reSee.it - Related Video Feed

County technical employees reported independently that the vote counts recorded by machines and stored on USB drives changed overnight after polls closed. Votes seemed to appear and disappear during this time. When we sought to verify the integrity of these voting machines, we were only permitted a superficial visual inspection of the USB drives and denied a forensic examination.

Every election should be as accurate as a bank account, with no room for error. It's puzzling why we accept a 1% error rate in elections, especially when the margin of victory was only 0.506%. We can track the handling of every ballot and the exact time it entered the system. There are concerns about the selection of hand-audited ballots, as the majority of them favored Biden. Out of 1675 boxes, only 52 were properly sealed and protected. Some batches of ballots lack processing dates and their origin is unclear. Interestingly, these batches match the ones chosen for hand auditing. Despite claims of a backlog, half of the extra counting days had no ballots counted, and the counted batches were smaller than usual. It's also questionable how the election was called and certified with incomplete processes. A full forensic audit would provide answers.

We need the counts to move forward with the audit. Despite concerns about a specific precinct, the focus should be on completing the audit and getting the number of ballots. The process is to finish the presidential race audit without separating the ballots and then proceed from there. The former state representative's issues with county ballots can be addressed later. Completing the audit is the priority right now.

Clark County Technical employees independently found votes appearing and disappearing at night. They were only allowed a visual inspection of a USB drive, not a forensic examination.

During the Arizona audit, Maricopa County made it clear that signature verification was off-limits. However, it's easy to understand why they didn't want us to examine the signatures because, in reality, they don't match.

The machines used in the election are tested by Maricopa County and the Secretary of State's office to ensure there is no tampering. If the machines fail these tests, they cannot be used.

Is it standard practice to delete files off a server after an election? I hope not. So, you admit Maricopa County deleted files after the election? Those files were archived. The auditors initially didn’t have access to those archived files, correct? They did not subpoena those, that's right. You didn’t feel obligated to turn them over? We responded to the subpoena. It’s laughable to suggest a county could delete files in response to a subpoena. Your Twitter mentions purging the 2020 election database in February as standard practice. Can you confirm that’s done for all elections? I cannot confirm that today, but we’ll get you an answer. Why was data from prior elections still present? I don’t have an answer now, but we will provide one. The recorder will answer questions in a timely fashion, but he previously criticized Adrian Fontes, who ran the 2020 election. Yes, we had oversight from both parties during the election.

In the exchange, concerns are raised about mail-in ballots in Allegheny and Philadelphia counties and how they were counted. Speaker 0 notes that ballots were counted without observers, citing 682,770 ballots observed and asking about the 1,823,148 mailed-out ballots, contrasted with a final count showing 2,589,242 mail-in ballots. The core question is: what explains the roughly 700,000 mail-in ballots that “appeared from nowhere”? Speaker 1 responds that their cyber team uses white-hat hacking techniques to gather publicly available information from the secretary of state’s website, which has been updated as late as 11:16 this morning with provisional and mail-in ballots, though those numbers continue to change. He adds that the 2,500,000 figure is no longer on the website, and it has “just been taken off.” There is no annotation explaining why. Speaker 2 then describes an on-the-ground observation: a deputy sheriff, a senior law enforcement officer, was seen not being observed and walking in with baggies, with USBs being inserted into machines. The witness claims to have personally witnessed this 24 times, with additional witnesses including Democrat poll watchers. They were told by an attorney that every election leaves a couple of USB cards in the voting machines to be brought back by the warehouse manager, but this account is contradicted by law enforcement and other officials. The witness states that 47 USB cards are missing and “they’re nowhere to be found,” and that 32 to 30 cards uploaded were not present in the live vote update. The witness demanded timely live upload of vote results, which showed 50,000 votes; they assert those votes were for Vice President Biden, though they note that identifying who those votes were for should not matter to a computer scientist. Speaker 1 emphasizes that forensic evidence from the computers was not obtained: the procedure would involve turning off the computer, imaging the drive with BitLocker, under law enforcement observation, which would take about an hour for five machines. This forensic imaging was never performed, despite objections three weeks earlier. They later learned that virtually all chain-of-custody logs, yellow sheets, and forensic records in Delaware County were gone; a signing party attempted to recreate the logs with poll workers but was unsuccessful in recovering them all. The discussion concludes with a claim that there are 100,000 to 120,000 ballots, both mail-in and USB, in question, and that there is no remedy or “cure” within the local charter for certifying a presidential vote, leaving the speaker asserting that nobody could certify the vote in good conscience.

The discussion centers on completing an audit of ballots to obtain a count and address concerns about the precinct. The participants emphasize that without counts, they cannot move forward. They insist that the audit piece must be completed first, not an investigation, so that a number of ballots can be established and the overall tally can proceed. Key points raised: - The need to finish the audit to determine how many ballots are in the ballot can, and to move forward with the numbers. “We need to move forward with the audit so we can get the numbers, so we can see how many ballots are here.” - A concern has been raised about the precinct, including the issue of multiple ballots with the very same signature. The team discusses handling this by counting the ballots and later addressing the concern, rather than delaying the process. “we will separate out and count those and add those in. We're there going to be an asterisk saying these ballots have the same.” - There is tension between continuing the presidential race audit and addressing potential irregularities. The instruction given is to complete the audit portion first and then review any issues. “the process right now is for you to put them in the piles where they belong and for the presidential vote and count the presidential votes… finish the presidential race audit, not separate them out, and then we'll move forward from there.” - The officials acknowledge the underlying concern about the precinct and previous issues with county ballots, but reiterate that, at this moment, the priority is to obtain a count and finish the audit. “We understand that there may be possibly an issue with this precinct. We understand that. But what I need for you to do right now is to finish the audit process.” - They clarify that the current activity is not an investigation, and that the aim is to produce a number for how many ballots were in the can when counting began, enabling progress based on the audit results. “This is not an investigation right now… not an investigation, not counting… what I need you to do is complete the audit so we can get a number.” In sum, the participants are focused on completing the ballot-count audit to establish a definitive tally, while acknowledging concerns about signatures and precinct irregularities, and planning to address those concerns after the audit yields a numeric result for the presidential ballots. The priority repeatedly stated is to finish the audit to obtain a count, then proceed with any further review.

I pleaded with multiple law enforcement agencies to collect forensic evidence from the computers to either prove or refute my claims. They could have easily done this by turning off the computers, using a device called a bit blocker to take a forensic image of the hard drive, and reassembling everything. However, this was never done, and all chain of custody logs and forensic evidence in Delaware County have mysteriously disappeared. This leaves around 100,000 to 120,000 mail-in and USB ballots in question, with no solution or remedy. I believe that certifying this vote would be unjustifiable.

The Maricopa County elections team allegedly admitted they lack admin access to their voting machines, raising questions about Dominion's control. It is uncertain if ceding this access to Dominion is legal, as there may be no specific statute addressing it. However, it is implied that counties should have full access to their election systems. Dominion's admin access potentially allows them to delete or alter logs, which is a concern. The senate subpoenaed related items, seeking further clarification.

Is it standard practice to delete files off a server after an election? I hope not. So, you admit Maricopa County deleted files after the election? Those files were archived. Initially, auditors didn’t have access to those archived files, correct? They did not subpoena those, that’s correct. It’s laughable to suggest that a county can delete files in response to a subpoena while claiming they are archived. Your Twitter mentions purging the 2020 election database in February; is that standard for all elections? I can’t confirm that today, but we’ll get you an answer. Why was data from prior elections still present? I don’t have an answer now, but we’ll provide one. The recorder will answer questions timely. You hired someone to oversee the 2020 election due to concerns about Adrian Fontes, correct? We took back responsibility for election operations to ensure oversight.

On November 12, 2020, the 1st vice chair of Maricopa County Republican Committee took over the chairman's duties. They were informed about the certification of Dominion Voting Systems, which was initially scheduled for November 23rd but later moved to November 18th. During the certification process, there were 11 issues that arose. The speaker arrived at the Maricopa County Tabulations and Election Center for the inspection, which took around 8 hours to complete. The Dominion software and machines were set up in the tabulation room, and there were regular and high-speed machines, a mainframe computer, and a technician's workstation. However, problems occurred during the certification process conducted by the secretary of state's elections office.

Maricopa County has been resistant to discussing signature verification during the Arizona audit because the signatures don't match.

In the 2020 election, Maricopa County reported 923,000 drop box ballots, but only 189,167 have documentation. This leaves 733,000 ballots unaccounted for. The election was not secure as claimed, with many process issues and non-compliance with laws. Evidence has been given to the attorney general, with all Democrats voting against in committee.

- The discussion centers on ballot processing in Maricopa County, with several shipments arriving after the initial belief that counting was near completion. Speaker 0 notes that the Wednesday before the Friday they quit voting, and ten days before they quit tabulating, more truckloads of ballots came in, leading to the question: “how can you not know how many ballots are still out there?” - Speaker 1 asks for clarification: “They thought they were done.” The conversation confirms multiple times that those running the counting rooms believed they were almost done, or would be done, on Wednesday morning, then Thursday morning, then Friday morning, and the process extended into the next week. - Trucks bringing ballots arrived on the third, fourth, and fifth days, continuing throughout the last week. The last day mentioned is the tenth, with ballots still arriving. The company involved is Runback, described as doing high-speed scanning and printing of duplications and military ballots. There was no observer presence at Runback, and Speaker 0 indicates she had not been called to work there; she does not know exactly what Runback was doing (printing vs. scanning). - It is stated that all high-speed scanning occurs at Runback, and the ballots go to Runback. There is uncertainty about off-site scanning and whether Dominion equipment was involved. Speaker 0 clarifies: “They were duplications, the ballots that wouldn’t read through the tabulation machines. They were ballots that came in from military and overseas.” The number of additional sources for ballots beyond military/overseas is unknown, and Speaker 0 suggests this is a question for county employees to explain. - About the counting process: Speaker 0 confirms that the ballots went through tabulation machines and that adjudication work took place for those late arrivals. They observed the ballots being processed, but did not know the exact totals for certain days. - Daily volumes are described. Speaker 0 estimates: one day a shift might handle 90,000 ballots, and some days had similar volumes across three shifts; other days had fewer. There were days when as few as 15,000 ballots were processed. The “back door” arrivals are contrasted with the front door, with Speaker 0 noting that all back door ballots were received through back entries, not the front door. The remaining ballots in the latter part of the period continued to come in and be tabulated, with ongoing full-time shifts through the eighth, ninth, and tenth days. - The episode concludes with Speaker 1 seeking further explanation, and Speaker 0 indicating that some of the details were not fully known and that a county employee should clarify where the incoming ballots came from during the latter part of the period.

Forensic copy bit for bit of everything that was on the Mesa County computer. Just to clarify, there were two forensic images taken of the Mesa County Election server. One, before the software update. Another image taken after. Everything that had been on that drive before this update was gone. Looks like a cover up. Low risk of being caught. Low consequence if they are caught. The reason we know it was deliberate is because of Tina Peters. Are those files important to elections? Critical. The federal voting system standards are very clear that the election records that are required to audit a voting system include the digital records that are all the log files generated by that voting system, especially when it's a complex computer system.

County technical employees reported independently that the vote counts recorded by machines and stored on USB drives changed between the closing of polls and their reopening the next morning. Votes appeared and disappeared overnight. Attempts to verify the integrity of these voting machines were limited to a superficial visual inspection of the USB drives, and a forensic examination was denied.

The Windows security logs were purged right before two audits were scheduled to begin. This makes it difficult to determine who had access to the RTR admin account, which is shared among all accounts. It is unclear why someone would delete all the records and files from the Dominion software, which is used for tallying and reporting election results, the day before an audit started.

Mr. Bennett questions if it's standard practice to delete files off a server after an election. Mr. Gates says they maintained files but deleted the ones that were archived. It is revealed that Maricopa County deleted files off the server after the election, which the auditors didn't have access to initially. The auditors didn't subpoena those files, and Maricopa County claims they responded to the subpoena. Mr. Bennett finds it laughable that the county would delete files in response to a subpoena, as the subpoena requested all records related to the election. The county interpreted the subpoena differently.

Arcoa County elections officials revealed they lack administrative access to their voting machines, which raises concerns about Dominion having complete control. The absence of passwords for administrative functions means Dominion could potentially alter or delete logs, prompting worries about election integrity. There's uncertainty regarding the legality of this arrangement, as no specific state statute addresses it, yet counties are expected to have full access to their systems. The Senate has issued subpoenas for related information, which have not yet been fulfilled, indicating a growing concern over the situation.

I called for a signature audit, but the Secretary of State has not ordered it yet. I believe it should be done, especially considering what we witnessed today. Transparency is crucial, and I urge for it. Hopefully, in the next 24 hours, we will learn more from the legislative hearings and determine the next course of action. The ongoing recount in the state allows for a thorough examination of these matters.

I'm calling out the recent news story as a setup for a time hack. In Maricopa County during the 2020 election, they had 10 tally machines counting over 140,000 ballots daily. Yet, on election day, they claimed they needed 10 extra days to count, processing only 89,000 ballots the day after and then dropping to just a few thousand. A month later, they counted 140,000 ballots again. This indicates they are creating excuses and using various hacks to interfere with the election. It's crucial to maintain chain of custody for forensic audits, which is costly but necessary to prevent disqualification of evidence. We learned from 2020, and it's vital to preserve this information for future legal actions. Barcodes are scanned using a laser that checks columns for light reflection, translating them into binary code for computers.

In the upcoming election, 100% of votes in Georgia will be recorded on security paper with the state seal. President Trump implied that delayed vote tabulation indicates potential wrongdoing, citing a lack of paper ballots as a problem and claiming results could take 7 days. However, over 96% of voting nationwide will be on paper ballots. In Georgia, a new law (SB 189) mandates that results for all early votes and early accepted ballots, potentially 70-75% of the total, be reported by 8 PM on election night. The remaining delay involves overseas ballots, with final numbers expected by Friday. Georgia aims to ensure fast, accurate, and secure elections.

Maricopa County officials are refusing to provide routers or router images to election auditors, defying a judge's orders. Initially, they claimed to have replaced the equipment and would provide it to the Senate, but later suggested virtual access instead. After weeks of delays, they now express concerns about potential risks to other agencies if they share the information. Additionally, it was noted that Hannah Klein, daughter of Biden's chief of staff, signed a document to the DOJ on behalf of the Brennan Center for Justice. There are questions about the Biden administration's involvement in this situation, but there is no comment on whether President Biden is hiding anything.