Dr. Frank: 2020 Election Data Research Reveals Troubling Patterns June 3, 2021 | Truth & Liberty Staff A published scientist recently made dramatic discoveries while analyzing results of the controversial 2020 presidential vote. Dr. Douglas G. Frank – a physicist, chemist and mathematician – believes he has found the key to revealing what really happened on Election Day.“I discovered the algorithms that were controlling the election,” said Dr. Frank. “To us on the outside watching the election, we see these behaviors and don’t understand them – [but] I can [now] predict them based on what I know is underlying it.”Dr. Frank recently joined the Truth & Liberty livecast to discuss the results of the 2020 election.Having earned a number of advanced science degrees, Dr. Frank has worked in the defense industry, published articles in several scientific journals, patented a method for viewing microscopic particles in metal surfaces, and established a school for gifted children. A man of varied interests, Dr. Frank brought his expertise to bear on the 2020 election. His analysis began when he was asked to investigate the contested results of a congressional race in Pennsylvania.Analyzing the NumbersJust months before the 2020 election, Dr. Frank had been teaching gifted students about how to analyze large quantities of data, using the United States Census as an example. When he began his investigation of the Pennsylvania race, he was able to recognize that voter registration data lined up with results from the U.S. Census in a way that made him curious.“I like to take lots of data, go swimming in it, see if I can find the patterns,” said Dr. Frank.When Dr. Frank charted the number of ballots received by each age, he found an uncanny correlation between that graph and the graph of registered voters and census data. They virtually matched each other. They also showed unprecedented and nearly impossible voter turnout figures. What’s more, when he examined other counties across Pennsylvania, he found the same correlation and stunning results. The complexity, precision, and widespread nature of the data correlation across precincts and counties throughout the state of Pennsylvania are beyond the ability of any human being to manually control, Dr. Frank has concluded. Upon further study, Dr. Frank determined that a precise formula was used to control the election results, and he was able to ultimately derive the actual numerical values that were used in the formula. He said that once he discovered the formula, he was able to predict the exact turnout by age in every county in Pennsylvania. Dr. Frank told Truth & Liberty that voting machines were absolutely connected to the internet, and that voter registration rolls are accessible online. He has concluded that voter registration rolls were artificially inflated with “low-propensity” voters in order to supply a pool for “phantom ballots.” He believes that persons with access to the voter registration rolls and voting machines utilized the algorithm to generate countless phantom ballots. “Each county’s registration rolls are artificially inflated,” said Dr. Frank. “For example, people who have passed away – you don’t remove them from the registration roll, so that gives you extra voters.”Dr. Frank said that, based on his calculations, he estimated a significant percentage of the votes cast in the 2020 election were actually “phantom votes.” Phantom votes, he said, are legally invalid ballots because they are attributed to people who, for example, died before the election, have moved out of state, already voted, are convicted felons, are underage or who say they did not actually vote. To corroborate his estimate, he assembled a team of canvassers who went door to door in Pennsylvania with a randomly selected list of people who supposedly (according to election results) cast a ballot in the 2020 election. The canvassers found, according to Dr. Frank, not about 20% as he initially believed, but over 30% of the ballots cast were from phantom voters. A Widespread ProblemAfter studying Pennsylvania, Dr. Frank began to notice similar patterns in other states. He has studied Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, and other jurisdictions. He finds that the same essential patterns are in every state. And, Franks says, there is significant corroborating evidence of the scheme across the nation. In just one county in Colorado, for example, he said 2,000 votes were attributed to people who had died before the election.“During the election, they monitor what is happening and insert those ‘phantom ballots’ appropriately as needed,” said Dr. Frank of those who could have engineered the election. “And they start with predictions ahead of time, so they have targets they are shooting for.”Dr. Frank was retained by the plaintiff in an election fraud case in Antrim County, Michigan. The fake results in that case were set aside and the plaintiff has been sworn into office. Dr. Frank said that the court there declined to address claims of a wider conspiracy, despite the implications of his report, because once the plaintiff was sworn into office, he lacked standing to assert the wider claim. Dr. Frank has also presented his findings in meetings across the nation, sharing evidence with concerned citizens. He has also been featured in a pair of interview documentaries – Scientific Proof and Absolute Interference – hosted by political activist and entrepreneur Mike Lindell. Learn MoreLearn more about Dr. Frank’s research by watching videos at his YouTube channel. He also shares regular updates on social media through Follow the Data with Dr. Frank.Watch the full episode at the Truth & Liberty website and visit our Research Center for great practical resources. Also learn how you can become a Truth & Liberty Coalition member and join us in standing for truth in the public square.