Michigan Election Integrity Group Drops 720-Page 2020 Report, Demands Fresh Probes

Lengthy analysis reignites questions about state’s vote handling

A Michigan-based election integrity organization has unveiled a sweeping 720-page report scrutinizing the 2020 presidential election results in the state and is urging authorities to open new investigations into its findings.

The document, obtained by The Center Square, compiles witness accounts, data analyses, and legal arguments that the group says expose irregularities in how the election was administered across multiple counties.

While the organization has not publicly named its leadership or detailed its full methodology at the time of writing, its representatives described the report as the culmination of thousands of hours of volunteer research, including ballot image reviews, signature verification studies, and a re‑examination of precinct-level tallies.

“We are not asking anyone to take our word for it — we are asking law enforcement and legislative committees to do their jobs and look at the evidence we’ve laid out,” a spokesperson for the group said in a prepared statement.

Specific areas flagged for further review

Though the complete report has yet to be posted online, early summaries indicate it focuses on several long‑debated aspects of Michigan’s election system:

• Procedural compliance with chain‑of‑custody requirements for absentee ballots.
• Discrepancies between the number of voters recorded in poll books and the number of ballots counted.
• The use of outside funding — often called “Zuckerbucks” — by certain municipalities, which critics say may have created a conflict of interest.
• Alleged late‑night ballot deliveries and counting practices at Detroit’s TCF Center.

The group is specifically calling on the Michigan Legislature to convene a select committee with subpoena power and is also petitioning county prosecutors to review whether any criminal statutes were violated.

Context within Michigan’s post‑2020 landscape

The release arrives nearly four years after a tumultuous election cycle that saw Michigan become one of the epicenters of legal challenges and partisan disputes. Dozens of lawsuits filed by the Trump campaign and allied groups were dismissed or withdrawn, and multiple audits — including an investigation by the Republican‑led state Senate Oversight Committee — ultimately affirmed the integrity of the state’s results.

Nevertheless, skepticism among a segment of the electorate has persisted. Grassroots groups have continued to collect affidavits and conduct parallel examinations, arguing that official reviews were insufficiently granular. The new 720‑page report appears to be the most voluminous attempt yet to compile that material into a single document.

Jocelyn Benson, Michigan’s Secretary of State, has consistently maintained that the 2020 election was the most secure in the state’s history. Her office pointed to post‑election audits that showed no evidence of widespread fraud or error altering the outcome.

“Professional, bipartisan election administrators across Michigan ran a fair and transparent election, and every post‑election review has confirmed that,” a department spokesman said in a previous statement.

Expert reaction and unanswered questions

Independent election experts have yet to weigh in on the report’s specifics, but several cautioned that long‑form analyses by advocacy groups often rely on misinterpretation of routine administrative errors.

“Length alone does not guarantee credibility,” said one elections scholar who requested anonymity pending a full review. “The devil is always in the detail of the sourcing and whether claims can be cross‑verified against official records.”

The group behind the report has promised to release the full document on a public website in the coming days, along with an executive summary and supporting datasets.

For now, the publication is certain to intensify a debate that never fully subsided in Michigan — and could influence the posture of the 2024 election season in this key battleground state.