Eric Hovde’s Wisconsin Senate Race Opens the Door to a Criminal Investigation

Hovde had been winning until another all too familiar suspicious drop occurred

The Democrats may have made a significant mistake in their all-too-obvious attempt to steal a U.S. Senate seat from GOP candidate Eric Hovde. As Hovde explained in a November 12 video, in the early hours of November 6, 2024, he received congratulatory calls for his apparent win. Then, suddenly, by 4:00 am, “a staggering 108,000 absentee ballots were dumped from Milwaukee, with two-term incumbent Senator [and [Democrat candidate]Tammy Baldwin receiving nearly 90 percent of those votes.” Hovde objected: “Statistically, this outcome seemed improbable, as it didn’t match the patterns from same-day voting in Milwaukee, where I received 22 percent of the votes.”

The problem for Democrats is that the late-night drop of an improbable 108,000 thousand absentee ballots that were nearly all for the Democratic candidate fitted an all-too-recognizable pattern of election fraud made possible by cryptographic algorithms embedded covertly in the official State Board of Elections (SBOE) voter registration database. Unfortunately for the Democrats, Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., had previously found an illegal clandestine algorithm in the SBOE voter rolls. As reported on GodsFiveStones.com, Paquette concludes:

This study of Wisconsin’s voter rolls reveals strong evidence of multiple ID number assignment algorithms, with two appearing over-engineered, enabling data segregation and hidden assignment. The presence of over 60,000 records with encrypted ID numbers further suggests hidden attributes, potentially violating public disclosure laws.

Paquette has also discovered similar illegal cryptographic algorithms in New York, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Arizona, with algorithms yet to be reported also found in New Jersey, Texas, and Hawaii.

---

In common sense parlance, the algorithms are an intelligence-grade complexity mathematical scheme that facilitates creating and hiding false voters who receive legitimate state voter IDs. After making the false voter records, the criminals responsible for embedding the algorithm in the database can hide the false records so that they can be recovered by an algorithm locator number known only to the criminals. The criminals’ favorite targets for creating duplicate clone voter records are inactive voters, deceased voters, and voters who have moved out of the state.

By creating duplicate “clones” of these records, the criminals have exploited a voter record that should have been purged to produce a second “nonexistent” voter registration duplicate that can be double-voted in mail-in ballot schemes that are difficult to detect. State officials turning a blind eye to the late dropping of thousands of mail-in votes favorable to Democrats strive to block forensic examination of the mail-in ballots that almost certainly would have detected the fraud by identifying mail-in ballots that were never mailed, signatures on mail-in ballots that do not match signatures on registration cards, failure to date mail-in ballots properly, and in community canvassing to see if qualified registered voters live at the addresses to which the fraudulent mail-in ballots were supposed to have been mailed.

Searching the Wisconsin SBOE voter registration database, Paquette discovered that a search of voter names and phone numbers yielded 2,471,519 matched clone voter records in a database of 7,744,986 voter records, nearly one-third of the SBOE voter records on file. Startled by these results, Paquette commented:

Wisconsin’s clone records significantly outnumber those in other states, potentially matching New York’s total despite having only a third as many registered voters. This fare exceeds any normal error rate or acceptable administrative standard. Alarmingly, new clone records have increased dramatically year-over-year for over two decades, potentially surpassing legal registrations within years.

Paquette continued:

These findings indicate potentially unethical management of Wisconsin’s voter roll records. Regardless of intent, the algorithm’s use creates a hidden classification system for data segregation, posing a security risk. The large number of cloned records exacerbates this risk, as such records would be of particular interest to those seeking to misuse voter roles—a concern recently realized when Wisconsin mailed absentee ballots to inactive voters.

In a statement issued on November 13, Hovde objected:

Since last Wednesday, numerous parties have reached out to me about voting inconsistencies, such as certain voting precincts in Milwaukee having a turnout of over 150% of registered voters, and in some cases, over 200%. Additionally, in 2020, President Biden received 10 million more votes than Vice President Harris did last Tuesday. Yet in Milwaukee, even though the population has declined and registered voters decreased by 26,330, and early voting numbers were down, somehow, Harris received only 1,100 fewer votes than Biden did, which is not consistent with most major cities. This was accomplished by same-day registration that surged by almost 50% on a rainy day. Many people have reached out and urged me to contest the election.”

On Monday, November 18, Hovde conceded without asking for a recount. Since the margin of defeat was less than 1 percent, he would have had to pay for the recount.

In the 12 days between the election and the concession, Hovde was heavily criticized for not conceding immediately. Sam Liebert, the leftist Wisconsin state director for All Voting Is Local, charged at a news conference that Hovde’s statements constituted “a direct attempt to cast doubt on our fair and free elections” and said that Hovde’s refusal to concede “not only disappointing but also unnecessary.”

---

Another problem for Hovde is that a recount would not allow a forensic examination of the mail-in ballots, while a computer search of falsified mail-in votes would be certified because the state ID numbers assigned “false clone voters” would show up within the SBOE computers with matching numbers requesting a mail-in ballot and casting a ballot with the same number that was tabulated.

Moreover, Wisconsin has a 45-day window to complete certification, allowing very little time to organize a challenge to the federal district courts to challenge the election results on suspicion that a large enough number of algorithm-assisted “clone voting” records could be found in a forensic examination of the mail-in ballots to substantiate claims of election fraud. Final counts showed 108,000 absentee and provisional ballots from Milwaukee in the early hours of Wednesday, November 6, went 82 percent for Baldwin, according to the Milwaukee Election Commission—a percentage perhaps calculated to be more in line with the 75 percent of the in-person votes cast for Baldwin in Milwaukee on election day.

In conclusion, those playing “21” in a casino found to be using marked cards have a justifiable claim that the casino cannot prove the player lost any hand played. Similarly, how can anyone certify any election as legitimate based on an SBOE voter registration database riddled with clandestine cryptographic algorithms, in which nearly one-third of all voter records are suspected to be illegal duplicates?How could the SBOE officials possibly prove Hovde lost when cryptographic algorithms could have been responsible for producing a suspicious early morning drop containing enough fraudulent mail-in ballots from Milwaukee to steal an election from Hovde—an election Hovde had been winning until the suspicious drop occurred?

A criminal investigation in which an honest forensic examination of the SBOE computers and the mail-in physical ballots should provide helpful information to answer these outstanding questions.

In full disclosure, our offer to assist a Hovde campaign challenge to the election results has not resulted in a response from the Hovde campaign to proceed. We at GodsFiveStones.com reserve the right to present our findings to any criminal investigation of election fraud that a reconstituted Department of Justice under Trump administration control may care to pursue.

---

GodsFiveStones.com is a tax-deductible 501(c)3 foundation created by Jerome R. Corsi, Ph.D., and Karladine Graves, M.D., managed by Capstone Legacy Foundation. As reported on GodsFiveStones.com, Andrew Paquette, Ph.D., has discovered cryptographic algorithms in the State Board of Elections voter registration databases in New York, Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Arizona and yet to be reported in New Jersey, Texas, and Hawaii. As noted in a statement on Donald J. Trump’s election victory published on November 8, 2024, Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò explained that “the algorithms allowed false voter registrations to be printed and concealed, which could be used in various election fraud schemes, including counting absentee ballots by nonexistent voters. By exposing the scheme, Dr. Corsi prevented the creation of millions of fraudulent votes for Kamala Harris.