- JoNova - https://www.joannenova.com.au -

Expert criminal profilers talk about “sovereign scale vote fraud” in the US

US Flag, Flying.Expert criminal profilers who work for insurance companies looked at the 2020 election and saw a “sovereign level crime”. A crime so big that parts of the government must have been “a participant, active or passive, enabling vote fraud.” These were part of the team that didn’t investigate Hunter Bidens lap top for nearly a year….

The criminal profilers estimate that the crime was so well developed that small runs of fraud must have been already at work, in test runs in past elections, and they want to hunt for that evidence now…

And they warn that unless they are caught, the fraudsters will only grow. The good news is that there is already insurance software that can check and catch dead, moved, and out of state voters on-the-spot as they try to vote. But the legislatures and FBI aren’t going to do that unless The People speak loudly and speak now…

If these experts can predict where and when the worst future election fraud is most likely to occur, we just hope that somehow someway there predictions can be used to stop it.

The Sovereign Crime of Industrial Scale Vote Fraud

Our team members were the lead builders of one of the world’s most sophisticated criminal profiling systems in use by law enforcement today.  We broke the eBay auction fraud rings and deployed a never-before-used technology to end auction fraud as an emerging crime category. We identified numerous Medicaid fraud rings and were hired by most of the top 10 property and casualty insurance firms to solve auto crash rings that eluded the FBI and every fraud technology.

It’s what the government agencies didn’t do that reveals the sovereign involvement.

The national government refusing to investigate the most egregious examples of voter fraud like hundreds of thousands of more ballots than voters in several states, that is a pretty good indicator that they are passive participants in industrial level vote fraud.

The refusal of the FBI to fully investigate Jesse Morgan’s truck with the hundreds of thousands of ballots going from New York to Pennsylvania – yet dispatching agents to a NASCAR location to investigate a garage pull-down they hoped was a noose – well, that’s a good indicator, too.

Pretty clearly, the evidence is piling up that the FBI had zero interest in trucks with ballots crossing state lines, ballots being shredded in Maricopa County, tens of thousands of ballots received before being mailed and all sorts of other clues any competent law enforcement agency would at least investigate.

The experts were not interested in the 2020 election though  — it was “too obvious”:

There was no interest on our profilers’ part in doing investigation of massive voter fraud.  They felt it was so obvious and the current work being done by citizens and published on hard-to-find blogs was state-of-the-art and no further investigations would find much more. Their comments were striking because they said the data easily available showed the election fraud patterns had two very alarming characteristics: It was not the first time this was tried, and it will be performed again, at scale, in the next election.

Fraud behaviour evolves — which means it doesn’t just come out of nowhere, and future directions can be predicted.

The sociology of fraud has a start, test runs, and techniques and teams that grow.  Successful sub-branches take over:

Fraud rings, when organized, grow.  They continue to expand with new entrants, slightly different profiles, corrupting more people with money that dwarfs what one might make honestly. Fraud techniques are like an organic species: what works, thrives; and what fails, dies out.  Patterns emerge.  Patterns equal prediction and prediction enables eradication.

The profiling team were not interested in the 2020 election where the fraud was so obvious. They’d rather hunt through past elections to find the early runs they are now sure must be there:

The team, educated in some of the most sophisticated organized fraud tactics, posited that this was not a dry run.  Their thesis is that if one were to seriously evaluate the balloting in many states for 2014, 2016 and 2018, one will find traces of what happened in 2020.  That project is under discussion.

The US Supreme Court inaction invites more fraud

Without any punishment or consequences there is no way this fraud will not be used in 2022 and so on.

Fraud perps are greedy and when left to commit fraud, for which there was likely millions of dollars in remuneration either presently or in the future, they are not going to stop. As fraudsters recognize that national law enforcement refuses to investigate and the courts will not look at evidence, they are emboldened.  Who wouldn’t be?

Our courts and law enforcement are saying “come, commit all the fraud you want, we won’t investigate, and if there is litigation, we will toss it out on procedural grounds.”

If anyone protests, the FBI may raid their home with an assault vehicle.  Don’t believe me, well, meet Christopher Worrell.

A lot of the standard level fraud could be stopped live if only there was the will to do it

It’s almost like election officials are going out of their way to avoid catching cheats:

We have technologies that can identify dead voters the moment they cast a ballot.  We can identify people who are out-of-state, voted twice, are underage, live in a vacant lot or a UPS or FedEx postal box.  We can even show a photo of that vacant lot so you can see where your fake neighbor claims to live.

Literally, the second their ballot is counted, they can be flagged as a likely fraud.

Yes, we can deploy that technology today.  We have done it in the insurance industry for decades.

We can predict where election fraud is going to happen.  We can predict how it is going to be done.  We can deploy technologies to identify likely fraud within seconds of when it happens.

The question is, if the government is pretty much in on the election fraud, does it really matter?

Jay Valentine’s site.

9.4 out of 10 based on 116 ratings