Rep. Daire Rendon says she has evidence of “systemic election fraud” in her comments on the Michigan Senate Oversight Committee’s newly released 2020 election report. Senator Edward McBroom chaired the committee. The committee allegedly found no evidence of widespread voter fraud. Rendon disagrees but leaves open the basis for her statement:
“I have read and considered the June 23 report titled ‘Report on the November 2020 Election in Michigan’ from the Michigan Senate Oversight Committee.
“The Michigan Senate Oversight Committee concluded their investigation without examining appropriate evidence, expert reports or requesting testimony from qualified experts. The report concludes that there was ‘no widespread or systematic fraud in Michigan’s execution of the 2020 election.’ And yet, the Oversight Committee Chair stated in his executive summary that ‘this investigation should not be considered exhaustive’ and that ‘every possible investigative avenue was not undertaken’.”
“I am in receipt of evidence reflecting systematic election fraud in Michigan that occurred in the November 2020 election.
“Many Michigan voters believe that the Michigan Senate Oversight Committee’s conclusion was formed without a proper investigation, and so I encourage attorneys in Michigan and beyond to pursue legal avenues that will reveal truth and transparency to the citizens of the United States.”
The committee did recommend “statutory improvements” to the elections system. They also recognized their investigation was not “exhaustive.”
“This Committee found no evidence of widespread or systematic fraud in Michigan’s prosecution of the 2020 election. However, we cannot and should not overlook severe weaknesses in our election system. Whether it is lack of clarity in the tabulation of ballots, unnecessary barriers to ensuring that every lawfully cast ballot is counted, inconsistent poll worker or challenger training, or simply a system not primarily designed to handle ballots cast absentee or otherwise prior to Election Day, it is the opinion of this Committee that the Legislature has a duty to make statutory improvements to our elections system.”
“This Committee exhausted every resource available to it to thoroughly and faithfully examine our elections process in Michigan and drill down on claims and testimony specific to the 2020 election. However, this investigation should not be considered exhaustive. Remaining conscientious of the limitations of this Committee, every possible investigative avenue was not undertaken. Nevertheless, this Committee stands steadfastly behind the recommendation that our current elections system requires change in order to meet the future challenges presented by modern voting preferences, behaviors, and threats. There are clear weaknesses in our elections system that require legislative remedy.”
The general outline for their investigation is captured below. They focused on 13 areas of concern:
The Oversight Committee devoted about 5 pages of the 55-page report to attorney Matt DePerno and his findings in Antrim County. Their discussion of his evidence was scathing. The committee stated in multiple places that the experts and forensics used to show election fraud were “misleading and irresponsible.”
Notably, the committee stated that Allied Security Operations Group’s (ASOG) Antrim County Forensic Report “mislead citizens,” explaining that ASOG left out critical information that would have provided contextual explanations for the vote flip on Nov. 3. The committee stated that the “data was available to ASOG and others utilizing the previous chart, yet they chose not to provide the context nor the additional data.”
The first chart is the one presented by ASOG. The second is the one presented by the Oversight Committee. It is unclear why ASOG did not supply the additional first entry, which is where the committee may find issue.
DePerno disputes the findings, citing his court filings on his DePerno Law website.
The committee concludes that the errors on the part of the Antrim County clerk and staff were avoidable but also commended them for correcting them and giving “their time for the canvass and hand recount.” They recommended “logic and accuracy tests with penalties for failing to do so” in the future.
The committee also recommended an inquiry by the state’s Attorney General to “consider investigating those who have been utilizing misleading and false information about Antrim County to raise money or publicity for their own ends. The Committee finds those promoting Antrim County as the prime evidence of a nationwide conspiracy to steal the election place all other statements and actions they make in a position of zero credibility.”
The idea of fractional voting has been discussed in many circles as one explanation for irregularities in the data. It was allegedly proven by Dr. Shiva, an MIT data scientist. However, the committee found no evidence of fractional voting, despite “repeated requests from the chair and assurances from those making the allegation.”
They also found no evidence of internet connections, another hotly contested claim.
“It is true that every tabulator was connected to a local area network (LAN), which would create the same icon on a computer screen indicating a network connection as is shown by an internet-accessible network. This may be a source of some of the confusion.”
“Many theories and speculation regarding tabulators not at the TCF Center also include a component that necessitates an internet connection. It is particularly important to note that Dominion voting machines that are not part of an absentee voter counting board do not have built-in modems or wireless internet. Reports to the contrary are false, with some falsely labeling non-Dominion machines as Dominion machines to make it appear as if they do have wireless internet capabilities. The secure cellular modems some clerks use to transmit the unofficial results to the county clerk are not even turned on or connected to the tabulators until after the official results are printed by the individual machine.”
Citizens in Michigan have delivered at least 10,000 affidavits demanding a full forensic audit of the election, according to DePerno. Election integrity activist Patrick Colbeck says the audit story has not been fully told without a full forensic audit. SoS Jocelyn Benson only performed a risk-limiting audit (a limited recount), with a sampling of ballots that was very limited. Jovan Hutton Pulitzer discusses his thoughts on the Michigan Oversight report Monday. He is an expert in the field of forensic auditing of ballots. He worries that some in the Michigan legislature either do not fully grasp what a full forensic audit really looks like—or they do—and they are pretending they do not. He also stated that Michigan has performed a fractional audit only—which is, in his opinion, meaningless. However, he confirmed that if Michigan genuinely wants to perform one, they should look to Arizona for their blueprint. He said that the committee “filled the Michigan people full of sh$%t with their report.” He feels that Michigan voter’s civil rights were violated because they have not performed a proper audit.