By John Paluska, Founder of The Daily Fodder

As more and more evidence of voter fraud is uncovered in Michigan, another affidavit came out proving NUMEROUS absentee ballots were SUBSTITUTED for REAL VOTERS in the state. 

This time from an official poll-worker, Zachary Larsen, who uncovered funny business on one of the tabulation computers where another poll-worker was simply taking absentee ballots with no name on them and substituting them to people already on the voting record.

His testimony came in a lawsuit filed November, 8, 2020. He recounted that multiple poll-workers were trying to deter him from watching what was going on, trying to get him to leave and, ultimately, forcing him out of the booth where it was happening because they didn't want him to see what they were doing.

The worker Mr. Larsen was observing was taking absentee ballots with no names on them and then plugging them into the computer where she substituted them for registered voters. As Zachary Larsen tried to glance at the voter roll because he suspected funny business, he immediately realized what he suspected was true, and a poll worker who was responsible for "numerous" ballots was, indeed, substituting them for real voters.

However, once he was looking at the voter roll, the poll-worker turned around and glared at him, then the poll-worker used Coronavirus regulations to try to obstruct Zachary Larsen's views of the voter roll so he could no longer witness what was going on.

Ultimately, multiple officials forced him out using the poll-workers Coronavirus regulations as an excuse even though other officials stated he had a right to stand where he was standing.

He testified in the lawsuit:

17. Mr. Larsen was concerned that this practice of assigning names and numbers indicated that a ballot was being counted for a non-eligible voter who was not in either the poll book or the supplemental poll book. From his observation of the computer screen, the voters were not in the official poll book. Moreover, this appeared to be the case for the majority of the voters whose ballots he personally observed being scanned (Exhibit A).


26. This supervisor had not been at the table at any time during the process, and she had responsibility for numerous ACVBs. Further, the supervisor’s choice of chairs was approximately three feet to the left of the first official and therefore in violation of the six-foot distance rule (Exhibit A). 

27. Accordingly, Mr. Larsen understood that this was a ruse to keep him away from a place where he could observe the confirmation of names in the supplemental poll book. The supervisor began to repeatedly tell him that he “needed to leave” so he responded that he would go speak with someone else and fill out a challenge form (Exhibit A). 

28. After Mr. Larsen observed and uncovered the fraud that was taking place and had the confrontation with the supervisor, he left the counting room to consult with another attorney about the matter around 1:30 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. (Exhibit A).

Hopefully Mr. Larsen's testimony makes it into Texas's Supreme Court filing as it is an alarming eyewitness experience of blatant voter fraud. If anything, the shocking amount of evidence piling up at this point should make the Texas suit a cakewalk.


SHARE our articles and like our Facebook page and follow us on Twitter!

Post a Comment