Most research into election fraud began in the six battleground or swing states, yet after numerous other states reported integrity issues the research has widened. We’re hoping to expand our coverage to every state in the US. The sections below outline what we know so far about Indiana.
The Indiana First Action Report
On March 21, 2022, the grassroots group Indiana First Action released an hour-long video presentation of their research and findings surrounding the 2020 election:
|13:00||Voter Roll Analysis Executive Summary|
|26:40||Legislator Interviews with Curt Nisly and John Jacob|
|38:00||Who IFA spoke with / How do we fix this?|
|43:00||Take the Pledge|
|46:00||County by County Analysis|
|54:30||Past 4 Elections Overlay Analysis|
|57:00||Mail in vs. Early Walk in vs. Election Day result analysis|
|1:03:45||Registration File Anomalies|
|1:09:30||CTCL (Center for Tech & Civic Life) push in Indiana|
|1:11:15||One Day One Vote|
From the door-to-door canvassing performed in Hamilton and Johnson counties, they found that 34-46% of addresses surveyed had some kind of election-related anomaly whether it was a voter who didn’t exist at the address, a vote that was not correctly recorded, or some other kind of concerning record-keeping error.
Similar grassroots canvass efforts are underway in at least eleven states. Learn more about the thousands of irregularities being uncovered in our article on Door-to-Door Canvassing Results.
Election Integrity Scorecard
The Heritage Foundation’s Election Integrity Scorecard is an assessment of each state’s voting laws, written regulations and procedures. Indiana was ranked 14th out of 51.
|Indiana's Total Score||68%|
|Voter ID Implementation||70%|
|Accuracy of Voter Registration Lists||53%|
|Absentee Ballot Management||81%|
|Vote Harvesting/Trafficking Restrictions||75%|
|Access of Election Observers||100%|
|Verification of Citizenship||0%|
|Identification for Voter Assistance||100%|
|Vote Counting Practices||100%|
|Election Litigation Procedures||0%|
|Restriction of Same-day Registration||100%|
|Restriction of Automatic Registration||100%|
|Restriction of Private Funding of Election Officials or Government Agencies||100%|
It’s important to note that the scores above reflect the laws, regulations, and processes that exist within the state, but not whether they were actually followed. In the 2020 election, some states with highly-rated election integrity measures did not uphold them. 1 As The Heritage Foundation reminds us, even the best laws are not worth much unless responsible officials enforce them rigorously. It is up to the citizens of each state to make sure that their elected and appointed public officials do just that.
Seth Keshel’s Trend Analysis
Former US military intelligence officer and statistical analyst Seth Keshel analyzed the trends of voter registrations versus actual votes and discovered alarming anomalies in a number of counties, ones that defy typical historical trends. He has published a report for every state, indicating which counties’ vote counts align with the trend in voter registrations and which have small or large divergences.
|Trump votes||Biden votes||Other votes|
|Officially reported results||1729519 (57.0%)||1242416 (41.0%)||60606 (2.0%)|
|Estimate of potential fraud||74000 (2.4%)|
|Estimate of actual result
(with fraud removed)
|1729519 (58.5%)||1168416 (39.5%)||60606 (2.0%)|
Seth estimates that there may be approximately 74,000 votes for Biden in excess of what Indiana registration trends would indicate — a possible indicator of fraud. Counties with the greatest number of excess votes deserve closer inspection.
Seth has listed Indiana’s Lake County as being among the Nation’s Top 100 Worst Counties in terms of abnormal trends during the 2020 election.
Dr. Doug Frank’s Analysis
Dr. Douglas Frank discovered a strange algorithmic pattern that enabled him to accurately predict voter registration by age and voter turnout by age with a very high degree of accuracy.
The same, exact algorithm (or “key” as Frank calls the mathematical formula) used in one county could be applied to many other counties in Indiana to predict their voter registration and turnout by age, too.
Dr. Frank has performed his analysis on at least 17 other states and has found the same disturbing pattern where he is able to predict the voter turnout rate for every age bracket in many counties based only on US Census Bureau data.
Having registration and turnout rates that repeatedly reflect a common mathematical formula across numerous demographically-unique counties is an indication that voter rolls and votes themselves may have been illegally manipulated via a computer algorithm. In all cases where this has occurred, we believe a forensic audit of the ballots, software logs, election records, and voter rolls is highly necessary.
Bloated Voter Rolls
In Oct 2020, a month before the election, Judicial Watch released a study that found 353 US counties in 29 states had voter registration rates exceeding 100% of the eligible voting-age citizens.
In Indiana the following counties exceeded 100%:
Hamilton County (113%); Boone County (112%); Clark County (105%); Floyd County (103%); Hancock County (103%); Ohio County (102%); Hendricks County (102%); Lake County (101%); Warrick County (100%); Dearborn County (100%)
While this could be a symptom of poor clean-up of voter rolls — where voters that have died or moved interstate are left on the rolls for extended periods of time — it creates significant opportunity for fraudulent ballots to be submitted under the names of expired voters, making them appear legitimate. This was made even easier with the prevalence of mail-in ballots and widespread abandonment of voter ID rules which occurred in many states during the 2020 election.
The door-to-door canvassing across numerous states is proving that “phantom votes” were indeed counted for certain voters who were registered but did not themselves submit a ballot.
Research is also underway to explore disconcerting cases in some states whereby voter rolls appear to have been deliberately padded with false, duplicated, or expired records, possibly for the purpose of providing cover for fraudulent ballots. This is evidenced by graphing the changes to voter rolls over time and observing patterns which appear algorithmically-generated rather than organic, and then drilling down to identify specific anomalous records. We hope to release more findings on these anomalies in the coming weeks.
Electronic Voting Machines
The polling and tabulation equipment used for each county in the US is listed at Verified Voting, although see our disclaimer 2. They also have a detailed database including photographs of the various models of voting equipment. Note that the polling and ballot marking equipment is different to the scanning and tabulation equipment — both need to be highly secure, and in most cases are not.
Voting machines and computerized tabulation equipment have introduced many vulnerabilities and avenues for manipulation in elections. Cybersecurity experts tell us that there is no such thing as a fully secure computer system, and the more complex our voting systems and election systems get, with more moving parts and connections, the more impossible it will be for any state or county to defend against a nation-state-level threat. Local counties running elections can no longer defend against these motivated and well-funded foreign nations. The efficiency gains brought by machines are not reason enough to tolerate the loss of security, accountability, and transparency.
Elections need to return to paper ballots and mechanical or hand counting to minimize the threat of cyber attacks and manipulation by fraud. Let your state representative, county clerk, county commissioners, and Secretary of State know your opinion about this.
The Arizona Ballot Integrity Project is one such initiative promoting new, ultra-secure paper ballots with state-of-the-art security features to prevent fraud and help restore faith in elections. Learn more about the initiative.
Alleged Interference from Mark & Priscilla Zuckerberg
Multiple reports 3 4 5 6 7 8 accuse charities supported by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife of illegally influencing the 2020 presidential election in multiple states, including Indiana. Through their donations of $400 million into charities like The Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), millions poured into the key swing states of Michigan 9, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, as well as Texas, North Carolina, and Virginia, in violation of federal law. 6
25 out of the 26 cities and counties that received at least $1 million from CTCL were won by Biden in 2020. 4
According to Indiana First Action’s report, the largest CTCL grants in Indiana were all won by Biden:
Marion and Lake counties received the windfall of $2,003,930, while the Republican counties of LaPorte, Decatur, Posey, and Washington received a comparative pittance of $100,250. Lake county’s CTCL grant was 23% of the entire county’s budget for elections.
Indiana mirrors national trends with the analysis of 8 swing states by Rep. Claudia Tenney, revealing 90% of donations went to Democrat counties vs 10% to Republican counties ($130,417,301 vs $13,778,219), although Indiana’s percentage was even more skewed: 95% of donations went to Democrat counties, while only 5% went to Republican ones.
Having paid poll workers in one district and only minimal volunteers in Republican districts added to the disparity while counting the votes, which could lead to inaccurate tallies.
As of March 2022, twelve states have either banned or severely restricted the acceptance and use of private funds for state and local elections: AZ, AK, FL, GA, ID, IN, KS, MS, ND, OH, TN, and TX. Another 5 states have passed anti-Zuckerbucks legislation that is awaiting a Republican governor’s signature: AL, OK, SD and VA. We’re hoping that more will soon follow suit.
Volunteers are needed to help verify the irregularities found. One key way this is done is through voter canvassing, with teams analyzing the county and state records and voter rolls, and others going door-to-door to identify whether the records match the actual residents living at the address.
State Representatives Supporting Election Integrity & Audits
Following the results of the Maricopa Arizona Forensic Audit, 188 state representatives from 39 states signed a letter asking for forensic audits in all 50 states. The signatories for Indiana include:
- Representative Curt Nisly
- Representative John Jacob
Indiana Congressman Jim Banks and Congressman Jim Baird are part of the US Congress Election Integrity Caucus, a group of 55 federal members working together on issues of election integrity to ensure that Americans in every state and territory have confidence in free, fair, accurate, and transparent elections.
Election Audit Groups on Telegram
To join the grassroots efforts in pursuing election integrity and audits of the 2020 election in Indiana, you can join the following groups on Telegram:
- Indiana Audit Force
- Indiana Audit Force Discussion
- Indiana First Action
- Indiana One Six (helping Jan 6 political prisoners)
- Indiana One Six Discussion (helping Jan 6 political prisoners)
For other states, see our Full List of Telegram Channels.
ElectionFraud20.org has no affiliation with nor any responsibility for these channels. Discern carefully, as some users and even admins of channels have shown obstruction to transparent audits of our elections.
We aim to publish links to both the raw election data and voter registration data for Indiana so that citizens and researchers can analyze this information for themselves.
|Certified Election Results||
In most states, the certified election results are available from the Secretary of State or State Board of Elections. Check their website for details. States are also required by HAVA law to inform the public of how many absentee ballots were both sent and received to uniformed services and overseas voters.
|Voter Registration Rolls/Database||
In some states, these are freely available from the Secretary of State or State Board of Elections. Check their website. In other states, voter rolls must be purchased and/or accessed via a signed legal agreement. Some officials are also obstructing access to the rolls, to make auditing difficult. Let us know via Telegram or via the comment section below if you experience issues.
|Cast Vote Records||Ordros Analytics has collated a repository of Cast Vote Records (CVRs) which list everyone who voted in the Nov 2020 election. Only some counties in some states are represented, but the list is growing.|
|The New York Times 2020 Election Results||Results for all states, with several maps and charts.|
|Data Explorer Tool||Our own tool for inspecting the 2020 New York Times data, including the time-series data of how the counting progressed. Also provides download links for raw JSON or CSV data, including counts for every precinct and county.|
|US Election Atlas||
Detailed results for 2020 and previous years. Some data is freely accessible on their website, while some, such as detailed historic results in CSV format, are purchasable for a fee.
This appears to be the source commonly used by Seth Keshel for his analysis, although we have not officially confirmed this.
|2020 General Election Data & Research||A broad collection of national stats, vote and registration counts, time-series data, voting machine information and manuals, PDF reports, and other research collated by citizen auditors.|
|Election Night Time-Series Data from Edison||
Provides more detail than is available from the New York Times, and includes numerous interactive charts.
Download ZIP of Raw Data
Published by Jeff O’Donnell, MagaRaccoon.com
|Weekly HAVV SSN Reports||
Social Security Administration (SSA) Weekly Data for Help America Vote Verification (HAVV) Transactions by State.
Learn more about this data
Published by Jeff O’Donnell, MagaRaccoon.com
The following list of election allegations and links was collated by HereIsTheEvidence.com with public contributions. Some items have not been reviewed for accuracy, but we provide them below in case they contain important information that we have not covered elsewhere. Remember to use your own discernment.
Beyond Indiana, additional links of nationwide relevance are available on our Further Leads page.
Footnotes & References
Looking at the nationwide trends over the 2020 election, it became commonplace to stretch or completely ignore the laws for absentee/mail-in ballot eligibility, bulk ballot collection, independent observation, voter ID, signature verification, citizenship verification, removal of inactive/ineligible voters from rolls, voting machine accreditation, retention of election records, transparency of operations, and numerous other laws. Most breaches have not yet been prosecuted. ↩
Verified Voting has some useful information on their website, however we feel the need to caution visitors about the partisan ties and Democrat influence within the organization. According to The Gateway Pundit: 10
Barbara Simons, Board Chair of Verified Voting, was appointed by top-ranking Democrats (Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and later Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer) to the seemingly-corrupt and powerful U.S. Election Assistance Commission (EAC).
Verified Voting also appear to have hidden the fact that cybersecurity consultant and New Hampshire election auditor Harri Hursti was previously a member of the organization, with all mention of him removed from their website two days after being selected for the audit, without explanation.
Utilize the VV website with these questionable issues in mind. ↩
American Voters Alliance & The Amistad Project: “The Legitimacy and Effect of Private Funding in Federal and State Electoral Processes”, Dec 14, 2020. ↩
RealClear Investigations: “How Zuckerberg Millions Paid for Progressives to Work With 2020 Vote Officials Nationwide”, May 26, 2021. The article outlines many of the specifics about how the funds were spent. ↩
“39 Election fraud witnesses take case to Michigan Supreme Court, one alleges outside influence by Zuckerberg funded charities”, The Sara Carter Show, Dec 3, 2020 ↩ ↩2
Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute, as reported in The Federalist: “The 2020 Election Wasn’t Stolen, It Was Bought By Mark Zuckerberg”, Oct 12, 2021. ↩
US Representative Claudia Tenney: “New Information Confirms Zuckerberg-Connected Group Funneled Majority of Election Payments to Democrat-Leaning Counties”, Dec 20, 2021 ↩
Do you have more information about what happened in Indiana? Share in the comments below.