Election Fraud in Pennsylvania

Number of disputed ballots	500,000 votes (approx.)
Joe Biden’s winning margin	81,660 votes (1.2%)
Pennsylvania’s electoral college votes under dispute	20 votes (36 would need to be flipped for a Trump win)
Independent forensic audit investigation	❌ Audit process was initiated, but stonewalled by Senate President Corman

Key Allegations

• The state supreme court permitted lax security controls for mail-in ballots, contravening the US constitution ^{1 2}

• The state’s DoS/SURE system records indicate that only 6,760,230 total voters actually voted, and yet 6,962,607 total ballots were cast (a discrepancy of 202,377 votes). 6,931,060 of these were eventually counted in the presidential race (a discrepancy of 170,830). ^{3 4}

• 882,777 ballots were entered without any independent observation (uninspected), against the law of Pennsylvania - all done in the middle of the night, when Biden was behind by 600,000 votes. ⁵

• Significant statistical anomalies. See below for examples.

• Ballot counts reached impossible numbers, and were later corrected without transparent explanation ¹

• In the early morning hours after election night, the votes for Joe Biden increased by 578,014 while Trump’s only increased 3,290 during that same period (a ratio of 99.5% to Biden, 0.5% to Trump). ⁵ This has not been explained.

• A USPS-contracted trucker alleged in a sworn affidavit that he transported about 144,000 to 288,000 completed ballots from New York to Pennsylvania on Oct. 21 and the trailer disappeared. He wasn’t given any notice about his trailer. “The next day, it just got weirder. As I arrived at the Lancaster USPS with my tractor, I went to hook up to my trailer and the trailer was gone,” Jesse Morgan said in a media statement. ⁶

• The day prior to the election, ballot records indicated that 2.7 million ballots had been sent out. The day after the election, this number mysteriously increased by 400,000. This also has not been explained. ¹

• So-called “naked ballots”—mail-in/absentee ballots arriving without being sealed in an envelope, as required by law—were a major problem. ³

• 75,505 ballots were added to the data 12 days after the election, with no explanation ¹

• 154,585 ballots were either dated impossibly early, or mailed too late, and yet were still counted ¹

• 1,573 ballots came from voters over 100 years old ¹

• Attempts by state and federal members to obtain data have been obstructed ¹

• Courts have refused to hear the evidence ⁵

• Philadelphia has had the nation’s highest rates of fraud during past elections and deserves critical examination ⁵

Senate Committee Report by Francis X. Ryan ¹

On December 16, 2020, the US Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs held a full committee hearing, examining irregularities in the 2020 Election. Representing Pennsylvania, Francis X. Ryan stated:

The mail in-ballots system for the general election of 2020 in Pennsylvania was so fraught with inconsistencies and irregularities that the reliability of the mail-in votes in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania is impossible to rely upon.”

— The Honorable Francis X. Ryan, State Representative, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ¹

Francis X. Ryan also submitted the following specific concerns:

1. State Supreme Court undermining of authenticity controls

Pennsylvania supreme court undermined the controls inherent in Act 77 of 2019 which included:

• Extended mail-in ballot deadline to 3 days after election ⁷
• Mandated that ballots mailed without a postmark would be presumed to be received
• Allowed use of drop-boxes for collection of votes
• Skipped authentication of mail-in ballots, treating them dissimilarly and eliminating a critical safeguard against fraud

It’s believed that relaxing these controls permitted the issues that follow.

2. Counting irregularities, and lack of oversight controls

“At the county level the pattern of inconsistencies is easily seen. For instance, Over-vote in Philadelphia County – On November 4th at 11:30am, the Department of State (DOS) posted updated mail in vote counts for Philadelphia County. The number of ballots reported to have been counted was an impossible 508,112 ballots despite the fact that only 432,873 ballots had been issued to voters in that county. Later that day, the ballots counted number was reduced but this begs the question, who had the authority to add and subtract votes on the ballot counts reported to the Department of State? Even if this was simply a data entry error, the lack of internal controls over such reporting necessitates a review of the numbers, the process and system access.” ¹

3. Unexplained changes in ballot records

“Additionally, in a data file received on November 4, 2020, the Commonwealth’s PA Open Data sites reported over 3.1 million mail in ballots sent out. The CSV file from the state on November 4 depicts 3.1 million mail in ballots sent out but on November 2, the information was provided that only 2.7 million ballots had been sent out. This discrepancy of approximately 400,000 ballots from November 2 to November 4 has not been explained.

“Furthermore, a newly available voter dataset available on data.pa.gov which had been offline for weeks indicated that it was last updated on 11/16/2020. The download of 11/16 shows 75,505 more ballots returned on 11/16 than the download from 11/15. Therefore, from 11/15 to 11/16, 75,505 ballots were added to the dataset with no explanation.”

“Due to the magnitude of the potential discrepancies and closeness to the elections the results of the 2020 presidential election of pennsylvania would just be completely difficult if not impossible to determine with conclusiveness.”

4. Ballots with invalid dates

“Mail Date irregularities to include ballots mailed before the ballot was finalized, ballots mailed late and ballots mailed inconsistent with enacted legislation relative to mail in ballots: 154,584 ballots.”

5. Number of votes over 100 years old

“Voter Date of Birth irregularities: (voters over age 100): 1573 ballots”

6. Lack of transparency

“Before and after the election of November 3, 2020, the efforts by the State Government Committee and other members of the PA Legislature to obtain oversight information and relevant data to confirm or deny claims of improprieties were stymied. For instance, a hearing sought by Dominion Voting Systems with the State Government Committee of the PA House, which was scheduled for November 20, 2020, was cancelled by Dominion at the last-minute citing litigation concerns. Right to know requests were similarly not responded to except by delay from the Executive Branch until well into January 2021.”

“Without knowing the answer to these questions and due to the magnitude of the discrepancies and the closeness of the election, the results of the 2020 presidential election in Pennsylvania cannot be conclusively determined.”

“2000 Mules” Reveals Ballot Harvesting Operation

The May 2022 documentary 2000 Mules revealed video evidence of a coordinated, funded, illegal ballot trafficking network across critical swing states including Arizona, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada, and Texas.

The documentary explains how True the Vote were able to identify over 2,000 ballot traffickers by obtaining 2 petabytes of geofencing cellphone ping data purchased from brokers. Their threshold for identifying a mule was if they visited at least 10 drop boxes and made at least 5 visits to a non-profit organization which showed evidence of functioning as a ballot “stash house”. They then obtained 4 million minutes of drop box video surveillance footage through FOIA requests which showed the traffickers in action. ⁸

PENNSYLVANIA
Mules identified:	1,150
Drop boxes involved:	45
Estimated illegal votes:	275,000

This massive number of votes was more than enough in itself to tip Pennsylvania’s election outcome where Biden supposedly won by 81,660 votes.

Learn More About 2000 Mules

Statistical Anomalies

• John R. Lott, the Senior Advisor for Research and Statistics at the US Department of Justice, wrote a paper that outlines several major statistical issues, especially within Allegheny and Philadelphia Counties. ⁹ As one example, he notes that Trump’s percentage of absentee votes was 3.4% lower in Allegheny County border precincts (where fraud is alleged to have occurred) compared with precincts just across the street in neighboring counties.

• Convoluted election data that appeared to show four instances where votes were subtracted from the totals, and another four batches (or “vote dumps”) where the counts were abnormally weighted towards Biden ¹⁰

• After finding large statistical impossibilities in Georgia ¹¹, Mathematician Edward Solomon found that Pennsylvania also had similar indications of a fraudulent algorithm, although with a few twists.

  His detailed report and affidavit alleges that hundreds of ballot batch tallies across multiple precincts had mathematically improbable results, which suggests there may have been a fraudulent computer algorithm switching votes to reach a specific target fraction. The algorithm appeared to be switched on for short periods, and then switched off and moved to another precinct to avoid detection. He predicts that 124,649 votes were stolen from President Trump using this method in these four counties alone: Allegheny, Chester, Montgomery and Philadelphia.

• A declaration and a photo suggest that a poll worker used an unsecured USB flash drive to dump an unusually large cache of votes onto vote tabulation machines. The resultant tabulations did not correlate with the mail-in ballots scanned into the machines. [Unverified] ¹²

• Mathematician Bobby Piton, who testified at an election integrity hearing in Arizona (Nov 30, 2020) also later examined voting data from Pennsylvania. ¹³ He reported that out of 9 million records:

  • There were 521,879 unique last names (an unusually high number)
  • Of those, 245,033 or just under 47 percent of the total “only belong to 1 and only 1 person!” In other words, these people have “no parents, siblings, aunts, uncles or cousins that share this particular last name,” Piton noted.

• ElectionFraud20.org has also reviewed the voting and registration trends from 2000 to 2020 and noted anomalies in Westmoreland County, Pennsylvania, among others. Read our article that explains the method and the observations.

Eyewitness Accounts

The following 20min video contains a number of eyewitness testimonies of fraud witnessed in Pennsylvania:

Source: Election Investigation Law

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.

Seth estimates that there may be approximately 504,000 votes for Biden in excess of what Pennsylvania registration trends would indicate — a possible indicator of fraud. Counties with the greatest number of excess votes deserve closer inspection.

Seth has listed Pennsylvania’s Allegheny, Berks, Bucks, Chester, Delaware, Erie, Lackawanna, Luzerne, Montgomery, Northampton, Philadelphia, Westmoreland, and York counties as being among the Nation’s Top 100 Worst Counties in terms of abnormal trends during the 2020 election.

View Seth’s National Summary   View Seth’s Pennsylvania Report

Election Integrity Scorecard

The Heritage Foundation’s Election Integrity Scorecard is an assessment of each state’s voting laws, written regulations and procedures. Pennsylvania was ranked equal 19th out of 51.

View the full Scorecard for Pennsylvania

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. ¹⁴ 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.

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 (a correlation of 0.996).

The same, exact algorithm (or “key” as Frank calls the mathematical formula) used in one county could be applied to many other counties in Pennsylvania 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.

Learn More About Dr. Frank’s Analysis View Dr. Frank’s Report on Pennsylvania

Audit The Vote PA’s Anomalies By County

A helpful explanation on how to understand the county data above is provided in this YouTube video.

Dominion Voting Machines

Pennsylvania used Dominion Voting Machines in at least some counties. Numerous integrity issues have been uncovered with Dominion.

Learn about Dominion

The polling and tabulation equipment used for each county in the US is listed at Verified Voting, although see our disclaimer ¹⁵. 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.

AuditTheVotePA.com has also provided a separate list of all the voting machines used in the state, along with an explanation video:

View Voting Machine List

Alleged Interference from Mark & Priscilla Zuckerberg

Multiple reports ^{16 17 18 19 20 21} accuse charities supported by Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife of illegally influencing the 2020 presidential election in multiple states, including Pennsylvania. 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 ²², Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, Georgia, Nevada, as well as Texas, North Carolina, and Virginia, in violation of federal law. ¹⁹

25 out of the 26 cities and counties that received at least $1 million from CTCL were won by Biden in 2020. ¹⁷

In Pennsylvania, donations were dispersed in a seemingly partisan way: ¹⁶

Counties previously won by Hillary Clinton	$13,063,828	94.7%
Counties previously won by Donald Trump	$692,742	5.3%
Total	$13,756,570

Here are the 10 largest CTCL grants in Pennsylvania and who won each county in 2020: ¹⁷

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.

The American Voter’s Alliance published a detailed investigative report on this issue, as did RealClear Investigations, InfluenceWatch, and Caesar Rodney Election Research Institute.

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.

Voting Trend Anomalies

In our series of articles on election trend analysis, we identified the following statistical outliers for Pennsylvania which deserve further investigation. Visit the linked articles to learn more.

⚠️	Voting Rate Increase	The turnout, or percentage of registered voters who voted, was significantly higher in 2020 than in previous elections, increasing from a range of 57-65% up to 70.2%.
⚠️	Biden’s Vote Gains Far Surpassing Obama’s	The increase in Democrat votes Pennsylvania displayed in 2020 far surpassed the increase achieved in Obama’s successful campaign in 2008. This seems unusual.

Court Hearings

It appears that evidence of fraud has not yet been heard by a court, despite two attempts:

1. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court denied a petition by state lawmakers, seeking review of the election result. The Court’s order invoked “laches” — the legal doctrine that calls for dismissal of complaints filed too late.

2. Despite the above issues, the US Supreme Court declined to hear the case. ³

As of October 2021, the district, state and supreme courts have ruled on several election fraud issues, while numerous other cases are still open. Some cases were dismissed on legal technicalities, preventing evidence from being presented and considered; but a detailed list of cases and outcomes available here show that at a national level, Trump/Republicans have so far prevailed in 18 out of 25 cases that were decided on the merits of the evidence.

View Court Case Outcomes

Election Audits

A small, but state-wide “risk-limiting” audit of 45,000 randomly selected ballots was performed in February 2021. ²³ The process was a smaller version of a “hand recount” which checks that the paper ballots match the official tally. It concluded that the counts were accurate.

Note that a recount does not tend to identify chain of custody issues and the alleged injection or manipulation of fraudulent paper ballots, such as those noted in the above sections. It may simply recount the same fraudulent ballots.

Philadelphia County rejected attempts at further audits claiming that it would duplicate “extensive efforts already undertaken by the Philadelphia County Board of Elections, the Pennsylvania Department of State, state and federal courts, and … the Pennsylvania State Senate”. ²⁴ It’s not clear, however, whether these previous investigations went any deeper than the risk-limiting audit.

If you have any further information, let us know in the comments below.

Forensic Audit

Pennsylvania’s Intergovernmental Operations Committee followed Arizona’s lead and decided a deeper forensic audit was necessary and initiated this process on July 7, 2021.

Senator Doug Mastriano (a Republican, and also the chairman of the Senate Intergovernmental Operations Committee) requested three counties hand over all of their election material in order for them to be audited. All three refused: ²⁵

County	Response
Philadelphia County	“We will not cooperate as this duplicates previous audits” 26
York County	“We will not send materials or provide access to voting machines” 27
Tioga County	“We will not provide access to machines unless the Senate pays for a new set of machines” 28

Governor Tom Wolf and Attorney General Josh Shapiro, both Democrats, instructed counties not to participate in the audits. The Department of State then gave a directive to all 67 counties that they must block unauthorized third party access to their voting machines, or otherwise face decertification. ²⁹

The deadline passed, and none of the counties complied. The Senator sought official subpoenas (legally binding requests) to force the counties to hand over all ballots, records, documents, voting machines and tabulators in order to conduct a forensic audit, but this was blocked. The majority of the Senate Committee supported this move.

Republican Senate President Jake Corman has repeatedly blocked Senator Mastriano’s forensic investigation by demanding that he not send requests to the counties, blocking subpoenas, blocking committee meetings, stripping Mastriano of his investigation and role on the committee, and even removing his entire staff. ^{30 31}

[This was] a move many of my fellow senators feel was an outrageous and unprecedented move unbecoming of a senate leader.

“I don’t know why Senator Corman obstructed my investigation for so long or why he has now hijacked it. What I do know is that if it was up to Senator Corman, there would be no investigation for him to steal. What I also know is that no matter who leads it, the investigation must go forward. I know that the people of Pennsylvania will never settle for a symbolic investigation. They deserve nothing less than a full forensic investigation that gets to the bottom of what happened in the 2020 election, and I’ll be a relentless voice to make sure that’s exactly what happens. I haven’t, and will not retreat.

“The question is why Jake Corman went from ten months of obstructing a forensic investigation to suddenly hijacking it and maligning the hard work we put into making this happen. The people need answers.”

— Senator Doug Mastriano, Aug 26, 2021 ³⁰

Voter Canvassing Results

In the summer of 2021, Audit The Vote PA began working on a canvassing effort in 20 counties across the state to verify the certified results from the 2020 election. This effort was designed to restore voter confidence given all the controversy and unanswered questions surrounding the 2020 election.

The results show that there are egregious discrepancies between the certified result from the State Department and what our canvassers were told from residents at the door.

Preliminary and incomplete results as of Mar 21, 2022. Source: Audit the Vote PA

Lancaster County

As of Feb 1, 2022, 411 doors had been knocked on, with 256 able to be surveyed. ³³

• 37% of houses had some election anomaly occur
• 21.17% had phantom registrations (not belonging to the residents) at the address
• 8.56% had less registrations on record than resident stated
• A massive 26.39% of addresses had a different number of votes on record for 2020 than resident stated. 17.13% had phantom votes and 9.3% were missing votes.

York County

As of Feb 1, 2022, 486 houses had been knocked on, with 206 able to be surveyed. ³³

• 45% of houses had some election anomaly occur
• 23.4% had phantom registrations (not belonging to the residents) at the address
• 13.1% had less registrations on record than resident stated
• A massive 29.2% of addresses had a different number of votes on record for 2020 than resident stated. 15.3% had phantom votes and 13.8% were missing votes.

Video Summary

Watch on Rumble. By Toni Shuppe, Audit the Vote PA, Feb 1, 2022.

While the results are unable to conclude whether Biden or Trump actually won the election, the number of anomalies is likely far greater than the winning margin, deeming the result inconclusive. This indicates that the election results should not have been certified and may be invalid.

Online Survey

Residents of Pennsylvania can complete the following online form to submit their voting information to help match it against the state databases and identify any anomalies.

Other Counties

Results for other counties in PA are due to be released in the coming weeks. Subscribe to @AuditTheVotePA and stay tuned.

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.

Further Updates

Mar 12, 2022	Video Evidence: Jim Allen Instructs Staff To Make It Impossible To Reconcile Ballots In May 2021, James Allen instructed an employee to contact Hart to obtain a Verity key to switch off a setting to allow scanners to accept ballots from any precinct, which is one reason the precincts could not be reconciled. Election Fraud Evidence and Litigation
Jan 15, 2022	Nearly 100 Liberal Organizations Have Access to Pennsylvania’s Voter Rolls Through a public records request Audit the Vote PA (ATVPA) learned that nearly 100 Democrat-funded groups outside of PA have keys to the state’s voter registration system. There’s not a single conservative organization on that list. Liberty Overwatch
Nov 19, 2021	Savage Election Fraud Lawsuit Filed Against Delaware County, PA and Former SOS Kathy Boockvar Liberty Overwatch
Nov 19, 2021	Whistleblower Videos Capture Pennsylvania Election Officials Destroying Evidence A complaint alleges Pennslyvania election officials were tearing tapes ‘into pieces and placing … them into the trash stating they will have a campfire to burn the data.’ The Federalist
Nov 18, 2021	PA County Whistleblower: Data Regarding Thousands of Return Ballots Erased Liberty Overwarch

Election Audit Groups on Telegram

To join the grassroots efforts in pursuing election integrity and audits of the 2020 election in Pennsylvania, you can join the following groups on Telegram:

• AuditTheVotePA
• Audit The Vote (Website)
• PennsylvaniaAudit

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.

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 Pennsylvania include:

• Representative David Zimmerman
• Representative Russ Diamond
• Representative Stephanie Borowicz
• Senator Doug Mastriano

Pennsylvania Congressman Mike Kelly, Congressman Dan Meuser, and Congressman Scott Perry 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.

Raw Data

We aim to publish links to both the raw election data and voter registration data for Pennsylvania so that citizens and researchers can analyze this information for themselves.

Show Raw Data Links

Further Leads

Show List of Further Leads

Footnotes & References

Visitor Comments

Do you have more information about what happened in Pennsylvania? Share in the comments below.

Show Comments