Dirty voter rolls have been around for 30 years. Absentee voting has been around longer. 2024 will be determined by dirty voter rolls tied to Leftist ballot mills - and Republican blindness
last i read they get returned to the PO and that is where the cheaters gather them up. they are in bunches so easy to grab. this is according to postal worker whistle blowers.
Yes, this is what I’ve wondered, if the NGOs are picking up the ballots at the ineligible address they were supposed to be delivered at, or if all of them are being rejected as undeliverable and returned to the sorting facility where they are then picked up by the NGOs. Or is it a bit of both? Some delivered at the ineligible address and some returned to the sorting facility, and the NGOs have to travel around to multiple locations to pick all of them up.
Thank you Jay and your team for all you have done. I hope you have great security. You have a major bull's eye on your back. Many of us will start contributing as soon as website is online. I still think you should call it MEGA - Make Elections Great Again.
Park them at traffic choke points where people can't avoid seeing them. Google will never show people this. Time to go old school. IRL.
Integrate Jay's "Quantum Eye of Truth" into the display. It pings like a submarine sonar scope. It shows "objects" on the scope relative to the current GPS position of the truck. And by objects I mean "bad" ballot addresses that need donations for cleanup.
It's like an instrument that drives around displaying how corrupt the voter rolls are in the immediate vicinity of the truck.
This does not have to be the only avenue of attack. Pummel The BORG!
Operation: "Friends of America"
"How Trump Can Harness the Migrant Invasion to Ensure Victory & Restore the Rule of Law"
It's guerilla election fare. Trump pulls a judo move and puts the deep state on the canvas. Oh look at that. They built a trap for themselves. How ironic.
It’s probably a good idea but it might be best to stay under the radar. Adopting stealth maneuvers will blow their minds because by the time they discover the damage done to their “infrastructure “ it will be too late😂
Jay, Not only do I completely understand your concerns but I believe your technology provides much needed controls in stopping major fraud in elections. The frustrating part is dealing with state election officials (especially in swing states where cheating is an art form) that do not want clean voter rolls and do not want to stop mailing ballots to illegitimate addresses. They do not want to stop the cheating.
That’s because those “ Republican” are probably benefiting from it directly or indirectly as well. There are no true country first patriots anymore they are lifelong gov leaches that all want endless power and money.
What I don't understand is if a letter is undeliverable, it's returned to sender. Isn't this at least a misdemeanor if not a felony? I understand it would be hard to police if the practice is rampant...
A lot of things that the Dems do are illegal and... unpunished.
In a fight with the Dems, when, against all experience with the Dems' illegality, we expect the legal system to catch and punish this behavior we are preventing ourselves from acting to counter what the Dems are doing. We have to accept that the Dems are doing what they are doing and move on to countering what they are doing.
This is September 16… Hey JV where are you… Is this a scam… Is it a hoax… Where the hell are you… You have turned into a controversial subject… And now you are nowhere to be seen or heard……your communication skills are puzzling… Though you project that you are a technical genius… America needs you… Where the hell are you?
Maybe this is why Trump and the rest of the election integrity groups are not talking about him. I would imagine Steve Bannons warroom would be having him on. I hope I’m wrong we can’t afford for Jay to be a fake
Agree. I have been following Jay for awhile and I hope that everything's okay with him. He should really let us know because so many of us want to donate and get this show on the road!
Jay when you say “we show this” or “when you stop a ballot from going to Walmart …” or when you stopped a register from sending out fake ballots beforehand—how is this done? How can we help? Do we visit our local registrar offices and tell them to show us their voter rolls? Do we hang out at Walmart and abandoned strip malls and wait for the mail carrier to deliver bundles of ballots and then grab them and go? What are you doing when you say “we stopped X” or “we showed them fraud”?
"How can we help? Do we visit our local registrar offices and tell them to show us their voter rolls?... Do we hang out at Walmart and abandoned strip malls and wait for the mail carrier to deliver bundles of ballots and then grab them and go?"
____
It wouldn't hurt to do some investigation on you own on this issue.
Here's what I'd do, it’s a bit hunter-ish in that we need to figure out when the dirty deeds will be done and then lie in wait for the targets to show up. Also, to take into consideration, we need to recognize that there are roughly only 45 days (from election day (November 5th) to the electoral college to December 11, 2024, when the Certificates of Ascertainment Due, and then December 17th when the electoral college meets), to execute and win any challenges to the election results, we need to prepare an action plan (including lawsuits) that can be completed in the 45 days available to us.
Given that, as I see it, there are, at least, three major phases in the election fraud prevention process: (1) prevent the ballots from being mailed out to the invalid addresses (this is what they’re currently doing in Wisconsin and other states); (2) recognizing that industrial-level cheating requires industrial-level cheating mechanisms, surveil and document the capture and Dems’ ballot harvesters at work by sending out teams of monitors to high propensity ballot collection points; and (3) also recognizing that some of the ballots escape the mechanisms used in (1) and get sent out to the invalid addresses, our escapes, (also monitored in Item #2 above) and they won’t be officially processed until election day, we need to be able to quickly detect these ‘escapes’ and try to prevent them from being processed and tabulated by the election officials.
Jay’s tools to monitor the voter records in near real-time provides a mechanism we can use to re-challenge any of the fake addresses and prevent them from being tabulated. Another vector to that same goal of challenging these ballots would be around the signature validation process in the counties.
Understanding that, if this industrial cheating is going on, the processes involved in this fraud process is that there are going to be, at least, two different people signing and two different signatures, one for when they registered to vote and the other for when they submitted their ballots to be counted; there is a very good chance that these signatures will not match and, rather than challenging each voter, the election integrity effort could focus on the signature acceptance process.
For example, I worked as a poll worker during the 2020 election and by real-life, human-based, split-screen signature matching process 15-20% of the signature matches failed on the first review of the signatures; the reasons being many, but the bottom line was that many people don’t have a standard signature that they use so they fail in signature matching. Assuming two people will have a hard time getting their signatures to match, the signature matching process is another tack we can take on eliminating these manufactured ballots.
One, last, method we can use… one designed to externalize some of the findings that need to use, and that must fit within that 45-day interval from Nov. 5th to Dec. 11th, and that sits on top of all of the above, is to publicly increase the visibility to what we’re finding during this process around the overall intermediate findings as this fraud prevention framework unfolds. We don’t want to wait until the cheating has already occurred nor, assuming our legal and pressure campaigns will likely imperfectly prevent the county election officials from trying to get away with their cheating, so we should find some way to regularly publicize the findings and getting these findings to ‘soften up’, so to speak, the public to the idea that cheating is, indeed, taking place.
Possibly, weekly articles in friendly outlets or press releases of summaries of what is being found and taking place behind the scenes. The hope is that someone grabs hold of the story and starts to make a big deal of what is being found… sort of like a hurricane watch as a big one is starting to form out at sea and that is heading right towards us. Put some reality and urgency what is happening, allowing people time to adjust their thinking, and emotions, to come to grips with what is, in fact, happening… even if we’d rather stick our head in the sand and ignore it.
To my mind, the data and making it available to the GOP is really only part of what should be done, a necessary part but… more of a forcing function that allows other initiatives to work more effectively.
Anyway, that’s what I’d think we can do with the data that Jay’s system is providing us.
EXCELLENT and thoughtful post. Our NY county changed from the old fashioned poll books that people had to sign with a pen, to tablets that use a stylus to sign in. Those tablets must be connected to the internet although they claim they're not, because the poll workers sometimes have to check the signatures.
By the way- I have very good handwriting but my signature written with the stylus on the tablet looks nothing like my beautiful, Catholic school penmanship.
"Those tablets must be connected to the internet although they claim they're not, because the poll workers sometimes have to check the signatures.
...
By the way- I have very good handwriting but my signature written with the stylus on the tablet looks nothing like my beautiful, Catholic school penmanship."
____
First, it's OK for poll books to be connected to the internet, just not the voting or tabulation machines.
Over the last 4 years I've worked the polls both in Nevada and Arizona and the poll books were always connected to the internet, allowing us to update voter registration information like home addresses, name changes, etc. But, the electronic voting machines and/or tabulators were mostly off-line and/or possessed a storage card that allowed cross-validation of the vote totals sent to the central counting locations.
But, with respect to signatures, when we checked signatures we allowed for the fact that writing with a stylus was different so we just tried to get something close. But, the problems with most rejected signatures was more basic that that; I'd see an original signature with, say, first name, middle initial, and last name and the signature submitted for verification was just a scribble.
With some, we'd get to the third try and we'd have to resort to telling them exactly the form that the signature needed to be in and some of them couldn't even do it when we did that so we had to resort to a different kind of identity verification, say, a driver's license.
None of this is available for mail-in ballots... in the past the Dems have tried to 'cure' rejected envelopes containing ballots by having their operatives monitoring the voting process and identifying people's whose envelopes couldn't pass signature verification but, as Jay points out, for most of the manufactured ballots, there is no real human to come in and fix their deficient ballot.
So, signature verifications is almost a impregnable final redoubt, impossible for the Dems to remedy by non-existent 'voters'. Also, signature verification and/or rejection rates would allow us to establish a floor to just how much cheating is going on, the higher the rejection rate the more likely it is that, at a minimum, the number of manufactured ballots that have been submitted by the Dems' cheating machine.
BTW, I started writing this awhile ago and finally got around to finishing it but thanks for your comment on the post.
"Sometimes it seems that the problems we face are insurmountable when it comes to our elections."
____
I think the sense of dread we feel is directly proportional to the inability of the leadership, and I use that term advisedly, to define the real why(s) and then to initiate methods and techniques to 'solve' the problems.
I deeply respect what Jay is trying to do and the tools he's built but, coming from the same world of data analytics and programming as his... plus some others of my own, what he's built is a tool, not the solution to the problem.
Some of the people associated with him in Wisconsin and other states have formulated a method to use his tool to clean the voter roles and it's a great start. But, as of today, few large-scale successes have been had with these efforts... they're promising but, even after the invalid addresses have been pointed out... even after the Registrar of Voters or Secretaries of States are threatened with legal action... the problems are still here.
My experience with combined analytical component and development of full-spectrum solutions informs me that just challenging the legality of sending out ballots to invalid addresses won't be enough. Jay's tools are as good as we need to act right now and maybe even good enough into the future, but, by themselves and in today's world, where the Dems WANT TO CHEAT they are not the full solution.
Something around this approach is likely all that we can hope to implement in the next 50 days but it would be even better if we layer in more actions targeted at increasing the pain that the keepers of the voter roles experience, upping that level of pain to include, not just legal, but an irresistible pressure by the public to, not necessarily solve the whole mess, but to stop running interference for a system that is truly broke.
One important result from a more full-spectrum approach to the whole current cheating paradigm might just be to disrupt what the Dems were planning on doing enough that it'd be less effective at cheating... hopefully, MUCH LESS effective.
Anyway, awhile back I suggested that we're asking Jay to do something beyond what he is capable of doing with his Fractal approach and I still believe that, which is why I've spent the time to lay out this approach in such detail.
Honestly though, I've suggested that the implementers, like those expressing concern here that Jay isn't telling us what we can do, need to have their own forum to have this discussion and refine our approaches to cleaning up the voter rolls... I still think that.
We need our own forum. We can use what Jay's doing as a focus of what we do but we need our own forum to identify action plans.
I also think that, while it's much better what Jay is doing with running the records of interest and getting them to some organization that should act on them, they will not necessarily implement the action plan I laid out above and I fear that we'll get to November 6th and find out that the pressure campaign on these SoS and county Registrar of Voters won't yield enough of a benefit to keep the Dems from stealing the election.
Simple problems benefit from simple solutions and get worse when overly complex solutions are used to fix those simple problems. But.. when we apply simple solutions to more complex problems the problems get more intractable and, eventually, we'll be left scratching our heads wondering why we didn't get the results we expected.
In the statistical field called design of experiments, we'd call this one factor at a time experimentation rather than, the more appropriate for complex systems, many factors at a time approach. We do this so that we can understand the effects of multiple factors interacting with each other and craft an appropriately sophisticated approach to a solution.
The approach I laid out was sophisticated but not overly complex and, in my humble opinion, comes closer to a real, workable, solution to the problem we have with election integrity. It is no more, nor no less, complicated than it needs to be to solve this problem.
Unfortunately today, we're cursed with leadership that can only understand and use simple tools or solutions to do their jobs and solve problems while at the same time the problems they are presented with, like election integrity, are complex.
It's a bad matchup of abilities and problems and everyone gets frustrated because we never solve the problems we have.
In L.A. County the Smartmatic electronic poll book system put the check-in signature at the bottom of the tablet screen. I immediately called out corruption on that layout.
How can my signature on a floating tablet using a stylus be expected to match the original ink signature on a paper voter registration form, when the tablet is suspended in the air, leaving no place for me to anchor my hand on the surface as I would with pen on paper because they put the signature line at the very bottom of the screen.
If I have to sign with my hand "floating" in the air, you would have to dial-down the matching software because my and most voter's signatures will have a low match percentage due to the lack of hand anchoring.
I believe this was an intentional design bug that works as a feature when they need to steal an election. It give them an excuse to dial-down signature authentication fidelity on the machines allowing the fakes to get through without scrutiny.
I think you are correct! Most people, especially young people like my grand kids, no longer know how to write in script, not even their own signatures! Can you believe it? There is no way that you can accurately compare a signature that's written on a paper card with one that's done on a floating tablet with a stylus.
First you asked, "What do you think about ballots on demand which are being used in NY?" ... then, "Also, there is no chain of custody for the actual ballots from the time they are printed to the time they're counted."
___
First, I'm doing this from memory but everything I described here I have either trained on or performed the actual tasks within the last 2 months so I don't think I've left many steps out.
Because the ballots on demand (BoD) might work differently where we used them and what you seem to be asking I'm not clear what exactly you're asking. So, I'm going to describe how we handle a pure, BoD process. So, this was our process:
(1) We get blank ballot stock, no pre-printed ballots of any kind;
(2) In Maricopa County, and also Clark County (Las Vegas), with the electronic pollbook anybody in the county can vote at any of the polling locations in the county. Differences in the ballots for the different municipalities is automatically handled by the SW, changing who each person sees on the ballot based on their address;
(3) When we check the person in with the electronic pollbook, in addition to the differences in the contents of the ballots, the system handles all of the accountability processes you'd expect, allowing us to (a) allowing us to see if they're an valid, active voter, possessing the proper proof of identity and where they reside; (b) if not an valid, active voter, and/or some other form of irregularity has been detected like a ballot already being submitted (but maybe not tabulated yet) by mail that they challenge, they will be allowed to cast a provisional ballot and the mail-in ballot then we can print the provisional ballot for them and they can vote; (c) voiding ballots and allowing people to get a new ballot and vote again (they can only void two ballots before their ballots must be cast provisionally); and (d) the software tracks how many times they have tried to vote and might have spoiled a ballot (they can cast their 2nd and 3rd ballots at a different polling location) but the 3rd try the system automatically prints a provisional ballot and the ballot is segregated from the tabulated ballots by it being put into an envelope that they must sign, date, and supply a contact number.
Many of the processes require a witness of the opposite party and we sign and document each non-standard process step. There is one, additional ballot type printed, a conditional, provisional ballot where one or more of the ID or address verification steps couldn't be completed because the voter didn't have that information on their person... the ballots for these are held for 5 days or until the people brings in the missing documentation.
So, in the BoD system we use in Maricopa County, it never prints a ballot that is not accounted for by either the total ballots tabulated, total provisional or conditional provisional ballots printed, and/or spoiled ballots... all accounted for in our closeout process.
Additionally, all of the blank ballot stock paper are counted (both standard ballots as well as the handicap accessible ballot stock) and it's done before and after we vote, and cross-validated against the sum total of the ballots printed for voters, test printed, or printed and spoiled by a standard witnessed, and documented, process. The whole closeout process takes an hour or more after the polls close and we use a prepared form that includes cross-checks, and we go nowhere until all of the numbers are verified as correct.
The ballots, both tabulated as well as un-tabulated, provisional, are placed in bags with both the printed tabulation of the votes cast by voting precinct, position they're running for, and candidate plus the memory card containing a digital version of the same information, the bag is sealed with tamper-proof seals that are signed and dated by a bi-partisan team of judges; and transported to a centrally located collection point (usually a van with both security and a bi-partisan team) and finally released to the team using a standard, and auditable, documentation process.
You also asked the question preceded by an observation that "Also, there is no chain of custody for the actual ballots from the time they are printed to the time they're counted" but, in Maricopa County (and I assume this is a industry standard process) chain of custody is assured by the above described process. We don't have excess, unspoiled ballots, and the chain of custody is assured by the above described process... the entire team goes nowhere until we finish this process.
Where accountability breaks down... well, where it becomes more opaque... is that the drop box where the provisional/conditional provisional ballots are placed is the same drop box that the mail-in ballots will be dropped.
But, the ballots we print with the BoD system are fully accounted for, well... assuming all polling locations perform their closeout tasks with due diligence.
I suspect, but I have no proof of this, that there might be some of the polling locations that do the closeout activities poorly and make mistakes in the process but, since all of the ballots are provided to them in sealed bags with all of the information they need to re-verify the totals, that these non-compliant polling locations can be brought fully into compliance. (From what I can tell of Detroit's election teams they would struggle getting this process completed.)
I've provided you with an overview of how our BoD system works... really, with the way any system should work... I think it is a well-designed process... but you have to figure out where, if anywhere, the process you are using in your location differs from that process described above. Then, if it varies from that, you'd have to figure out (or ask me again) whether the differences in process steps significantly compromises the integrity of the BoD process.
One final thought... when I worked the 2020 election in Las Vegas, the issue of unaccounted for ballots was a real issue but that was because the state sent out ballots to every voter in the state and many of those voters, because they wanted to vote in-person, brought their ballots with them. That created a real ballot accountability issue, one that I don't think worked to the GOP's advantage. In Vegas, we used voting machines there so, anybody that voted in person stranded a pristine ballot but, even there, once the person voted in person, the person's mail-in ballot was nullified, because we verified whether the person had already voted before we could let them cast another vote; this process worked both for mail-in ballots that had been cast, I personally saw two of these, or mail-in ballots submitted for someone that had already voted in-person.
Dieter- I cannot thank you enough for your brilliant and informative comments. I have been involved in NY state and local politics for decades including running for office, poll watching, running campaigns, taxpayer advocacy, etc.
Although NY is supposedly a Blue/Dem state, many of us who are working on trying to clean up the voter rolls and elections think otherwise because the majority of counties are Red/Rep.
Anyway- to clear up my initial question: currently in my county, they are using ballots on demand for early voting only which is not that many.
Nearly all the ballots will be regular paper ballots that the BoE have printed somewhere. They admit that they will be printing the maximum amount of ballots based on the number of registered voters.
Not sure what happens to all the extras except that the BoE says they keep them for 2 years, then destroy.
Thanks again for all your information and clarity.
"Not sure what happens to all the extras except that the BoE says they keep them for 2 years, then destroy."
___
Yeah, that's a real black hole that might be difficult to get a light shined on it. In the 2020 election in Nevada, when I asked what they were doing with the pristine mail-in ballots that the voters surrendered, we were told that, "trust us, they would be 'shredded'" but nobody supplied anything more than vague statements about the how and, more concerning, there was no documentation or procedures defined that had the same level of accountability that I outlined for ballots cast at the polling place.
It may be too late in the cycle but maybe you could try to force the locale to create a method sheet of sorts for the handling and accountability for these ballots. Maybe even prepare a fully fleshed-out method sheet with cross-checks that fully accounts for these excess ballots.
Doing it on you own wouldn't be a terrible idea, it allows you to clarify your own thinking around what the process needs. Then, if the town seems to be dragging its feet on creating this method sheet, you can use some combination of persuasion and/or other pressure to get the town to adopt the method sheet as their own.
My experience is that when you find people avoiding doing a task like this, more often than not, the hesitation and avoidance that you encounter, is associated with them not clearly seeing how to perform the task. So, if you help them by doing some of the work for them they can, pick up where you left off, and then finish what you've started for them.
Unfortunately, human pride can get in the way and the offer of help is often rejected because, being smart people, entrusted with a job, to accept help is like admitting that they are either, not smart or not qualified to do their job. This is where the human touch is important... making a connection with them so that they can put their ego aside so they can do their job better.
But I think it's still a good idea for you to create the method sheet yourself, it'll firm up your thinking around what needs to be on the method sheet.
In NY we deal with the County Board of elections. Except for school budget votes that are handled by school districts, all our elections are BoE.
Further- the only way you can force the BoE to give you accurate information is to send in a FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) request.
For years, this has been our most effective way of fighting government corruption.
The BoE commissioners often call me back in response to my FOIL requests and after speaking with them I immediately file another request to confirm what they told me.
At this time I am putting together an omnibus FOIL request with specific questions about the election.
This is a very small county so I am amazed at how much fraud there is. The Repub RINOs are worse than the DemonRats in so many ways.
People ignored the video proof from 2020 of all the late-night multiple ballot box drops from the same people over and over at different locations. People ignore proof of James O’Keefe undercover videos. I want to know how I can stop illegal ballots from being mailed out and processed.
I completely agree with you Dino it’s my concern as well. I fact it’s my biggest concern. Half the country is ok with it because the ends justify the means of it keeps orange man bad out of power. This is a cultural problem as well
I agree but if half the country denies that she won this time we stand a much better chance of things being done. Only a small percentage of people even on the right thought the election fraud was legit last time
Yes, besides identifying the ineligible ballots, what is the actual process being employed to stop them, and will additional manpower be able to help increase the success of carrying out this part of the process?
We have been trying to find out what the process is for some time.
Every state is different when it comes to running elections.
Some like NY are run by boards of election. Others by the Secretary of State.
There is no one size fits all solution for dealing with fake, fraudulent or phantom "voters" on the rolls.
Most states do not have an “as of right” ability to challenge either the voter address or the voter.
That's why there are so many lawsuits.
Also, what about Catherine Engelbrecht and True the Vote? She has been doing incredible work for years to stop the steal- she was way ahead of her time.
Anyone here want to claim that she’s some kind of “grifter?” I dare anyone to try and impugn this remarkable patriot.
So what happens if only a thousand people donate to the website?
Does that mean JV only returns a few thousand phony addresses and we lose the election anyway?
I would like to see more info to better understand how this is going to play out once JV and his team identify the fake "voter" addresses.
I live in NY and have experience with our counties' Boards of elections. Most of them tell us to "sue them" when given information we presented proving thousands of phantom voters and/or bad addresses. My own county election commissioner told me they would investigate the bad addresses but thus far it's been crickets.
I totally understand what Jay's fractal tech can do, but what I don't understand is how we can force the power that be- boards of election or secretaries of state- to do the right thing and remove those bad addresses so they won't get a ballot.
Jay have have you shown this to Steve Bannon ( currently a political prisoner) his podcast Warroom had a huge reaching audience. It’s why he’s currently in the gulag just like Peter Navaro. They had to silence his voice just in time for election season. He is scheduled for release just before the selection on Nov 5. His podcast is still going strong.
Jay appeared on the Warroom, I believe it was June 2023. There used to be a video posted of his appearance on the show. There must be more going on behind the scenes that we are not privy to.
I probably heard him on warroom I listen daily to almost every one of this 4 episodes. I think if he would get on again it couldn’t hurt. Lord know Mike Lindell is on every day
Thanks Jay ! Godspeed to you on all your efforts. We need all the help we can get. I hope and pray we raise a lot of money for you, and at least one big donor who you’ve been talking with , steps up.
last i read they get returned to the PO and that is where the cheaters gather them up. they are in bunches so easy to grab. this is according to postal worker whistle blowers.
Yes, this is what I’ve wondered, if the NGOs are picking up the ballots at the ineligible address they were supposed to be delivered at, or if all of them are being rejected as undeliverable and returned to the sorting facility where they are then picked up by the NGOs. Or is it a bit of both? Some delivered at the ineligible address and some returned to the sorting facility, and the NGOs have to travel around to multiple locations to pick all of them up.
This was addressed in a recent Substack.
Even the cats and dogs are thanking you Jay
Thank you Jay and your team for all you have done. I hope you have great security. You have a major bull's eye on your back. Many of us will start contributing as soon as website is online. I still think you should call it MEGA - Make Elections Great Again.
Yes Pat, oMEGA!
Operation: Make Elections Great Again!
Awesome!! A light in a dark world
Yes!!! Jay's Quantum Eye of Truth mobile display.
Electronic billboard advertising trucks, like these.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=billboard+trucks&t=brave&iax=images&ia=images
Park them at traffic choke points where people can't avoid seeing them. Google will never show people this. Time to go old school. IRL.
Integrate Jay's "Quantum Eye of Truth" into the display. It pings like a submarine sonar scope. It shows "objects" on the scope relative to the current GPS position of the truck. And by objects I mean "bad" ballot addresses that need donations for cleanup.
It's like an instrument that drives around displaying how corrupt the voter rolls are in the immediate vicinity of the truck.
This does not have to be the only avenue of attack. Pummel The BORG!
Operation: "Friends of America"
"How Trump Can Harness the Migrant Invasion to Ensure Victory & Restore the Rule of Law"
It's guerilla election fare. Trump pulls a judo move and puts the deep state on the canvas. Oh look at that. They built a trap for themselves. How ironic.
https://its1159america.substack.com/p/operation-friends-of-america
It’s probably a good idea but it might be best to stay under the radar. Adopting stealth maneuvers will blow their minds because by the time they discover the damage done to their “infrastructure “ it will be too late😂
Jay, Not only do I completely understand your concerns but I believe your technology provides much needed controls in stopping major fraud in elections. The frustrating part is dealing with state election officials (especially in swing states where cheating is an art form) that do not want clean voter rolls and do not want to stop mailing ballots to illegitimate addresses. They do not want to stop the cheating.
That’s because those “ Republican” are probably benefiting from it directly or indirectly as well. There are no true country first patriots anymore they are lifelong gov leaches that all want endless power and money.
I'm curious: Who is collecting the Walmart/gas station/parking lot ballots, someone working there? How about empty lots? Someone at the post office?
The Post Office is in on it.
What I don't understand is if a letter is undeliverable, it's returned to sender. Isn't this at least a misdemeanor if not a felony? I understand it would be hard to police if the practice is rampant...
Yes. The handoff from the Post Office to the NGO is criminal. The NGO is not a sworn election official!
A lot of things that the Dems do are illegal and... unpunished.
In a fight with the Dems, when, against all experience with the Dems' illegality, we expect the legal system to catch and punish this behavior we are preventing ourselves from acting to counter what the Dems are doing. We have to accept that the Dems are doing what they are doing and move on to countering what they are doing.
This is September 16… Hey JV where are you… Is this a scam… Is it a hoax… Where the hell are you… You have turned into a controversial subject… And now you are nowhere to be seen or heard……your communication skills are puzzling… Though you project that you are a technical genius… America needs you… Where the hell are you?
Maybe this is why Trump and the rest of the election integrity groups are not talking about him. I would imagine Steve Bannons warroom would be having him on. I hope I’m wrong we can’t afford for Jay to be a fake
Agree. I have been following Jay for awhile and I hope that everything's okay with him. He should really let us know because so many of us want to donate and get this show on the road!
Is this Jay's website? https://jayvalentine.com/
If so, why doesn't it mention the voting and election issues?
Many people want to donate to save this election from going down the tubes! We cannot afford another 2020 disaster.
What is going on here ?
Jay when you say “we show this” or “when you stop a ballot from going to Walmart …” or when you stopped a register from sending out fake ballots beforehand—how is this done? How can we help? Do we visit our local registrar offices and tell them to show us their voter rolls? Do we hang out at Walmart and abandoned strip malls and wait for the mail carrier to deliver bundles of ballots and then grab them and go? What are you doing when you say “we stopped X” or “we showed them fraud”?
"How can we help? Do we visit our local registrar offices and tell them to show us their voter rolls?... Do we hang out at Walmart and abandoned strip malls and wait for the mail carrier to deliver bundles of ballots and then grab them and go?"
____
It wouldn't hurt to do some investigation on you own on this issue.
Here's what I'd do, it’s a bit hunter-ish in that we need to figure out when the dirty deeds will be done and then lie in wait for the targets to show up. Also, to take into consideration, we need to recognize that there are roughly only 45 days (from election day (November 5th) to the electoral college to December 11, 2024, when the Certificates of Ascertainment Due, and then December 17th when the electoral college meets), to execute and win any challenges to the election results, we need to prepare an action plan (including lawsuits) that can be completed in the 45 days available to us.
Given that, as I see it, there are, at least, three major phases in the election fraud prevention process: (1) prevent the ballots from being mailed out to the invalid addresses (this is what they’re currently doing in Wisconsin and other states); (2) recognizing that industrial-level cheating requires industrial-level cheating mechanisms, surveil and document the capture and Dems’ ballot harvesters at work by sending out teams of monitors to high propensity ballot collection points; and (3) also recognizing that some of the ballots escape the mechanisms used in (1) and get sent out to the invalid addresses, our escapes, (also monitored in Item #2 above) and they won’t be officially processed until election day, we need to be able to quickly detect these ‘escapes’ and try to prevent them from being processed and tabulated by the election officials.
Jay’s tools to monitor the voter records in near real-time provides a mechanism we can use to re-challenge any of the fake addresses and prevent them from being tabulated. Another vector to that same goal of challenging these ballots would be around the signature validation process in the counties.
Understanding that, if this industrial cheating is going on, the processes involved in this fraud process is that there are going to be, at least, two different people signing and two different signatures, one for when they registered to vote and the other for when they submitted their ballots to be counted; there is a very good chance that these signatures will not match and, rather than challenging each voter, the election integrity effort could focus on the signature acceptance process.
For example, I worked as a poll worker during the 2020 election and by real-life, human-based, split-screen signature matching process 15-20% of the signature matches failed on the first review of the signatures; the reasons being many, but the bottom line was that many people don’t have a standard signature that they use so they fail in signature matching. Assuming two people will have a hard time getting their signatures to match, the signature matching process is another tack we can take on eliminating these manufactured ballots.
One, last, method we can use… one designed to externalize some of the findings that need to use, and that must fit within that 45-day interval from Nov. 5th to Dec. 11th, and that sits on top of all of the above, is to publicly increase the visibility to what we’re finding during this process around the overall intermediate findings as this fraud prevention framework unfolds. We don’t want to wait until the cheating has already occurred nor, assuming our legal and pressure campaigns will likely imperfectly prevent the county election officials from trying to get away with their cheating, so we should find some way to regularly publicize the findings and getting these findings to ‘soften up’, so to speak, the public to the idea that cheating is, indeed, taking place.
Possibly, weekly articles in friendly outlets or press releases of summaries of what is being found and taking place behind the scenes. The hope is that someone grabs hold of the story and starts to make a big deal of what is being found… sort of like a hurricane watch as a big one is starting to form out at sea and that is heading right towards us. Put some reality and urgency what is happening, allowing people time to adjust their thinking, and emotions, to come to grips with what is, in fact, happening… even if we’d rather stick our head in the sand and ignore it.
To my mind, the data and making it available to the GOP is really only part of what should be done, a necessary part but… more of a forcing function that allows other initiatives to work more effectively.
Anyway, that’s what I’d think we can do with the data that Jay’s system is providing us.
EXCELLENT and thoughtful post. Our NY county changed from the old fashioned poll books that people had to sign with a pen, to tablets that use a stylus to sign in. Those tablets must be connected to the internet although they claim they're not, because the poll workers sometimes have to check the signatures.
By the way- I have very good handwriting but my signature written with the stylus on the tablet looks nothing like my beautiful, Catholic school penmanship.
"Those tablets must be connected to the internet although they claim they're not, because the poll workers sometimes have to check the signatures.
...
By the way- I have very good handwriting but my signature written with the stylus on the tablet looks nothing like my beautiful, Catholic school penmanship."
____
First, it's OK for poll books to be connected to the internet, just not the voting or tabulation machines.
Over the last 4 years I've worked the polls both in Nevada and Arizona and the poll books were always connected to the internet, allowing us to update voter registration information like home addresses, name changes, etc. But, the electronic voting machines and/or tabulators were mostly off-line and/or possessed a storage card that allowed cross-validation of the vote totals sent to the central counting locations.
But, with respect to signatures, when we checked signatures we allowed for the fact that writing with a stylus was different so we just tried to get something close. But, the problems with most rejected signatures was more basic that that; I'd see an original signature with, say, first name, middle initial, and last name and the signature submitted for verification was just a scribble.
With some, we'd get to the third try and we'd have to resort to telling them exactly the form that the signature needed to be in and some of them couldn't even do it when we did that so we had to resort to a different kind of identity verification, say, a driver's license.
None of this is available for mail-in ballots... in the past the Dems have tried to 'cure' rejected envelopes containing ballots by having their operatives monitoring the voting process and identifying people's whose envelopes couldn't pass signature verification but, as Jay points out, for most of the manufactured ballots, there is no real human to come in and fix their deficient ballot.
So, signature verifications is almost a impregnable final redoubt, impossible for the Dems to remedy by non-existent 'voters'. Also, signature verification and/or rejection rates would allow us to establish a floor to just how much cheating is going on, the higher the rejection rate the more likely it is that, at a minimum, the number of manufactured ballots that have been submitted by the Dems' cheating machine.
BTW, I started writing this awhile ago and finally got around to finishing it but thanks for your comment on the post.
Thank you too! Sometimes it seems that the problems we face are insurmountable when it comes to our elections.
The Demo-Commies are WAY ahead of us when it comes to cheating, especially in a state like NY.
Or so they think.
"Sometimes it seems that the problems we face are insurmountable when it comes to our elections."
____
I think the sense of dread we feel is directly proportional to the inability of the leadership, and I use that term advisedly, to define the real why(s) and then to initiate methods and techniques to 'solve' the problems.
I deeply respect what Jay is trying to do and the tools he's built but, coming from the same world of data analytics and programming as his... plus some others of my own, what he's built is a tool, not the solution to the problem.
Some of the people associated with him in Wisconsin and other states have formulated a method to use his tool to clean the voter roles and it's a great start. But, as of today, few large-scale successes have been had with these efforts... they're promising but, even after the invalid addresses have been pointed out... even after the Registrar of Voters or Secretaries of States are threatened with legal action... the problems are still here.
My experience with combined analytical component and development of full-spectrum solutions informs me that just challenging the legality of sending out ballots to invalid addresses won't be enough. Jay's tools are as good as we need to act right now and maybe even good enough into the future, but, by themselves and in today's world, where the Dems WANT TO CHEAT they are not the full solution.
Something around this approach is likely all that we can hope to implement in the next 50 days but it would be even better if we layer in more actions targeted at increasing the pain that the keepers of the voter roles experience, upping that level of pain to include, not just legal, but an irresistible pressure by the public to, not necessarily solve the whole mess, but to stop running interference for a system that is truly broke.
One important result from a more full-spectrum approach to the whole current cheating paradigm might just be to disrupt what the Dems were planning on doing enough that it'd be less effective at cheating... hopefully, MUCH LESS effective.
Anyway, awhile back I suggested that we're asking Jay to do something beyond what he is capable of doing with his Fractal approach and I still believe that, which is why I've spent the time to lay out this approach in such detail.
Honestly though, I've suggested that the implementers, like those expressing concern here that Jay isn't telling us what we can do, need to have their own forum to have this discussion and refine our approaches to cleaning up the voter rolls... I still think that.
We need our own forum. We can use what Jay's doing as a focus of what we do but we need our own forum to identify action plans.
I also think that, while it's much better what Jay is doing with running the records of interest and getting them to some organization that should act on them, they will not necessarily implement the action plan I laid out above and I fear that we'll get to November 6th and find out that the pressure campaign on these SoS and county Registrar of Voters won't yield enough of a benefit to keep the Dems from stealing the election.
Simple problems benefit from simple solutions and get worse when overly complex solutions are used to fix those simple problems. But.. when we apply simple solutions to more complex problems the problems get more intractable and, eventually, we'll be left scratching our heads wondering why we didn't get the results we expected.
In the statistical field called design of experiments, we'd call this one factor at a time experimentation rather than, the more appropriate for complex systems, many factors at a time approach. We do this so that we can understand the effects of multiple factors interacting with each other and craft an appropriately sophisticated approach to a solution.
The approach I laid out was sophisticated but not overly complex and, in my humble opinion, comes closer to a real, workable, solution to the problem we have with election integrity. It is no more, nor no less, complicated than it needs to be to solve this problem.
Unfortunately today, we're cursed with leadership that can only understand and use simple tools or solutions to do their jobs and solve problems while at the same time the problems they are presented with, like election integrity, are complex.
It's a bad matchup of abilities and problems and everyone gets frustrated because we never solve the problems we have.
Dieter- JV is not the only one working on trying to stop the Steal. See my post about True the Vote.
Hey Nanny,
In L.A. County the Smartmatic electronic poll book system put the check-in signature at the bottom of the tablet screen. I immediately called out corruption on that layout.
How can my signature on a floating tablet using a stylus be expected to match the original ink signature on a paper voter registration form, when the tablet is suspended in the air, leaving no place for me to anchor my hand on the surface as I would with pen on paper because they put the signature line at the very bottom of the screen.
If I have to sign with my hand "floating" in the air, you would have to dial-down the matching software because my and most voter's signatures will have a low match percentage due to the lack of hand anchoring.
I believe this was an intentional design bug that works as a feature when they need to steal an election. It give them an excuse to dial-down signature authentication fidelity on the machines allowing the fakes to get through without scrutiny.
I think you are correct! Most people, especially young people like my grand kids, no longer know how to write in script, not even their own signatures! Can you believe it? There is no way that you can accurately compare a signature that's written on a paper card with one that's done on a floating tablet with a stylus.
What do you think about ballots on demand which are being used in NY?
Also, there is no chain of custody for the actual ballots from the time they are printed to the time they're counted.
In my town there are 8000 registered voters. In any election maybe we get 50% turn out, sometimes less.
The board of elections is going to print 8000 ballots.
We don't really know what happens to the extras.
How do we deal with this? I''m sure NY isn't the only place where they do this..
Any ideas for a work around?
First you asked, "What do you think about ballots on demand which are being used in NY?" ... then, "Also, there is no chain of custody for the actual ballots from the time they are printed to the time they're counted."
___
First, I'm doing this from memory but everything I described here I have either trained on or performed the actual tasks within the last 2 months so I don't think I've left many steps out.
Because the ballots on demand (BoD) might work differently where we used them and what you seem to be asking I'm not clear what exactly you're asking. So, I'm going to describe how we handle a pure, BoD process. So, this was our process:
(1) We get blank ballot stock, no pre-printed ballots of any kind;
(2) In Maricopa County, and also Clark County (Las Vegas), with the electronic pollbook anybody in the county can vote at any of the polling locations in the county. Differences in the ballots for the different municipalities is automatically handled by the SW, changing who each person sees on the ballot based on their address;
(3) When we check the person in with the electronic pollbook, in addition to the differences in the contents of the ballots, the system handles all of the accountability processes you'd expect, allowing us to (a) allowing us to see if they're an valid, active voter, possessing the proper proof of identity and where they reside; (b) if not an valid, active voter, and/or some other form of irregularity has been detected like a ballot already being submitted (but maybe not tabulated yet) by mail that they challenge, they will be allowed to cast a provisional ballot and the mail-in ballot then we can print the provisional ballot for them and they can vote; (c) voiding ballots and allowing people to get a new ballot and vote again (they can only void two ballots before their ballots must be cast provisionally); and (d) the software tracks how many times they have tried to vote and might have spoiled a ballot (they can cast their 2nd and 3rd ballots at a different polling location) but the 3rd try the system automatically prints a provisional ballot and the ballot is segregated from the tabulated ballots by it being put into an envelope that they must sign, date, and supply a contact number.
Many of the processes require a witness of the opposite party and we sign and document each non-standard process step. There is one, additional ballot type printed, a conditional, provisional ballot where one or more of the ID or address verification steps couldn't be completed because the voter didn't have that information on their person... the ballots for these are held for 5 days or until the people brings in the missing documentation.
So, in the BoD system we use in Maricopa County, it never prints a ballot that is not accounted for by either the total ballots tabulated, total provisional or conditional provisional ballots printed, and/or spoiled ballots... all accounted for in our closeout process.
Additionally, all of the blank ballot stock paper are counted (both standard ballots as well as the handicap accessible ballot stock) and it's done before and after we vote, and cross-validated against the sum total of the ballots printed for voters, test printed, or printed and spoiled by a standard witnessed, and documented, process. The whole closeout process takes an hour or more after the polls close and we use a prepared form that includes cross-checks, and we go nowhere until all of the numbers are verified as correct.
The ballots, both tabulated as well as un-tabulated, provisional, are placed in bags with both the printed tabulation of the votes cast by voting precinct, position they're running for, and candidate plus the memory card containing a digital version of the same information, the bag is sealed with tamper-proof seals that are signed and dated by a bi-partisan team of judges; and transported to a centrally located collection point (usually a van with both security and a bi-partisan team) and finally released to the team using a standard, and auditable, documentation process.
You also asked the question preceded by an observation that "Also, there is no chain of custody for the actual ballots from the time they are printed to the time they're counted" but, in Maricopa County (and I assume this is a industry standard process) chain of custody is assured by the above described process. We don't have excess, unspoiled ballots, and the chain of custody is assured by the above described process... the entire team goes nowhere until we finish this process.
Where accountability breaks down... well, where it becomes more opaque... is that the drop box where the provisional/conditional provisional ballots are placed is the same drop box that the mail-in ballots will be dropped.
But, the ballots we print with the BoD system are fully accounted for, well... assuming all polling locations perform their closeout tasks with due diligence.
I suspect, but I have no proof of this, that there might be some of the polling locations that do the closeout activities poorly and make mistakes in the process but, since all of the ballots are provided to them in sealed bags with all of the information they need to re-verify the totals, that these non-compliant polling locations can be brought fully into compliance. (From what I can tell of Detroit's election teams they would struggle getting this process completed.)
I've provided you with an overview of how our BoD system works... really, with the way any system should work... I think it is a well-designed process... but you have to figure out where, if anywhere, the process you are using in your location differs from that process described above. Then, if it varies from that, you'd have to figure out (or ask me again) whether the differences in process steps significantly compromises the integrity of the BoD process.
One final thought... when I worked the 2020 election in Las Vegas, the issue of unaccounted for ballots was a real issue but that was because the state sent out ballots to every voter in the state and many of those voters, because they wanted to vote in-person, brought their ballots with them. That created a real ballot accountability issue, one that I don't think worked to the GOP's advantage. In Vegas, we used voting machines there so, anybody that voted in person stranded a pristine ballot but, even there, once the person voted in person, the person's mail-in ballot was nullified, because we verified whether the person had already voted before we could let them cast another vote; this process worked both for mail-in ballots that had been cast, I personally saw two of these, or mail-in ballots submitted for someone that had already voted in-person.
Dieter- I cannot thank you enough for your brilliant and informative comments. I have been involved in NY state and local politics for decades including running for office, poll watching, running campaigns, taxpayer advocacy, etc.
Although NY is supposedly a Blue/Dem state, many of us who are working on trying to clean up the voter rolls and elections think otherwise because the majority of counties are Red/Rep.
Anyway- to clear up my initial question: currently in my county, they are using ballots on demand for early voting only which is not that many.
Nearly all the ballots will be regular paper ballots that the BoE have printed somewhere. They admit that they will be printing the maximum amount of ballots based on the number of registered voters.
Not sure what happens to all the extras except that the BoE says they keep them for 2 years, then destroy.
Thanks again for all your information and clarity.
"Not sure what happens to all the extras except that the BoE says they keep them for 2 years, then destroy."
___
Yeah, that's a real black hole that might be difficult to get a light shined on it. In the 2020 election in Nevada, when I asked what they were doing with the pristine mail-in ballots that the voters surrendered, we were told that, "trust us, they would be 'shredded'" but nobody supplied anything more than vague statements about the how and, more concerning, there was no documentation or procedures defined that had the same level of accountability that I outlined for ballots cast at the polling place.
It may be too late in the cycle but maybe you could try to force the locale to create a method sheet of sorts for the handling and accountability for these ballots. Maybe even prepare a fully fleshed-out method sheet with cross-checks that fully accounts for these excess ballots.
Doing it on you own wouldn't be a terrible idea, it allows you to clarify your own thinking around what the process needs. Then, if the town seems to be dragging its feet on creating this method sheet, you can use some combination of persuasion and/or other pressure to get the town to adopt the method sheet as their own.
My experience is that when you find people avoiding doing a task like this, more often than not, the hesitation and avoidance that you encounter, is associated with them not clearly seeing how to perform the task. So, if you help them by doing some of the work for them they can, pick up where you left off, and then finish what you've started for them.
Unfortunately, human pride can get in the way and the offer of help is often rejected because, being smart people, entrusted with a job, to accept help is like admitting that they are either, not smart or not qualified to do their job. This is where the human touch is important... making a connection with them so that they can put their ego aside so they can do their job better.
But I think it's still a good idea for you to create the method sheet yourself, it'll firm up your thinking around what needs to be on the method sheet.
Dieter- thanks again for your detailed reply.
In NY we deal with the County Board of elections. Except for school budget votes that are handled by school districts, all our elections are BoE.
Further- the only way you can force the BoE to give you accurate information is to send in a FOIL (Freedom of Information Law) request.
For years, this has been our most effective way of fighting government corruption.
The BoE commissioners often call me back in response to my FOIL requests and after speaking with them I immediately file another request to confirm what they told me.
At this time I am putting together an omnibus FOIL request with specific questions about the election.
This is a very small county so I am amazed at how much fraud there is. The Repub RINOs are worse than the DemonRats in so many ways.
I think part of this is videoing and documenting the actual fraud in real time. The public can’t deny it
People ignored the video proof from 2020 of all the late-night multiple ballot box drops from the same people over and over at different locations. People ignore proof of James O’Keefe undercover videos. I want to know how I can stop illegal ballots from being mailed out and processed.
I completely agree with you Dino it’s my concern as well. I fact it’s my biggest concern. Half the country is ok with it because the ends justify the means of it keeps orange man bad out of power. This is a cultural problem as well
Why not? They deny everything else. The Demo-Commie media has brainwashed half the country into thinking FJB is a great president.
I agree but if half the country denies that she won this time we stand a much better chance of things being done. Only a small percentage of people even on the right thought the election fraud was legit last time
Yes, besides identifying the ineligible ballots, what is the actual process being employed to stop them, and will additional manpower be able to help increase the success of carrying out this part of the process?
We have been trying to find out what the process is for some time.
Every state is different when it comes to running elections.
Some like NY are run by boards of election. Others by the Secretary of State.
There is no one size fits all solution for dealing with fake, fraudulent or phantom "voters" on the rolls.
Most states do not have an “as of right” ability to challenge either the voter address or the voter.
That's why there are so many lawsuits.
Also, what about Catherine Engelbrecht and True the Vote? She has been doing incredible work for years to stop the steal- she was way ahead of her time.
Anyone here want to claim that she’s some kind of “grifter?” I dare anyone to try and impugn this remarkable patriot.
So what happens if only a thousand people donate to the website?
Does that mean JV only returns a few thousand phony addresses and we lose the election anyway?
I would like to see more info to better understand how this is going to play out once JV and his team identify the fake "voter" addresses.
I live in NY and have experience with our counties' Boards of elections. Most of them tell us to "sue them" when given information we presented proving thousands of phantom voters and/or bad addresses. My own county election commissioner told me they would investigate the bad addresses but thus far it's been crickets.
I totally understand what Jay's fractal tech can do, but what I don't understand is how we can force the power that be- boards of election or secretaries of state- to do the right thing and remove those bad addresses so they won't get a ballot.
Jay have have you shown this to Steve Bannon ( currently a political prisoner) his podcast Warroom had a huge reaching audience. It’s why he’s currently in the gulag just like Peter Navaro. They had to silence his voice just in time for election season. He is scheduled for release just before the selection on Nov 5. His podcast is still going strong.
Jay appeared on the Warroom, I believe it was June 2023. There used to be a video posted of his appearance on the show. There must be more going on behind the scenes that we are not privy to.
I probably heard him on warroom I listen daily to almost every one of this 4 episodes. I think if he would get on again it couldn’t hurt. Lord know Mike Lindell is on every day
Thanks Jay ! Godspeed to you on all your efforts. We need all the help we can get. I hope and pray we raise a lot of money for you, and at least one big donor who you’ve been talking with , steps up.
Full speed ahead! The game is on. They are manufacturing ballots as we read this! I want to donate asap!
Jay I am trying to contact you via “
Your substack email, it brings me to “Substack home page” NOT your contact info or a place to write you, PLEASE ADVISE on how to write you, Thank you!
Thanks NY N ….. That’s big ! TTV is well
established, well organized and looks
to be well Funded . 25 million ineligible names is impressive….. great info…. You would think JV ‘s Fund Site ( live soon)
could work with TTV. …. As JV points out
It’s average 500 thousand bad addresses
getting ballots per state X 7 swing Stated
= 3.5 M bad/ ineligible ballots …… not sure
how much can be raised here…. But if JV just targets 1-2 Swing States ( PA NC)
…… that could win it …… hope you’re listening JV.
Update in PA Supreme Court rules improperly dated mail in ballots won’t be counted. Im sure mark Elias will find a corrupt judge to stop it
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/09/breaking-huge-blow-cheating-democrats-pennsylvania-supreme-court/
Ohio just uncovered how they plan on voting illegally with all the Haitians in Ohio
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/09/breaking-ohios-election-integrity-unit-uncovers-illegal-haitian/