Fact check: What were the main allegations of fraud in the 2024 US election and how were they investigated?

1. Summary of the results

The 2024 US election generated fraud allegations from multiple directions, creating a complex landscape of claims and investigations. The main allegations fell into several categories:

Statistical and Technical Concerns:

• SMART Elections raised concerns about unnatural data patterns, software code allowing remote access to voting machines, and higher drop-off rates on the Republican side ^[1]
• A lawsuit by SMART Legislation in Rockland County, New York alleged voting discrepancies where hundreds of voters chose Democratic Senate candidates but zero chose the Democratic presidential candidate - a statistical near-impossibility according to experts ^{[2] [3]}
• Claims included bomb threats, security breaches, and hardwired passwords in Dominion voting systems ^[1]

Technology-Based Conspiracy Theories:

• Widespread claims that Elon Musk's Starlink internet service was used to rig the election in favor of Donald Trump ^{[4] [5]}
• These allegations were thoroughly debunked by election officials from multiple swing states, including North Carolina, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, who confirmed voting equipment is never connected to the internet during tabulation ^{[4] [5]}

Voter Suppression Allegations:

• Greg Palast documented systematic voter suppression tactics including mass purges of voter rolls, disqualification of provisional and mail-in ballots, and "vigilante" challenges that allegedly cost Kamala Harris millions of votes ^[6]
• Right-wing organizations including Harmeet Dhillon's group, Public Interest Legal Foundation, Arizona Free Enterprise Club, United Sovereign Americans, Judicial Watch, America First Legal, and America First Policy Institute were identified as actively working to disenfranchise voters, particularly voters of color ^[7]

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The original question fails to capture the bidirectional nature of fraud allegations in 2024. While it implies a singular set of claims, the evidence shows fraud allegations came from both sides of the political spectrum:

Pro-Trump Fraud Claims:

• Traditional claims about vote counting irregularities, mail-in ballot issues, and voting machine problems were spread primarily on social media by right-leaning speakers ^[8]
• PolitiFact and other fact-checking organizations worked extensively to debunk these claims ^[8]

Pro-Harris Fraud Claims:

• Statistical analysts and organizations like SMART Legislation presented data suggesting Republican vote manipulation ^{[2] [3]}
• Greg Palast argued that systematic voter suppression, not traditional fraud, determined the election outcome ^[6]

Financial and Political Motivations:

• Right-wing legal organizations benefit from promoting voter suppression narratives as it helps maintain Republican electoral advantages by targeting Democratic-leaning demographics ^{[7] [9]}
• Fact-checking organizations and election security experts benefit from debunking conspiracy theories as it reinforces their institutional credibility and expertise ^{[8] [4] [5]}
• Statistical analysis groups like SMART Elections benefit from promoting their technical expertise and positioning themselves as election integrity watchdogs ^{[1] [2]}

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question contains an implicit bias by assuming a single, unified set of "fraud allegations" when the reality was far more complex. The framing suggests traditional post-election fraud claims similar to 2020, but omits entirely the documented voter suppression campaigns that targeted millions of voters before and during the election ^{[6] [9]}.

The question also fails to acknowledge that election officials from multiple states provided definitive rebuttals to major conspiracy theories, particularly the Starlink allegations, with the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency confirming no evidence of malicious activity affecting election integrity ^{[4] [5]}.

Most significantly, the question ignores the systematic nature of voter suppression efforts documented by investigators like Greg Palast, who estimated these tactics cost the Democratic candidate enough votes to change the election outcome - a claim that, if accurate, represents a far more significant threat to election integrity than the technical frau