from The Gateway Pundit:
The Gateway Pundit reported earlier on Jerome Corsi, Ph.D., and Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., meeting with the official Ohio Secretary of State’s Inquiry regarding alleged evidence of secret algorithms encoded into the Ohio State Board of Elections official Ohio voter registration database with a presumed purpose of facilitating mail-in ballot fraud.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
In a one-hour-and-twenty-minute meeting, Corsi and Pacquette presented to Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose’s office a series of voter ID scatterplots for various counties. Corsi and Pacquette told The Gateway Pundit that these scatterplots revealed undeniable evidence that mathematical formulas had been secretly applied to create a cryptographic assignment of State Board of Election Voter ID numbers in Ohio, a fact previously unknown to the Ohio Board of Elections.
On Monday, a complaint was filed with the Ohio Secretary of State — with all the documentation on the CRYPTOGRAPHIC ALGORITHM that Dr. ANDREW PAQUETTE found embedded in the Ohio Board of Elections Official Database.
GodsFiveStones suggests that the preliminary report submitted to the Ohio Secretary of State and the Ohio Attorney General on Monday, September 16, 2024, Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., identified a complex cryptographic algorithm embedded in the voter identification numbers of three counties in the Ohio State Board of Elections voter registration that he believes were designed “for the purpose of covert data manipulation.”
In his 22-page heavily illustrated mathematical analysis, Paquette has allegedly discovered that an algorithmic scheme based on modular mathematics was employed, likely unbeknownst to Ohio State Board of Election officials, to determine the assignment of voter identification (ID) numbers in three Ohio counties: Franklin, Lucas, and Montgomery.
Paquette explained the principal question of his investigation in Ohio: “Do Ohio’s voter rolls exhibit evidence of algorithmic manipulation for covert tagging or selective data obstruction? Paquette answered both questions in the affirmative. He stressed: “For this paper, the issue isn’t whether ‘algorithms’ were used to assign or modify Ohio voter roll identification numbers. Literally, they were. The real issue is whether the algorithms used were unnecessarily complex, performed hidden or inexplicable tasks, or exhibited any unusual characteristics.”
Further, Paquette allegedly discovered that a modular algorithm encryption scheme was embedded in the ID numbering in Franklin, Lucas, and Montgomery counties by first finding a pattern where ID numbers were incrementing unusually by “gaps” divisible by 8, such that the following ID assigned was +8 the previous, with gaps of 8, 16, and 24, such that ID number 27is incremented next to ID number 35 (+8 from 27), next to 43 (+8 from 35), next to 51 (+8 from 43), to 59 (+8 from 51). The arithmetic algorithm then assigns the following numbers in an offset from ID 59 to ID 65 (+6 from 59) before reverting to another sequence of +8 offsets. Originally, Paquette called the algorithm the “octagon” before realizing he was dealing with modular arithmetic—a realization that caused Paquette to relabel the algorithm “Modulus 8.”
Read More @ TheGatewayPundit.com
