TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

In this video, the speaker talks about a voting system that had 36 million votes in one day. They emphasize the use of strong voter ID and identification, along with special paper ballots that have watermarks, making them difficult to forge. The speaker mentions that there were no disputes, and the winner was happy while the loser was unhappy. They highlight the benefits of same-day voting, paper ballots, and voter ID, stating that it saves a lot of money.

The speaker discusses the issue of inspecting ballots for signatures. They mention that the Voter Privacy Act prohibits inspectors from looking through a ballot to verify a signature. They also point out that many ballots have two different patterns of the letter "s" written for the signature, even though some of them don't even have an "s" in the voter's name. They state that out of the 104,820 ballots reviewed, 20,232 had mismatched signatures, which accounts for 20% of the total.

You're able to register even if and cast a vote if you don't live in the in the country as evident of his brother in Pakistan. I think we have some evidence of two or three other people out of the country that voted. Is that correct? Yeah. Approximately two or three other people out of the country as well as people residing outside the district. Okay. The online voter registration system, it seems to be an honor system. Anybody can put information in there to to register a vote. All you have to do is click a box and say that you're not lying, and then you'll get an email from the secretary of state or something in the mail saying thank you for registering to vote, and there you are. Once you're on the voter rolls, anytime an election comes around, guess what? You get mailed a ballot. Right? You get mailed something to vote. So we found that a little bit problem

In California and New York, showing ID when voting is not allowed, even if you want to. The question is, why would that ever be a good idea? Well, if you're trying to facilitate fraud in elections, it's a great idea. There's logically no other reason why that would be a good idea. It's for fraud. Wake up, people. If you wanted to commit fraud, the first things you would do is say that you don't need an ID and that you can mail in your ballot.

Speaker 0 cautions that what you’re doing is extremely dangerous. Speaker 1 asks why it’s dangerous and replies that it’s not a conspiracy theory, and questions whether the person has $45. Speaker 1 emphasizes they are not saying people are voting there, but that people are currently registered to vote there. They state they went around Fulton County in the last few weeks and found that people are currently registered to vote in places like empty lots and homeless shelters that closed ten years ago. Speaker 1 asks what would you do if you become secretary of state to address that. Speaker 0 responds by saying they will reply to conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 reiterates that it’s not a conspiracy theory, and argues that there is a current act of voter rolls: “It’s a current you can currently go on the voter rolls, purchase them for $45, and go there with us.” They offer to take the other person to verify claims. Speaker 0 pushes back, saying they won’t respond to conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 asks how it’s a conspiracy theory, labeling it an act of voter rolls. Speaker 0 says, “If you're gonna be running for secretary of state, you're … in charge of maintaining the voter rolls. Don't you care about if people are registered to vote from empty lots?” Speaker 1 continues questioning, asking if it’s a conspiracy theory that people are registered to vote from empty lots and mentions they have the ability to go wherever they want. They reiterate that people are currently registered to vote in empty lots, MARTA bus stations, and elsewhere in Fulton County, and asks if the other person will not do anything about that, calling back the accusation of conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 asks for the exact addresses and notes: “205 Elm Street Northwest. That’s an empty lot. You can go there right now and see it for yourself.” They press: do you not care about that? You’re an elected official, and you don’t wanna address that? They argue that as a potential secretary of state, one should address maintaining clean voter rolls in one of the United States’ most important counties. Speaker 0 repeats that what you’re doing is extremely dangerous. Speaker 1 insists it’s not a conspiracy theory and repeats that people are currently registered to vote there, highlighting the $45 purchase of voter rolls and the need to clean the rolls, including registrations from empty lots and a MARTA station. The exchange ends with Speaker 1 noting that they are trying to have the rolls cleaned, and pointing to the claim of conspiracy theory, and suggesting to actually verify the situation.

Our current voting systems are complicated and messy. Votes are not reconciled and verified at the precinct level in many states. Instead, they are sent to third party entities or counted at centralized locations without public oversight. Mail-in ballots are not secure and can lead to fraud. We need to return to hand counting at the precinct level to ensure accurate accounting and transparency. This system worked for years before 2000 and is still used in France because it is secure. Our current system invites fraud and distrust, so we must act now to restore faith in our elections. Demand hand counting at the precinct level to stop fraud and build back trust in our elections.

The speaker highlights the insecurity of the system, mentioning that over 600,000 mail-in ballots have been counted, including some sent to dead people and those who moved out of the state. They claim that 200,000 votes were verified by a machine with a reduced signature verification standard. The speaker also mentions that the machine requires a 200 DPI setting to match signatures, but the photos in the Nevada system fall below this standard. They express concern that 400,000+ votes have not been looked at and emphasize the lack of scrutiny in the mail-in system. Specific allegations include dead voters and over 3,000 people who moved out of Las Vegas but still voted. The speaker acknowledges the difficulty in verifying these claims.

They go to the New York City Board of Elections office at 200 Varick Street, 10th Floor, in New York, NY, planning to pose as a non-citizen, Canadian green card holder to see how far they can get in the voter registration process. They note that a clerk initially says you must be a citizen to fill out the registration, but another clerk claims they “accept anything that comes over the counter” and that there are people who have legal situations and registered when they weren’t a citizen. The first clerk’s behavior raises concern: he does not tell them it would be illegal to complete the application as a noncitizen, only that he wouldn’t recommend it. The participants press for clarity. The first clerk admits that “we can’t stop you from submitting the application and if it goes through, but most likely because they don’t do like a full background check,” and adds that “once in a while, you know, we have people who come in here and they have legal situations and they registered, they weren’t a citizen, boom, boom, boom.” The participants quote that as a direct admission that non-citizens are in fact registering to vote. One participant asks if they can fill out the form, and the clerk responds: “Up to you. That’s right. I can’t tell you what to do. You wanna fill that, fill it out. But everything is clear clearly stated, especially at this bottom, it says American citizens.” The participant asks if the clerk would report them; the clerk says “No. No. No. I’m not, no. I’m not that’s not my job to report anyone. My job is just to collect the application and put it and submit it to the department.” The clerk adds that they “accept anything that comes over the counter, you know.” Under New York election law, section 17-106, it is stated that “any election officer who willfully violates any provision of the election law relative to the registration of electors is guilty of a felony.” The participants note it would be a criminal offense for the worker to process their voter registration after admitting to being a noncitizen. They ask if they can take materials with them and the clerk confirms they can “take one of these.” The participants are told that they can fill out the form, and if it comes back or doesn’t, they will submit it; the clerk reiterates that they “can’t do our background check on you. We just collect it.” On leaving, they decide not to submit any application, since doing so would be illegal. They later return to gather more information, but the worker becomes suspicious, consults a coworker, and then changes his stance and refuses to accept the application. They observe that at these centers, there is no requirement to show ID, Social Security, or any proof of identification; all you have to do is sign an affidavit stating you are an American citizen. They describe this as a potential threat to the integrity of the U.S. electoral system. They conclude with the implication that non-citizen registrations have occurred and question how many such forms have been processed.

The speaker believes some amount of cheating takes place in elections, particularly with mail-in ballots and lack of proof of citizenship, making it hard to prove. Statistically unlikely events occurred, such as the use of Dominion Voting Machines in specific locations like Philadelphia and Maricopa County. The speaker advocates for paper ballots, hand-counted, citing the ease of hacking computer programs. They also support in-person voting with voter ID, which they claim is standard in almost every country with democratic elections. To effectively address fraud, the speaker suggests in-person voting with ID. Given the current situation, they believe a very large margin of victory is needed to overcome potential cheating.

The video documents an undercover-style investigation at the New York City Board of Elections on the 10th Floor at 200 Varick Street, focusing on whether noncitizens can register to vote. Speaker 0 plans to pose as a noncitizen Canadian green-card holder and attempts to engage a staffer about voter registration. In the first encounter, Speaker 2 tells Speaker 1 that “Everything you fill out, you’re swearing an affidavit that everything you’re putting down is true,” and notes that “you gotta be a citizen to fill it out.” Speaker 1 identifies as “a green card holder from Canada.” The staffer initially signals uncertainty about whether to fill out the form, saying, “I wouldn’t fill it out,” but also suggests the possibility that noncitizens have previously registered. Speaker 0 observes that the staffer does not state it would be illegal to complete the application as a noncitizen, only that the staffer “doesn’t recommend it.” The conversation reveals that the staffer acknowledges noncitizens have registered before: “We have people who come in here and they have legal situations and they registered, they weren’t a citizen, boom boom boom.” The staffer also admits that they “can’t stop you from submitting the application,” and that there is generally no full background check; “we can’t do our background check on you. We just collect it. That’s it.” Speaker 2 reinforces that the staff’s role is to collect and submit, not to verify citizenship, stating, “we accept anything that comes over the counter,” and reiterating that “if it comes back to you, it comes back to… If it doesn’t, it doesn’t.” When Speaker 1 asks if they will report the noncitizen, the staffer responds, “No. No. No. I’m not… that’s not my job to report anyone. My job is just to collect the application and put it and submit it to the department.” Speaker 0 cites New York election law—“Under New York election law, section seventeen one zero six, any election officer who willfully violates any provision of the election law relative to the registration of electors is guilty of a felony”—to argue that processing a noncitizen registration would be a criminal offense. After leaving the office, the pair return to request more information, but the staffer becomes suspicious, consults a coworker, and then refuses to accept their application. The video notes that, according to the staff, “we get registrations come to the mail. We, you know, we whatever comes through, we accept and then it’s submitted,” and emphasizes the absence of ID or proof of citizenship requirements at registration, solely requiring an affidavit asserting citizenship. The segment concludes by highlighting concerns about potential threats to electoral integrity, asserting that there is no requirement to show ID or documentation to register, and that all that is required is signing an affidavit claiming American citizenship.

We need to stop mail-in applications and ballots because we don't have the means to control them in the United States. Additionally, drop boxes are causing problems and should be eliminated. Some states will still have drop boxes funded by Zuckerberg for the midterms, while others won't. Georgia, for example, will keep drop boxes but move them inside buildings.

42,000 people in Nevada voted more than once, 1,500 were deceased, 19,000 didn't live in Nevada or attend college, 8,000 voted from non-existent addresses, 15,000 were registered at vacant addresses, and 4,000 were noncitizens. The speaker questions if any prosecutions are happening in Nevada for the 130,000 instances of voter fraud identified in the 2020 election. No prosecutions have been reported yet.

42,000 people in Nevada voted more than once, 1,500 were deceased, 19,000 didn't live in Nevada or attend college, 8,000 voted from a non-existent address, 15,000 were registered to vacant addresses, and 4,000 were noncitizens. The speaker asks if there are any ongoing prosecutions for voter fraud in Nevada, given the 130,000 instances identified in the 2020 election. The response is that there are currently no prosecutions.

The speaker describes a situation in which registration and voting can occur even when a person does not live in the country, citing an example involving a brother in Pakistan to illustrate the point. According to the speaker, there is evidence of two or three other people who are outside the country voting, as well as people residing outside of the district. This is presented as a factual observation about who has voted, including individuals located abroad and not within the local district boundaries. The speaker then critiques the online voter registration system by characterizing it as an honor system. The claim is that anybody can enter information into the online system to register and vote, relying on the promise of truthfulness. The process alleged by the speaker is described as follows: a person would place information into the system and then simply click a box stating that they are not lying about the information provided. After doing so, the person would receive an email from the secretary of state or a similar official channel in the mail, indicating acknowledgment or thanks for registering to vote, effectively confirming their registration. Following this registration, the speaker notes a procedural consequence: once an individual is on the voter rolls, they are mailed a ballot for each election. In other words, the pattern described is that being on the voter rolls automatically leads to receiving a mailed ballot for every election that occurs, according to the speaker’s account of how the system operates. The speaker emphasizes a continuity of this process across elections, implying that the mailed ballot would be a recurring consequence of enrollment on the voter rolls. Throughout the account, there is an emphasis on what the speaker views as the potential vulnerability or problematic nature of the system. The speaker asserts that the combination of an online registration process that relies on an honor system, the possibility of registering with false or unverified information, and the automatic mailing of ballots to those on the rolls creates a situation that the speaker finds problematic. The overall narrative connects the initial observations about individuals voting from abroad and outside the district to a broader critique of the online registration and ballot distribution processes, underscoring concerns about eligibility verification and the integrity of the voting system as described by the speaker.

The speaker noticed irregularities with the ballot numbers and names on absentee and mailing ballots. The numbers were almost consecutive, and some envelopes lacked a date. When the speaker questioned this, they were met with resistance. The ballot numbers were all from the same area, with similar signatures and no date stamp. None of these details were entered into the system, and they were being manually entered. The speaker suspected something was amiss but didn't challenge further to avoid being kicked out.

Key points from the testimonies: - There is a contention that ballots were run through the counting process multiple times, possibly thousands, with Speaker 0 noting statements that ballots could have been counted up to 30,000 times. When examining the poll book and comparing it to the votes cast, it is asked whether the numbers would align with the total votes from Detroit. - Speaker 2 asserts that the poll book is "completely off," with Speaker 3 estimating an error of over 100,000 in the poll book. A Downriver resident explains arriving at 3:40 a.m. due to 38,000 ballots that were “ride here” and “sitting over there and getting counted,” framing this as an eye-opening revelation about hypocrisy. - Security measures are described as unusual: Speaker 3 notes that windows are being taped up so challengers cannot see in, or out, raising questions about transparency. - Speaker 4 describes observing that none of the names on ballots were being scanned from the ballots into electronic poll books; instead, names appeared only on supplemental sheets. They note electronic poll books were updated on Sunday, November 1, implying that thousands of new ballots would have had to be registered on November 2 or 3. The speaker began writing down names after ballots were scanned but was obstructed by five individuals, including a poll worker, a supervisor, an uncredentialed person, a Democrat challenger, and a top ABCB leader, according to their affidavit. The speaker questions whether 30,000 to 40,000 new voters could have been legally signed up in two days. - Speaker 5 reports ballots that do not belong to anybody and do not appear in voter registration. They describe ballots with no names attached and note attempts to reevaluate them by placing them in a box. Multiple ballots show several different numbers. - Speaker 6 explains that, on the tables, ballots are accompanied by a computer screen showing which ballot it is. Sometimes a ballot has no name, but the registration file shows a person born in 1921 registered long before that year (1900), suggesting anomalies. The speaker asks what is wrong with being born in 1921, while Speaker 5 emphasizes a registration dating to 1900. - Speaker 7 lists egregious items: not allowed to perform duties, GOP challengers obstructed, procedures not followed, backdating ballots from November 4 to November 2, and data entered into computers for mail-in ballots with dates of birth like 01/01/1900, absent from electronic poll books or paper supplement books prior to that. They claim dead people were voting and reference a list of 17,327 Michigan voters over 80 who voted in 2020 and were found in obituaries online. This speaker calls the election described as the most important in their lifetime and in the republic’s history. - Representative Johnson is also mentioned, with a prompt to question the turnout rate, hinting at a purported turnout of 120%. Overall, the testimonies allege discrepancies between poll books and ballots, improper registration, backdated or misdated ballots, ballots lacking identifying information, obstructions to challengers, and possible participation of non-existent or deceased voters, culminating in claims of a highly irregular election process.

Speaker 0 visits a location in California described as “home to a porta john and a giant empty parking lot,” yet inside this empty lot there are “registered voters.” He states that there are “26 registered voters for this exact location. 100 Sunset Avenue in Venice. 26 people registered to a porta john and an empty parking lot. Where do their ballots go exactly? So who's picking up the ballots? Who's voting for the people in this lovely porta john empty lot? Ask the question.” He concludes, “I think you know the answer.”

Speaker 0 warns that what you’re doing is extremely dangerous, and questions why it is dangerous. Speaker 1 challenges this by asking why it would be dangerous, and clarifies that they are not saying people are voting in certain places, but that people are currently registered to vote there. Speaker 2 interjects, referencing a recent sweep around Fulton County. Speaker 1 reiterates: they see that people are currently registered to vote in places like empty lots and homeless shelters that closed ten years ago, and asks what the other speaker would do if they became secretary of state to address that. Speaker 0 responds that the other party will have to reply to conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 counters that it is not a conspiracy, describing it as a current situation: people are currently registered to vote there, and it’s possible to purchase voter rolls for $45 to verify this. They insist they are not saying people are voting there, but that people are currently registered to vote there, and they reference Jason as the person who can verify that. They further state they will gladly take the other speaker to see if it’s true, arguing that if someone is running for secretary of state, they are in charge of maintaining the voter rolls. Speaker 0 continues to label the claim as dangerous and as conspiracy theory. Speaker 1 again emphasizes that they are not alleging people are voting there, but that people are currently registered to vote there. They reiterate that it took $45 to purchase the voter rolls, and that the same could be done for Fulton County. They mention specific locations where people are allegedly registered to vote: empty lots and a MARTA bus station, and ask whether the other speaker will address that instead of labeling it conspiracy theories. They reference the existence of a death address, 205 Elm Street Northwest, described as an empty lot that one could visit to verify the claim. They ask whether the other speaker, as an elected official who might become secretary of state, cares about ensuring clean voter rolls in a county considered one of the most important in the United States. Speaker 0 maintains that the other party’s approach is dangerous. Speaker 1 repeats the core assertion: it’s not a conspiracy, it’s a current condition where people are registered to vote in empty lots, a MARTA bus station, and other locations, and stresses that the issue is about maintaining clean voter rolls. The exchange cycles through insistence that “people are currently registered to vote there,” the availability of voter-roll data for verification, and the imperative for someone who could be secretary of state to address the integrity of the rolls rather than dismissing the claim as conspiracy theory.

I've discovered how ineligible voters are being added to voter rolls. The source is the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, led by David Becker. Becker was involved in a scandal as a US attorney, worked for the far-left organization People for the American Way, and then Pew. With funding from George Soros, Becker created ERIC. ERIC contracts with states to access DMV records, which are normally protected. They use this data to identify unregistered individuals but the agreement prohibits states from telling ERIC who is or isn't a citizen. ERIC then puts these names on voter rolls and shares the data with the Center for Election Innovation and Research, the group that received Zuckerbucks in 2020.

Do any Democrats want to explain how this isn't election fraud? In New York, voters don’t need to show ID to vote, except for first-time voters. This means anyone can claim to be someone else and vote without verification. It’s concerning that ballots can be received a week after the election, delaying certification and allowing late ballots to influence results. A secure election should have all votes counted by election day. Additionally, why request a mail-in ballot if you’re just going to drop it off in person? How can poll workers verify identity if ID isn’t checked? This raises serious questions about election integrity. Remember to vote early and in person, and ensure your ballot remains secure.

The speaker discusses foreign interference in elections and questions why the president is not pursuing this avenue. They mention evidence of votes being sent overseas and foreign actors meddling in elections. The speaker then explains how voter rolls are kept in foreign nations, such as Pakistan, and how fake ballots are attributed to registered voters who have not yet voted. They reveal that 171,000 blank fake ballots were dropped into the system and attributed to different people, ultimately benefiting the Democratic candidates. The speaker concludes by stating that there are other aspects of foreign involvement in elections.

I was surprised to learn that there was no signature verification done for the ballots. I questioned how ballots without signatures were handled, and the response was they were just sent back out. This made me uncomfortable certifying the results.

Voting illegally happens frequently, despite penalties. In California, registering to vote online doesn't require ID. The DMV is registering people to vote, even illegal immigrants, with immunity from prosecution. Safeguards against voter fraud are lacking.

In California and New York, it is illegal to ask for or show ID when people vote. According to the speakers, there is no logical reason for this law other than to facilitate election fraud. To commit fraud, one would eliminate the need for ID and allow mail-in ballots.

Up to 13 states' Board of Elections voter registration roles are coded with secret algorithms that allow for hidden, unreal votes. This coding system is like a national security coding system. In Ohio, there is a mathematical formula embedded within the state board of election voter role that permits someone within the board of election to vote as many mail-in votes as they want to rig and steal an election without it being known. The speaker is in Ohio demanding a proof of concept.