reSee.it - Related Post Feed
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
1. Election security experts told Hillary she lost. 2. Obama is an election denier who ordered a congressional investigation of 2016. 3. National security told Hillary the election was hacked. The same people who yelled the most secure election in history in 2020. https://t.co/OpdbRJGPql
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker states that the recounts support the correct election outcome, providing assurance that Donald Trump won without doubt. While there is no strong evidence of fraud or cyberattacks, the incomplete counts make verification imperfect. President Obama ordered an investigation into hacking before leaving office, with intelligence agencies agreeing that hacking likely influenced the outcome. Although the speaker can sleep at night, they cannot completely rule out fraud. Another speaker mentions that the recounts further confirm that the election was not hacked, increasing confidence in the election. However, they also discovered that hacking a US presidential election would be even easier than initially believed.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The recounts support that the, election outcome was correct. That that, you know, we we can I I can sleep at night knowing that Donald Trump won the election and having no doubt? There is not strong evidence that there wasn't fraud or that there wasn't a cyberattack, though, counts were incomplete because there's sort of an imperfect way to do this, you know, to verify. So, Yeah. Like we said, cyberattacks already happened before.
We did get a a, congressional investigation out of this. President Obama has ordered an investigation before he leaves Office. And, you know, we got intelligence agencies to agree that, you know, there was hacking that did happen that probably influenced the outcome. But overall, I we can sleep at night, but we can't completely rule out fraud.
Speaker 1: So the recounts didn't complete. What I thought at the beginning, as I said in my medium piece, was that, well, the election probably wasn't hacked. What do we learn from the recounts? Well, we learned that It even more probably wasn't hacked. We get additional basis for confidence in the election.
But at the same time, along the way, we found that hacking an election in the US for president Would be well even easier than I thought when I began this process.
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
My University of Michigan undergrad election security students could have changed (by hacking) the outcome of the election. It really is that bad. https://t.co/Wxl4MYmLlc
Video Transcript AI Summary
At the University of Michigan, we may not have the capability to manipulate paper ballots across multiple states to alter the presidential election. However, I believe that my undergraduate security course could have influenced the outcome of this year's election. The situation is extremely concerning. Thank you.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I'm not sure that we at the University of Michigan could hack into all the paper ballots, across multiple states sufficient to change the presidential election, but I'm pretty sure my undergraduate security course could, have changed the outcome of the presidential election this year. It really is that bad. Thank you.
@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat
Hacking America's Election System 1 hour of computer scientists, election security experts, and Senate Democrats talking about how easy it is to hack voting machines. @KariLake @katiehobbs @GenFlynn @realMikeLindell @bgmasters @PatrickByrne @JackPosobiec @DavidSacks @elonmusk https://t.co/sH4Ft0iMsB
Video Transcript AI Summary
Voting machines in the US are vulnerable to hacking and manipulation, according to researchers. These machines, which come in various models, have been found to have security vulnerabilities that allow attackers to inject malicious software and change election data. The machines can be hacked through the machine used to program them, and many of them have wireless modems that can connect to the internet, despite claims that they are not connected. The vulnerabilities in the voting machines, along with the lack of secure systems for voter registration and result reporting, pose a significant risk to the integrity of elections. It is crucial to address these vulnerabilities to ensure the trustworthiness of election results.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I know America's voting machines are vulnerable because my colleagues and I have hacked them repeatedly. We've created attacks that can spread from machine to machine like a computer virus, and silently change election outcomes, and in every single case We've found ways for attackers to sabotage machines and to steal votes. Across the country, there are about 52 different models of machines. They they fall into essentially 2 styles. Ones that scan a piece of paper or ones where the vote, the voter just interacts with the touch screen.
And many of them have been analyzed now by researchers, looking for security vulnerabilities. In every single case where a US voting machine has been analyzed by competent security researchers, They have found vulnerabilities that would let someone inject malicious software and change election data. Every single case.
Speaker 1: The better or the more efficient way of hacking machines would be to subvert them all through the machine that's used to actually program those machines. So prior to each election, the county election office or the voting machine vendor will actually program memory cards for that election. It tells the machine who are the candidates, what are the, you know, the the contests being decided, and that gets It's inserted into the voting machine. If you can alter, if you can subvert that machine that is used to program those memory cards, then you can pass rogue software to the voting machine.
Speaker 0: Voting machines that are not connected to the internet. This is something that you hear all the time in the US from election officials. Unfortunately, it's not actually true. Many new voting machines that come with 4 gs wireless modems so that they can be connected to the internet from the polling place in order to upload the results faster. Now to me, that sounds crazy.
Why would you want to put your voting machines on the Internet right in the middle of the election, potentially at the most vulnerable
Speaker 2: time. Studies conducted in 2007 by the state of California, state of Ohio, state of Florida found security vulnerabilities that could take advantage of these To engineer viruses where 1 compromised voting machine could then infect eventually the entire fleet of machines for an entire county. Typically at the end of the election day, you move a memory card through each of the machines in the precinct, and that's to collect the vote totals. That process can spread a virus. And there are other processes.
The details vary from machine to machine.
Speaker 3: When you say hacked, what were they able to do once they gained access to the machines?
Speaker 4: All sorts of Executally manipulate the outcome of the vote. They could manipulate the tally. They could delete the tally, and and they could compromise the vote in any number of ways.
Speaker 5: The machines used in Georgia have been demonstrated to be hackable through a virus that's carried on ballot definition cartridges. Very much like this Duxnet virus was inserted into nuclear centrifuges in Iran.
Speaker 3: There are a number of states that outsource their reporting of elections to third parties, some of which are corporations based in other countries like Spain. So you've got to trust that the aggregation of the votes and the reporting of the votes is accurate as well.
Speaker 0: I'm pretty sure my undergrad computer security class at Michigan could have changed the outcome of the 2016 teen Michigan election if we wanted to. It is that bad. And we have a combination of very powerful adversaries, and unfortunately quite vulnerable and obsolete systems. That's that's why I say it's only a matter of time.
Speaker 6: Unfortunately, in a lot of these systems, The audit trails are just as vulnerable as the other aspects of the system. So there may not be good forensic evidence of a successful intrusion. With the current design, we cannot be universally confident that it hasn't happened. And it's probably only a matter of time before it will.
Speaker 7: I come here today as a computer scientist who spent the better part of the last quarter century studying Election system security. As you're well aware, the integrity of elections across the US depends heavily on the integrity of computers and Software systems. Unfortunately, much of this infrastructure has proven dangerously vulnerable to tampering and attack, and in some cases, In ways that cannot be easily detected or corrected, after the fact. These vulnerabilities can create practical avenues for, corrupt candidates or foreign adversaries to do everything from cause large scale disruption on Election Day to potentially, undetectably alter, election outcomes in some cases. So let me begin with the voting equipment itself.
To be blunt, it's a widely recognized, really indisputable fact that every piece of computerized voting equipment in use at polling places today Can be easily compromised, in ways that have the potential to disrupt election, operations, compromise firmware and software, Potentially alter, vote tallies in the absence of, other safeguards. This is partly a consequence of historically poor design and implementation by equipment vendors, but it's ultimately a reflection of the nature of complex software. It's simply beyond the state of the art, to build software systems that can reliably withstand targeted attack By a determined adversary in this kind of an environment. The vulnerabilities are real. They're serious.
And absent a surprising and very fundamental break through in my field, which I would welcome, but I don't see coming, soon, probably inevitable. We give most of the attention to vulnerabilities in voting machines, But that's not the whole story. Each of the more than 5,000 jurisdictions responsible for running elections across the nation Must maintain a number of critical information systems that are attractive targets for disruption by adversaries. Most important of these are voter registration databases, the systems that report, final results, and so forth. Unfortunately, There are even fewer standards for how to secure these systems.
The administration of these systems varies widely. And the threats against these systems are often even more, acute than the threats against individual voting systems. You know, just as we don't expect the local sheriff to single handedly defend against military ground invasions, we shouldn't expect county election IT managers to defend against cyber attacks by foreign intelligence services, but that's precisely what we've been asking them, to do.
Speaker 0: I'm a professor of computer science and have spent the last 10 years studying the electronic voting systems that our nation relies on. My conclusion from that work is that our highly computerized election infrastructure that is vulnerable to sabotage, and even to cyber attacks that could change votes. These realities risk making our election results more difficult for the American people to trust. I know America's voting machines are vulnerable because my colleagues and I have hacked them repeatedly, as part of a decade of research, studying the technology that operates elections and learning how to make it stronger. We've created attacks that can spread from machine to machine, like a computer virus, and silently change election outcomes.
We've studied touch screen and optical scan systems, and in every single case we've found ways for attackers to sabotage machines and to steal votes. These capabilities are certainly within reach for America's enemies. As you know, states choose their own voting technology. And while some states are doing well with security, others are alarmingly vulnerable. This puts the entire nation at risk.
In close elections, an attacker can probe the most important swing states or swing counties, find areas with the weakest protection, and strike there. In a close election year changing a few votes in key, localities could be enough to tip national results. The key lesson from 2016 is that these threats are real. Some say the fact that voting machines aren't directly connected to the Internet makes them secure, but unfortunately this is not true. Voting machines are not as distant from the Internet as they may seem.
So the way these attacks work Is that before every election, every voting machine needs to be programmed with the design of the ballot, the names of the races and candidates. And voting officials do that by inserting a memory card into the machine. If an attacker can infect that memory card With malicious code, well, when the memory card is inserted into the machine, it can change the programming running on the voting machine And caused the voting machine to, at the end of the election, output whatever results the attacker wants.
Speaker 5: The machine that I hacked is called the Sequoia AVC Advantage, now called the Dominion AVC Advantage. It's in The computer program that counts the votes on this machine is in a read only memory that's mounted in a socket on the motherboard. To hack this machine, you have to Remove that memory chip from its socket and install a memory chip, on which you've prepared a cheating program. The cheating program that I prepared, has an extra 100 lines of code basically that, when the polls are about to close, it goes in there and changes some votes stored in the machine. And there is an electronic log of all votes cast, so it changes the log too.
So to install that, the attacker doesn't need to be a computer scientist, the attacker just needs to have A bunch of copies of this memory chip, with the fraudulent program on it. And for each voting machine, unscrew 10 screws to remove the panel that that covers the motherboard, pry out the ROM chip containing the legitimate program and install the ROM chip containing the fraudulent program. Other kinds of voting machines store their computer program that counts to votes in flash memory. And this can be updated Under the control of whatever computer program happens to be running in the voting machine. These voting machines, typically the generation developed in the 1990s and after, can be hacked without actually physically changing any hardware in the machine, just by installing a software upgrade Memory card in the same slot that one would normally install the ballot definition.
And this particular attack was demonstrated by my colleague at Princeton, Professor Felton, In about 2007, working with 2 of his graduate students. But it's not just us at Princeton, there are many kinds of voting machines and The same kinds of hacks are applicable to all voting machines and have been demonstrated at several other universities, including University of Connecticut, Johns Hopkins, Michigan and others. There are cyber security issues in all parts of our election system. Before the election, voter registration databases. During the election, voting machines.
After the election, vote tabulation, canvassing, precinct aggregation computers. Installing new software in a voting machine is not really much different from installing new software in any other kind of computer. Installing new software is how you hack a voting machine to cheat. In 2009, in the courtroom of the Superior Court of New Jersey, I demonstrated how to hack a voting machine. I wrote a vote stealing computer program that shifts votes from 1 candidate to another.
Installing that vote stealing program in a voting machine takes 7 minutes per machine with a screwdriver. But really the software I built was not rocket science. Any computer programmer could write the same code. Once it's installed, it could steal elections without detection for years to come. Voting machines are often delivered to polling places several days before the election, to elementary schools, churches, firehouses.
In these locations, anyone could gain access to a voting machine for 10 minutes. Between elections, the machines are routinely opened up for maintenance by county employees or private contractors. Let's assume they have the utmost integrity. But still in the US we try to run our elections so that we can trust the election results without relying on any one individual. Other computer scientists have demonstrated similar hacks on many models of machine.
This is not just 1 glitch in 1 manufacturer's machine. It's the very nature of computers. So how can we trust our elections when it's so easy to make the computers cheat?
Speaker 8: Mr. Appel, in that scenario, an attacker would actually have to have access to all 100 in the 1 county in order to manipulate the records.
Speaker 5: In Georgia, that's not the case. The machines used in Georgia Have been demonstrated to be hackable through a virus that's carried on ballot definition cartridges, very much like this Stuxnet virus was, inserted into nuclear centrifuges in Iran. So, and in
Speaker 8: that auditing system, in the auditing of these machines. We look at that. Is that correct?
Speaker 5: I'm sorry. Can you repeat the question?
Speaker 8: So, in those machines that have that vulnerability in the auditing process. Isn't that scanned? Don't we scan for that?
Speaker 5: It's difficult to scan for that vulnerability in the sense of if you Ask a machine to report what software is loaded in it. If it's fraudulent software, it will lie. So, the AccuVote TS machines, used in Georgia and in a few counties in other states are particularly vulnerable to this kind of virus that can be carried to the machines even if the criminal attacker doesn't touch the machines or is not even in the same state with the machines. Cap.
Speaker 9: With parts made all over the world, and software made all over the world, and as Sherry said, there's only 3 or 4 manufacturers, the the one core point That kind of election security experts and others have been making about why our votes are safe was that the decentralized nature of our, Voting systems, the thousands and thousands of of, voting offices around the country that administer the election is what kept safe because Russians would need to have tens of thousands of operatives go get physical access to machines to actually, infiltrate the election. We now know that's false. And that through a handful of simple attacks, into manufacturers not in the United States, The Russians could plant malware into, thousands of machines all at once and hack the entire U. S. Election without ever leaving the Kremlin.
Speaker 10: Or is there a different way where you could just hack one machine and that would transmit a bug to other machines in the precinct, again, even though they're not connected to an internet.
Speaker 2: Sure. So before we had an Internet, we had computers with floppy drives. And there were computer viruses that could spread from 1 computer to another over floppies. Electronic voting machines, some of them use memory cards, some of them have these big battery packs, some of them have local area networks. Studies conducted in 2007 by the state of California, state of Ohio, state of Florida found security vulnerabilities that could take advantage of these to engineer viruses where 1 compromised voting machine could then infect eventually the entire fleet of machines for an entire county.
And Each of these studies found ways that regular poll workers and election officials going through their standard procedures and and standard operations Could unwittingly be used to transmit viruses from 1 machine to another through the motion. Typically at the end of the election day, you move a memory card through each of the machines in the precinct, and that's to collect the vote totals. That process can spread a virus. And there are other processes. The details vary from machine to machine.
Speaker 10: Okay. So it's accurate to say that just because something is not connected to the internet, it does not have a vulnerability to cyber attack.
Speaker 2: Being disconnected from the Internet helps, but it's not a panacea, okay?
Speaker 11: When you and your colleagues hacked election systems, did you get caught?
Speaker 0: We hacked, election systems as part of academic research where we had machines in our system. Did you get caught?
Speaker 11: Did they did they see your intrusion into their systems?
Speaker 0: The one instance when I was invited to hack a real voting system to while people were watching, was in Washington, D. C. In 2010, and in that instance it took less than 48 hours for us to change all the votes, and we were not caught.
Speaker 11: Vice, Chairman.
Speaker 0: I have sitting in my office right now actually, a deep old AccuVote TSX machine, a touchscreen machine that's still in use in 23 states, where, I've hacked it to give whatever outcome I want. It it really is that easy. And when you're talking about, when you're talking about these attacks, though, I don't think it's something that, You know, just in every case, a, a freshman in college could do it. Some states are a little bit better protected, but that's not who we're up against. We're up against nation state attackers that are among some of the most Powerful, adversaries in the world when it comes to cyber attacks, and which have routinely compromised highly protected sites like, like military installations, and large tech companies.
I think that's the thing that I want voting officials and and voters to understand is quite what they're up against. And we have a combination of very powerful adversaries and series, and unfortunately quite vulnerable and obsolete systems. That's why I say it's only a matter of time.
Speaker 3: The standard arguments that, our elections can't be hacked in the US are some combination of physical security. You can't get access to the devices, they're not connected to the internet, they're tested before Election Day, and the system is too decentralized. It's run by, you know, a bunch of individual election officials and individual counties and and jurisdictions. So it's it's a it's a hard target. Most of this has already been debunked by, the previous speakers, but, physical security is pretty lax.
Equipment, has sleepovers in school gymnasiums, and churches, and this and that. There are lots of, examples on the Internet of photos of, election, equipment warehouses, where the the Election officials warehouses with the door propped open and nobody watching. Just, it's just not true. It isn't true that the machines aren't connected to the Internet, and even if they weren't to the Internet that would still be hackable through other means. One of the things that hasn't been mentioned so far yet is supply chain hacks.
There are components in these voting systems that come from foreign countries. A colleague of ours, Karsten Sherman, at the IT University of Copenhagen, Found Chinese pop songs in memory of a voting machine that he bought, on the Internet. So that those songs somehow made it through the quality control of The election equipment vendor, and then through, how many elections that it was actually used in by the local election official, and, and, you know, we're still there. Moreover, there's an issue in reporting, which I'm not going to talk about that much, but there are a number of states that outsource their reporting of elections to third parties, some of which are corporations based in other countries like Spain. So you've got to trust that the aggregation of the votes and the reporting of the votes is is, is accurate as well.
There's a lot of technology being rolled out in this election, that had either not been used or not been used as widely before. This includes, much more widespread reliance on things like electronic poll books, which become a point of vulnerability that can disenfranchise people if they malfunction, if they lose their Internet connection, or if they've been hacked, some jurisdictions are relying on uploading election results using cellular modems or, the internet That, of course, introduces another point of vulnerability, not just to the data that's flowing, but also to the software, the devices that, that are being connected. Voting equipment itself, there are states that have rolled out touchscreen voting for all in person voters. This is, An unnecessary introduction of brittle and vulnerable technology. Many pieces of electronic technology that are involved in elections are Either incorporate, devices that were built overseas, or assembled overseas, and many crucial functions are being outsourced to foreign companies.
One, noteworthy example that I'm especially concerned about, there is a Spanish firm, called CITL, which runs, they they provide election reporting for something like 11 US states. They're based in Spain, and they're bankrupt. So that could, obviously, is a point of failure where, someone could shed a lot of mistrust over the election results By simply falsifying what gets posted, even if the correct results could ultimately be recovered from durable reliable records, that would certainly, cast a lot of fear uncertainty and doubt on what's going on. There have been ransomware attacks on, government systems now including some voting systems, We know that there are cyber warfare attacks by Russia, China, Iran and North Korea. There most states voter registration databases were, penetrated in 2016, there is a lot of evidence that data were changed, but that could certainly happen this time around.
So all in all, there's a lot of confusion, there are a lot of points of vulnerability. There are a lot of known problems. There are some election vendors who have been hacked, before 2016. VR systems was hacked in Florida. Some of their clients were, there were phishing attacks against them this time, around, let's see, I forgot my name of it.
Tyler Technologies, which provides some, vote by mail ballot, tracking and some vote aggregation reporting has also been hacked. So overall, there's an awful lot that can go wrong.
Speaker 12: He saw no evidence of, Tampering with, no, voter voting machines or voter tallies. That's not true. It didn't happen. We just didn't see the evidence of it.
Speaker 13: Well, there has been never a documented incident when votes have been changed during the real election. And my answer was please continue using these machines and that will remain to be true forever, Because these machines don't have a capability of providing you forensic evidence to see if they cannot prove they were honest, they cannot prove that they were have been hacked. They simply don't have the fundamental basic capabilities of providing you that forensic evidence, that data. Only way you can see that that machine was hacked if the attacker wanted to be found that it was hacked. That's a sad truth.
So Anyone who says I have a information one way or another, that's an opinion. That's not fact based. Fact is, it can be done without leaving trace.
Speaker 14: When you know how the system for looking for the evidence, you know that you won't find it because the systems are not recording, Generating, preserving or protecting meaningful forensic evidence. And this is from the very beginning to the end of the process everywhere. These systems really don't have a capability of recording and protecting any meaningful audit information or forensically important information. So a lot of times I would also argue that even if you try to take a look into the into the evidence, the problem is that there is no Evidence which is trustworthy and and worth on a lot. Even recently, a case where a voting machine was reporting, and I believe that was in the last year in North voting machine was in the race where they had 50,000 votes cast, was cast reporting to 1 candidate 164 or something like that votes.
And when the paper was looped, that person actually get 26,000 vote and vote by 1 by 1,000 votes.
Speaker 12: Wow.
Speaker 14: So we we really need to have that paper ballot. There's nothing we don't have a technology to do electronic voltage. The problem the most most Driving thing is, first of all, from 2006 to now is nothing changed. The actual same version of software I hacked 2005 is still in use. It's those machines are still in 20 states.
Mhmm. So they're still around. Even the so called new sold today is In the end of life version of of Windows, etcetera, like, just something which no other industry would be acceptable, would be remotely acceptable. So I think the most as overall, it is how outdated everything is And and how hard it is to make people to understand the the reality and and get the warning through that this needs to be fixed or things will get really, really worse, turn the worse. They're bad right now, but and I cannot even Cannot imagine what the worst would be looking like.
Parties, they are not actually but a lot of these voting machines are not US origin. And I'm not only talking about the components being made in China or a voting machine being assembled in in Philippines, but also the very of the machine, the programming. In many many many voting machines, that programming, either whole or in the large part is Coming from a foreign from code sources. And it seems to be the case that actually the voting machine vendors, Generally speaking, either don't know or they refuse to tell the truth where the code actually comes. And it turned out that the system he is using exactly the same system which created this magnitude 16,022 votes in Volusia County for Al Gore.
So I took a look into the system, figured out a couple of ways to manipulate the central tabulator. But I told I on this well, this is not elegant. You leave a audit trail. You leave a evidence, the bet bet, breadcrumbles. You can trace it.
I was asked, well, if there what is the elegant way? So I have I don't know if there's 1. But if if there is, it's gotta be this memory card.
Speaker 15: So it's so it's a memory card that fits into the voting machine that you found could be the more or less untraceable or hard to trace way to manipulate the results, whereas they were thinking it was something in the machine. You thought this was attack because you would see a ton of evidence and, like you said, breadcrumbs being left by the tampering party.
Speaker 14: Well, it's it's no. It's if not even that. I was just Thinking about the architecture of the system. And with that architecture, it made sense that there's executable program in the memory card. And I was quickly told that that's impossible because it's against the certified rules.
But, also, the vendor was dishonest about the origin of the card. So, well, if they are not Honest about one thing they're probably not honest about. The second thing, I found an executable program on a memory card. I found it's it's completely unprotected. This This memory card is so old.
It's older than floppy drive. So it actually, I found it because I was I remember that I have seen it before floppy drives existed. So that's what I found who was the original manufacturer of it. And a, interesting The thing about this explanation afterwards was that demand 16,000 was malfunction Of the memory card, that's the, that's the reason why it happened. Not possible.
That reason why it's not possible is that that memory card Doesn't know how to make negative numbers. So whatever caused that man respond 16,000 votes, which we don't know what caused it. At least the official explanation given at the time, not possible. Something else happened.
Speaker 1: So everyone was focused in 2000 on the punch card machines and the problems that that brought. But in Fallucia County, there was an incident that occurred. It didn't A lot of attention. And the attention that it did get sort of disappeared and got lost in all of the focus on the punch card machines. What happened in Volusia County was around At 10 p.
M. Midnight or sorry, 10 p. M. On election night. Prior to that, Al Gore in Volusia County was ahead of George Bush.
But around 10 p. M, suddenly, Al Gore's number started reversing. And it reversed more than 16,000 votes. And in There aren't, it was all happening in 1 precinct, and of course, there weren't 16,000 voters in that 1 precinct. So Gore's numbers were actually showing a negative 16,000 in that precinct.
And the explanation that election officials provided was that, a faulty memory card was inserted into the tabulating machine. Now, it wasn't, the, let's say, legitimate memory card. So there was 1 memory card for this precinct, and it was uploaded to a tabulator on election night. But the logs show that an hour after that memory card was uploaded, another 2nd memory card for that same precinct was uploaded. And after that 2nd card was uploaded, that's when the votes for Gore started disappearing.
And no one has been able to explain what exactly happened with that, whether that was a rogue card that was intentionally designed to hack the votes and misfired and therefore, Erased too many votes for Gore or whether this was, you know, a software mishap. But no one has explained why 2 memory cards for the same precinct were uploaded. And that's that's sort of the main problem in terms of chains of custody, the fact that a second memory card was actually ever able to be uploaded.
Speaker 6: And John Kerry has expressed misgivings about the 2004 vote in Ohio.
Speaker 1: Yes. So they had concerns about the machines in Ohio. Ohio was still largely using punch card machines. They hadn't replaced theirs yet. But there were still counties there were counties that were already using optical scan machines and also paperless DRE machines.
And he and his group, he revealed this only recently, actually went to court court to try and obtain the algorithms, the software, to look at the software to make sure that it would be counting votes accurately. And the courts denied access to it because the proprietary software on voting machines is considered a trade secret. And so the private voting machine companies go to court to fight against this, and the courts generally agree with them.
Speaker 14: When I and others, when we 2005, 2006 got involved And up until 2008, we all thought now when the problem has been exposed, it will be fixed very quickly. It would it was completely Always incomprehensible for me and and other secretary researchers that now 2020, we are talking about this topic. And, also, we are 2020 using the same machines with the same software. It's just you wouldn't be using a a 30 year old PC with with no security patches, But that's exactly how the elections are conducted. Let's talk about everything in the world how this works.
Speaker 16: Okay.
Speaker 17: So
Speaker 14: you have a voting message, a voting terminal. That's how you pass your ballot, either electronically or paper ballot, it's go scanning. And after that, these machines are reporting those results Very often, our our communication lies through the central tabulator. Now in both in the county level, or or state level, where the votes are accumulated in database, and along the path, there are number of data storage, systems databases. And if you manipulate those, you can create an illusion of a different results.
And you can even do it in the about election reporting system. So instead of even hacking anything in the tabulator system, you are just creating wrong reporting. So there are a number of ways how you can, through this whole path, influence the results. And we have to actually step even further back, Steph, because if we look the election as whole, it's a myriad of system. We have voter registration system.
Them. We have electronic poll book systems. We have the election management. We have the ballot casting. We have the tabulation, and we have the reporting.
Any of these, if you have one of these, you can always have the result. You can disenfranchise voters so they can cast their ballot. You can change the the outcome. You can change the reporting. Each of these needs to be secured.
None of these is less important than the others. And that's why we have been I think in the public mind, we have been focusing in a very narrow area, Which is you cast a ballot on how the ballot is counted, but not missing the whole big picture. How many other systems from a adversary, how from from ethical's point of view, where the other can go and achieve the same goal. How about the Internet? It really it's everything is connected to Internet either directly or indirectly.
And the more modern voting machines, they actually have a mobile phone Modem, in to speak, they have a they have a mobile phone mobile phone connectivity to county headquarters. They are sending the results. So wireless is coming back to the voting message in the newer generations. Nice marketing material trying to tell it's not, but it is. A journalist in a year ago, she found 200 voting machines in the Internet.
Voting machine vendors say, well, they are not in Internet because they are not pingable. My answer to that is, are you from the past? Because since since 15 years ago, nothing is really anymore pingable, And they are still connected to Internet. It's the the whole argument is 15 that argument was to have been meaning something 15 years ago. It doesn't mean anything today.
And, again, I I was just came from Atlanta, and and they have new working machines because the judge ordered the old ones to be scrapped. And part of the things in the the judge's ruling was that, The finding was that the voting machine were programmed by basically 3 guys from their homes and who sent all the programming of the voting machine for next hours and over Internet to We distribute all the machines.
Speaker 15: Oh, so these guys had programmed the machines from home, and then they they pushed the code update to the voting machines via the Internet.
Speaker 14: We what they said but they pushed it to the state, and then the state pushed it to the counties. And, actually, this whole thing about, the critical election specific programming going over Internet is very common because lot of this programming is done by private companies, third party management companies. And it's, it has been shocking the last 2 years when I have been working for a number of secretaries of state And looking how the security has done in their state just to find that email, FTP with no security. These are the common methods to send the most mission critical programming from the private company, which might be out of state, to the local county who is putting it into the machines. It is whoever controls that data controls the election.
Speaker 15: And these machines, they like you said, they have network cards. You show in Kill Chain, again, the documentary that we'll link in the show notes, that they have USB ports. They have memory card slots. They have modems and phone jacks sometimes. So these things were built for connectivity.
They're not immune to connectivity. And we don't by the seem seemingly, we don't have to hack Hundreds of machines. These are networked. You can just make software that infects 1 and then dozens of others or just changes the data. Do you think we could, Is it possible so do you think it's possible that we could create a worm that it yet we get on 1 machine in the voting center and it just connects to the other machines covertly and infects them without the bad actors so much as laying a hand on the machine themselves.
Speaker 14: The real, proof of concept virus was demonstrated over 10 years ago. So, that that already has been demonstrated publicly that voting machine virus which can, self propagate from 1 voting machine to another, that's a reality which We have sown it's possible. So beyond and that's one of the things why that was created was because, Again, when you say it's possible by showing the vulnerability, people said, well, I don't believe until you show it. So it's one of the rear Things where, a team of researchers developed in the actual virus just to show the logical outcome of the the the vulnerability. Yes.
There can be a voting machine virus. Full stop. Here it is.
Speaker 18: We've heard a lot from voting machine vendors and election officials that voting machines Can't be hacked because they're not connected to the Internet. All of those vulnerabilities that Andrew talked about, are not a problem because no one can access the machines. And it turns out that the message that they've been giving us for years, and particularly after the 2016 election, just isn't true. Voting machine vendors have sold election officials on these in use of modems. In some cases, the modems are embedded inside the voting machines.
In other cases, there are external modems that get attached to the voting machine at the end of the election. So at the end of the election, the machine goes into shutdown mode And then this option pops up about modoming results. And so the system will automatically then dial in and send these votes, over a cellular modem to a server on the Internet that collects the results. So everyone will tell you, and they've told me every time I've spoken with them, that cellular modems are not really Internet connectivity. They will say that doesn't mean that the machine is connected to the Internet.
It's using a cellular modem. Well, that's not true. And Election Systems and Software, which is tax. This is one of their statements over and over again with the public. But this is one of their own diagrams that they actually gave to Rhode Island in 2015.
And if you see that circular part in the centre there showing that modem transmission using a wireless modem, They sit there, right there. It's on their own diagram that it's going over the internet. So what happens is that the transmission of the votes votes, that the voting machine will dial in using the cellular modem and it contacts the nearest cell tower. And then the data goes through that cell tower into the carrier's back end network. But then the data actually has to get to that county network, and it goes over the Internet to a system, a server that's on the Internet to receive those votes.
So we've already now basically shown the misinformation of the transmission of those votes. So ES and S will then say, well, it doesn't matter because all of that process is secured. So the transmission of the votes are secured so that no one can intercept them and read the votes or alter them. The modem is configured in such a way so that no one can actually dial into the modem, it can only dial out, and it can only dial out when the machine shuts down at the end of the election. So apparently, there are all of these safeguards.
And also, the back end system that receives the transmitted votes is supposed to communicate only with one of those authenticated machines with the modem. The problem is none of this has been tested or certified. The voting machines themselves go through sort of a federal testing lab process And through certification, the modem transmissions don't. So we don't know what's inside those modems. We don't know how they work.
We don't know how they're configured. And ES and S doesn't have a good track record on implementing security. So we don't actually know that the way that they are saying that these are transmitted securely is actually case. So what can happen with a modem machine that's transmitting? So I don't know if you're familiar with something called a stingray.
It's a device that law enforcement uses and the military uses. And what it does is it, masquerades as a legitimate cell tower. It transmits a much more powerful signal than the nearby cell tower so that your cell phone will connect to the stingray instead of the cell tower. And then it might pass it on to the cell tower as well. It's mostly used for tracking phones, but there are also Stingrays that are designed also to intercept the content of communication.
So if you've got a cellular modem in a voting machine, a rogue person can put a rogue cell tower near some kind of voting precinct, whatever. And instead of that modem then connecting to that cell tower, they can connect to that rogue The rogue cell tower. You can intercept data. If it's not properly encrypted, you could intercept the data and change the results. Or you could basically swap out the a whole package of results if it's not authentically signed, and replace it with your own package of results.
And so those go on to the server. If there's a vulnerability in that modem, A hacker can actually transmit malware back onto that voting machine through the rogue cell tower. And once you're in that voting machine, Either that way or maybe you've gotten into the voting machine prior when it's being programmed, you now actually control the configuration of that modem. So even if ES and S says that modem will only work at the end of the election and will only call out and not receive calls in. If you control the configuration of that modem, you change all of that.
You can have that machine contact your system at any time you want, for however you want, so that you can do reconnaissance on that machine and study it and established your attack. There were a group of researchers that decided that they would try and see if they could find those backend servers that receive the votes that are transmitted by modem. So if you've got something that's transmitting the votes over the cellular network, there's something that has to be connected to the internet to receive them. So there is a server. And it turns out that they could actually, based on configuration information that's publicly available on the internet, that the voting machine vendors provide to election offices and the election offices post on the internet.
They describe the type of that we have created a firewall that they use. It's made by Cisco. They describe the type of FTP software that receives the votes, that sits on that server. They describe the whole configuration, including the type of cellular modem that's embedded in their machines. So based on that information, they decided to see if they could look for that very specific footprint of ESNS machines that are receiving the votes.
And they did a scan and they were able to find these systems on the Internet. So they found 9 Wisconsin counties that had systems connected to the Internet, 7 Florida counties, from 4 Michigan counties. They actually found systems in 10 different states, but these were the primary ones. And of course, these are all important critical swing states. So here's the thing.
Election officials will tell you, well, the modem transmissions don't matter because we only turn on those modems for a very brief period, less than a minute at the end of the election to transmit. And that's not sufficient time for someone to hack. Any of the technical attack. But more importantly, it turns out these systems aren't just connected for a few minutes after an election. Those back end systems that receive the votes are quite often connected year round.
You can see them when they're doing the scans. You can sometimes see them. They come up a couple of weeks. Some of the ones that are only up temporarily will sometimes come up a couple of weeks before the election because they want to test the transmission. And then they leave it on for those weeks before the election.
And after the election, they might forget to take it down and it might stay up a couple of other weeks. But there are some that simply never take them down at all. And Wisconsin was one of them. They were on year round. These systems, so what are they?
I describe this as a server, but that sounds kind of benign. What is happening is that the The votes are being transmitted, and on the receiving end there's a firewall that's connected to the internet. And behind the firewall, There is this FTP server that the votes are transmitted on. Now that FTP server is supposed to serve as kind of like a DMZ, a safe zone, right? So the votes are deposited and there's supposed to be then no direct connection to the system that actually tabulates the votes.
But it turns out that's not the case at all. This is a diagram that ES and S created and handed out to election officials. And so you can see that the votes are coming over the Internet, and they're coming and there's the firewall, and then you see all those wires connected. And you see at the bottom there that EMS, that's the Election Management system. That is the system that tabulates the final results.
So even though they say that, that transmission of votes over the Internet is just unofficial, Connected to that system that's receiving those unofficial votes is also the system that is tabulating the official results. What's more, that election management system is also used to program all the voting machines prior to an election. So when, I brought this To ES and S's attention, they didn't then say that nothing is connected to the Internet. What they said was none of those critical systems are pingable from the Internet because there's a firewall in front. So essentially what they're saying is that even though now first they've said that none of these systems are connected to the Internet.
And now when they're faced with someone saying, well, they actually are connected, they say, well, they may be configured in some manner that you're showing, but there's a firewall in front of them and therefore, you can't see what's behind the firewall. But if you can find the firewall, then you find the systems that are behind the firewall. The only thing that's protecting anyone from getting into those critical systems behind the firewall are the rules of that firewall that say, only these certain systems can connect to us, only these certain systems can transmit data. That's simply software. It's configuration rules.
And if you misconfigure that software, then anything can get into that firewall. And of course, many, many hacks happen because firewalls are misconfigured.
Speaker 0: I was part of the team that did the first hands on study of any electronic voting machine used in the US and it was using exactly this machine. And what we found, well, we got one of these machines from a whistleblower, Brought it into a laboratory. Reverse engineered it. And well, here's the result of what we found. We we would run a mock election with George Washington and Benedict Arnold, just like this.
And, wanted to know, well, if an attacker that could get malicious software into the machine somehow. Could they change the results? And what we found after reverse engineering the machine was, well, Yeah. There are actually a lot of problems with it. All the records of the vote are contained in, in computer memory.
And, an attacker can manipulate the software that's supposed to be running in the machine in a pretty straightforward way. Before every election, officials program the machine with the names of the candidates on the ballot by, installing some that they can change the software running in the machine. There are, unauthenticated software update mechanisms, there are offer overflows and the code that reads the data files from this. There's even an interpreted programming language and the rules for how the votes will be counted are contained in an unauthenticated program contained on the memory card. So through any of those means, An attacker can change the software running on the voting machine and cause the machine to produce whatever election results they want.
So that was in about 2007. We, we published the first paper about this. In and that's what we're going to do. And so we're going to have to do that. And so we're going to have to do that.
And so we're flows and so forth. There have been hundreds and hundreds of pages of technical reports about US voting machines like this. But even after that, They haven't even updated the software since before the studies I talked about. That's how bad it is. And it's not even just a single model of machine that's the only problem.
Country. There are about 52 different models of machines. They fall into essentially 2 styles, ones that scan a piece of paper or ones where the vote, the voter just interacts with the touch screen and many of them have been analyzed now by researchers, Looking for security vulnerabilities. In every single case where a US voting machine has been analyzed by by competent in security researchers. They have found vulnerabilities that would let someone inject malicious software and change election data, every single case.
Before every election, election officials have to program the voting machines with who's on the ballot and what are the rules for counting. Well, they make that election programming on a PC workstation somewhere, either at the, at the jurisdiction or at an outside vendor that does it for them. If an attacker can break into that workstation which is called an election management system. They can spread malicious code to all of the memory cards used to program all of the voting machines in the jurisdiction. And those election management system workstations sometimes are connected to the internet, or they're, or the data that's programmed into them passes through an internet connected system.
So we're just 1 or 2 hops away from an online attacker. Now how well secured are these systems? Well, here's, a vendor that did the election programming for, in a large fraction of my state in 2016. And we can just take a look at their website to see how secure this is likely to be. You can see, first of all, they don't have any HTTPS.
Here are lots of nice, high resolution photographs of their warehouse, in case you want to break in. And perhaps most interestingly, here's their employee directory with everyone's name, job title, email address and photograph. So if I wanted to break into this company, let's say I was the attacker, I'd probably start by forging an email from, let's say, Larry, the president here, to Sue, his administrative assistant, asking her to urgently open an attachment. Now, of course, when she does, that attachment has my malware in it. I have a foothold into their network, and I can try to spread from there to the election management system and to the voting machines in most of the state.
Tampering with the national election result in my country it's easier than well, easier than even I thought in 2016. I keep learning things that convince me that the situation is scarier than, than even experts had thought. You identify the states that are most weakly protected and going to be close. Target the computers that are going to program voting machines there, spread malware to machines to change a fraction of the votes, and then rely on the fact that most states, even if they have a paper record, are not going to rigorously use it to check that the computers are right. But the fact is that in close national contests in the US, the result really only hinges on the result in a small number of states.
You've heard about the swing states in any given election. The ones that are, really competitive. In such a situation, an attacker can, before the election, identify which states are likely to be close. Try probing all of them in the way that the Russians did the voter registration systems in 2016 and just find the weakest swing states and attack there. So in this way, the American system converts, diversity of implementation into basically this patchwork of strength and weakness that gives attackers a menu of possible places to strike.
It makes us weaker in close elections. So just to review, you look at the polls before the election and figure out which states were likely to be close. Probe all of them, find the ones with the weakest protection, then hack into the, election management systems there or at the outside vendors the states use. Once you hack into the election management system, you can spread malicious code to individual voting machines and have your code say, swap 10% of the votes in the places you infected. Then even if the votes are also recorded on a piece of paper, you don't have to worry.
Because in most of those states, they're going to just toss the paper out without looking
Speaker 5: Modems in voting machines are a bad idea. Those modems are network connections. And that leaves them vulnerable to hacking by anybody who can connect to that network.
Speaker 19: ESNS insists While there are 14,000 of its modems in use, there are firewalls separating those modems from the public Internet.
Speaker 5: Once a hacker Starts talking to the voting machine through the modem. They can hack the software in the voting machine and make it cheat in future elections.
Speaker 17: What is the vehicle for the transmission from the ICP? Is it cellular modem versus VPN? It is a cellular modem that can be configured in a VPN. Right. And we currently in Chicago and Cook County, we work with Verizon to, secure that network.
What wireless chipset Slash modem does the hardware have? We support a variety. So, it's really up to the jurisdictions, what technology they want to use, what's compatible with their networks.
Speaker 16: Currently, in some jurisdictions, we're using, Basically a modem that is a three d modem, GSM, but we can support multiple varieties of modem that can be.
Speaker 17: Including latest 4 gs standards
Speaker 14: as well.
Speaker 17: So the answers to the next question, is it
Speaker 3: 3 gs or 4 gs? Verizon, 8 gs or 2 gs or Sprint,
Speaker 5: I'm assuming
Speaker 17: all? Yeah, all networks.
Speaker 15: Just to
Speaker 17: ask a quick question. Yes, I mean, we actually transmit from the ICP in Mongolia as well. So
Speaker 7: We're not committed to networks.
Speaker 16: And in Puerto Rico, there is 3 vendors because the island is not covered by any by any of the vendors completely. So we use 3 different cellular vendors for some ICPs with this vendor Claro, AT and T, MT Mobile, I think, in the different parts of the app.
Speaker 14: More modern attack voting machines. They actually have a mobile phone modem, and to speak, they have a they have a mobile phone mobile phone connectivity to county headquarters. They are sending the results.
Speaker 3: Some jurisdictions are relying on uploading election results using cellular modems or, the Internet. That of course introduces another point of vulnerability, not just to the data that's flowing, but also to the software, the devices that, that are being connected.
Speaker 1: Many of these voting machines have modems embedded into them. And the modems are used at the end of the election to transmit the vote totals on election night to the county, The, elections office. So these modems contact their cellular modems, and they contact the cellular network, they contact the cell tower. So the cell tower traffic these In our modern times, it actually goes through Internet. It goes through the same kinds of routers and switches that the regular Internet traffic goes to.
But also, in between that cell tower and that voting machine, An intruder can, intercept data going to the cell tower and intercept that that communication, that phone call. If you can trick a voting machine into, contacting your device, A fake cellular tower instead of a legitimate tower. You can actually use that connection to get back into the voting machine and get back into the tabulator, and then alter votes and software.
Speaker 20: Virginia just stopped Using touch screen computer voting because it's so vulnerable.
Speaker 18: We need to look at
Speaker 20: all the voting machines. Every secretary of state needs to be, You know, assisted in making sure that they are not being, hacked and and attacked.
Speaker 6: I continue to think that our voting machines are too vulnerable.
Speaker 21: But researchers have repeatedly demonstrated That ballot recording machines and other voting systems are susceptible to tampering.
Speaker 22: Even hackers with limited prior knowledge, tools, and resources are able to breach voting machines In a matter of minutes.
Speaker 23: In 2018, electronic voting machines in Georgia and Texas deleted votes for certain candidates or switched votes from 1 candidate to another.
Speaker 21: The biggest seller of voting machines is doing something that violates cyber security 101, directing that you install remote access software, which would make a machine like that, you know, a magnet for fraudsters and hackers.
Speaker 24: These voting machines can be hacked quite easily.
Speaker 25: You could easily Hack into them. It makes it seem like all these states are doing different things, but in fact 3 companies are controlling that. It is the individual voting machines That some pose that pose some of the greatest risks.
Speaker 26: There are a lot of states that are dealing with antiquated machines, Right? Which are vulnerable to being hacked.
Speaker 24: Workers were able to easily hack into an electronic voting machine. It was possible to switch votes. 43%
Speaker 21: of American voters use voting machines that researchers have found have serious security flaws, Including backdoors.
Speaker 3: We know how vulnerable now our systems were. We know I know the hackathon that took place last year, where virtually every machine was broken into fairly quickly.
Speaker 26: I actually held a demonstration for my colleagues here at the capitol, where we brought in, folks Who, before our eyes, hacked election machines, those that are not those that are being used in many states.
Speaker 22: Aging systems also frequently rely on unsupported software, like Windows XP in 2000, which may not receive regular security patches and are thus more vulnerable To the latest methods of cyber attack.
Speaker 24: In a close presidential election, they just need to hack 1 swing state, or maybe 1 or 2, Or maybe just a few counties in one swing step.
Speaker 27: I'm very concerned that you could have a hack that finally went through. You have 21 states that were hacked into. They didn't find out about it for a year. Right now, we have over a dozen dozen states That either don't have any backup paper ballots or only have them partially. Do you think that our adversaries don't know what those states are?
Of course, they know what those states are. And if we have a close election in the general election, in a presidential race, and one state's out withstanding And their ballot boxes get hacked into, their elections get hacked into, we will have absolutely no backup.
@Curiousityfirst - DogAndBone @Curious Cat
@jhalderm the same guy that found the Dominion vulnerability, wherein instead of stating they breached their contract, he ensured that DOMINION's CVR's were "sanitised" to make it difficult to analyse. @JanuszP20 @noodles @CannConActual @TxSaving https://t.co/AL4uliCgdh
reSee.it AI Summary
Both Democrats and Republicans have a history of denying election results. In 2020, 77% of Republicans believed there was widespread fraud, while in 2016, 78% of Democrats believed the election was stolen. Stacey Abrams claimed voter suppression in her 2018 Georgia gubernatorial race, and Al Gore claimed he would have won in 2000 if all votes were counted. Democrats boycotted Trump's inauguration in 2016, and Rob Reiner funded a group to control media coverage of the Russia conspiracy. Both parties have denied elections for decades.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
THREAD Proof that AOC was right about Republicans denying the 2020 Presidential Election.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
On December 10, 2020 a Quinnipiac poll reported that “77% of Republicans said they believe there was widespread fraud in the 2020 election. On August 20, 2018 Gallup poll stated 78% of Democrats said the 2016 presidential election was "stolen." So, which party denies the most?
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
In 2018, Democrat Stacey Abrams claimed she lost her Georgia gubernatorial race due to voter "suppression." She refused to concede. 3 years later, she told CNN that her opponent "won under the rules of the game at the time, but the game was rigged against the voters of Georgia.
Video Transcript AI Summary
This election has tested our faith. Some have tried to take our voices away, scare us, and distract us. But if we stay focused, we can see the finish line. You have inspired me every day during this campaign. I know the sacrifices you made to vote and volunteer. You put your faith in me, and tonight, I want you to know that the feeling is mutual. Look around, and you'll see that when we trust the people of Georgia, we can achieve anything together. Georgia still has a decision to make between division and trickery or leadership that defends our rights, our children, our careers, our communities, and our right to vote. To all Georgia voters, including those who haven't shown up before, welcome aboard. If I wasn't your first choice or if you made no choice at all, you'll have a chance to do a do-over.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This election has tested our faith. Yeah. I'm not gonna name names, but some have worked hard to take our voices away. To scare us away, to distract us. But if our vision is clear and we see the finish line.
You you have inspired me every single day of this campaign. I know what you sacrificed to make your way to the polls, to volunteer after work or on lunch breaks. And I know that you put your faith in me. You'll do it again. Georgia, you put your faith in me.
But I want you to know tonight, the feeling is mutual. And I want you to look around. Tonight should be all the proof you need that when we put our faith in the great people of the state, There is nothing we can't accomplish together. This this This fundamental truth is why we fight on, because Georgia still has a decision to make. A decision between division and trickery, Or a leadership that defends your rights, your kids, your career, your community, and your right to vote in America.
That's what's on the ballot. Now, to all of Georgia's voters, including the 1,200,000 Who haven't shown up before, welcome aboard. But I wanna say this, if I wasn't your first choice Or if you made no choice at all, you're gonna have a chance to do a do over.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
On November 15, 2002, Washington Post interviewed former Vice President Al Gore about his election versus Bush he said, "I believe that if everyone in Florida who tried to vote had had his or her vote counted properly, that I would have won." This is denial by definition.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
On January 6, 2001 several House Democrats voted against certifying the election results of 2000. Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., said in a joint session: "The objection is in writing, and I do not care that it is not signed by a member of the Senate. @RepMaxineWaters comments?
Video Transcript AI Summary
Miss Waters from California rises to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes. The objection is in writing but not signed by a senator. The chair advises that the rules require a senator's signature. Miss Waters mentions gross violations of the voting rights act in Florida but acknowledges that the objection is not signed by a senator. The chair thanks Miss Waters but states that the point of order may not be received.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: For what purpose, does the gentlewoman from California, miss Waters, arise?
Speaker 1: Mister vice president, I rise to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes.
Speaker 0: Is the objection, in writing and signed by a member of the house and a senator?
Speaker 1: The objection is in writing, and I don't care that it is not it is not signed by a member of the senate.
Speaker 0: The, the chair will advise that the rules do care, And, the the signature of the senator,
Speaker 1: The
Speaker 0: the signature of a senator is required, the chair will again, put that part of the question. Is the objection assigned by a senator?
Speaker 1: Mister vice president, there are gross violations of the voting rights act From Florida?
Speaker 0: The
Speaker 1: gentleman and it is not signed by a senator.
Speaker 0: The chair thanks the gentleman from California on the Base has previously stated the point of order may not be received.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
If John Kerry won Ohio in 2004 he would have become president. President George W. Bush carried it 51% to 49%, a margin of about 100,000 votes. But Jan. 6 Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., on Jan. 6, 2005, joined 30 other House Democrats in refusing to certify Ohio.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
Former President Jimmy Carter said in 2019: "I think a full investigation would show that Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf." Why were Democrat politicians able to speak?
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker asserts that the Russians interfered in the 2016 election, suggesting that a full investigation would reveal Trump's illegitimacy as president. They claim that Trump lost the election and was only placed in office due to Russian interference. The speaker then asks if the listener believes Trump is an illegitimate president based on their statement, which they cannot retract.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: There's no doubt that the Russians did interfere in the election, and I think the interference, although not yet quantified, if fully investigated, would show that Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put in the office because the Russians interfere on his behalf. So do you believe president Trump is an illegitimate president? Based on what I just said, which I can't retract.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
Now the 2016 election, former Obama Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson testified under oath that, while the Russians tried to manipulate voting machines, there is no evidence that a single vote tally was changed. Have Republicans like @KariLake gotten this support?
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
If a political party feels their voting system has flaws they have the right to be heard, the problem is that millions of dollars were spent denying the 2016 election in unison with Liberal Media and Politicians, Conservatives were banned for being vocal about the same concerns.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
In 2022 YouTubers began announcing that their channels were being banned for simply covering the 2016 election Democrat denial. Why are the largest platforms on the internet able to push their ideas but ban conservatives with no backing, is this truly fair?
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
How is it possible that a conservative is eligible for de-platforming if they question the 2020 election when Democrats denied the 2016 election and set riots after the win? We can see very reputable sources and notable people that clearly state the election was stolen.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers discuss the legitimacy of the 2016 election, with some claiming it was stolen and others mentioning Russian interference. They emphasize that Russia hacked the election and express concerns about an illegitimate president. There are references to protests and violence following Trump's victory. The speakers question the validity of the election and express anger towards Trump. They mention petitions and calls to overturn the results. Overall, the transcript highlights the controversy surrounding the 2016 election and the division it caused.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: So if we're all in agreement that it is incorrect to say the 2020 election was stolen, what about the 2016 election?
Speaker 1: Look. I'm not gonna Go back into history. It was a stolen election. It was stolen.
Speaker 2: Stolen. He's an illegitimate A president. He's an illegitimate president. You know, pretending to be president.
Speaker 3: Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to essentially Prove that
Speaker 4: he beat you because he didn't.
Speaker 1: 1 third of Clinton's supporters say Trump election is not legitimate. I make you the legitimate president that didn't really win.
Speaker 2: You are absolutely right. You can run the best campaign. You can even become the nominee, and you can have The election stolen from you.
Speaker 1: The 2016 election was stolen. Got a nicer way to say that.
Speaker 2: Say Russia hacked the election.
Speaker 1: Russia hacked our election.
Speaker 2: Russia hacked our election. A little louder, please. Russia hacked our Our election. That was a 9 11 scale event. This was a kind of cyber 9 11 American institution.
Yes.
Speaker 1: Russia hacked our election.
Speaker 5: Russia, you know, of course, After our election here
Speaker 1: Half of Clinton's voters believe the conspiracy theory that Russia hacked election day votes.
Speaker 2: We know that they were We're into voting rolls. Actual interference with the elections themselves. We know it happened.
Speaker 1: Despite no Credible evidence. 67% of Democrats believe Russia tampered with vote tallies.
Speaker 2: Hacking the US election. Hacking the US election. Russia hacked our elections. The Russians hacked our election.
Speaker 1: Russia hacked our election. Russia hacked
Speaker 4: our election.
Speaker 2: Russian hacking of our election. Hacking of our of our election. Russia hacked our election. Russia hacked Act our election
Speaker 1: A stolen election.
Speaker 4: Russia hacked our election.
Speaker 2: Russia hacked our election.
Speaker 4: Universal assessment that Russia hacked our election in twenty Foreign governments. Act our elections.
Speaker 1: Most young Americans consider Donald Trump an illegitimate president. Illegitimate president. He's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 2: Why is he is illegitimate. He just won an election.
Speaker 5: He is an illegitimate president in my mind.
Speaker 1: That's it. I Absolutely agreed. Experts urge Clinton Kemp to challenge election results.
Speaker 2: We will see how illegitimate his victory actually was. He's an illegitimate president. So then Russia hacked our election. Russians hacking our election. Hacked our election.
Russia hacking our election.
Speaker 1: I don't see this president elect has a legitimate president. Trump is an Legitimate president who stole the election.
Speaker 2: He is not a president.
Speaker 5: He's illegitimate. And my biggest fear is that he's gonna do it again with the help of Vlad. His best past, Terrifying.
Speaker 1: Would you be my vice presidential candidate? Hillary Clinton voters called to overturn election results.
Speaker 3: More than 4,000,000 people have already signed A petition on change .org. Calling for the electors of the electoral college to, quote, ignore their states, votes, and cast their ballots for secretary
Speaker 1: Clinton Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. We are the victims of a bloodless coup. She didn't won the general election. Yo. Electoral College.
Make Hillary Clinton president, period.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump is an illegitimate president. Unlegitimate president.
Speaker 1: Fence don't accept Trump as a legitimate president.
Speaker 2: Wasn't on the level. This election was not on the level.
Speaker 1: I don't think he's a legitimate president. Our election wasn't
Speaker 2: legit. He got his victory from cheating.
Speaker 1: Yes. Trump cheated. Trump cheated
Speaker 2: the 2016 election He's an illegitimate president. No validity. No credibility. Mhmm. And because of that
Speaker 1: anger at what some see as an illegitimate president. Donald Trump has got to vote. It will not be
Speaker 2: a peaceful change of power.
Speaker 4: A number of incidents turned violent. Protesters Earl trash cans, flash bombs, and objects at police.
Speaker 1: Several officers injured. Protesters blew rocks and smashed windows, leading to more confrontations, Injuries and arrests. Stop. The chaotic scene just blocks outside the secure area of the inauguration.
Speaker 0: If denying election results It's extreme now. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Why was it Let's let's
Speaker 2: be really clear. That comparison that you made is just ridiculous. Protests against Donald Trump's election victory surged overnight, and some became violent. Violence erupted on the streets of Portland During the 2nd straight day of protests over the election of Donald Trump, some protesters launched fireworks and other projectiles at police. Several people began vandalizing cars.
The card
Speaker 4: Some demonstrators smashed door windows. Protesters faced off with police in other cities too, including Oakland, Denver, and Minneapolis.
Speaker 6: Violent protests Continuing now for the 3rd day in a row, some 4,000 angry demonstrators over Trump's election victory taking to the streets.
Speaker 4: Officers in front Thousands of protesters in what police called a riot.
Speaker 6: Setting fires, taking their frustrations out on cars and buildings. People threw projectiles at officers and damaged property as well.
Speaker 1: I do a trash can't happen because I'm angry.
Speaker 2: 1 woman driving through was attacked as someone used a bat to smash her windshield. They are undermining our democratic process, everything that we stand for.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
It is very important to note that Republicans had both members of the House and Senate object the 2020 election, something that Democrats did not have in 2016 and during the 2001 election. If the ‘Insurrection’ never happened what would have been the result of the objections?
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
On March 22, 2019, it was revealed that Rob Reiner, a man who might be the most consistent critic of Donald Trump, is funding the Democracy Integrity Project (TDIP) with billionaire liberal investor, George Soros. - Click the ALT button on all photos in this THREAD for more info
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
TDIP is cloaked in mystery but more than a dozen interviews and determined that the group is implementing a comprehensive media-influence effort that included driving and controlling daily coverage of the Russia conspiracy. Why was this much money spent if it was true?
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
On July 25, 2016, Election Justice USA released a 100 page report compiling evidence of massive election fraud during the 2016 Democratic primaries. Election Justice USA, a non-partisan organization. Essentially, EJUSA concluded that Hillary Clinton stole Bernie Sanders election.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
After President Trump’s victory in 2016, Over 70 Democrats boycotted his inauguration, with many “claiming his election was illegitimate.” Why did they support Hillary Clinton when Bernie Sanders supporters accused her of stealing his election? Where is the middle ground?
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
Democrats have been denying elections for decades, every comment in this video is linked to its original source, we can only be in denial for so long until we pay the price for ignorance. Please Fact-Check the links in this video immediately: DNC Links: https://americafirstreport.com/here-are-so-many-examples-of-democrats-denying-election-results-that-your-head-will-spin/ https://americafirstreport.com/here-are-so-many-examples-of-democrats-denying-election-results-that-your-head-will-spin/
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: Let's get started. Light is solid, tough like a child. We're driving through the city, cruising in our cars. My steps are confident as I walk.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hot damn hole, here we go again. Light is a rock, hard as a kid. This is not for blocks through hardtops in the parking lot. Where my feet rock like this walking
Here Are So Many Examples of Democrats Denying Election Results That Your Head Will Spin
The Republican National Committee is a strange beast sometimes. On one hand, they've essentially disavowed all discussions about the stolen
americafirstreport.com
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
The truth is, I would need 3 threads to cover about half the amount of election denying that Democrats have accomplished in the past decades. I will close with this 12- Minute video displaying Democrats denying the 2000, 2004, and 2016 Elections. I am only here to make you think.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers in the video discuss the idea of illegitimate presidents and stolen elections. They mention Russian interference in the 2016 election and express doubts about the legitimacy of President Trump's victory. They also bring up the 2000 and 2004 elections, claiming that Al Gore and John Kerry were the rightful winners. The speakers highlight concerns about voter suppression, electronic voting machines, and the lack of transparency in the electoral process. They argue that elections have been stolen through tactics such as voter ID laws and voter purging. Overall, they question the fairness and integrity of various elections and express the belief that some candidates were deprived of their rightful victories.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You can
Speaker 1: run the best campaign. You can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen
Speaker 2: from you.
Speaker 3: How can you win with Russian interference, though?
Speaker 4: That's a real thing. By
Speaker 0: in 2020. But rightly.
Speaker 3: Because I'm thinking an illegitimate president that didn't really win. So how do you, you know, fight against that in 2020?
Speaker 0: You are absolutely right.
Speaker 5: He's an illegitimate president in by mine.
Speaker 6: Would you be my vice president for a candidate, brother? Folks, look, I absolutely agree.
Speaker 7: Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost And he was put in the office because of the Russians in affair.
Speaker 1: Trump knows he's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 8: The president elect, although legally elected, is not legitimate.
Speaker 2: I don't see this President-elect as a legitimate president.
Speaker 9: You said you believe that Russia's interference altered through the outcome of the election.
Speaker 10: I do. We have a president who, if in fact, it is proven, has been assisted by the Russians and may in fact not be a legitimate president.
Speaker 1: The one thing that Trump is fearful of, when it comes to his being president, is that finally, we We will see how illegitimate his victory actually was.
Speaker 2: I have an objection.
Speaker 10: I object to the 15 votes from the state of North Carolina. I object because people are horrified.
Speaker 1: He's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 11: Do you believe Trump is a legitimate president?
Speaker 4: What I believe is that there's no question that the outcome of this Finn was affected by the Russian interference.
Speaker 12: There absolutely is a cloud of illegitimacy.
Speaker 8: So that legitimacy is in question. Yes. So that was a very tainted election, and and in that Since it it's illegitimate.
Speaker 11: Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to essentially prove that he beat you?
Speaker 1: Because he knows he didn't. He knows he's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 9: Stolen emails. Stolen drone. Stolen drone. Stolen election. Welcome to the world of unprecedented Trump.
So do you believe president Trump is an illegitimate president?
Speaker 7: Based on what I just said, which I can't retract.
Speaker 8: The Russian attempt to to have the election. And, frankly, the FBI's weighing in on the election. I think make the make makes this election illegitimate.
Speaker 1: There was a widespread understanding that this election was not on the level. We still don't know what really happened, Isaac. I mean, there's just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover, but you don't win by 3,000,000 votes and have all this other shenanigan stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, Woah. Something's not right here.
Speaker 4: The outcome of the election was affected by their interference. And now we need to know, you know, to what degree, if any, the Trump campaign was actually in Collusion with the with Russia.
Speaker 1: He knows he's an illegitimate president, so, of course, he's obsessed with me. And I believe that it's a guilty conscience.
Speaker 2: We actually won the last presidential election, folks. They stole the last presidential election.
Speaker 6: If Al Gore won that election, I think he won anyway.
Speaker 2: Actually, I think I carried for it.
Speaker 1: Bush versus Gore. A court took away a presidency.
Speaker 13: If all the votes were counted in Florida, then Al Gore would be president today and George Bush would be backing
Speaker 0: I come from Florida, where you and others participated in what I call the United States coup d'etat.
Speaker 7: There's no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president.
Speaker 10: I rise to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes.
Speaker 2: I must object Because of the overwhelming evidence of official misconduct, deliberate fraud, and an attempt to The chairman must provide.
Speaker 10: It Signed by myself on behalf of my diverse constituents and the millions of Americans who have been disenfranchised by Florida's in Accurate vote count for Supreme Court, not the people
Speaker 11: of the United States, decided this election.
Speaker 10: Speaking to a Democratic group in Chicago Tuesday, he made it clear He thinks Al Gore was the winner.
Speaker 2: By the time it was over, our candidate had won the popular vote, And the only way they could win the election was to stop the voting in Florida. Catherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Jim Baker, and the Supreme court hadn't tampered with the results. Al Gore would be president.
Speaker 4: The Supreme Court elected president. 2004. Yeah. Laura won the state of Florida in 2000, although not the presidency.
Speaker 13: But the Supreme Court hampered? That's a large charge. The Supreme Court stopped the counting votes. And if they let the count go on, they all would've got the necessary votes.
Speaker 0: The Supreme Court selected George w Bush As the president, he was not elected.
Speaker 10: There is overwhelming evidence that George w Bush did not win this election.
Speaker 14: What I observed, as a voter,
Speaker 15: as a citizen of Illinois, 4 years ago, were troubling evidence of the fact that not every vote was being counted.
Speaker 7: Don't think that George w Bush won the election, in 2000. I guess that would go because I I think that he probably lost Florida and also that nationwide.
Speaker 13: If you invite me back on this show in about 8 weeks, I think you're gonna learn that Al Gore actually did get all the votes there.
Speaker 2: The court has been thwarting formation of the popular will. The most spectacular example being Bush versus Gore, where the majority by a five four vote enjoined the counting of more than a100000 ballots
Speaker 12: in Florida and essentially gave America its 1st court appointed president.
Speaker 2: The system is bankrupted and stolen. I think
Speaker 16: in 2000, Everybody talked, well,
Speaker 2: he did win the election. It'll court.
Speaker 0: After the election, when you stole the election, you came back here and said, get over it. No. We're not gonna get over
Speaker 2: You know it. I know it. They know it. We won that election.
Speaker 17: Constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio and malfunctioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts, have led to additional loss of confidence by the public.
Speaker 2: The right to vote has been stolen from qualified voters.
Speaker 10: In 2004, the democratic process was thwarted.
Speaker 2: The 2004 Presidential election at Ohio was riddled with unnecessary problems.
Speaker 5: Some machines malfunctioned, causing votes to be counted more than once or not at all.
Speaker 18: Based upon an Inordinate number of allegations suggesting gross voting rights violations and misconduct, I join with my colleagues in objective to counting the State of Ohio's electoral votes.
Speaker 16: As in 2000, the votes of many who wanted to vote were not, in fact, counted.
Speaker 19: This last Friday night, I I arranged to meet senator Kerry at fundraiser to give him a copy of my book. He told me he now thinks the election was stolen.
Speaker 5: The wife of John Kerry said she has lingering doubts doubts about the legitimacy of the election. Her theory goes like this. 2 brothers, she calls hard right Republicans, Own 80% of voting machines in the US. Therefore, it would be easy to hack into the mother machines that To control the electronic voting.
Speaker 10: There were numerous irregularities in Ohio, including large percentages of rejections The provisional balloting, problems with voting machines.
Speaker 1: As we look at our election system, I think it's fair to say that there are many legitimate questions about its accuracy, about its integrity.
Speaker 17: There are still legitimate Concerns over the integrity of our elections.
Speaker 20: Question, obviously, is how many instances were not caught that we don't know about? Number 1, we've seen a lot of what I Honest glitches where it just didn't work right, but also that these machines are hackable. A dishonest employee of the vendor or a dishonest employee of the local board of elections Or simply someone who knows electronics, and has a computer at home, could hack into these machines and then put in a secret instruction to disregard every 20th Democratic vote or at 10% to the carrier, to the Bush vote, or whatever, he might not ever know it.
Speaker 2: I agree with tens of millions of Americans who are All very worried that when they cast the ballot on an electronic voting machine, that there is no paper trail to record That vote. The numerous irregularities that occurred with the electronic voting machines in Ohio on November 2nd last year Point to an unresolved national crisis.
Speaker 10: We cannot declare that the election of November 2, 2004 was free and clear and and transparent and real. There must be independent testing of the voting machines used in Ohio.
Speaker 21: I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided. We know that there was substantial voter suppression, and the machines were not reliable.
Speaker 17: The members of congress who have brought this challenge are Speaking up for their aggrieved constituents, many of whom may have been disenfranchised in this process.
Speaker 16: Treating today's electoral vote in congress as a meaningless ritual would be an insult to our democracy unless we registered our own protest against the obviously flawed voting process that took place in so many of our states.
Speaker 22: Voters who wish to cast a vote for president or vice president can't approach the polls with certainty that their vote will be counted.
Speaker 13: One of
Speaker 23: the most significant problems in Ohio and in many other states was the lack of measures to ensure the integrity of electronic floating machines.
Speaker 24: In 2004, they caused Democratic voters in Ohio to wait for 8 hours before they could cast ballot. They turn the department of civil rights and the justice department into the voter suppression division with voter ID laws, voter purging, voter Caging, voter intimidation. There aren't gonna be any more election stealing.
Speaker 11: And despite the final tally and the inauguration and the situation we find ourselves in, I do have one very affirmative statement to make.
Speaker 0: We won. Without Voter suppression. Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia. Andrew Gillum is the governor of Florida.
Speaker 11: I acknowledge that former secretary of state Brian Kemp will We'll be certified as the victor in the 2018 gubernatorial election. This is not a speech of concession.
Speaker 1: If she had a fair election, She already would have won.
Speaker 11: You refused to concede and say that you lost. Do you stand by that decision today? Absolutely. The election was not fair. The process was not fair.
Speaker 2: If Stacey Abrams doesn't win in Georgia, they stole it. It's clear. It's clear.
Speaker 13: I
Speaker 15: think that Stacey Abrams' election is being stolen from her.
Speaker 9: You, notably did not concede. I did not. Okay. You acknowledged that he won, But you did not concede.
Speaker 11: Correct.
Speaker 9: 5 months later, do you still feel like your opponent won through voter suppression?
Speaker 11: Yes. Georgia voters did not have their votes counted. They were not allowed to cast votes. They had their votes discarded.
Speaker 2: She would be the governor of Georgia today had the governor of Georgia not disenfranchised 1,400,000 Georgia voters before the election. That's what happened to Stacey Abrams. They took the votes away.
Speaker 9: Was the election in Georgia statewide a free and fair election?
Speaker 11: It was not a free and fair election.
Speaker 9: Reminder, she wrote, Brian Kemp stole the gubernatorial election from Georgians and Stacey Abrams.
Speaker 11: And it was not fair to those who filled up absentee ballots. And depending on the county you sent it to, it either was counted or not count it assuming you received it in time. Brian Kemp oversaw for 8 years the systematic and systemic dismantling of our receipt. And that means there could not be free and fair elections in Georgia.
Speaker 16: Certainly gave the appearance of unfairness. I think it was, unfairness. He ran a great campaign. He probably won.
Speaker 11: But will I say that this election was not tainted, was not a disinvestment and a disenfranchisement of thousands of Voters, I will not say that.
Speaker 1: Candidates, both black and white, lost their races because they have been deprived of the votes they otherwise would have gotten. And the clearest example is from next door in Georgia. Stacey Abrams should be governor leading that state right now.
Speaker 11: So you don't feel that you lost fair and square.
Speaker 6: I'm not saying it's gonna be legit. It's the increase in the prospect of being illegitimate is a direct proportion of us not being able to get these These reforms passed.
@dom_lucre - Dom Lucre | Breaker of Narratives
I know you guys were waiting on an AOC THREAD but how else could I get all these Democrats to read this? They need to see the truth, I knew they would promote something that might get me sued, if you wish to donate to my THREADS I added my link below: https://www.creditcadabra.com/dom-lucre-twitter-thread-collection/
reSee.it AI Summary
The 2020 election is believed by some to have been interfered with by various organizations. A young lady's testimony in front of Congress is being discussed. The Daily Caller has produced a documentary on the topic, which I applaud for its courage.
@BillEllmore - Bill Ellmore 𝕏
The 2020 election was purposely, strategically and deliberately interfered with by the CIA, FBI, DNC, and Biden crime syndicate. Does RICO apply here? What do you think about this young lady’s testimony in front of Congress? #2020Election #CIA #FBI #BidenCorruption https://t.co/I263FqNDJj
Video Transcript AI Summary
I am Emma Jo Morris, a politics editor at Breitbart. I reported on Hunter Biden's laptop scandal in 2020, revealing emails showing Biden's involvement in family business deals. Social media platforms censored the news as hacked or Russian disinformation, with support from former intel officials. Recently, it was revealed that federal agencies influenced social media to discredit the reporting. This included FBI directing Twitter's censorship operation and granting top secret clearances to Twitter management.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Thanks so much for inviting me. My name is Emma Jo Morris, a politics editor at Breitbart. I'm here today because I published a series of news stories 3 years ago in October of 2020 about Hunter Biden's now infamous laptop, also known as the laptop from hell, which is seen as some of the most scandalous reporting of the last decade. What was more scandalous than the reporting itself, though, was the fact that it exposed the unholy alliance between the intelligence community, social media platforms, and legacy media outlets. At the time, I was deputy politics editor at The New York Post, and my reporting showed that despite then candidates Joe Biden's repeated and furious denials, he was apparently involved in the foreign business deals of his family.
Over several days, just weeks before Americans would vote for their next president, I revealed verified authentic emails from the Biden scions hard drive showing Ukrainian business partners receiving leaks from the Obama White House. I documented an off the books meeting between then Vice President Biden and a Ukraine Ukrainian energy executive and introduced the world to the big guy, who who got action on a deal with CEFC China Energy Company. The Post published exactly how the material for the reporting was obtained even identifying But when the stories appeared on social media that morning, the venue where millions of Americans go to find their news and editors to get their angles, within hours the reporting was censored on all major platforms on the basis of being called hacked or Russian disinformation. Twitter refused to allow users to share the link to the stories, ban the links from being shared in private messages. A policy by the way that's used to clamp down on child porn, and lock the post out of its verified account.
Facebook said it would curb distribution and reach of the links on its platform. However, the stories were not based on hacked materials nor were they Russian disinformation. And despite those claims appearing to come out of thin air at the time, we would eventually learn that they actually didn't come out of thin air at all. On October 19th, 5 days after the Post began publishing, Politico ran a story headline, Hunter Biden's story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say. God, I can't even say that with a straight face, you know.
Politico printed a letter completely uncritically from veteran members of the US intelligence community falsely claiming that the post expose has quote all the classic earmarks of a Russian information operation. My god. Most notable among the signatories of that letter were Jim Clapper from former DNI, Michael Hayden former CIA, John Brennan former CIA, despite having such damaged credibility following their participation in the Russia collusion conspiracy theory. A few days later on October 22nd when Biden appeared in the 2nd presidential debate and was confronted with the facts of the post reporting, he said to Trump, quote, 50 former national intelligence professionals said this. What he's accusing me of is a Russian plot, but it was not.
And he knew that. Now fast forward to this year, 3 years later, Just last spring, house investigators revealed it was a call by now secretary of state, Antony Blinken, to former acting CIA director, Michael Morell, that prompted the spy letter published by Politico, which bypassed agency approval processes that would have been normally applied. It is also now known that ahead of my reporting, federal agencies were priming social media companies to execute an operation to discredit it. According to internal documents released by Elon Musk, upon his acquisition of Twitter, the FBI and other intelligence community members essentially directed the platform's censorship operation in part externally by working with top management and in part internally by social media companies hiring eye popping numbers of agency alumni. Journalist Michael Schallenberger reported based on documents he obtained from Musk, that during all of 2020, the FBI and other law enforcement agencies repeatedly primed Twitter executives to dismiss reports of Hunter Biden's laptop as a Russian hack and leak operation.
Feds arranged for top secret security clearances to be granted to Twitter management and even had encrypted messaging network set up which they dubbed a virtual war room.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Hundreds of intelligence community members work at social media companies. Mainstream news outlets confirmed my reporting on the laptop story. The censorship was due to the truth being a threat to power. The US government's influence on corporations undermines the first amendment. Our response will determine the future of a free press. Thank you.
Translation: Many intelligence community members work at social media companies. News outlets confirmed my reporting on the laptop story. Censorship was due to the truth being a threat. The US government's influence on corporations undermines freedom of speech. Our response will determine the future of a free press. Thank you.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: To this day, hundreds of people from the intelligence community work at social media companies. Over the last few years, my reporting has been confirmed by virtually every mainstream news outlet from the Washington Post to the New York Times to Politico, when the stakes were nothing by the way, 2 years later. No one denies that the laptop is real. That the origin story is exactly what I told you it was in the first place. This elaborate censorship conspiracy wasn't because the information being reported on was false.
It was because it was true and it was a threat to the power centers in this country. What this relationship between the US government officials and American corporations represent is is an unprecedented push to undermine the first amendment. The right to think, write, read, say whatever we want. And how we respond will determine whether we see a free press as inalienable or as optional. Thanks.
@BillEllmore - Bill Ellmore 𝕏
This brave woman will be in the @DailyCaller documentary this Friday 🔥
@KanekoaTheGreat - KanekoaTheGreat
Russell Brand highlights prior warnings from Hillary Clinton, VP Kamala Harris, and Senator Amy Klobuchar that the U.S. election system is connected to the internet, compromised, and vulnerable to hackers. See the detailed 70-post thread below. https://twitter.com/KanekoaTheGreat/status/1648462770936115202
Video Transcript AI Summary
Democrats have long criticized the vulnerability of voting machines and the potential for hacking. They argue that all voting machines need to be examined to ensure they are secure. They specifically mention Dominion voting machines as being susceptible to hacking. They claim that these machines can be easily hacked and that the results of elections have been questioned for a long time. They also highlight the issue of outdated and vulnerable machines in some states. However, they are accused of only raising these concerns when they lose elections. Republicans have also challenged election results in the past. The overall message is that there are doubts about the integrity of elections and the influence of powerful interests.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: The democrats who have been saying that there are rigged elections, problematic machines, problems with voting systems for a long time now. But who are you gonna believe, the mainstream media or your own lion eyes? Let's have a look.
Speaker 1: Virginia just stopped using touchscreen computer voting because it's so vulnerable. Right. We need to look at All the voting machines. Every secretary of state needs to be, you know, assisted in making sure that they are not being, hacked and attack.
Speaker 2: I continue to think that our voting machines are too vulnerable. For researchers have repeatedly demonstrated that ballot recording machines and other voting systems are susceptible to tampering.
Speaker 0: So you don't like the voting machines? What about the Dominion ones?
Speaker 3: Even hackers with limited prior knowledge, tools and resources are able to breach voting machines in a matter of minutes.
Speaker 0: So you see, in microcosm, democracy means we get a mandate for what we wanna do anyway? In the event we lose, we complain about the system. The Republicans do it and plainly, as you just saw, the Democrats to do it.
Speaker 4: In 2018, electronic voting machines in Georgia and Texas deleted votes for certain candidates or switched votes from 1 candidate to another.
Speaker 2: The biggest Seller of voting machines is doing something that violates cybersecurity 101, directing that you install remote access software which would make a machine like that, You know, a magnet for fraudsters and hackers. These voting machines can be hacked quite easily.
Speaker 0: So the legitimacy of elections and the results of elections is something that's been queried for a long time. Here are voices of the Democrat party in various settings making the exact same claim.
Speaker 3: You could easily hack into them. It makes it seem like all these states are doing different things. But in fact, 3 companies are controlling that. It is The individual voting machines that some pose that pose some of the greatest risks.
Speaker 1: There are a
Speaker 3: lot of states that are dealing with antiquated Machines, right, which are vulnerable to being hacked.
Speaker 0: So basically, they just say stuff unless they win. Unless they win, they say the problem is the machine. You don't see any more politicians going, listen, we lost fair and square, but ultimately, we all love America, and we want American people to See.
Speaker 2: Workers were able to easily hack into an electronic voting machine. It was possible to switch votes. 43% of American voters use voting genes that researchers have found have serious security flaws including backdoors.
Speaker 0: Backdoors. I think that, Dominion needs to look into Ron Wyden. He hates voting machines. Backdoors, they've got bad breath and stinking little dicks.
Speaker 2: We know how vulnerable now our systems were. We know I know that hackathon that took place last year, where virtually every machine was broken into fairly quickly.
Speaker 0: Oh, my god. All of them. They're all broken. None of them were led Dominion watching this.
Speaker 3: I actually held a demonstration for my colleagues here at the Capitol, where we brought in, folks who, before our eyes, hacked election machines.
Speaker 0: These are the same people that after Trump made the claims that the election was rigorous, that's Possible. How dare you say that? You, sir, are a disgrace to democracy. And you keep causing insurrections. And your hair's ridiculous.
And your orange? And that's all there really is to discuss. This once again shows you there are no ultimate values or principles. There's just rhetoric attached to achieving the outcomes that they would prefer to achieve that are themselves tethered to financial interests that they're personally affected by? Look at all the nepotism.
Look at all the stock ownership and look at the way they legislate on the behalf of big business.
Speaker 5: I'm very concerned that you could have a hack that finally went through. You have 21 states that were hacked Didn't too. They didn't find out about it for a year.
Speaker 3: It is worth fighting for integrity in our election system, which means that they are free From interference by a hostile or an unfriendly nation.
Speaker 0: Like Russia, for example. No evidence of that at all. Absolutely no evidence. Completely cooked up media concoction in conjunction with the Democrat pie.
Speaker 3: And there's a saying that I'm sure many of you have heard, which is the, Do you know the difference between being hacked and not being hacked?
Speaker 2: Mhmm. Go on.
Speaker 3: Is knowing you've been hacked.
Speaker 0: Yeah. You know? Okay. Don't do that joke again. Hillary, how do you feel about voting machines?
Do you have a principled perspective on them that will not change depending on whether you win or lose an election. The opinion will stay the same. Right?
Speaker 1: There are some text experts in Silicon Valley Valley with whom I have met, who say that, you know, maybe what they'll do this next time is to really disrupt the actual election. Shut down the servers that you send results to. Interfere with the operation of voting machines because still Too many of them are linked to the Internet. So they're we are still very vulnerable.
Speaker 0: Why don't they just accept that Some people vote for Donald Trump because they're disillusioned with the political class. Why don't we all accept more broadly that the problem is deeply systemic and is a result of the ability of powerful deep state and corporate interests to manipulate the congressional and democratic process to the point where democracy is sort of a facade. K? So after the 2016 election, the democrats said there's a problem with vote machines, but after the 2020 election, there's no problem with vote machines. What an amazing miracle.
After Republican victories in 2000, 2004, and 2016? Democrats in Congress used the formal counting of electoral votes as an opportunity to challenge election results. Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Iowa wrote in a New York Times opinion piece in 2021. In January 2001, representative Maxine Waters joined several other democrats challenging George w Bush's victory, claiming Florida's electoral votes were fraudulent. In January 2005, after Bush's reelection, senator Barbara Boxer, formally challenged Ohio's electoral vote even though Bush won Ohio by more than 118,000 votes.
Wait. Let's recount that because what they've done is that 118,000 votes could have been done by a little Cyber Lego hacker that gets in the machine. Did you see The Lego Movie? They're bastards. In January 2017 after Trump's victory, representative Sheila Jackson Lee, said there was the malfunction of 87 voting machines, and representative Jim McGovern, Democrat Massachusetts, said there were confirmed and illegal activities engaged by the government of Russia in the 2016 elections.
Then as now, each member of congress was within their rights to make an objection, Chenmuller wrote. But the objections were naive at best, shameless at worst. Either way, the readiness of members of Congress to disenfranchise millions of Americans was disconcerting. And now there's Stacey Abrams, the Democrat who ran for governor of Georgia, who claims that Brian Kemp, the Republican who beat her 4 years ago, won under the rules of the game at The time that the game was rigged against the voters of Georgia. Fraudulent electoral votes, malfunctioning voting machines, rigged elections.
Sound familiar? Well, yeah. It does, actually. It sounds like exactly what's being claimed right now. How is it different?
If the election results go their way, these are some of the best electoral machines we have ever How dare you criticize those this Dominion Voting Machine's been like a brother to you. How dare you criticize it? You lost The election? You little son of a bitch. You little Russian racist son of a fuck.
Speaker 3: I sit on the Senate Intelligence Committee and Senate Homeland Security Committee. And we receive all kinds of information about the vulnerabilities to our national security. We are vulnerable in terms of Foreign interference with our elections.
Speaker 0: Did you see that on the road to the White House 2020? So when they're on the way to the White House, oh my god, we could lose. The voting machines, if we do lose, they are Terrible voting machines. They could be hacked by, you know, a Russian with a hat with snow in their boots with cancer like Putin bastards, son of bitches. You've won the election.
Those are some of the best Folding machines? Look at this little guy. I love it. What a reliable folding machine. How can I stay mad at you?
@RNCResearch - RNC Research
ELECTION DENIERS: Here are 24 straight minutes of Democrats denying election results — dating all the way back to 2000. https://t.co/gDnNqfruWD
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers in the video discuss their belief that the 2016 and 2020 elections were stolen or illegitimate due to Russian interference, voter suppression, and issues with electronic voting machines. They express concerns about the integrity of the election process and question the legitimacy of the elected officials. They also mention specific instances, such as the 2000 election and the Georgia gubernatorial race, where they believe the election results were unfair. Overall, they argue that the election system is flawed and needs reform to ensure fair and transparent elections.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You can
Speaker 1: run the best campaign. You can even become the nominee. And you can have the election stolen
Speaker 2: from you.
Speaker 3: How can you win with Russian interference, though?
Speaker 2: That's the real thing. Cared about
Speaker 1: it in 2020. But rightly.
Speaker 2: Because I think I'm taking
Speaker 3: an illegitimate president that didn't really win. So how do
Speaker 2: you, you know, fight against that in 2020? You are absolutely right. He is an illegitimate president in my mind. Could you
Speaker 4: be my vice president for Denimid president in my mind.
Speaker 2: Could you be my vice president for candidate? Paul Brooks, I absolutely agree. Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put in the office because the Russians interfered.
Speaker 5: Russia interfered with our election, attacked our democracy for the sole purpose of artificially placing someone at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, they were successful.
Speaker 1: Trump knows he's as an illegitimate president.
Speaker 3: The president will elect, although legally elected, is not legitimate. Unless it is president-elect As a legitimate president.
Speaker 6: You said you believe that Russia's interference altered the outcome of the election.
Speaker 1: I do. We have a president who, if In fact, it is proven, has been assisted by the Russians and may, in fact, not be a legitimate president. The one thing that Trump Is fearful of, when it comes to his being president, is that finally, we will see how illegitimate his victory actually was.
Speaker 2: I have an objection.
Speaker 7: I object to the 15 votes from the state of North Carolina. I object because people are horrified.
Speaker 6: He's an illegitimate president. Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to hashtag protect our democracy and hashtag follow the facts.
Speaker 5: John Lewis is completely right. There is a cloud of legitimacy around the election of Donald Trump. The Russians interfered with his election. James Comey and the FBI interfered with his, Election. The fake news industry interfered with his election.
Speaker 1: Trump knows he's an illegitimate president who got illegitimate foreign powers. Do you believe Trump is a legitimate president?
Speaker 4: What I believe is that there's no question that the outcome of this election was affected by the Russian interference.
Speaker 2: There actually is a cloud of Okay. Legitimacy.
Speaker 6: So that legitimacy is the question. Yes.
Speaker 3: So that was a very tainted election. And and in that sense, it's it's illegitimate.
Speaker 1: Why Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to essentially prove that he beat you? Because he knows he didn't. He knows he's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 6: Stolen email. Stolen drone. Stolen drone. Stolen election. Welcome to the world of unprecedented Trump.
So do you believe President Trump is an illegitimate president.
Speaker 2: Based on what I just said was I can't for Trump.
Speaker 6: He tweeted in February 2018, quote, the more we learn about 2016 election, the more illegitimate it becomes. America deserves to know whether we have a fake president in the Oval Office.
Speaker 3: And The rest in attempt to to have the election. And frankly, the FBI is weighing in on the election. I think make the make it makes this election illegitimate.
Speaker 1: There was a widespread Understanding that this election was not on the level. We still don't know what really happened, Isaac. I mean, there's just a lot that I think will Be revealed, history will discover, but you don't win by 3,000,000 votes and have all this other shenanigans stuff going on and not come away with An idea like, woah, something's not right here.
Speaker 5: Seems to me that there's a cloud of illegitimacy that continues to hang Over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Speaker 4: The outcome of the election was affected by their interference. And now we need to know, To what degree, if any, the Trump campaign was actually in collusion
Speaker 1: with the Russia? He knows he's an illegitimate president. So of course, he's obsessed That's with me. And I believe that it's a guilty conscience.
Speaker 2: We actually won the last presidential election, folks. They stole And Al Gore won that election. I think he won anyway. Actually, I think I carried Florida. Al Gore won the election nationwide Also in Florida, but the Supreme Court ruled the other way.
Al Gore got more votes, but not enough to stay out of the Supreme Court where president Bush was elected five four.
Speaker 1: Bush versus Gore. A court took away a presidency.
Speaker 2: If all the votes were tallied in Florida, Adele Gold would be president today and George Bush would be back in office.
Speaker 0: I come from Florida where you and others participated in what I call The United States coup d'etat.
Speaker 6: In 2013, according to reports, vice president Joe Biden, he claimed that Al Gore was The one who was elected president. And he claimed that the recount result was, quote, a bad decision.
Speaker 2: And never forget, dear friends, what they did in Florida to Al Gore and me, to all of us, to older Americans, to African Americans, to Haitian Americans Deny the right to vote and have those votes counted.
Speaker 8: I do believe that projections were right in the 1st place at 7 o'clock when they called
Speaker 1: it before. Let me tell you without a doubt. George Bush did not carry Florida and it was not closed.
Speaker 2: There's no question that you won Oh, thank you, Charles. No. It's a question.
Speaker 4: That's a question.
Speaker 2: We will never know because The votes weren't weren't counted. But but and and then in your judgment I mean, that's unfortunate. And there is no other way of saying Let's be very blunt. Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, and we should never Forget it. Most Americans or great many Americans don't have confidence that the election of 2000 was fair.
Speaker 8: But I don't believe we lost that. I believe we just failed to have all of the votes counted
Speaker 4: The Supreme Court elected president. In 2004. Yeah. Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, although not the presidency.
Speaker 3: We know we won this election. They know we won this election. And Americans know we won this election.
Speaker 7: I know some people want you to believe that the Gore Campaign was a campaign that wasn't able to complete its mission. We did. Had all of
Speaker 0: those votes been found in Florida,
Speaker 8: I
Speaker 7: think Al Gore would be president on today.
Speaker 2: We had more votes. We won, and we are never going to let the United States Supreme Court choose the president of the United Takes the care. You should know by now based on the fact that he lost the popular vote by more than a half 1000000 voters, And we don't know how many he lost to buy in Florida. There's no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president.
Speaker 9: I rise to Object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes.
Speaker 2: Really, we won the election in 2000, but they stole the election. I must object because of the overwhelming evidence of overwhelming evidence of official misconduct, deliberate fraud, and an attempt to The chairman has provided Imran had already Helped the Bush team with such favors as burying their rent a mob to Florida in 2000 to permanently halt of the counting of legally cast ballots. It is
Speaker 7: signed by myself on behalf of my diverse constituents and the millions of Americans who have been disenfranchised by Florida's inaccurate vote counts to Supreme Court not to speak with
Speaker 4: the United States despite of this election.
Speaker 1: Speaking to a Democratic group in Chicago, he said he made it clear he thinks Al Gore was the winner.
Speaker 2: The time it was over, our candidate won the popular vote. And the only way that could win the election was to stop the voting and fraud it. Catherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Jim Baker and the Supreme Court hadn't tampered with the results, l Gore would be. President? I think that the issue before us today, is not who won or should have won the 2000 presidential election.
That issue has been settled not to my opinion, but it has been settled. Let's just drop the vice president president or not. Al Gore should have been president of the United States.
Speaker 10: Al Gore, made it possible for George Bush to be The only appointed president in the history of these United States.
Speaker 6: Democrats have won the past 3 presidential elections. In two
Speaker 2: 1,000 unions turned out 25% of the vote and Al Gore won. But the Supreme Court hampered? That's a large The Supreme Court stopped the counting of votes, and if they've left the council on, Al Gore would've got the necessary votes.
Speaker 0: The Supreme Court selected tent. George w Bush
Speaker 2: as the president. He was not elected. There is overwhelming evidence that George w Bush did not win this Election.
Speaker 3: What I observed, as a voter, as a citizen of Illinois, 4 years ago were troubling evidence of the fact that not every vote was being counted. Don't think that George w Bush won the election, in 2000 against our goal because I I think he he probably lost Florida and also the nationwide.
Speaker 2: If you invite me back on this show
Speaker 3: in about 8 weeks, I
Speaker 2: think you're gonna learn that No, Roy. I think you get all the votes there. I felt what happened in Florida was a carefully worked out conspiracy. That many things could not go wrong in one state Without there having been a conspiracy, and many, many different things did go wrong. Many tricks were pulled of various kinds.
Speaker 8: The vice president did win, but, And I do believe that the majority of voters that intended to to go to polls last year wanted to vote and cast their votes for Al Gore. I do believe that in in in terms of Florida as well.
Speaker 2: The court has been supporting formation of the popular will. The most spectacular example being Bush versus Gore, where the majority by a five For a vote and joined the counting of more than a 100,000 ballots in Florida and essentially gave America its 1st court appointed president. A stolen citizen is naked and stolen. Even though Al Gore won the election, he won't take office.
Speaker 11: That election was stolen from of the rightful winner. So, mister speaker, I'm here today to talk about a stolen presidential election.
Speaker 2: I think in 2000, everybody Talk. Well, he did win the election out of the war. He started dividing America here in Florida By trying to take an election that I think any reasonable person would say he hadn't Actually, one.
Speaker 0: What happened in Florida will go down in history As a coup d'etat.
Speaker 2: Could we conclude, is it possible There was a conspiracy, and Florida officials were involved in the conspiracy. Never have so many things gone It's too wrong in one place before. Why how do all these things happen all at the same time in the same state? It is not as possible if there was a conspiracy that was very well organized. Why was the state police out there on that Today, election day, checking license plates and and so forth.
You know, how did all these things happen in 1 state at one time in 1 election? Is is it possible that Use the word conspiracy and not be afraid of it.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure wish Gore was president right now. He should be.
Speaker 2: Well, yes, he got elected. Well done. A battle that by the will of the people should have ended in victory. But tens thousands of Florida votes either were not counted or tossed down in the 2000 presidential election. 5 supreme court justices.
You've trumped the votes of 51,000,000 Americans. We should've let the entire state be reconned so it was clear, that Al Gore actually won the state of Florida.
Speaker 0: And Al War won the election.
Speaker 2: We had the election stolen from us. You must admit that. They stole it, And we need a leader to help us get revenge.
Speaker 6: I voted for Al Gore. He won the election.
Speaker 2: They usurped the the powers as far as being put in it and intervene. It was With the fix as far as we're concerned, you know, it's it's there's no polite way to talk about it except the fix was in.
Speaker 0: After the election, when you stole Hold the election. You came back here and say, get over it. No. We're not gonna get over it.
Speaker 2: You know it. I know it. They know it. We won that election.
Speaker 12: Constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio and malfunctioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts have led to additional loss of confidence by the public.
Speaker 2: The right to vote has been stolen from qualified voters. The New
Speaker 6: Yorker reported that Kerry thought that, quote, proxies for Bush had rigged many of the voting machines.
Speaker 7: In 2004, the democratic process was thwarted.
Speaker 2: To The 2004 presidential election in Ohio was riddled with unnecessary problems.
Speaker 4: Some machines malfunctioned, causing votes to be counted more than once or not at all.
Speaker 2: Based upon an inordinate number of allegations suggesting gross voting rights violations and misconduct, I joined with my colleagues and objective to counting the state of Ohio's electoral votes. As in 2000, the votes of many who wanted to vote were not, in fact, This
Speaker 3: last Friday night, I I arranged to meet senator Kerry at a fundraiser to give him a copy of my book. He told me he now thinks the election was stolen.
Speaker 1: The wife of John Kerry said she has lingering doubts about the legitimacy of the election. Her theory goes like this. 2 brothers, she calls hard right Republicans, Own 80% of voting machines in the US. Therefore, it would be easy to hack into the mother machines that control the electronic voting.
Speaker 7: There were Numerous irregularities in Ohio, including large percentages of projections of provisional balloting, problems with voting machines.
Speaker 1: As we look At our election system, I think it's fair to say that there are many legitimate questions about its accuracy, About its integrity.
Speaker 12: There are still legitimate concerns over the integrity of our election.
Speaker 3: The question obviously is How many instances were not caught that we don't know about? Number 1, we've seen a lot of, what I'll call, honest glitches where it just didn't work right, But also that these machines are hackable. A dishonest employee of the vendor or dishonest employee of the local board of elections or simply someone who knows electronics And as a computer at home, could hack into these machines and then put in the secret instructions to disregard every 20th Democratic voter had 10% to the carrier to the Bush vote or whatever. He might not even know it.
Speaker 2: I agree with tens of millions of Americans Who are more very worried that when they cast the ballot on an electronic voting machine, that there There is no paper trail to record that vote. The numerous irregularities that occurred with the electronic voting machines In Ohio on November 2nd last year, point to an unresolved national crisis.
Speaker 7: We cannot Clear that
Speaker 3: the election of November 2, 2004 was free and clear and transparent and real. There must be independent testing of the voting machines used in Ohio.
Speaker 1: I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was barely decided. We know that there was substantial voter suppression, and the machines were not reliable.
Speaker 12: The members of Congress who have brought this challenge are speaking up for their agreed constituents, many of whom may have been disenfranchised in this process.
Speaker 6: Treating today's electoral vote count in congress as a meaningless ritual would be an insult to our democracy unless we registered our own protest against the obviously fraud voting process that took place in so many
Speaker 2: of our states. Voters who wish to cast a vote for president or vice president Can't approach the polls with certainty that their vote will be counted. One of the most significant problems in Ohio and in many other states Was a lack of measures to ensure the integrity of electronic voting machines. In 2004, they caused democratic voters in Ohio to wait for 8 hours before they could cast their ballot. They turned the department of civil rights and the justice department into the voter suppression division with Voter ID laws, voter purging, voter caging, voter intimidation.
There aren't gonna be any more election stealing.
Speaker 1: Now you have one very
Speaker 6: We won. But I
Speaker 1: didn't lose. I got the votes, but we won't know exactly how many because of how they cheat it. I did win my election. I just didn't get to have the job. We were robbed of an election.
Without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia. Andrew Gillum is the governor of Florida. Using the
Speaker 4: word rigged, using the word steal, do you think it's dangerous going into 2020?
Speaker 1: I I don't because we can actually back it up. And so in response What I believe was stolen election. I'm not saying they stole it from me. They stole it from the voters' doors. That's when I was asked if I'm ever gonna concede.
The answer is no. If she had a fair election, she already would have won. This is not a speech of concession. This is a step that needs to acknowledge an action that's right, true, or action is right, true or proper. And I will not concede because the erosion of our democracy is not You refuse to concede and say that you lost.
Do you stand by that decision today? Absolutely.
Speaker 2: If Stacey Abrams doesn't win in Georgia, they Stolen. It's clear. It's clear.
Speaker 1: The only election It was not a free and fair I think the election was stolen from the people of Georgia. I believe it was stolen from the voters.
Speaker 2: So I
Speaker 3: think that Stacey Abrams' election is being stolen from her.
Speaker 1: The election was not fair. The process was not fair. Thousands of Georgians had their voices stolen because they were not able to cast ballots. And they cannot be guaranteed that their votes will be counted in 2020 if we don't do this right.
Speaker 4: If what happens to you happens nationally and we we see, whoever runs for whoever wins the Democratic nominee. If they say, actually, I can prove that there's a number of votes in every state that that and that's and that's the same thing that you just described happens in multiple states should they concede.
Speaker 1: I do not think we should concede an election until we know the results of an election. I still fundamentally believed it could be fair. And that's just not how life works. If it looks like it's cheating, it probably is. If it looks like it's rigged, it probably is.
Speaker 2: He would be the governor of Georgia today had the governor of Georgia not disenfranchised 1,400,000 Georgia voters before the election. That's what happened to Stacey Abrams. They took the votes away.
Speaker 6: You, notably did not concede. I acknowledge. Okay. You acknowledge That he won, but you did not concede. Correct.
5 months later, do you still feel like your opponent won through voter suppression? Yes. Reminder, she wrote. Brian Kemp stole the gubernatorial election from Georgians and Stacey Abrams.
Speaker 1: I said that the election stolen from Georgia voters, the process that took place during the legislative cycle was one that did not countenance and did not pay attention To the deep and real concerns of those who watch this election be stolen in the state of Georgia. It was stolen from the voters of Georgia. Georgia voters did not have their votes Counted. They were not allowed to cast votes. They had
Speaker 2: their votes discarded. Certainly gave the appearance of unfairness. I think it was, unfair. Stacy ran a great campaign. Probably won.
Speaker 1: And it was not fair to those who filled up absentee ballots. And depending on the county you sent it to, it Either it was counted or not counted, assuming you received it in time. Brian Kemp oversaw for 8 years the systematic and Systemic dismantling of our democracy, and that means there could not be free and fair elections in Georgia. As long as we have eligible American citizens who cannot cast a ballot, Then the game is rigged. I am complicit if I say that that system is fair.
Concession in the political space is an acknowledgement that the process This is fair. And I don't believe that to be fair. But I refuse to concede because concession means that the process was proper, that the result was true and And right. And I cannot say that. If I tend to
Speaker 0: say I didn't lose, I just didn't win.
Speaker 12: And I don't call it a lot.
Speaker 1: I just didn't win.
Speaker 2: Yes. Yes. Officially. Yes. Officially.
Speaker 1: Put it this way. I didn't get to get Inaugurated, next problem. Okay. But will I say that this election was not tainted, was not a disinvestment and a disenfranchisement of thousands of voters? I will not say that.
Candidates votes, black and white, lost Their races because they have been deprived of the votes they otherwise would have gotten. And the clearest sample is from next door in Georgia. Stacey Abrams should be governor leading that state right now. I was joking with Beth backstage when she lost. I'm like, no, I just didn't win, because we don't know what really happened because of the miasma of voter suppression.
I can't know for a fact that I would be the governor of Georgia, but for the He's in the management of Brian Kemp, but I know it's a pretty good guess. So I can't prove that I would have won, but I know we don't know because of how he behaved.
Speaker 3: Is he the legitimate governor elect of Georgia?
Speaker 1: He is the person who won an adequate number of votes from the governor.
Speaker 2: With all with all due respect, and
Speaker 3: I respect where you're coming from and I respect the the issues that you're raising. You're not answering the question. Do you think that
Speaker 1: Wait a minute. I no. I what I talked to you
Speaker 3: You're not using The word legitimate, is he the legitimate governor elect Georgia?
Speaker 1: He is the legal governor of Georgia. He's not here to tell you that just because you win doesn't mean you're won. And you said to that you did not lose. You just did not win. Yes.
So we're gonna talk about that. Bad news is that we didn't get the victory we secured. And the thing is we will never know empirically that I got more votes because we will never know which votes did make count. This was not fair. It was not right and it is deeply improper that someone could ascend to that role having performed So basically and so crassly against the very people he is now supposed to represent.
The election was not fair. The process was not fair. So you don't feel that you lost fair and I do recognize I am not the governor of Georgia, but I do like to point out something that is true for me and for many in our state. And that is we won.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying it's gonna be legit because the increase in the prospect of being illegitimate is a Direct proportions not being able to get these these reforms passed.
Speaker 1: Right wing extremists already have a plan to literally seal the next presidential election.
Speaker 13: It's not as if it's just Republicans who have monkeed around with elections in the past. Sometimes Democrats have to.
Speaker 2: You
Speaker 13: know, whenever people are in power, they're, you know, they have this tendency to try to, you know, tilt things in their direction.
@Real_RobN - 🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸
Election deniers, conspiracy theorists and J6 political prisoners listen up, Voter fraud occurred on a massive scale the likes of which we’ve never witnessed in this county. 17, 327 dead people found in obituaries voted in Michigan 2020 presidential election. Check for yourself https://t.co/VcGuYct3BS
Video Transcript AI Summary
I witnessed numerous instances of irregularities during the election process. GOP challengers and I were not allowed to perform our duties properly, as Michigan laws require. Procedures were not followed, and our concerns were dismissed. We observed ballots being backdated and data being entered incorrectly. There have been many reports of voter fraud, including dead people voting. I have shared this information with Republican senators and representatives. The most important election in our history is at stake, and it is crucial for legislators to defend the constitution. Despite media claims, there is substantial evidence of widespread voter fraud. Time is of the essence.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I witnessed personally, the following are only a few of the most egregious items witnessed. I was not allowed to perform my job and from what I observed were any of the GOP challengers in accordance with Michigan laws. We were constantly prevented from getting close enough to see what was going on with the respect with respect to the ballots, procedures were not being properly followed when we brought these to the attention of the supervisors, our concerns were dismissed and ignored. We observed ballots being backdated from 114 to 112, and data being entered into the computers for these mail in ballots. Poll workers were entering ballot information from new mail in ballots including dates of birth of 1/1/1900 into the electronic poll books and processing those ballots for tabulation.
The information was not entered wasn't in either the electronic poll book or the paper supplement book prior to that. There's been, lots and lots of reports after the election counting process. First of all, I did email a copy of what I'm reading from to each of the Republican senators and the house of representative members. So I'd be happy to provide this to you. Dead people were voting.
I they sent a website to that effect and the list that, they had up to that date was 17,327 randomly checked Michigan voters that were registered for voting and were above the age of 80. Every name on this list has voted in the 2020 election check for yourself and has also been found in 1 or more of the obituaries online. This is the most important election in my life and I think the most important election in the history of our republic, every legislator whether seated in the House or the Senate, whether Democrat or Republican, took an oath to defend the US and state constitutions of, the US and Michigan against enemies both foreign and domestic. Time is of the essence, and now is the time to fulfill that oath. Despite what the media is telling everyone, there are mountains of evidence that voter fraud occurred on a massive Gail, the likes of which we've never witnessed in the country.
30 seconds. For those
reSee.it AI Summary
In shocking footage, Audit the Vote PA reveals that 350K GOP votes mysteriously vanished in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court election. Despite the election being decided by 200K votes, 350K in-person Republican votes disappeared without explanation. This blatant election fraud raises concerns about government transparency. A video, saved by a patriot, exposes the globalist agenda behind suppressing this evidence. Democrats' extreme policies may have alienated average voters, but their influence persists. #ElectionFraud #Transparency
@JoshWhoX - JoshWho #SeekingTheTruth
🚨Video Showing That 350K GOP Votes "Disappeared" in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Election🧐‼️ In 2023, 350,000 votes cast for the Republican nominee for Pennsylvania Supreme Court were eliminated "without reason," as shocking footage from Audit the Vote PA revealed. In spite of the fact that the election in question was decided by 200,000 votes, 350,000 votes cast in person for the Republican candidate vanished without any explanation from the authorities. Have we come to a place where the government doesn't even try to hide their misdeeds anymore? This is overt election fraud. In technical terms, it's fraud in the counting of votes. This is the video that Audit the Vote PA provided to show you what transpired:
@JoshWhoX - JoshWho #SeekingTheTruth
It almost seems as though Democrats gave up on winning the public vote a few years ago since their policies have grown so extreme and appealing to so few average people. Nevertheless, the Democrats of this generation haven't been erased from the political map and relegated to the trash can of history, where they belong. What's going on over here? Recall the moment Hillary Clinton disclosed her pal George Soros's intention to influence US elections? That's correct—US elections, not US politics. This video is not what the Democrats and their globalist overlords want you to see. Most of it has been eradicated off the face of the planet.
@JoshWhoX - JoshWho #SeekingTheTruth
This video is not what the Democrats and their globalist overlords want you to see. Most of it has been eradicated off the face of the planet. Fortunately, a patriot saw that it would one day be crucial and reveal the globalists' scheme, saving it. Observe:👀👇 https://t.co/uyOrkue9C9
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker criticizes Democrat policies as radical and unpopular, suggesting they have given up on winning the popular vote. They mention a video of Hillary Clinton introducing George Soros, claiming it has been suppressed. The speaker also accuses Obama of justifying cheating and discusses the control of major conglomerates over retailers. They urge viewers to switch to a Patriot company for non-toxic products. The speaker questions the Democrats' denial of voter fraud despite evidence and highlights Obama's comments on manipulating elections. They argue that the Democrats lack shame and moral compass, living by the rule of the ends justifying the means. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is mentioned as challenging Biden for the Democratic nomination, and allegations of rigging the 2024 election are made. The speaker encourages viewers to support the People's Voice and join their community.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Democrat policies have become so radical and appeal to so few normal people that it's almost as though they gave up on winning in the popular vote years ago. And yet this current generation of democrats haven't been wiped off the electoral map and consigned to the dustbin of history where they belong. So what's going on here? Before we dive in, subscribe to the channel if you haven't already and join the People's Voice locals community for exclusive and uncensored content And to support the channel, the link is below this video. Do you remember the time that Hillary Clinton introduced her friend George Soros and his interest in getting involved in US elections?
That's right. Not US politics, but US elections. The Democrats and their masters, the globalist elites, don't want you to see this video. They have wiped it from the face of the earth for the most part. Luckily, it was saved by a patriot who understood that one day it would be very important to expose the globalist elite plan.
Speaker 1: You know, it is not enough for America's future that some participate and others don't. We have been given an extraordinary blessing, and at this moment in time, Our country needs us, and we need people like George Soros who is fearless and willing to step up when it counts. So please join me in welcoming George Soros.
Speaker 2: It is the first time That I feel that I need to stand up and do something Really, in, and become really engaged, in the electoral process in in this country.
Speaker 0: Damning stuff. But it gets even worse. Obama is up to his neck in this as well. And he is even more shameless than Hillary when it comes to justifying cheating. The globalist elite have become so arrogant in recent years, but it's working against them.
More and more people are waking up to the truth about their agenda. And it's our duty to expose their crimes, and we've had enormous success in recent times. Now it's time to take the next step in this war against these people Who have used their power and status to attack humanity in ways most people don't even think about. If you think you have the choice Of choosing nontoxic, non mRNA produce from the big box retailers, think again. All of the retailers in America are controlled by the same handful of major conglomerates to control everything.
We have been spending our whole lives loyally buying products from these companies even though we know they are working to slowly kill us with toxic carcinogenic products. But there is a choice. There is a Patriot company that manufactures everything in America that can provide us with natural products that won't kill us. All of those products in your bathroom sink cabinet with chemicals proven in laboratories to make us infertile and slowly kill us, replace them. All of those products in the kitchen that are slowly poisoning us with GMOs and mRNA, do not feed them to your family.
Make the switch. Visit switch with the people's voice .com to take control back from the big box retailers and their masters. Join millions of Americans who are taking back control from these Companies by making the switch. Visit switch with the people's voice .com or click the link below this video for more information. According to the Democrats and the mainstream media, Voter fraud does not exist regardless of the emergence of statistically impossible voting patterns in key seats that always end up going the way of the Democrats.
While Democrats continue claiming there is no issue with voter fraud in the US and election results continue getting stranger and stranger, it's worth taking a look at what Obama said in 2008 before he was elected president.
Speaker 3: Well, I tell you what. It it helps in Ohio that we got, Democrats in charge of the machines.
Speaker 0: But the stunning footage doesn't stop there. The then Illinois US senator continued by claiming that Republicans have monkeyed around with elections in the past before admitting that sometimes Democrats have too, which is very strange because Democrats in 2023 claim that there's no such thing as voter fraud.
Speaker 3: But but look, I come from Chicago. So so I want to be honest. It's not as if it's just Republicans who have monkered around with elections in the past. Sometimes Democrats have to. You know, whenever people are in power, they're you know, they have this tendency to try to, you know, tilt things in their direction.
Speaker 0: You know what they say about the devil. The greatest trick he ever pulled was convincing the world that he doesn't exist. Is convincing the nation that voter fraud does not exist the greatest trick Ever pulled by the Democrats, you heard it straight out of the horse's mouth. Whenever people are in power, they have this tendency to try, you know, to tilt things in their direction. Perhaps that explains why every close race that requires days weeks to count falls to the democrats despite statistically bizarre anomalies.
Pointing out the hypocrisy of the left never seems to make a dent or have any impact on them whatsoever. Why? Because they have no shame. And they have no shame because they have no moral compass. And they have no moral compass because they live according to the rule of the ends justify the means.
This precept invests every fiber of their ideology From elections to open borders to climate change, abortion, you name it. Robert f Kennedy junior has thrown his hat into the ring to challenge Biden for the Democratic nomination for 2024, And he has wasted no time in getting down to business. According to Kennedy, the new world order has already begun the process of rigging the 2024 election To ensure Joe Biden wins by hook or by crook, Kennedy junior appeared on SiriusXM on Monday and dropped a series of truth bombs about the undemocratic system the Democrats use in their primary elections to ensure the establishment candidate is nominated against the will of the people. Don't forget, This is the party whose lawyers openly stated that if the party wants to pick a nominee over cigars in backrooms and ignore the votes in the primary elections, It's within their legal rights to do so. No wonder Biden said that the Democrats have put together the most extensive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics.
Speaker 4: We have put together, I think, the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud Organization in the history of American politics.
Speaker 0: Here at the People's Voice, we are determined to continue exposing the elites, but we need your help. Subscribe to the channel and join the People's Voice locals community, the link is below this video, for exclusive and uncensored content. I hope to see you there.
@JoshWhoX - JoshWho #SeekingTheTruth
@threadreaderapp unroll
@ShotGun_Bonnie - ShotGunBonnie
For those who need a reminder … Heres 24 straight minutes of Democrats denying election results — dating all the way back to 2000. https://t.co/Fq60eYOFML
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers in the video discuss their belief that the 2016 and 2020 elections were stolen or illegitimate due to Russian interference, voter suppression, and issues with electronic voting machines. They express concerns about the integrity of the election process and question the legitimacy of the winners. They also mention specific instances, such as the 2000 election and the Georgia gubernatorial race, where they believe the election results were unfair. Overall, they argue that the election system is flawed and needs reform to ensure fair and transparent elections.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You can
Speaker 1: run the best campaign. You can even become the nominee. And you can have the election stolen
Speaker 2: from you.
Speaker 3: How can you win with Russian interference, though?
Speaker 2: That's the real thing. Cared about
Speaker 1: it in 2020. But rightly.
Speaker 2: Because I think I'm taking
Speaker 3: an illegitimate president that didn't really win. So how do
Speaker 2: you, you know, fight against that in 2020? You are absolutely right. He is an illegitimate president in my mind. Could you
Speaker 4: be my vice president for Denimid president in my mind.
Speaker 2: Could you be my vice president for candidate? Paul Brooks, I absolutely agree. Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put in the office because the Russians interfered.
Speaker 5: Russia interfered with our election, attacked our democracy for the sole purpose of artificially placing someone at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, they were successful.
Speaker 1: Trump knows he's as an illegitimate president.
Speaker 3: The president will elect, although legally elected, is not legitimate. Unless it is president-elect As a legitimate president.
Speaker 6: You said you believe that Russia's interference altered the outcome of the election.
Speaker 1: I do. We have a president who, if In fact, it is proven, has been assisted by the Russians and may, in fact, not be a legitimate president. The one thing that Trump Is fearful of, when it comes to his being president, is that finally, we will see how illegitimate his victory actually was.
Speaker 2: I have an objection.
Speaker 7: I object to the 15 votes from the state of North Carolina. I object because people are horrified.
Speaker 6: He's an illegitimate president. Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to hashtag protect our democracy and hashtag follow the facts.
Speaker 5: John Lewis is completely right. There is a cloud of legitimacy around the election of Donald Trump. The Russians interfered with his election. James Comey and the FBI interfered with his, Election. The fake news industry interfered with his election.
Speaker 1: Trump knows he's an illegitimate president who got illegitimate foreign powers. Do you believe Trump is a legitimate president?
Speaker 4: What I believe is that there's no question that the outcome of this election was affected by the Russian interference.
Speaker 2: There actually is a cloud of Okay. Legitimacy.
Speaker 6: So that legitimacy is the question. Yes.
Speaker 3: So that was a very tainted election. And and in that sense, it's it's illegitimate.
Speaker 1: Why Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to essentially prove that he beat you? Because he knows he didn't. He knows he's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 6: Stolen email. Stolen drone. Stolen drone. Stolen election. Welcome to the world of unprecedented Trump.
So do you believe President Trump is an illegitimate president.
Speaker 2: Based on what I just said was I can't for Trump.
Speaker 6: He tweeted in February 2018, quote, the more we learn about 2016 election, the more illegitimate it becomes. America deserves to know whether we have a fake president in the Oval Office.
Speaker 3: And The rest in attempt to to have the election. And frankly, the FBI is weighing in on the election. I think make the make it makes this election illegitimate.
Speaker 1: There was a widespread Understanding that this election was not on the level. We still don't know what really happened, Isaac. I mean, there's just a lot that I think will Be revealed, history will discover, but you don't win by 3,000,000 votes and have all this other shenanigans stuff going on and not come away with An idea like, woah, something's not right here.
Speaker 5: Seems to me that there's a cloud of illegitimacy that continues to hang Over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Speaker 4: The outcome of the election was affected by their interference. And now we need to know, To what degree, if any, the Trump campaign was actually in collusion
Speaker 1: with the Russia? He knows he's an illegitimate president. So of course, he's obsessed That's with me. And I believe that it's a guilty conscience.
Speaker 2: We actually won the last presidential election, folks. They stole And Al Gore won that election. I think he won anyway. Actually, I think I carried Florida. Al Gore won the election nationwide Also in Florida, but the Supreme Court ruled the other way.
Al Gore got more votes, but not enough to stay out of the Supreme Court where president Bush was elected five four.
Speaker 1: Bush versus Gore. A court took away a presidency.
Speaker 2: If all the votes were tallied in Florida, Adele Gold would be president today and George Bush would be back in office.
Speaker 0: I come from Florida where you and others participated in what I call The United States coup d'etat.
Speaker 6: In 2013, according to reports, vice president Joe Biden, he claimed that Al Gore was The one who was elected president. And he claimed that the recount result was, quote, a bad decision.
Speaker 2: And never forget, dear friends, what they did in Florida to Al Gore and me, to all of us, to older Americans, to African Americans, to Haitian Americans Deny the right to vote and have those votes counted.
Speaker 8: I do believe that projections were right in the 1st place at 7 o'clock when they called
Speaker 1: it before. Let me tell you without a doubt. George Bush did not carry Florida and it was not closed.
Speaker 2: There's no question that you won Oh, thank you, Charles. No. It's a question.
Speaker 4: That's a question.
Speaker 2: We will never know because The votes weren't weren't counted. But but and and then in your judgment I mean, that's unfortunate. And there is no other way of saying Let's be very blunt. Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, and we should never Forget it. Most Americans or great many Americans don't have confidence that the election of 2000 was fair.
Speaker 8: But I don't believe we lost that. I believe we just failed to have all of the votes counted
Speaker 4: The Supreme Court elected president. In 2004. Yeah. Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, although not the presidency.
Speaker 3: We know we won this election. They know we won this election. And Americans know we won this election.
Speaker 7: I know some people want you to believe that the Gore Campaign was a campaign that wasn't able to complete its mission. We did. Had all of
Speaker 0: those votes been found in Florida,
Speaker 8: I
Speaker 7: think Al Gore would be president on today.
Speaker 2: We had more votes. We won, and we are never going to let the United States Supreme Court choose the president of the United Takes the care. You should know by now based on the fact that he lost the popular vote by more than a half 1000000 voters, And we don't know how many he lost to buy in Florida. There's no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president.
Speaker 9: I rise to Object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral votes.
Speaker 2: Really, we won the election in 2000, but they stole the election. I must object because of the overwhelming evidence of overwhelming evidence of official misconduct, deliberate fraud, and an attempt to The chairman has provided Imran had already Helped the Bush team with such favors as burying their rent a mob to Florida in 2000 to permanently halt of the counting of legally cast ballots. It is
Speaker 7: signed by myself on behalf of my diverse constituents and the millions of Americans who have been disenfranchised by Florida's inaccurate vote counts to Supreme Court not to speak with
Speaker 4: the United States despite of this election.
Speaker 1: Speaking to a Democratic group in Chicago, he said he made it clear he thinks Al Gore was the winner.
Speaker 2: The time it was over, our candidate won the popular vote. And the only way that could win the election was to stop the voting and fraud it. Catherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Jim Baker and the Supreme Court hadn't tampered with the results, l Gore would be. President? I think that the issue before us today, is not who won or should have won the 2000 presidential election.
That issue has been settled not to my opinion, but it has been settled. Let's just drop the vice president president or not. Al Gore should have been president of the United States.
Speaker 10: Al Gore, made it possible for George Bush to be The only appointed president in the history of these United States.
Speaker 6: Democrats have won the past 3 presidential elections. In two
Speaker 2: 1,000 unions turned out 25% of the vote and Al Gore won. But the Supreme Court hampered? That's a large The Supreme Court stopped the counting of votes, and if they've left the council on, Al Gore would've got the necessary votes.
Speaker 0: The Supreme Court selected tent. George w Bush
Speaker 2: as the president. He was not elected. There is overwhelming evidence that George w Bush did not win this Election.
Speaker 3: What I observed, as a voter, as a citizen of Illinois, 4 years ago were troubling evidence of the fact that not every vote was being counted. Don't think that George w Bush won the election, in 2000 against our goal because I I think he he probably lost Florida and also the nationwide.
Speaker 2: If you invite me back on this show
Speaker 3: in about 8 weeks, I
Speaker 2: think you're gonna learn that No, Roy. I think you get all the votes there. I felt what happened in Florida was a carefully worked out conspiracy. That many things could not go wrong in one state Without there having been a conspiracy, and many, many different things did go wrong. Many tricks were pulled of various kinds.
Speaker 8: The vice president did win, but, And I do believe that the majority of voters that intended to to go to polls last year wanted to vote and cast their votes for Al Gore. I do believe that in in in terms of Florida as well.
Speaker 2: The court has been supporting formation of the popular will. The most spectacular example being Bush versus Gore, where the majority by a five For a vote and joined the counting of more than a 100,000 ballots in Florida and essentially gave America its 1st court appointed president. A stolen citizen is naked and stolen. Even though Al Gore won the election, he won't take office.
Speaker 11: That election was stolen from of the rightful winner. So, mister speaker, I'm here today to talk about a stolen presidential election.
Speaker 2: I think in 2000, everybody Talk. Well, he did win the election out of the war. He started dividing America here in Florida By trying to take an election that I think any reasonable person would say he hadn't Actually, one.
Speaker 0: What happened in Florida will go down in history As a coup d'etat.
Speaker 2: Could we conclude, is it possible There was a conspiracy, and Florida officials were involved in the conspiracy. Never have so many things gone It's too wrong in one place before. Why how do all these things happen all at the same time in the same state? It is not as possible if there was a conspiracy that was very well organized. Why was the state police out there on that Today, election day, checking license plates and and so forth.
You know, how did all these things happen in 1 state at one time in 1 election? Is is it possible that Use the word conspiracy and not be afraid of it.
Speaker 1: I'm not sure wish Gore was president right now. He should be.
Speaker 2: Well, yes, he got elected. Well done. A battle that by the will of the people should have ended in victory. But tens thousands of Florida votes either were not counted or tossed down in the 2000 presidential election. 5 supreme court justices.
You've trumped the votes of 51,000,000 Americans. We should've let the entire state be reconned so it was clear, that Al Gore actually won the state of Florida.
Speaker 0: And Al War won the election.
Speaker 2: We had the election stolen from us. You must admit that. They stole it, And we need a leader to help us get revenge.
Speaker 6: I voted for Al Gore. He won the election.
Speaker 2: They usurped the the powers as far as being put in it and intervene. It was With the fix as far as we're concerned, you know, it's it's there's no polite way to talk about it except the fix was in.
Speaker 0: After the election, when you stole Hold the election. You came back here and say, get over it. No. We're not gonna get over it.
Speaker 2: You know it. I know it. They know it. We won that election.
Speaker 12: Constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio and malfunctioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts have led to additional loss of confidence by the public.
Speaker 2: The right to vote has been stolen from qualified voters. The New
Speaker 6: Yorker reported that Kerry thought that, quote, proxies for Bush had rigged many of the voting machines.
Speaker 7: In 2004, the democratic process was thwarted.
Speaker 2: To The 2004 presidential election in Ohio was riddled with unnecessary problems.
Speaker 4: Some machines malfunctioned, causing votes to be counted more than once or not at all.
Speaker 2: Based upon an inordinate number of allegations suggesting gross voting rights violations and misconduct, I joined with my colleagues and objective to counting the state of Ohio's electoral votes. As in 2000, the votes of many who wanted to vote were not, in fact, This
Speaker 3: last Friday night, I I arranged to meet senator Kerry at a fundraiser to give him a copy of my book. He told me he now thinks the election was stolen.
Speaker 1: The wife of John Kerry said she has lingering doubts about the legitimacy of the election. Her theory goes like this. 2 brothers, she calls hard right Republicans, Own 80% of voting machines in the US. Therefore, it would be easy to hack into the mother machines that control the electronic voting.
Speaker 7: There were Numerous irregularities in Ohio, including large percentages of projections of provisional balloting, problems with voting machines.
Speaker 1: As we look At our election system, I think it's fair to say that there are many legitimate questions about its accuracy, About its integrity.
Speaker 12: There are still legitimate concerns over the integrity of our election.
Speaker 3: The question obviously is How many instances were not caught that we don't know about? Number 1, we've seen a lot of, what I'll call, honest glitches where it just didn't work right, But also that these machines are hackable. A dishonest employee of the vendor or dishonest employee of the local board of elections or simply someone who knows electronics And as a computer at home, could hack into these machines and then put in the secret instructions to disregard every 20th Democratic voter had 10% to the carrier to the Bush vote or whatever. He might not even know it.
Speaker 2: I agree with tens of millions of Americans Who are more very worried that when they cast the ballot on an electronic voting machine, that there There is no paper trail to record that vote. The numerous irregularities that occurred with the electronic voting machines In Ohio on November 2nd last year, point to an unresolved national crisis.
Speaker 7: We cannot Clear that
Speaker 3: the election of November 2, 2004 was free and clear and transparent and real. There must be independent testing of the voting machines used in Ohio.
Speaker 1: I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was barely decided. We know that there was substantial voter suppression, and the machines were not reliable.
Speaker 12: The members of Congress who have brought this challenge are speaking up for their agreed constituents, many of whom may have been disenfranchised in this process.
Speaker 6: Treating today's electoral vote count in congress as a meaningless ritual would be an insult to our democracy unless we registered our own protest against the obviously fraud voting process that took place in so many
Speaker 2: of our states. Voters who wish to cast a vote for president or vice president Can't approach the polls with certainty that their vote will be counted. One of the most significant problems in Ohio and in many other states Was a lack of measures to ensure the integrity of electronic voting machines. In 2004, they caused democratic voters in Ohio to wait for 8 hours before they could cast their ballot. They turned the department of civil rights and the justice department into the voter suppression division with Voter ID laws, voter purging, voter caging, voter intimidation.
There aren't gonna be any more election stealing.
Speaker 1: Now you have one very
Speaker 6: We won. But I
Speaker 1: didn't lose. I got the votes, but we won't know exactly how many because of how they cheat it. I did win my election. I just didn't get to have the job. We were robbed of an election.
Without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia. Andrew Gillum is the governor of Florida. Using the
Speaker 4: word rigged, using the word steal, do you think it's dangerous going into 2020?
Speaker 1: I I don't because we can actually back it up. And so in response What I believe was stolen election. I'm not saying they stole it from me. They stole it from the voters' doors. That's when I was asked if I'm ever gonna concede.
The answer is no. If she had a fair election, she already would have won. This is not a speech of concession. This is a step that needs to acknowledge an action that's right, true, or action is right, true or proper. And I will not concede because the erosion of our democracy is not You refuse to concede and say that you lost.
Do you stand by that decision today? Absolutely.
Speaker 2: If Stacey Abrams doesn't win in Georgia, they Stolen. It's clear. It's clear.
Speaker 1: The only election It was not a free and fair I think the election was stolen from the people of Georgia. I believe it was stolen from the voters.
Speaker 2: So I
Speaker 3: think that Stacey Abrams' election is being stolen from her.
Speaker 1: The election was not fair. The process was not fair. Thousands of Georgians had their voices stolen because they were not able to cast ballots. And they cannot be guaranteed that their votes will be counted in 2020 if we don't do this right.
Speaker 4: If what happens to you happens nationally and we we see, whoever runs for whoever wins the Democratic nominee. If they say, actually, I can prove that there's a number of votes in every state that that and that's and that's the same thing that you just described happens in multiple states should they concede.
Speaker 1: I do not think we should concede an election until we know the results of an election. I still fundamentally believed it could be fair. And that's just not how life works. If it looks like it's cheating, it probably is. If it looks like it's rigged, it probably is.
Speaker 2: He would be the governor of Georgia today had the governor of Georgia not disenfranchised 1,400,000 Georgia voters before the election. That's what happened to Stacey Abrams. They took the votes away.
Speaker 6: You, notably did not concede. I acknowledge. Okay. You acknowledge That he won, but you did not concede. Correct.
5 months later, do you still feel like your opponent won through voter suppression? Yes. Reminder, she wrote. Brian Kemp stole the gubernatorial election from Georgians and Stacey Abrams.
Speaker 1: I said that the election stolen from Georgia voters, the process that took place during the legislative cycle was one that did not countenance and did not pay attention To the deep and real concerns of those who watch this election be stolen in the state of Georgia. It was stolen from the voters of Georgia. Georgia voters did not have their votes Counted. They were not allowed to cast votes. They had
Speaker 2: their votes discarded. Certainly gave the appearance of unfairness. I think it was, unfair. Stacy ran a great campaign. Probably won.
Speaker 1: And it was not fair to those who filled up absentee ballots. And depending on the county you sent it to, it Either it was counted or not counted, assuming you received it in time. Brian Kemp oversaw for 8 years the systematic and Systemic dismantling of our democracy, and that means there could not be free and fair elections in Georgia. As long as we have eligible American citizens who cannot cast a ballot, Then the game is rigged. I am complicit if I say that that system is fair.
Concession in the political space is an acknowledgement that the process This is fair. And I don't believe that to be fair. But I refuse to concede because concession means that the process was proper, that the result was true and And right. And I cannot say that. If I tend to
Speaker 0: say I didn't lose, I just didn't win.
Speaker 12: And I don't call it a lot.
Speaker 1: I just didn't win.
Speaker 2: Yes. Yes. Officially. Yes. Officially.
Speaker 1: Put it this way. I didn't get to get Inaugurated, next problem. Okay. But will I say that this election was not tainted, was not a disinvestment and a disenfranchisement of thousands of voters? I will not say that.
Candidates votes, black and white, lost Their races because they have been deprived of the votes they otherwise would have gotten. And the clearest sample is from next door in Georgia. Stacey Abrams should be governor leading that state right now. I was joking with Beth backstage when she lost. I'm like, no, I just didn't win, because we don't know what really happened because of the miasma of voter suppression.
I can't know for a fact that I would be the governor of Georgia, but for the He's in the management of Brian Kemp, but I know it's a pretty good guess. So I can't prove that I would have won, but I know we don't know because of how he behaved.
Speaker 3: Is he the legitimate governor elect of Georgia?
Speaker 1: He is the person who won an adequate number of votes from the governor.
Speaker 2: With all with all due respect, and
Speaker 3: I respect where you're coming from and I respect the the issues that you're raising. You're not answering the question. Do you think that
Speaker 1: Wait a minute. I no. I what I talked to you
Speaker 3: You're not using The word legitimate, is he the legitimate governor elect Georgia?
Speaker 1: He is the legal governor of Georgia. He's not here to tell you that just because you win doesn't mean you're won. And you said to that you did not lose. You just did not win. Yes.
So we're gonna talk about that. Bad news is that we didn't get the victory we secured. And the thing is we will never know empirically that I got more votes because we will never know which votes did make count. This was not fair. It was not right and it is deeply improper that someone could ascend to that role having performed So basically and so crassly against the very people he is now supposed to represent.
The election was not fair. The process was not fair. So you don't feel that you lost fair and I do recognize I am not the governor of Georgia, but I do like to point out something that is true for me and for many in our state. And that is we won.
Speaker 2: I'm not saying it's gonna be legit because the increase in the prospect of being illegitimate is a Direct proportions not being able to get these these reforms passed.
Speaker 1: Right wing extremists already have a plan to literally seal the next presidential election.
Speaker 13: It's not as if it's just Republicans who have monkeed around with elections in the past. Sometimes Democrats have to.
Speaker 2: You
Speaker 13: know, whenever people are in power, they're, you know, they have this tendency to try to, you know, tilt things in their direction.
reSee.it AI Summary
Many so-called "experts" claimed by November 16, 2020, that there was no evidence of computer fraud in the election, but I question their credibility. These partisan individuals seem to be involved in a cover-up and should be held accountable. Their actions only contribute to the erosion of trust in experts. Similar to the experts who dismissed Hunter Biden's laptop as Russian disinformation, it's difficult to believe anything they say in the future.
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
Can someone tell me how all of these supposed “experts” knew by November 16, 2020, that there was no evidence of computer fraud in the election? They didn’t. They are simply partisan hacks that were part of the cover-up. They should be named and shamed. https://t.co/iQTYg1mGMN
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
These dummies demean themselves and cause more and more people to lose trust in any “expert” due to stunts like this.
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
It’s like the “experts” that said that Hunter Biden’s laptop was Russian disinformation. Why would any thinking person believe anything they say going forward? https://t.co/Y0pZhjfJ4u
reSee.it AI Summary
Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows removed Trump's name from the primary ballot, accusing him of "insurrection" without any legal basis. This sets a dangerous precedent for future elections. Hillary Clinton's involvement in the 2016 election, hiring a foreign national to create a dossier against Trump, raises questions about her own eligibility. Clinton and her associates worked to undermine Trump's presidency, even after the special counsel found no collusion. Clinton's claims of election theft and rigging set the stage for the 2020 election.
@VDHanson - Victor Davis Hanson
Who Are the Real Insurrectionaries? Part One Maine Secretary of State Shenna Bellows just ordered Trump’s name removed from the primary ballot in May. She claimed he is guilty in her view of “insurrection”—a crime Trump has never been charged with, much less convicted of. Her evidence, mostly gleaned from popular news accounts and video reports, would not stand up in a court of law. Bellows has no law degree. She was appointed by a majority vote of the Democratic-controlled Maine legislature, not through a popular ballot. Her legal expertise seems to be derived from years of political activism with the ACLU. We can see where the ultimate trajectory of this usurpation is going—once a single official decides to remove the leading primary and general election candidate of the opposition from the ballot by fiat. Tit-for-tat will likely follow and would unwind the republic. Take Bellows’ action and then apply it to any future candidacy of Hillary Clinton. And by these new rules she surely would fail to qualify to have her name on a state ballot. Remember, in 2016 Hillary Clinton illegally hired a foreign national (by law forbidden to work in presidential campaigns), Christopher Steele, to create a “dossier” of smears and fake-news accounts, aimed at destroying her presidential opponent Donald Trump by extra-legal means. Clinton hid her illicit payments to Steele behind the paywalls of the DNC, the Perkins-Coie law firm, and Fusion GPS. Her leftwing associates and partisans in the waning Obama administration, the DOJ, State Department, FBI, and CIA worked hard to brand the slurs as credible, as they variously passed them off and leaked to the media on the eve of the election. They and Democrats in congress later engineered the appointment of a special counsel, whose investigations consumed two years of the Trump administration’s term, before finding no “collusion”. Even three years after the election in 2019 and the special counsel’s findings, Clinton could still persist that Trump was an “illegitimate” president: “He knows he’s an illegitimate president”. She also declared that year that the 2016 election had been “stolen”: “I think it’s also critical to understand that, as I’ve been telling candidates who have come to see me, you can run the best campaign, you can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you”—de facto asserting the balloting was fraudulent. She was prepping the battlefield for 2020. So Clinton continued her denialism right up to the eve of the 2020 election, further claiming the 2016 election was rigged, “There was a widespread understanding that this election [in 2016] was not on the level.” To be continued…
reSee.it AI Summary
In a series of posts, the author discusses various instances of election denialism and attempts to overturn the 2016 election. They highlight how Hillary Clinton, Jimmy Carter, and Jill Stein questioned the legitimacy of the election and claimed interference by Russia. The author also mentions the efforts by Democrats to persuade electors to vote against their states' popular vote. Despite a Supreme Court ruling declaring such actions illegal, the "resistance" against President Trump continued throughout his administration.
@VDHanson - Victor Davis Hanson
Who Are the Real Insurrectionaries? Part Two Hillary Clinton was joined in her later efforts to deny the legitimacy of the 2016 election by a large chorus of elected House members, and ex-president Jimmy Carter. Carter in 2019 echoed her charges: “And there's no doubt that the Russians did interfere in the election. And I think the interference although not yet quantified, if fully investigated would show that Trump didn't actually win the election in 2016. He lost the election, and he was put into office because the Russians interfered on his behalf.” Here we have an ex-president election denialist accusing the then president of being a veritable traitor as well as an election rigger. We do not recall any outrage at the time. During the 2016 electoral-college process, third-party Green candidate Jill Stein, de facto acting as a DNC surrogate, claimed the 2016 ballot count was illegitimate. She thus sued in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin claiming the voting machines were rigged. (To my knowledge the companies involved like ExpressVote XL did not sue Stein, Dominion-Voting-Systems-style for $1 billion). Stein’s denialism arose mostly in reaction to the Clinton campaign that had loudly claimed “experts” found that Clinton tallies in those states did not meet her campaign’s pre-election expectations. At the same time, Democrats organized a media/publicity campaign— headed by about a dozen Hollywood “stars” appearing in nightly TV commercials —seeking to flip electors into “faithless” electors. In other words, they urged electors to violate their oaths, and not to reflect the uncontested majority votes of their states. Instead they were begged to vote for Hillary Clinton, who had lost their respective states’ popular vote. All this activism arose despite a July 2020 Supreme Court ruling clearly reaffirming the constitutionality of prior state laws that had declared faithless electors illegal. In other words, the Left organized a well-funded effort to overturn the 2016 election by creating faithless electors. They sought to deny the people’s majority votes in their states, and they continued despite a recent prior Supreme Court ruling that this ploy was patently illegal. Just four months after the Inauguration, Clinton boasted that she was part of the “Resistance”, a direct echo to the armed French armed effort —La Résistance—against the Nazi occupation. I suppose Hillary thought she was one of the heroic Democratic maquis and Trump of course Adolf Hitler. Leftwing fact-checkers bristle when such comparisons are made between the 2016 and 2020 election denialism. But the real difference between the two elections’ denialism was that the organized “resistance” to an “illegitimate” president who had “rigged” and “stolen” the 2016 vote continued throughout the Trump administration, often in illegal fashion. To be continued…
@ICU1010 - Eddie
@HillaryClinton Here are 20+ minutes of Democrats denying and questioning election results. Hillary Clinton, Obama, Biden, et al., with many calling President Trump illegitimate. The 2020 election was rigged, and Biden is illegitimate!! https://t.co/wu8Bt5WVgO
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speakers in the video discuss their belief that various elections, including the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections, were stolen or illegitimate due to factors such as Russian interference, voter suppression, and faulty voting machines. They express concerns about the integrity of the electoral process and call for reforms to ensure fair elections. The video also mentions specific instances, such as the 2000 presidential election and the Georgia gubernatorial race, where the speakers believe the election results were not accurate. Overall, the speakers emphasize the need for transparency and accountability in elections to protect democracy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: You can run the best campaign. You can even become the nominee, and you can have the election stolen from you.
Speaker 1: How can you win with Russian interference, though?
Speaker 2: That's what real scared about it in 2020. But rightly.
Speaker 1: Because I'm thinking illegitimate president that didn't really win. So how do you, you know, fight against that in 2020?
Speaker 2: You are absolutely right.
Speaker 0: He is an illegitimate president in my mind
Speaker 3: Could you be my vice president to a candidate?
Speaker 4: Folks, look. I absolutely agree.
Speaker 5: Trump didn't actually win the election in 2 16. He lost the election, and he was put in the office because the Russians interfered.
Speaker 6: Russia interfered with our election, attacked our democracy for the sole purpose of artificially placing someone at 1600 Pennsylvania knew they were successful.
Speaker 0: Trump knows he's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 7: The president or elect, although legally elected, is not legitimate.
Speaker 8: I don't see
Speaker 9: this. President-elect as a legitimate president. You said you believe that Russia's interference altered the outcome of the auction.
Speaker 2: I do. We have a president who, if in fact, it is proven, has been assisted by the Russians and may in fact not be a legitimate president.
Speaker 0: The one thing that Trump It's fearful of, when it comes to his being president, is that finally, we will see how illegitimate his victory actually Was.
Speaker 10: I have an objection.
Speaker 11: I object to the 15 votes from the state of North Carolina.
Speaker 12: I object because people are horrified.
Speaker 0: He's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 13: Our election was hijacked. There is no question. Congress has a duty to hashtag protect our democracy and hashtag follow the facts.
Speaker 6: John Lewis is completely right. There is a cloud out of illegitimacy around the election of Donald Trump. The Russians interfered with his election. James Comey and the FBI interfered with his, election. The fake news industry interfered with his election.
Speaker 0: Trump knows he's an illegitimate president who got illegitimate foreign powers.
Speaker 2: Do you believe Trump is illegitimate president?
Speaker 14: What I believe is that there's no question that the outcome of this election was affected by the Russian interference.
Speaker 15: There absolutely is a cloud of illegitimacy.
Speaker 16: So that legitimacy is in question. Yes.
Speaker 7: So that was a very tainted election. And and in that sense, it's it's illegitimate.
Speaker 2: Why do you think the president is going to such great lengths to prove that he beat you.
Speaker 0: Because he knows he didn't. He knows he's an illegitimate president.
Speaker 13: Stolen emails. Stolen drone. Stolen drone. Own an election. Welcome to the world of unprecedented Trump.
Speaker 9: Did you believe president Trump is an illegitimate president?
Speaker 5: Based on what I just said, which I can't retract.
Speaker 13: Okay. He tweeted in Tory, 2018, quote, the more we learn about the 2016 election, the more illegitimate it becomes. America deserves to know whether we have a fake president in the Oval Office.
Speaker 7: In the Russian attempt to to have the election. And, frankly, the FBI is weighing in on the election. I think make the make it Makes this election illegitimate.
Speaker 0: There was a widespread understanding that this election was not on the level. We still don't know what really happened, Isaac. I mean, there's just a lot that I think will be revealed. History will discover. But you don't win by 3,000,000 votes and have all this other shenanigans stuff going on and not come away with an idea like, woah.
Something's not right here.
Speaker 6: Seems to me that there's a cloud of illegitimacy that continues to hang over 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
Speaker 14: The outcome of the election was affected by their interference. And now we need to know, you know, to what degree, if any, the campaign was actually in collusion with the with with Russia.
Speaker 0: He knows he's an illegitimate president. So, of course, he's obsessed with me, and I believe that it's a guilty conscience.
Speaker 4: We actually won the last presidential election, folks. They stole my presidential election.
Speaker 3: If Al Gore won that election, think he won anyway.
Speaker 4: Actually, I think I carried Florida.
Speaker 5: Al Gore won the election nationwide and also in Florida, but the supreme court ruled the other way. Al Gore got more votes, but not enough to stay out of the Supreme Court where president Bush was elected 5 to 4.
Speaker 0: Bush versus Gore. A court took away A presidency.
Speaker 17: If all the votes were carried in Florida, that Al Gore would be president today and George Bush would be backing off.
Speaker 2: I come from Florida Where you and others participated in what I call the United States coup d'etat.
Speaker 13: It's in 2013, according to reports, vice president Joe Biden, he claimed that Al Gore was the one who was elected president, and he claimed that the recount result was, quote, a bad decision.
Speaker 4: And never forget, dear friends, what they did in Florida to Al Gore and me, to all of us, the older Americans, the African Americans, the Haitian Americans denied the right to vote and have those votes counted.
Speaker 18: I do believe that the projections were right in the first place at 7 o'clock when they called it Boy.
Speaker 2: Let me tell you something without a doubt. George Bush did not carry Florida, and it was not closed.
Speaker 8: There's no question You won the state of Florida.
Speaker 4: Oh, thank you, darling. No. That's a question.
Speaker 17: That's a question.
Speaker 4: We will never know because votes weren't weren't counted. But by And
Speaker 13: and then in your judgment
Speaker 4: I mean, that's unfortunate. Yeah. And there is no other way of saying it, but to be very blunt, Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, and we should never forget it.
Speaker 19: Most Americans are great. Many Americans don't have confidence that the election of 2000 was fair.
Speaker 18: But I don't believe we lost. I I believe we just failed to have all of the votes counted. The Coach counted The
Speaker 14: Supreme Court elected president of 2004. Yeah. Al Gore won the state of Florida in 2000, although not the presidency.
Speaker 20: We know we won this election. They know we won on this election, and Americans know we won this election.
Speaker 18: I know some people want you to believe that the Gore campaign was a campaign that wasn't able to complete its mission. We did. Had all of those votes been found in Florida, I think Al Gore would be president today.
Speaker 21: We had more votes. We won, and we are never Going to let the United States Supreme Court choose the president of the United States again.
Speaker 14: You should
Speaker 12: know by now based the fact that he lost the popular vote vote by more than a half 1000000 voters, and we don't know how many he lost by in Florida.
Speaker 5: There's no doubt in my mind that Al Gore was elected president.
Speaker 12: I rise to object to the fraudulent 25 Florida electoral Folks.
Speaker 17: Really, we won the election in 2000, but they stole the election.
Speaker 4: I must object because of the overwhelming evidence of official misconduct, Delivery fraud and an attempt to The chairman must remain on. Enron had already helped the Bush team with such favors as ferrying their rent a mob to Florida in 2000 to permanently halt the counting of legally cast ballots.
Speaker 11: It is signed by myself behalf of my diverse constituents and the millions of Americans who have been disenfranchised by Florida's inaccurate vote count to The court, not
Speaker 16: the week
Speaker 12: with the United States, the Friday of this election.
Speaker 2: Speaking to a Democratic
Speaker 22: group in Chicago Tuesday, he
Speaker 2: made it clear He thinks Al Gore was the winner.
Speaker 16: By the time it was over,
Speaker 5: our candidate had won the popular vote, and the only way they could win the election was to stop The voting in Florida.
Speaker 17: Catherine Harris, Jeb Bush, Jim Baker, and the Supreme Court hadn't tampered
Speaker 4: with the results. Al Gore would be president.
Speaker 23: I think that the issue before us today, is Not who won or should have won the 2000 presidential election. That issue has been settled, not to my belief, but it has been settled.
Speaker 13: Let's just drop the vice. President, presidentor. That's all I got.
Speaker 9: Al Gore should
Speaker 13: have been president of the United States.
Speaker 24: Al Gore, made it possible for George Bush to be the only appointed president in the history of these United States.
Speaker 13: Democrats have won the past 3 presidential elections.
Speaker 19: In 2000, unions turned out 25% of the vote, and Al Gore won.
Speaker 17: But the Supreme Court hampered? That's a large start. The Supreme Court stopped the counting of the votes, and if they'd let the council on, El Gore would have got the necessary vote.
Speaker 2: The Supreme Court selected George w Bush as the president. He was not elected.
Speaker 12: There is overwhelming But it said Joyce w Bush did not win this election.
Speaker 25: What I observed, as a voter, as a citizen of Illinois, 4 years ago were troubling evidence of the fact that not every vote was being counted.
Speaker 5: Don't think that George w Bush won the election, in 2000, I guess, our goal because I I think that he probably lost Florida and also that nationwide.
Speaker 17: If you invite me back on this show in about 8 weeks, I think you're gonna learn that El Goran actually did get all the votes there.
Speaker 26: I felt what happened in Florida was a carefully worked out conspiracy. That many things could not go wrong in 1 one state without there having been a conspiracy, and many, many different things did go wrong. Many Tricks were full of various kinds.
Speaker 18: The vice president did win, but, and I do believe that the majority of voters that intended to to go to Polls last year wanted to vote and cast their votes for Al Gore. I do believe that in in in terms of Florida as well.
Speaker 19: The has been
Speaker 10: thwarting formation of the popular will. The most spectacular example being Bush versus Gore, where the majority by a 5 four vote and joined the counting of more than a 100,000 ballots in Florida and essentially gave America its first court appointed president.
Speaker 13: And stolen.
Speaker 27: Even though Al Gore won the election, he won't take office.
Speaker 25: That election was stolen from the rightful winner. So, mister speaker, I'm here today to talk about a stolen presidential election.
Speaker 17: I think in 2000, everybody So, well, he did win the election out of court.
Speaker 15: He started dividing America here in Florida By trying to take an election that I think any reasonable person would say he hadn't actually won.
Speaker 2: What happened in Florida will go down in history as a coup d'etat.
Speaker 16: Did we conclude, is it possible that There was a conspiracy, and Florida officials were involved in the conspiracy. Never have so many things gone so wrong one place before. Why how do all these things happen all at the same time in the same state? It's not possible there was a conspiracy. It was very well organized.
Why were the state police out there on that day, election day, taking license plates, And and so forth. You know, how did all these things happen in one state at one time in one election? Is is it possible that we are Use the word conspiracy and not be afraid of it. Not sure wish, Gore was president right now. He should be.
Speaker 17: Well, yes, he got elected.
Speaker 16: Oh, well, good.
Speaker 28: A battle that by the will of the people should have ended in victory. But tens of thousands of Florida votes either were not counted or tossed out in the 2000 presidential election.
Speaker 17: 5 supreme court justices, This is Trump the votes of 51,000,000 Americans. We should've let the entire state be recounted so it was clear, that Al Gore actually won the state
Speaker 2: And won the election.
Speaker 23: We had the election stolen from us, and you must admit that. They stole it, and we need a leader to help us get revenge.
Speaker 13: I voted for Al Gore. He won the election.
Speaker 26: They usurped the The powers of the forest being caught and and and intervene, it was a fix as far as we're concerned. You know? It it there's no polite way to talk about it except the fix was in.
Speaker 2: After the when you stole the election, you came back here and say, get over it. No. We're not going to get over it.
Speaker 4: You know it. I know know it. They know it. We won that election.
Speaker 22: Constantly shifting vote tallies in Ohio and now functioning electronic machines, which may not have paper receipts, have led to additional loss of confidence by the public.
Speaker 6: The right to vote
Speaker 4: has been stolen from qualified voters.
Speaker 13: The New Yorker reported that Kerry thought that, quote, proxies for Bush had rigged of the voting machines.
Speaker 12: In 2004, the democratic process was thwarted.
Speaker 5: The 2004 presidential election in Ohio was riddled with unnecessary problems.
Speaker 29: Some machines malfunctioned, causing votes to be counted more than once or not at all.
Speaker 30: Based upon an inordinate number of allegations Suggesting gross voting rights violations and misconduct, I join with my colleagues in objective to counting the state of Ohio's electoral votes.
Speaker 31: Nas in 2000, the votes of many who wanted to vote were not, in fact, counted.
Speaker 32: This last Friday night, I I arranged to meet senator Kerry at Fundraiser to give him a copy of my book. He told me he now thinks the election was stolen.
Speaker 2: The wife of John Kerry said she has Lingering doubts about the legitimacy of the election. Her theory goes like this. 2 brothers, she calls hard right Republicans, Own 80% of loading machines in the US. Therefore, it would be easy to hack into the mother machines that control the electronic voting. There were numerous irregularities in Ohio, including large percentages of rejections of provisional balloting, problems with voting machines.
Speaker 0: As we look At our election system, I think it's fair to say that there are many legitimate questions about its accuracy, About its integrity
Speaker 22: There are still legitimate concerns over the integrity of our elections.
Speaker 8: The question obviously is How many instances were not caught that we don't know about? Number 1, we've seen a lot of what I'll call honest glitches where it just didn't work right, But also that these machines are hackable. A dishonest employee of the vendor or a dishonest employee of a local board of elections or simply someone who knows electronics and has Computer at home, could hack into these machines and then put in a secret instruction to disregard every 20th democratic voter at 10 percent to the carrier to the Bush vote or whatever, you might not even know it.
Speaker 4: I agree with tens of millions of Americans who are very worried that when they cast the ballot on
Speaker 33: an electronic voting machine that there is no paper trail to record that vote. The numerous irregularities That occurred with the electronic voting machines in Ohio on November 2nd last year point to an unresolved of national crisis.
Speaker 11: We cannot declare that the election of November 2, 2004 was free and clear and transparent and real. There must be independent testing the voting machines used in
Speaker 0: Ohio. I'm not confident that the election in Ohio was fairly decided. We know that there was substantial voter suppression, And the machines were not reliable.
Speaker 22: The members of congress who have brought this challenge are speaking up for their aggrieved constituents, many of whom may have been disenfranchised in this process.
Speaker 31: Treating today's electoral vote count in congress as a meaningless ritual would be an insult to our unless we registered our own protest against the obviously flawed voting process that took place in so many of our states.
Speaker 34: Voters who wish to cast a vote Vote for president or vice president can't approach the polls with certainty that their vote will be Counting.
Speaker 27: One of the most significant problems in Ohio and in many other states was the lack of measures to ensure the integrity of electronic voting machines.
Speaker 19: In 2004, they caused Democratic voters in Ohio to wait for 8 hours before they could cast their Ballot. They turn the Department of Civil Rights and the Justice Department into the voter suppression division with voter ID laws, voter purging, voter caging, voter intimidation. There aren't gonna be any more election stealing.
Speaker 2: Now you have one very affirmative statement to make.
Speaker 23: We won.
Speaker 2: But I didn't lose. I got the votes, but we won't know exactly how many because how they cheated. I did win my election. I just didn't get to have We were robbed of an election. Without voter suppression, Stacey Abrams would be the governor of Georgia.
Andrew Gillum is the governor of Florida.
Speaker 29: Using the word rigged, Using the word steal, do you think it's dangerous going into 2020?
Speaker 2: I I don't because we can actually back it up. And so in response to what I believe Well, it's stolen election. I'm not saying they stole it from me. They stole it from the door.
Speaker 29: Back to the
Speaker 2: outside asking if I'm ever gonna concede. The answer is no.
Speaker 0: If she had a fair election, she already would have won.
Speaker 2: This is not a speech of concession. Because concession needs to acknowledge an action that's Right, true, or prop. And I will not concede because the erosion of our democracy is not right. You refuse to concede and say that you lost. Do you stand by that decision today?
Absolutely.
Speaker 5: If Stacey Abrams doesn't win in Georgia, they stole it. It's clear. It's clear.
Speaker 2: It was not a free and fair election. I think the election was stolen from the people of Georgia. I believe it was stolen from the voters.
Speaker 25: So I think that Stacey Abrams' election is being stolen from her.
Speaker 2: The election was not fair. The process was not Fair. Thousands of Georgians had their voices stolen because they were not able to cast ballots, and they cannot be guaranteed that their votes will be counted in 2020, if we don't do this right.
Speaker 29: If what happens to you happens nationally and we we see, whoever runs for whoever wins the Democratic nominee, if they They actually I can prove that there's a number of votes in every state that that and that and that's the same thing that you just described happens in multiple states. Should they concede?
Speaker 2: I do not think we should concede an election until we know the results of an election. I still fundamentally believe it could be a failure, And that's just not how life works. If it looks like it's cheating, it probably is. If it looks like it's rigged, it probably
Speaker 4: She would be the governor of Georgia today had the governor of Georgia not disenfranchise 1,400,000 Georgia voters before the election. That's what happened to Stacey Abrams. They took the vote away.
Speaker 2: We've been raised to believe that it is in that respect to
Speaker 16: call
Speaker 35: You, notably did not concede.
Speaker 2: I did not.
Speaker 35: Okay. You acknowledged That he won, but you did not concede. Correct. 5 months later, do you still feel like your opponent won through voter suppression?
Speaker 2: Yes.
Speaker 13: Reminder, she wrote, Brian Kemp stole the gubernatorial election from Georgians and Stacey Abrams.
Speaker 2: I said that the election was stolen from Georgia voters. The Process that took place during the legislative cycle was one that did not countenance and did not pay attention to the deep and real concerns of those Who watched this election be stolen in the state of Georgia? It was stolen from the voters of Georgia. Georgia voters did not have their votes counted. They were not allowed to cast votes.
They had their votes Scarded.
Speaker 36: It certainly gave the appearance of unfairness. I think it was, unfair. Stacy ran a great campaign. She probably won.
Speaker 2: And it was not fair to those who filled up absentee ballots. And depending on the county you sent it to, it either was counted or not counted, assuming you received it in time. Brian Kemp oversaw for 8 years the systematic and systemic dismantling of our democracy, and that means there could not be free and fair elections in Georgia. As long as we have eligible American citizens who cannot cast a ballot, then the game is rigged. I am complicit if I say that that system fair.
Concession in the political space is an acknowledgment that the process was fair, and I don't believe that to be so. But I refuse to concede because concession means that the process was proper, that the result was true and right, and I cannot say that. If I tend to say I didn't lose, I just didn't win. And I don't call it a loss. I just didn't win.
Right. Right. Yes. You did. Okay.
Officially. Yes. Eventually. Put it this way. I didn't get to get inaugurated, and that's possible.
Okay. But will I say that this election was not tainted, was not and a disenfranchisement of thousands of voters, I will not say that.
Speaker 0: Candidates, both black and white, lost their races because they have been deprived of the votes they otherwise would have gotten. And the clearest Example is from next door in Georgia. Stacey Abrams should be governor leading that state right now.
Speaker 2: I was joking with Beth backstage when Cliff said, you know, she lost. I'm like, no. I just didn't win, because we don't know what really happened because of the miasma of voter suppression. I can't know for a fact that I would be the governor of Georgia but for the malfeasance and the mismanagement It's Brian Kemp, but I know it's a pretty good guess. So I can't prove that I would have won, but I know we don't know because of how he behaved.
Speaker 9: Is he the legitimate governor elect him towards me.
Speaker 2: He is the person who won an adequate number of votes But that's not from the governor.
Speaker 9: With all with all due respect, and I respect where you're coming from, and I respect The the issues that you're raising, you're not answering the question. Do you think it was
Speaker 2: Wait a minute. No. I what I'm talking to you
Speaker 9: You're not using the word legitimate. Is he the legitimate governor Like, Georgia.
Speaker 2: He is the legal governor of Georgia. See, I'm here to tell you that just because you win doesn't mean you're won. They said to me that you did not lose. You just did not win. Yes.
So we're gonna talk about that. Bad news is that we didn't get the victory we secured. And the thing is we will never know empirically that I got more votes because because we will never know which votes didn't count. This was not fair. It was not right, and it is deeply improper that Someone could ascend to that role having performed so basely and so crassly against the very people he is now supposed to represent.
The election was not fair. The process was not fair. So you don't feel that you lost fair
Speaker 8: and square?
Speaker 2: I do recognize I am not the governor of Georgia, but I do like to point out something that is true for me and for many in our state, And that is we won.
Speaker 3: I'm not saying it's gonna be legit. It's the increase in the prospect of being illegitimate is a direct proportion of us not being able to get These these reforms passed.
Speaker 0: Right wing extremists already have a plan to literally steal the next presidential Election.
Speaker 25: It's not as if it's just Republicans who have monkeed around with elections in the past, sometimes Democrats have to. You know, whenever people are in power, They're you know, they have this tendency to try to, you know, tilt things in their direction.
@Real_RobN - 🇺🇸RealRobert🇺🇸
Election deniers, conspiracy theorists, hallucinators and schizophrenics, listen up, “We have video tape of Jackie Amos inserting thumb drives into machines” “I personally observed USB cards uploaded to machines 24✖️as of today 47 USB cards are missing and no where to be found” https://t.co/KN92bF8qTR
Video Transcript AI Summary
I have evidence of a conspiracy and correspondence regarding my election. The chairperson, Jackie Amos, received a text supporting me and responded that I won but would take action against David Archie. I request that Jackie Amos and Sandra McCall step down from their positions in the Hinds County Democratic Party. We have evidence of Jackie Amos engaging in fraudulent activities during the election. This issue extends beyond the party and concerns all citizens in Mississippi. It is an opportunity to combat corruption and fraud in elections statewide.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I provided each of you with a copy of the information in her, conspiracy and correspondence to someone concerning my election on August 8th. I cannot read all and everything that she said on this, paper, because some of it, the words are not fit to use. She correspond with an individual. That individual call the chairperson, Jackie Amos, or texted chairperson, Jackie Amos, and stated, hey. Don't let them cheat Deborah Dixon out of her election.
She won fair and square. Jackie Aymond respond to that text was that she won, but I'm going to f David Archie on the site. This matter came from a the chairperson of the Hinds County Democratic Party. And so on today, we asking that the Hinds County Democratic party take immediate action. We're asking that she step down from her position as high end county chairperson of the Democratic Party along with Sandra McCall, who is the secretary, who is her running buddy in and around this election.
We have videotape of Jackie Amos going into boxes, bringing in thumb drives, bringing in, ballots to be inserted into machines. We have pictures of Jackie Amos, participating in what we think that is fraud as well as corruption. And so we wanna be absolutely clear that this matter is not only with the Hinds County Democratic Party, but this matter is with every citizen in the state of Mississippi. This is the opportunity to stop corruption and to stop fraud when it comes to elections in the state of missus
Video Transcript AI Summary
Last week, Miss Walker asked Mr. Zach about the whereabouts of the media sticks. He repeatedly claimed not to know where they were. Miss Walker urged him to find them. Eventually, on Friday afternoon, Mr. Zach located the media sticks. Surprisingly, they were not in his office vault but with election commissioner Mr. Clark. When asked about the source of the media sticks, Mr. Clark did not provide an answer. He argued that he had the right to be involved in the election, despite the law stating that the items should be kept in Mr. Zach's vault.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Now I wanna share the media sticks. On Wednesday the of last week, the first day of the review, I say to mister Zach, where are the media sticks? Listen close. It's recorded. Mister Zach says to us, I do not know where the media sticks are, miss Walker.
I said, do you recognize those are brains? Miss Walker, I do not know where the sticks are. That's on Wednesday. I then asked him on Thursday morning, where are the media sticks? He says, miss Walker, I do not know where the media sticks are.
I said, could you at least try to find out, mister Zach? I need the media sticks. On Friday morning, I asked mister Zach, where are the media sticks? I don't know, miss Walker. I said, please try to find the media sticks.
We did late lunch. When we returned, I said, you got those sticks, mister Zach. Not yet, miss Walker, but I'm working on it. I stand before you to tell you that about 2:30 on Friday afternoon, mister Zach located the media sticks. No, sir.
No, ma'am. They were not in the vault at his office locked up. They were here in this building with election commissioner mister Clark. Mister Clark said to me I asked him, when did you get them? I'm not sure of the date that I received it.
Who did you get them from? Who gave them to you? He did not answer that question. He advises me that he had the right to be involved with this election. The law does not dictate that he's the custodial person of anything.
Those items are to be locked in mister Zach's vault.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker points out several issues with the handling of numbers in the election. The numbers were not stored securely in a sealed bag but in a red canvas bag without a lock. Moreover, they were mixed together, which is against the law. The speaker also accuses Mr. Clark of keeping the media sticks instead of handing them over to Mr. Zach. The speaker advises checking with Mr. Clark as he may still have them. These actions are in violation of the law of Mississippi.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: In in addition to that, those numbers were not even in a sealed, locked bag. It was a red canvas bag with no lock. To make matters worse, they were all commingled. It was well over a 100. The law does not allow me to handle materials outside of the precinct that I'm representing.
To make matters even worse, mister Clark had the audacity to walk back to his office and keep the media sticks. He never turned them over to mister Zach. He never in our present turn those sticks over to mister Zach. So before you leave, check with mister Clark. He still may have them in his possession.
These are outside of the statues, not not thus says Cynthia Walker, but thus says the law of Mississippi.
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker witnessed multiple instances where the Delaware County Board of Elections did not follow proper procedures during the election. They personally saw the voting machine warehouse supervisor uploading USB cards into the machines without being observed. The speaker raised concerns to the deputy sheriff and the clerk of elections, but their objections were ignored. It was later revealed that the warehouse manager usually inserts a few USBs into the machines after each election, but the number observed was unusually high. Currently, 47 USB cards are missing and cannot be located.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: All cases, the chain of custody and the procedures that were defined by the Delaware County Board of Elections and election process review were all they didn't follow 1. I couldn't even redline this multipage document because the entire document would be, they didn't follow any of the procedures. So I personally observed USB cards being uploaded to voting machines by the, the, voting machine warehouse supervisor on multiple occasions. I saw this personally. I brought it to the attention of the deputy sheriff who was there stationed, who was a senior law enforcement officer, and I brought it to the attention of the clerk of elections.
I brought it to their attention. I objected. And I said, this person is not being observed. He's not part of the process that I can see. And he's walking in with baggies, which we have pictures of and it was submitted to in our affidavits.
And he was sticking these USBs into the machines. So, I personally witnessed over that. That happened 24 times over 24 times. We have multiple other witnesses to start, including Democrat poll watchers. And we were told, I was told the next day by, the, solicitors, v well, actually, not the solicitor, but the attorney that we had secured, that they said every election, they leave a couple of USBs in the voting machines and they're brought back.
And, generally, the warehouse manager comes over and puts them in. So in talking to, US Attorney General, McSwain, and other law enforcement officers, I found out that was not The case that generally, you know, more than more than 2 is unusual. So they denied they did it. But, as of today, 47 USBV cards are missing, and they're nowhere to be found.
@Squill_Mama - Squirrel Mama
How to steal an election… Many of them.. https://t.co/Zy6QyIL7wP
Video Transcript AI Summary
A computer science professor explains how a voting machine can be easily manipulated by gaining physical access to it. By connecting a computer to the machine's serial port, one can rewrite the code and control the election results. The professor also highlights the lack of security measures on these machines, making them vulnerable to hacking. Another expert shares their experience of being left alone with voting machines after an election, emphasizing how easily someone could insert malware into them. The central count scanner discussed is widely used in America for counting ballots. The speakers mention the ease of obtaining the machine's software from a Russian server and the numerous individuals who have access to the machines, including potential adversaries. They conclude that the multitude of possible hacks and entry points make it unlikely that someone isn't taking advantage of these vulnerabilities.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Hello. I'm a professor of computer science at Georgia Tech. How do we work? It looks like he has a USB connection into the scanner.
Speaker 1: The the serial console on the back gives us a wrench out.
Speaker 0: That means you have control of the of the machine once you
Speaker 1: I have full control of that, and then we can change the results of what it's scanning. My computer is connected to the machine. This is a serial cable, and it's connected to the back of the machine. Take off the back of the machine, and there's a serial port, and that gives a full root access with no password on the app.
Speaker 0: There's no security subsystem on this one?
Speaker 1: Nope. There's no password on it. With this kind of access, you could rewrite the code that's running on there and get it to count votes in whatever way you want it. You would do this in advance of election night and then wait for the results come in. You could control the election results.
Either way, as long as I had physical access to either plug something in or take off the back But you just need that access briefly? Once. Yes. Very briefly. About how long?
If you had this all prepped and ready to go a minute,
Speaker 2: this it's easily possible for, somebody to get into these machines because they're unsecured for such long periods of time. I have done research on and personally watched 150 elections, at least. 2 of our experts and I went to the closing of the polls in one of the recent elections. At the end of the closing of the polls, the poll workers left us there with about 6 voting machines by ourselves. I was with 2 guys who could have gotten into those machines in a matter of seconds and put in malware?
Speaker 3: The machine we're in front of is a central count scanner. It's the ES and S Model 650. It's, to our knowledge, the most widely deployed central count scanner in America. Anytime you do early voting or provisional voting or anytime you're in a state where they do central tabulation of all the ballots, so they bring them to one place, this is the kind of high speed scanner they would use to count ballots. Historically, these machines were examined, and they determined there was a there was a number of serious problems with them by virtue of messing with the Zip disk.
Just turn it on for 3 minutes and stick a disk in, wait 1 minute, and then walk away. You're able to change the behavior of the machine any way you want, including changing the results of an election.
Speaker 1: It's probably easier to do all of this by just
Speaker 0: plug
Speaker 1: in is So this probably came from
Speaker 0: a server or something else.
Speaker 1: I I have no idea where where they're getting their programs.
Speaker 3: We downloaded a image of the operating system, the software that runs on this machine from a Russian server.
Speaker 1: How many people might have access to stick in as if this like that?
Speaker 3: It would be everyone from elections officials to people who run the storage facilities, volunteers in the election, security guards, you name it. There's gonna be tens of thousands of people who have access to the machine in that fashion. And our adversaries definitely have this machine in Russia, Period.
Speaker 2: There are so many possible hacks And so many possible vectors for entry. It's hard to believe that someone's not taking advantage of it.
reSee.it AI Summary
Kamala Harris met with the Senate Intelligence Committee on the morning of January 6 to discuss the Solarwinds hack. The Solarwinds hack is believed to be connected to the theft of the 2020 election. Those involved in the election theft were also present at the Solarwinds public hearing. Senator Mark Warner, who was involved in the Russia collusion hoax, is suspected to be involved in the theft of the 2020 election and January 6.
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
Another piece of the puzzle of the theft of the 2020 election and the cover-up, January 6, comes together. Who was Kamala Harris meeting with the morning of J6 before she went to the DNC? The senate intelligence committee. The topic of discussion? The Solarwinds hack. https://t.co/XuT4I4qbf7
Video Transcript AI Summary
Newly released videos provide more context about the events at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) headquarters on January 6, 2021. The videos show the discovery of a pipe bomb at the DNC while Vice President-elect Kamala Harris was inside the building. Questions arise about the delayed response from law enforcement and the Secret Service's failure to secure the area promptly. The videos also raise questions about Harris's whereabouts and her silence on the incident. The DC media's lack of questioning and the narrative being protected are also highlighted. The SolarWinds hack is briefly mentioned, emphasizing the collaboration between government agencies and the private sector in responding to the cyberattack.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Over the past few weeks, Americans have been finally seeing and learning about what was happening at the Democratic Democratic National Committee headquarters on January 6, 2021, and the circumstances surrounding the discovery of a pipe bomb at the DNC while then vice president-elect Kamala Harris was inside that building. Never before seen videos released by representative Thomas Massie, Julie Kelly, and Blaze Media have provided more context about what was happening at the DNC just as the violence was beginning at the capitol building only a couple of blocks away. Context, maybe, but no clear answers. In fact, the real questions are just now being asked as a result of these video
Speaker 1: disclosures.
Speaker 0: Here's what we've seen and what we know so far. Julie Kelly showed us the first images of a bomb sniffing dog at the d n c parking garage ramp at about 9 50 AM that morning. Then we saw the arrival of vice president-elect and then still senator Kamala Harris's motorcade about an hour and a half later. The perplexing notification of the bomb's discovery by a plainclothes Capitol police officer and the even more perplexing delayed response by the Secret Service agents and other law enforcement in securing the area.
Speaker 2: One device was placed in an alley behind the RNC.
Speaker 0: After the first pipe bomb was discovered near the Republican National Committee headquarters on First Street, the United States Capitol Police officers and a bomb squad reportedly handled the scene by the book. Immediately, court owning off the area to establish a safe perimeter. Unfortunately, those same protocols were not initiated promptly by the Secret Service and other agencies at the scene of the DNC pipe bomb. You know, court owning it off from pedestrian, auto and nearby train traffic. Then in our 2 previous Blaze Media exclusives, we showed you the prime capital CCTV cameras being remotely turned away from the DNC bomb investigation scene.
And then we found a video that shows the destruction of the pipe bomb by a robot. But let's talk about Kamala Harris.
Speaker 3: I'm speaking.
Speaker 0: Why was she not at the capitol just as vice president Pence was gaveling the senate into session to begin the electoral college vote certification process? Why did it take almost 11 minutes after the bomb's discovery for the Secret Service to evacuate the vice president And how is it possible to Harris or any politician for that matter to not attempt to make political hay out of the danger she was in?
Speaker 4: I thought I was going to die.
Speaker 0: In fact, more than 3 years later, VP Harris has never once publicly mentioned her presence at the DNC on January 6th or her presence near that bomb. Politico was the first to report in November of 21 about a court filing in a January 6th defendant's case in which it was revealed for the first time that VP elect Harris was not at the Capitol when the riots began. A footnote from the legal filing itself states, in its earlier response to the defendant's motion to dismiss, the government incorrectly stated that vice president-elect Harris was present in the US Capitol at the time of the attack. Then, on the 1st year anniversary of January 6, Politico was again the first to report about the actual location of Harris that day. And in a speech she made on January 6, 2022, that 1 year anniversary, Harris never mentioned her whereabouts.
Speaker 3: On that day, I was not only vice president-elect. I was also a United States senator, and I was here at the capitol that morning at a classified hearing with fellow members of the senate intelligence committee.
Speaker 1: Krishna, president and CEO of SolarWinds, Brad Smith, president of Microsoft, and I believe remotely George Kurtz, president and CEO of CrowdStrike. I would like for the record to note that we also asked a representative from Amazon Web Services to join us today, but unfortunately, they declined. Today's hearing is on the widespread compromise of public and private computer networks in the United States by a foreign adversary, colloquially commonly called the SolarWinds hacked. This is the second hearing this committee has held on this topic. Our first was a closed hearing on the now infamous January 6th with government officials responding to the incident.
As deputy national security adviser, Anne Neuberger, who has been chosen by the president to lead the response in this in to this SolarWinds hack said last week, the response to this incident from both the public and private sector is going to take a long time. All of our witnesses today are involved in some aspect of the private sector response to this incident. I'd also like to hear from them about their experiences working with the Federal Government, namely the Unified Coordination Group in mitigating this compromise. The SolarWinds hack was a sophisticated and multifaceted operation. A software supply chain operation that took advantage of trusted relationships with software providers in order to break into literally thousands of entities.
Combined with the use of this sophisticated, Basically, granting the intruder the keys to the kingdom, allowing them to definitely move across both on premises and cloud based services, all while avoiding detection.
Speaker 2: Hey. So let's talk about the the solar winds incident. Alright? And so I believe everybody in this in this room will be tracking, okay, a, SVR attributed supply chain hack, that occurred in, in 2020. The first really important piece here is FireEye alerted both the government and the private sector of this, of this supply chain hack.
Alright? I cannot emphasize that enough. Okay? A, a private sector organization identified a threat, and they widely shared the information. There are a number of things that we on the Department of Defense, we in the US government side, start to do in order to remediate the threat.
Speaker 5: So from the point of view of CISA, when we got this tip from our partners at FireEye Mandiant I don't remember what their, corporate name was at that point in time. It's changed a lot. When we got this tip from our partners as well as amplifying information as we'll get into from Cyber Command, CNMF, and our partners, at at the NSA, we immediately jumped into action. And using our native visibility at CISA, using tipping from, Mandy and FireEye to the impacted agencies, from partners like Microsoft, we were able to rapidly identify 9 agencies that appeared to have been impacted by the SolarWinds campaign, which, of course, we know broadly was a campaign targeting Microsoft Office 5 identity infrastructure. We kicked off incident responses at many of those victim agencies, in many cases, hand in hand with private sector incident response firms, whether Mandiant, Microsoft Dart, or or many others, and undertook the initial steps to understand the breadth of the intrusions, understand the phases of of the backdoor, and the payload, and derive actionable artifacts that we could use to enable the community's broader response.
As part of this effort, we began to identify, extract, and image the compromised SolarWind Servers, that were used by many of these 9 identified impacted agencies. And as we image those servers, we instantaneously share that information with our partners at CNMF for use in their operations.
Speaker 2: So the ability to gain access to an image of the compromised server, invaluable for us. Alright. So what what do we do with that information? We immediately mock that up in our virtual training environment, and then we start to hone our skills to hunt for similar adversary activity, across a number of our mission elements. We're the Department of Defense.
We're really good at this. It's what we do. Okay? And over time, and when I say time, a number of days, we're able to really develop a high end capability to hunt for this adversary about the same time that, intelligence from the intelligence community, indicated to us that we had a partner, a foreign partner, that had had been compromised by the same actor. Alright?
Image, from DHS is a very deliberate rehearsal exercises, deployment of a team overseas. Alright? Because of the information that was shared from DHS CISA, we knew exactly what we were looking for. Alright? And as we, started to execute our hunt forward operation, we almost immediately saw adversary activity.
The important part here is because of the relationship and because of the preparation, not only were we able to gain access to the adversary, but we were able to do so in a manner, that the adversary didn't know we were there. Alright? And so now, we we see an active intrusion, We're collecting information, and we're immediately sharing that information back with DHS CISA and and other partners. We were eventually able to collect 18 pieces of novel malware. With permission from the partner, we were able to bring that malware back to the United States and and share it very broadly, and for us, just a model mission.
You know, one of the one of the members that deployed on that mission was a young airman. And and when the young airman was executing operations, looking for the the SVR activity, We we saw what we believe was the activity, but as he explained to me, the the SVR had hidden it in in legitimate processes, in the network, in an attempt to obfuscate where they were operating. Similar to the, to the image we rehearsed on, a little bit different hidden, in the the mission partner network that we that we were operating on. But, you know, the young airman looked at me when he got back, and he said, sir, the Russians didn't know that I like to solve puzzles. And, and at the end of the day, we were able to to to figure out what was going on on the network.
With the partner's permission, we were able to bring that, information back, broadly share it, and we were able to help the mission partner overseas, remediate their network, and and so the the SVR no longer had access to their network.
Speaker 5: And now back to the public part. As we continued our incident responses across the 9 impacted federal agencies, we, of course, realized that the broader community needed guidance. The broader community needed some understanding of the breadth of the campaign, the TTPs that the SVR actors were using, and how to make steps towards detection mitigation. And so we work together, with partners across the community to develop our public cybersecurity advisory in April 2021, which I'm sure many of you received at the time and reviewed. But the key linkage here is this advisory benefited not only from what CISA was seeing on victim agencies, benefiting not only what our partners like Mandy and FireEye and Microsoft were seeing from their visibility, but also what our partners at CNMF were gleaning from networks abroad.
And bringing all of this together, we were able to paint a comprehensive high competence tapestry of this campaign, of the TTPs, of the mitigations that we know would be most impactful. After we put on this advisor, we also realize, you know what, some of the victims need more. Some of the victims need to really understand how do they have confidence that this f that this SVR actor set has actually been evicted from the network. And so we work closely with our partners at agencies, including CNMF and NSA, partners in in industry like Mandiant, like Microsoft to develop our eviction guide. That's the first time that CISA has ever put out very clear step by step guidance to say, if you have been affected by this campaign and you want to have a reasonable level of assurance that this adversary is actually out given the unique persistence both of this actor actor and this particular intrusion, here are steps to take.
But we would never have had that degree of fidelity if not, of course, for information from industry, but also information that CNMF was able to yield from their hunt forward mission. So this really brought together our efforts domestically to do incident response, to to collaborate with our partners, and to leverage information that our partners can pull back from overseas to make sure that our community has the best possible information with the highest possible rigor, highest possible confidence to actually detect, respond, recover most effectively.
Speaker 3: Hours later, the gates of the capitol were breached. I had left.
Speaker 0: 2 years later, in remarks Harris made on the 3rd anniversary of January 6th, she said
Speaker 3: They used brutal force and fear to try and overturn the results of a free and fair election.
Speaker 0: But she never mentioned her proximity to the DNC bomb or the danger she was subjected to by virtue of the Secret Service failure to find a bomb so conveniently placed in the open, obviously, to be seen and found. We're still left to believe that the bomb sweep team and bomb dog or dogs never saw or sniffed the device, but a plainclothes Capitol police officer, the one seen casually and slowly notifying secret service and metro police found that device as he was strolling by 13 minutes after the first barricade breach at the Capitol. Why has VP Harris never mentioned her whereabouts at the DNC when the pipe bomb was discovered? Is this so as to not embarrass the Secret Service for their egregious security failure in missing the bomb during their advanced sweep of the DNC? Is it to not embarrass the FBI for their 3 year failure in breaking this case and discovering who planted the bombs?
Or does Harris herself have something to hide about why she was there in the first place?
Speaker 4: Clearly, something was missed. And then further, when you look at the timeline here, she arrived around 11:25 AM that day. The pipe bomb was not discovered until 1:0:6 PM. She was evacuated at 1:14 through an alternate route far away from this pipe bomb, but still, she was inside the DNC for nearly 2 hours before she was evacuated more than 90 minutes before the pipe bomb was even found.
Speaker 0: And why? After over 2 years since we've known Harris was in the DNC headquarters when that pipe bomb was discovered, has she never once been asked questions about that experience in either a press interview or a press conference. What is Harris and a complicit DC media hiding from us? What narrative are they protecting?
Speaker 4: To establish and preserve the narrative of that day.
Speaker 0: Vice president Harris once said about January 6th, It was horrific. Horrific, she said. And each day after, we are learning more and more Indeed, we are madam vice president. Indeed, we are. Indeed, we are madam vice president.
Indeed, we are.
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
The Solarwinds hack was the cover for the theft of the 2020 election. Those involved in the election theft participated in the Solarwinds public hearing including Microsoft, Fireye/CIA, and Crowdstrike/Hillary Clinton/FBI. https://www.c-span.org/video/?509234-1/senate-intelligence-hearing-solarwinds-hacking&live#
@listen_2learn - The Researcher
Senator Mark Warner was no doubt involved in the theft of the 2020 election and J6, just as he was in the Russia collusion hoax.
@ChuckCallesto - Chuck Callesto
FLASHBACK: ⚠️ Kamala Harris claims to have done a demonstration at the Capitol where they brought in folks that “HACKED ELECTION MACHINES” right before our very eyes.. https://t.co/IfazNq5TeN
Video Transcript AI Summary
We demonstrated how easily election machines can be hacked, raising concerns about the limited number of companies controlling voting technology. 43% of American voters use machines with security flaws, and some states lack a paper trail to verify results. The lack of transparency in cybersecurity practices is alarming.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: We recently also I actually held a demonstration for my colleagues here at the Capitol, where we brought in, folks who, before our eyes, hacked election machines, those that are not those that are being used in many states but are not state of the art from our perspective.
Speaker 1: We're very concerned because there's only 3 companies. You could easily hack into them. It makes it seem like all these states are doing different things, but in fact, 3 companies are controlling that.
Speaker 2: 43% of American voters use voting machines that researchers have found have serious security flaws including backdoors. These companies are accountable to no one. They won't answer basic questions about their cybersecurity practices and the biggest companies won't answer any questions at all. 5 states have no paper trail and that means there is no way to prove the numbers the voting machines put out are legitimate. So much for cybersecurity 101.
@WesternLensman - Western Lensman
FLASHBACK to the time when Hollywood openly exhorted Republican electors to overturn the 2016 Presidential election results and Donald Trump’s victory. They called on electors to change their votes, defy the will of the people, and install Hillary Clinton into office instead. https://t.co/9f89MCCiVw
Video Transcript AI Summary
The message urges Republican members of the electoral college to vote their conscience on December 19th to prevent an unfit candidate like Donald Trump from becoming president. They emphasize the importance of selecting a qualified candidate who is especially competent to serve as president. By doing so, they can give the House of Representatives the option to choose a better candidate. The message expresses support and solidarity with all citizens of the United States and calls on the electors to make history by standing up for the American people.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Republican members of the electoral college, this message is for you. As you know, our founding fathers built the electoral college to safeguard the American people from the dangers of a demagogue and to ensure that the presidency only goes to someone who is to an eminent degree endowed with the requisite qualifications.
Speaker 1: An eminent degree. Someone who is highly qualified for the job.
Speaker 2: The electoral college was created specifically to prevent an unfit candidate from becoming president. There are 538 members of the electoral college. You And just 36 other conscientious Republican electors can make a difference
Speaker 3: by voting your conscience on December 19th.
Speaker 2: And thereby shaping the future of our nation.
Speaker 3: I'm not asking you to vote for Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 2: I'm not asking you to vote for Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 0: I'm not asking you to vote for Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 4: As you know, the constitution gives electors the right to vote for any eligible person.
Speaker 0: Any eligible person, no matter which party they belong to.
Speaker 1: But it should certainly be someone you consider especially competent
Speaker 2: Especially competent to serve as president of the United States of America.
Speaker 5: By voting your conscience, you and other brave Republican electors can give the House of Representatives the option to select a qualified candidate for the presidency.
Speaker 2: I stand with you.
Speaker 0: I stand with you. I stand with you.
Speaker 2: I stand with you in support and solidarity with conservatives, independents, and liberals.
Speaker 1: And all citizens of the United States.
Speaker 0: The American people trust that your voice speaks for us all.
Speaker 3: And that you you will make yourself heard through the constitutional responsibility granted to you by Alexander Hamilton himself.
Speaker 4: What is evident is that Donald Trump lacks more than the qualifications to be president.
Speaker 1: He lacks the necessary stability.
Speaker 2: And clearly the respect for the constitution of our great nation. You have position
Speaker 3: The authority and the opportunity
Speaker 0: to go down in the books as an American hero
Speaker 5: who changed the course of history.
Speaker 4: And you have my respect You have my respect You have my respect
Speaker 0: For your patriotism. And service to the American people. Unite for America.
@myhiddenvalue - Not A Number
IT expert, after gaining access to a forensic image of the Dominion Rigging Management System in Mesa County Colorado, demonstrates how your government was overthrown on Nov 3, 2020, https://t.co/zTCWXoLR0z
Video Transcript AI Summary
In Mesa County, Colorado, IT experts demonstrate how easy it is to switch thousands of votes from Trump to Biden using a backdoor utility in the Dominion election management system. The tool allows them to change the results without leaving a trace. In Pennsylvania, live TV footage shows nearly 20,000 votes being switched from Trump to Biden, resulting in Trump losing almost 40,000 votes. The manipulation occurs within minutes, highlighting vulnerabilities in the voting system.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Being awarded to Biden and Jorgensen's totals being awarded to Trump. After gaining access to a forensic image of the Dominion election management system in Mesa County, Colorado, IT experts demonstrate how easy it is to switch tens of thousands of votes from Trump to Biden in seconds by simply changing the index number next to each candidate's name.
Speaker 1: This is a a backdoor utility called SQL Server Management Studio that is actually installed on the image of the voting system.
Speaker 0: So is it certified?
Speaker 1: It is not on the list of certified software. What I'm gonna do first, I'm just gonna pull up the presidential results in Mesa County for that election. And here they are. You can see Biden has 31, 000, Trump has 56, 000. So I'm gonna come up here now, and I'm going to make a quick change.
Change that. You change that to a 2? Yep. I'm changing Trump to a 1. K.
And then I'm going to come up here, and I'm gonna rerun it. Report. And there you go. Biden, 56, 000. Trump, 31, 000.
So I just flipped the results of the election using a tool that's actually built in to the voting system. And what I did is not even logged. There's no trace of what I just did now. For some reason, the logging of activities by a user that has the password are not retained.
Speaker 0: In Pennsylvania on live TV, Trump had 1, 690, 000 589 votes, while Biden had 1, 252, 537 votes. The time was approximately 1108 Eastern Standard Time. The next interval report shows Trump's votes decreasing to 1, 670, 631, and Biden's votes increasing to 1, 272, 495. The time is approximately 11:0:9 PM. Live on CNN, exactly 19, 958 votes were switched from Trump to Biden.
This means Trump lost 30 9, 916 votes.
@AndrewPatriot_ - ⭐Andrew⭐45 #MAGAdonian 🗽
Fraud in plain sight! And Democrats said there was no election fraud... https://t.co/mSyIESfgUh
@iluminatibot - illuminatibot
Proof elections are rigged https://t.co/y7oyxJGdK0
Video Transcript AI Summary
Clinton Eugene Curtis, a computer programmer, testified that in October 2000, he wrote a prototype program for then-Florida Speaker of the House Tom Feeney that could rig an election by flipping the vote 51/49. According to Curtis, this program would be undetectable to election officials, only visible in the source code or by comparing paper receipts to vote totals.
Curtis stated that while a protective program could not prevent such rigging, programmers could examine source code for irregularities. He testified that he did not know if Ohio elections had protective measures. Based on statistical anomalies between exit polling data and tabulated results, Curtis believes the Ohio presidential election was likely hacked.
Curtis said he was asked to hide the fraud in the source code to control the vote in South Florida. He handed in a report and program to Missus Yang, who said they needed to hide the fraud. Curtis stated that if exit polls are significantly different from the vote, then someone is manipulating the vote. He added that timers could also be set to manipulate the vote.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Mister Curtis, would you please state your full name for the record?
Speaker 1: Name is Clinton Eugene Curtis.
Speaker 0: And where do you reside?
Speaker 1: LSC, Florida.
Speaker 0: And what is your profession?
Speaker 1: I'm a computer programmer.
Speaker 0: Would you please speak into the microphone so the audience can hear your testimony? I'm a computer programmer. Mister Curtis, are there programs that can be used to secretly fix elections?
Speaker 1: Yes. How do you
Speaker 0: know that to be the case?
Speaker 1: Because in October of 2000, I wrote a prototype for president's congressman Tom Feeney at the company I work for in Oviedo, Florida that did just that.
Speaker 0: And we say did just that it would rig an election.
Speaker 1: It would flip the vote 5149 to whoever you wanted to go to and whichever race you wanted to win
Speaker 0: and with that program that you designed to be something that elections officials that might be on county boards of elections could detect?
Speaker 1: They never see it.
Speaker 0: Mister, would you answer that question once again?
Speaker 1: They would never see it.
Speaker 0: So how would such a such a program, a secret program that, fixes the election, how could it be detected?
Speaker 1: You would have to view it either in source code or you have to have a receipt and then count the hard paper against the actual photo. Other than that, you won't see it.
Speaker 0: Alright, mister Curtis. If you had been asked you or others with your professional expertise have been asked to design a protective program to that would protect the Ohio elections from against against that software to fix the election, could you have done so?
Speaker 1: If we've been asked to make a program that could fix the election, sure. Anybody can do it.
Speaker 0: No. Could could you have designed a program or a procedure or protocol that would have protected Ohio against this kind of rigging?
Speaker 1: No. You have to look at the source code. You have to get probably programmers from both or all parties to look at the source code and determine if there's anything in there that shouldn't be there. I mean, it's a simple program. You're adding 1 to a person's total.
It's a 100 lines of code tops. Alright. If
Speaker 0: So let's see. Are you aware of whether there was any protective action in Ohio against this kind of vote ring through software?
Speaker 1: I don't know. You don't know? I don't know.
Speaker 0: You were you were not asked to assist in the development of any protective system. Is that correct?
Speaker 1: No. I was not.
Speaker 0: In Europe, have you, reviewed at all the election results in Ohio?
Speaker 1: No. I haven't. Okay.
Speaker 0: Given the availability of such boat rigging software and the testimony that has been given under oath of substantial statistical anomalies, it grows this differences between exit polling data and the actual tabulated results, do you have an opinion whether or not Ohio election the Ohio election, presidential election was hacked?
Speaker 1: Yes. I would say it was. I mean, if you're if you have exit pulling data that is significantly off for the vote, then it's probably hacked.
Speaker 0: And your testimony is under oath?
Speaker 1: Yes, sir.
Speaker 0: And the testimony you've given is true?
Speaker 1: Yes, sir.
Speaker 0: Thank you.
Speaker 2: I was told that I'm gonna have the same question back to the podium. Who did you say you were asked to prepare?
Speaker 1: I was asked by Tom Feeney. He's now a congressman. At that time, He was speaker of the House of Florida. Yang Enterprises, which is the company I work for, lobbyist, and their corporate attorneys. We wore a lot of hats.
Speaker 2: And at the time, he was the speaker of the House of Florida. Is that what you said? Yes.
Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you.
Speaker 2: Congressman. You say he was the the lobbyist for the voting machine company as at the same time you're the speaker of the house?
Speaker 1: I don't know what the voting machine company is. He was a lobbyist for Yang Enterprises. We had NASA contracts and And
Speaker 2: Yang Enterprises did what? Computers? Computers. Okay. And he was your lobbyist.
Speaker 1: Your company. The lobbyist for that company. Yes.
Speaker 2: And he asked you to design a to seek to design a code to Reagan Watson? Yes. While he was speaker of the Ford House?
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 2: This is during or previous to the 2,000 election?
Speaker 1: Yes. October, end of September.
Speaker 2: And did he ever express why he wanted to go to Reagan election?
Speaker 1: No. I immediately assumed that they were trying to keep you guys from cheating them. So so I wrote up the documentation of what you would look for in the source code, how you would make sure that you didn't get you know, take advantage of, make sure that all voting machines had receipts because that way you could back count the ones that looked a little funny. And I handed it over Are receipts you mean a paper trail? Yes.
Paper trail. And I handed that in to missus Yang and said,
Speaker 0: here's your report, here's your program.
Speaker 1: And she said, you don't understand. We need to hide the fraud in the source in the source code.
Speaker 2: Hide the fraud, not reveal it.
Speaker 1: Not reveal the fraud because we needed to to control the boat in South Florida was what she said.
Speaker 2: Oh, absolutely. To your knowledge, was this used? I have
Speaker 1: no idea. I was ready to leave.
Speaker 2: Your testimony a moment ago, I think you said just before you left and answered the congressman and Tucker Jones' question, would you just repeat what you said in terms of the the, exit polls?
Speaker 1: Oh, the exit polls should not be significantly different than the vote.
Speaker 2: And if they were, you would conclude what?
Speaker 1: I would conclude someone's playing with the boat
Speaker 2: now with the exit polls.
Speaker 1: That's possible too. Okay. It is something is definitely skewed something
Speaker 2: is skewed in one of the other right
Speaker 1: to select which one you have to see where the problem is.
Speaker 2: Let me ask you one further question. Assuming for the moment that such software, that's what you call it, such software to rig a boat was used I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think,
Speaker 1: I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, I think, happen. You can also set timers to do that, but then you see the timers. Then you'd have to take those machines, decompile them, which I couldn't do, but possibly a Microsoft and MIT something to do. You might you might be able to see it. You might not depends on how good they are destroying what they had.
reSee.it AI Summary
I shared a thread highlighting the top 8 moments that expose the woke left, starting with typical CNN coverage. I mentioned KJP and questioned the implications of certain actions. I encouraged following @CNviolations for more humorous memes and @ResisttheMS for quick, alternative news updates. The list included original election deniers and copycats, with a nod to CNN again. I noted that one example was particularly insane, leaving the eighth point open for interpretation.
@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s
😬 Top 8 Defiant L's Exposing The Woke Left A thread 🧵 1. Typical CNN https://t.co/KXtRrO67qR
@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s
If you want to see more memes exposing the woke left and brutal community notes follow @CNviolations He always makes me laugh. https://t.co/yG2C3WBSLs
@DefiantLs - Defiant L’s
Another great follow is @ResisttheMS They keep me up to date with their quick reporting and they post stories you won't see on the mainstream media. https://t.co/zeDQBfJkn4
