During early voting for the Texas Republican primary on February 18, 2026, in Bexar County (San Antonio area), something unusual appeared in the electronic check-in data: thousands of voter records with impossible ID numbers that later vanished.
Independent researcher Dr. Andrew Paquette, PhD, analyzed files shared by congressional candidate Weston Martinez (running in Texas’ 21st District, which includes parts of Bexar). Paquette claims the data shows 4,110 “ghost” records, fake entries that could theoretically allow extra ballots, created by software and then deleted.
Paquette detailed his findings in a series on his Substack newsletter, The Zark Files. Read the main report here: Ghosts of the Alamo: Busted in Texas (Feb. 25, 2026). He adds more on the math in A Tiny Texas Addition (Feb. 27), and explains it visually in The Weston (Alamo) Algorithm, Naked (includes a video breakdown).
I’ve been studying voter roll algorithms since I first discovered one in NY in April 2022. What I found this week in TX is worse than anything I’ve seen anywhere else.
It demonstrates the capability of bypassing the voter rolls entirely — a scheme capable of generating fraudulent…— Art (@ZarkFiles) February 28, 2026
Here’s a simple breakdown of what Paquette describes; explained plainly, without tech overload:
What showed up in the files?
Texas voter IDs are always whole numbers (like 1,234,567 – no decimals). In Bexar’s February 18 check-in data (from KnowInk poll pads):
- 735 records matched real voters in the official Texas database.
- 4,110 others had weird decimal endings (e.g., 1,253,115,467.7999).
Those decimals don’t exist in Texas’ real voter system; they’re impossible for legitimate records.
How were the extras made?
Paquette says each fake was a near-copy of a real voter (same name/address with small tweaks, like street numbers 101, 102, etc.). Some real voters got copied 5 times; others 6 times, totaling exactly 4,110 extras.
Why does he say it wasn’t random?
When sorted, the fake IDs had perfect even spacing. Dividing the range gives exactly 4,109 intervals with zero leftover, something random errors or glitches rarely do perfectly. He argues only intentional software could produce that.
Where were they hidden?
All fakes sat in a huge “empty gap” in Texas ID numbers, a range with no real voters statewide. Spotting that gap requires looking at the full ~18 million Texas voter list, not just Bexar data.
The name-sorting detail
Paquette claims the software sorted the 735 real voters by last name, starting at “Abel” (first) and stopping at “Braswell” (exactly position 435). That cutoff is the only one that makes the clone math add up perfectly: 300 × 5 copies + 435 × 6 copies = 4,110. Any other split breaks the total.
Then they disappeared
The extras only appeared for February 18. By February 25, files were replaced with clean versions in a quick 78-second batch swap, no traces left on official rolls.
Important: This is one side of the story
Paquette calls it evidence of deliberate software issues in KnowInk poll pads (used in many Texas counties and 61% of U.S. jurisdictions). Candidate Martinez filed complaints with the Texas Secretary of State and Attorney General’s Election Integrity Division.
But Bexar County Elections officials strongly dispute any wrongdoing. They say no irregularities affected results, and everything checked out normally. KnowInk (the vendor) has declined to comment publicly so far.
No independent audit, forensic review, or official confirmation has verified Paquette’s analysis yet. Mainstream Texas media coverage is limited (e.g., some local outlets note the allegations but frame them as unproven, with official pushback). Separate AG probes in Bexar focus on other issues like mail ballots and consultants, not these poll-pad specifics.
Why watch this?
Even if it turns out to be a glitch or data quirk, questions about electronic check-in systems matter statewide, including counties near Austin County. Texans want elections they can trust.
This is a developing story. We’ll follow any updates from the Attorney General, Secretary of State, or Bexar officials. In the meantime, check Paquette’s posts (linked above) for the raw details and video.
This article summarizes publicly shared claims and responses. No evidence of widespread fraud has been confirmed by authorities, and investigations are ongoing in related areas.
