race, the precincts affected were NOT all the same when you compare which precincts had the pattern in each election.

This outcome is very suspicious since the precincts affected change from 2016 to 2020.

THE PATTERN EXPLAINED: Think of it this way - if you had groups of Republican and Democratic candidates running for multiple different races each election, they would all bring in a varied number of votes for their results in each precinct/municipality. If a bad actor decided they wanted to manipulate the President race for example, by taking many votes off the Republican Presidential candidate in each precinct, and adding them on to the Democratic Presidential candidate in each precinct, this could cause the Republican Presidential candidate's number of votes to go LOWER than all the other Republican candidates' vote totals in that precinct. It could also cause the Democratic Presidential candidate's vote total to go HIGHER than the remaining Democratic candidates' vote totals in that precinct.

THIS EXACT SCENARIO of the Republican Presidential candidate getting the lowest votes of all Republican candidates and the Democratic Presidential candidate getting the highest votes of all Democratic candidates happens repeatedly in many precincts across Chester County during the last three Presidential elections. It is seen in 2016, 2020 and 2024 (2024 data coming soon).

This suspicious pattern is found in publicly posted county precinct reports.

133 precincts (58%) in total have the pattern suspicious for vote swapping in the 2020 in-person Election Day votes in Chester County. While alarming and concerning, it must be pointed out that this is significantly less than the mail-in ballot votes, where 89% of precincts had the pattern.

15 of the 133 precincts had the suspicious pattern affect other races, which can be seen in the photos of data below.

An investigation into precinct and mail-in ballot tabulator software is needed immediately to find out the cause of the pattern.

To see the 2020 precinct report showing the in-person Election Day votes, click here (CHOOSE 2020 GENERAL):
https://t.co/3YybYRdrnQ

The photos below show the following:

1. The precincts that have the pattern suspicious for vote swapping in the 2020 Election Day votes

2. A comparison showing the 118 precincts in 2016 and 2020 with the suspicious pattern affecting the Presidential race

[Volunteer Data @DataVolunteer]

🚨CHESTER COUNTY POSTS NEW CONFUSING REPORTING DOCUMENTS AND WEBSITE

Chester County's new confusing reporting documents and website:
https://t.co/O67yNR32IE

Since at least 2012, Chester County would create easily readable precinct reports for each precinct in the county to show their election results. However, starting with this Municipal election, they adopted a new reporting website and documents that no longer show precinct reports laid out like they used to. Why did they suddenly decide to do this? The new reporting documents and website are much harder to navigate. They are not your typical "precinct" report like they have been creating for well over a decade.

From 2020 to the 2025 Primary Election, they used a document with "Electionware" written on it to lay out each of their 230 precinct's voting results. See an example here: https://t.co/djRvBiJ8sG

The document would break down vote method by candidate in each precinct. You could see how many mail-in votes, Election Day votes and Provisional votes each candidate in each precinct had. It showed all the races from each precinct together in each precinct report, so you could compare each candidate's votes with all the other candidates that ran in that same precinct. Why did they not post the old document this election?

**UPDATE: The county has posted a new "Electionware" document with unofficial election summary results. However, it still is not in the old format. It still makes it difficult to compare each candidate's votes with all the other candidates that ran in the same precinct. Why is the county suddenly changing the way they report their elections? Why are they making it harder for citizens to analyze? See the new document here:
https://t.co/rkyHNE3kIa