reSee.it - Related Video Feed

I found Brian in the server logs, showing him the database. Christy Francois let him in, which could be a problem later on.

Speaker 0 gave the FBI a thumb drive containing 29 minutes of high-definition video showing two men attacking a building. As of this morning, neither man has been arrested. Speaker 0 states that despite going through over 725 indictments, none of their video or even a single still picture of either man has appeared on the Internet. The FBI is allegedly refusing to take Speaker 0's calls, return emails, or accept an offer to meet. Speaker 0 believes the FBI is hiding these men. Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 to inquire about the identities of these men. Speaker 0 confirms that Ben Grundler has all this information and that they have been in contact for over a year.

Christy has access to the server room, and we need to send her name there. The server logs reveal Brian's involvement, and there's a significant database that I expected to find. Brian is a valuable team member despite any criticism. We see Christy interacting with the logs and deleting entries. She is granting Brian access to the server, and I’m monitoring the console. At this point, Christy is not in the room, but she is coordinating with others. This situation raises concerns as multiple people are nearby, indicating potential issues.

Speaker 1 describes a man on the team who, after he was shot, runs toward the vehicles, stays outside the vehicles, and films a TikTok selfie video. They ask to identify this person, and it is confirmed to be the audio-visual (AV) team member who runs the cameras. This individual is said to have said, “Charlie just got shot,” and is the same person associated with the footage and the AV setup contracted to shoot the coverage. Speaker 0 clarifies that this person works for a company called VI, which provides contract AV/video personnel, and is not a security guy. He is the AV team member who runs the cameras. He also is described as the person who “took down the cameras” and there were questions about what happened to the footage, noting that this is a legitimate inquiry. Speaker 1 adds that after the event, someone goes to the camera behind Charlie, pulls the camera down, and it looks like they pull the SD card out; this footage is in the hands of the FBI and was not deleted or erased. The SD card was pulled by someone named Senga, and the footage ended up with the FBI. Speaker 0 reiterates that the AV person works for VI, the video contracting company, not as security. He expresses confusion about the phone usage and states that it’s not for him to understand that part; he observes that, in tragic events, people pull their phones out instead of running, and says that’s for the AV person to explain. He notes that the AV person does not work for them, but from what he has seen, this is the same person who took down the cameras, prompting legitimate questions about where that footage went. He confirms that the person was interviewed by the FBI, asked questions, and that all relevant material was turned over.

I found a video where the speaker goes through some server logs and discovers a database issue. They mention finding different forensics related to it. They also mention a person named Christy, who seems to be active in the GMC community.

Speaker 0 recounts discovering a secret SCIF on campus, a secure facility with files nobody knew existed. An employee walked by a door, inquiries were made, the room was entered, and individuals were found working there with secret files on controversial topics. Those files have been turned over to attorneys and the speaker is pursuing what happened. The speaker notes that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) knows every traveler entering the country and every good that comes in, and they assess and collect tariffs. They highlight that information about travelers during COVID was with national labs under the speaker’s jurisdiction, and that scientists at those labs participated with the Wuhan lab. The speaker claims these scientists traveled back and forth between each other and worked on those experiments, describing this as eye-opening. Addressing Elon and his team, the speaker says they were extremely helpful since the speaker’s arrival in office, assisting in identifying a troubling issue: some of the speaker’s own department employees had downloaded software on the speaker’s phone and laptop to spy on them and record meetings. The speaker states that this had happened to several politicians and notes that bringing in technology experts helped reveal this software; without examining laptops and phones, the activity would still be ongoing. The speaker emphasizes a need to continue partnering with technology companies and experts to bring them in for assistance, as government work—especially within the department under the speaker’s jurisdiction—has been neglected and lagging behind what it should be. The speaker recalls that in the first four months, they couldn’t even email a PowerPoint from Department of Homeland Security servers if it was longer than six pages, illustrating what they view as backwards thinking that hindered national security. The speaker reflects on the concept of a deep state, admitting that they previously believed it existed but didn’t realize how severe it was. They describe daily efforts to uncover individuals who do not love America and who work within the Department and across the federal government. The overall message conveys uncovering secrecy, internal surveillance concerns, cross-agency connections involving CBP and national labs, collaboration with tech experts, and a strong critique of past departmental conduct and systemic protection failures.

The speaker discusses the issue of Windows security logs being purged right before two audits were set to begin. They highlight the difficulty in determining who had access to the RTR admin account, which is shared among all accounts. The speaker questions why someone would delete all the results and records from the Dominion software, which is used for tallying and reporting election results, just before an audit. They mention that the deletion was successful and affected files on the NAS directory where election images and details were stored. Overall, the speaker emphasizes the lack of accountability and the need to understand the motives behind this action.

On various dates, an individual ran a script to find blank passwords for the accounts on the system. The script was executed multiple times, overwriting a significant number of log entries. The EMS admin account was responsible for this, but due to the lack of accountability in assigning the username, it is difficult to prove who exactly did it. Fortunately, historical data from MTech video feeds helped identify the individuals at the keyboards during those times. However, their names will not be released to protect them from scrutiny and potential impacts.

The video features James O'Keefe, an undercover journalist, confronting an individual who works in the White House Office of Cybersecurity. O'Keefe questions why someone in a cybersecurity role would meet with him, as it raises concerns about the government's ability to protect networks. The individual denies knowing O'Keefe and expresses personal opinions about Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. O'Keefe criticizes the individual for discussing sensitive topics in a public setting. The video ends with O'Keefe promoting a medical emergency kit and urging viewers to support his investigative work.

The video starts with the time stamp and the mention of it being the third take of Bill Gates' deposition. The speaker then shows a document, government exhibit three, which is a message sent to Bill Gates, Mr. Maritz, and another person on February 24, 1997, at 11:07 pm. The message discusses a focus group report.

The speaker briefly greets the audience and mentions that they are currently conducting an investigation. They ask if anyone else is present, specifically law enforcement. They request the credentials of the person they are speaking to and express their appreciation. The speaker concludes by saying that the person they are speaking to needs to improve their ability to hide.

The speaker reviewed server logs and identified "Brian." The speaker found a database in the next vendor and new forensics. Christy is mentioned in connection to a server. The speaker shows access and a deletion on the log from the database. A previous tweet shows Christy letting Brian into the server. The speaker repeats "Here he is" multiple times. The speaker mentions another law proposal and altering.

Curtis from AOS Positioning Systems calls Sarah to tell her they will be removing her from their website. Curtis says customers are questioning the product because it was listed at “600 bodies” and later at “two fifteen,” which customers view as anomalies. Curtis explains the removal is intended to protect Sarah while the results are validated in “just a couple more years,” after which they will put her back on the website. Sarah reacts, asking what Curtis means and disputing the implication that it is their fault. Curtis says they stand by their systems and that they work, and he clarifies that the system did not come with the “white guys” who were present during Sarah’s last use of it. Curtis explains the people Sarah refers to were archaeologists at an archaeological site, and they do not come and operate the machine for Sarah; Sarah has to operate it herself. Sarah identifies herself as an archaeologist and calls herself a conflict anthropologist. She says she remembers the word “conflict” from CBC articles and assumed it related to archaeology because the work was described as an archaeological dig. Sarah acknowledges the article lent credibility to her work and she did not double-check. Curtis asks what conflict anthropology is, and Sarah responds with an explanation that it is “the study of hating white people.” Curtis then says he would like to read Sarah’s thesis about how much she hates white people, and Sarah agrees that she will read it.

The speaker reviewed server logs and identified "Brian." The speaker found forensics in a database. The speaker shows access and a deletion on the log from the database. The speaker claims Christy previously tweeted about letting Brian into the server. The speaker repeats "Here he is" multiple times. The speaker mentions a law proposal.

The speaker mentions server logs and their own logs, and then reveals that someone named Christie is involved. They state that Christie is not the right driver for the medical situation and imply that it is being discussed online.

David from the Sacramento FBI is approached for an interview about someone he met online. He refuses to speak on camera and declines to answer questions about his activities.

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.

I was about 10 feet to Charlie's left when it happened. It was one of those moments that will crystallize in your mind forever. You hear the pop, and it’s not completely clear what it is at first. I looked to my right and immediately saw what had happened. It was just one shot. The security got him immediately, got him into the car immediately, and then out again. They could not have done their job any better. Then, what do we do? I sent a message on Telegram to Turning Point, telling them to lockdown. I imagined they’d already seen it, but I said, lockdown Turning Point. I called my mom and said, I can’t say more, but mom, Charlie got shot. I love you. I have to go. Then I met with other team members, and we got to the hospital within about twenty-five minutes, and the rest of the day unfolded from there. Staff decided to address this head on because there’s so much intrigue, and I’m going to do a generous thing. The intrigue is because people care about Charlie. Blake, you were there and you interacted with Mikey. You left the scene and then reconnected with Mikey. So, explain what the video is. The video is by someone who attacked Mikey, Charlie’s friend, Charlie’s chief of staff, a guy we’ve seen on the show the last few weeks. They claim, based on a few seconds of clips, that he allegedly has a nonchalant or calm reaction to Charlie’s murder. This is an extremely disgusting attack. I was there when it happened and I was next to Mikey when it happened. When the shooting occurs, we both hear a loud crack and turn to see Charlie who has been shot. We both realize there is a shooter on the scene. We hear the crack and don’t know if it came from far or close, or if a mass shooting is unfolding. My reaction, and Mikey’s, was to get out of there before we were both shot. That is not us abandoning Charlie. Charlie had a security team; they leapt into action and got Charlie out, which was their job. My job was not to be a hero or get in the way. I remember running past the SUV we came in on, thinking, should I get in that car? Then I thought that would be stupid, and I kept going. I was ahead of Mikey as we left. We got out and ran for more than fifteen or twenty seconds. I paused, looked around, and saw Mikey. I will never forget what I saw. Mikey is usually bubbly and happy, but he was profoundly freaked out. His lip was quivering, something I’d never seen from him. He said, I think he literally said, he needs to call Erica, then he calls Erica. He also calls his dad, Rob McCoy, and says, Dad, someone shot Charlie. You need to call all of your pastor friends. We then gathered to direct actions: to get to the hospital and to relay information to Erica. After the call, Mikey regained control and stepped up, directing a battle-like flow: get to the hospital, wait here, and get information to Erica.

On the left is the image before the Dominion employee arrived at the election management server, and on the right is the image after the employee left. The logs folder on the left is missing on the right, indicating that it disappeared after the employee left. Additionally, in the Inetpub log folder, there are multiple log files that contain evidence of connections to the web server. The number of log files is not mentioned.

On various dates, an individual ran a script to search for blank passwords on the system. This script overwrote a significant number of log entries. The EMS admin account was responsible, but it's difficult to prove who specifically executed the script due to the lack of accountability in assigning usernames. Fortunately, historical data from MTech video feeds allowed us to identify individuals at the keyboards during those times. However, we won't disclose their names due to the potential scrutiny and impact on them.

Here's the video everyone is talking about. We’re examining the server logs, and it turns out it’s Brian. We’ll look at a database that enhances our findings. Forensics play a crucial role here, especially with AT&T and the server. I’ll demonstrate the app access and the log deletion process. You all know the history behind this. This is another log we’re reviewing, likely related to daily activities, such as purchasing a truck.

There is a discussion about log files on two screens. One screen shows hundreds of log files from 2019 until May 22, 2021. The other screen only has three years of log files, which have mysteriously disappeared. It is mentioned that when a Dominion employee came in, the log files vanished. These files record all access to a specific machine. It is also mentioned that Dominion sent people around the country for software updates during that time. Some participants confirm this information.

The video discusses evidence of foreign interference in the election, showing how votes were manipulated and which computers were involved. The speakers highlight the importance of cybersecurity experts uncovering the attacks in real-time, preventing potential election manipulation. They express gratitude for the proof of interference and emphasize the significance of having this information. The speakers marvel at the detailed documentation and consider it a miracle to have such insight into the attacks.

In this video, the speaker talks about checking the server logs and finding something interesting. They discovered a database in their extended logs, which they believe is related to forensics. They mention someone named Christy, who is an active member of the GMC community.

In this video, Speaker 1 confronts Dennis Gilliam about his alleged involvement in certain Signal and Telegram groups. Dennis claims to have no knowledge of these groups and suggests that he may have been added without his consent. Speaker 1 believes Dennis is not the creator of these groups and wants to collaborate in identifying the real culprits. They discuss the possibility of Dennis being transferred to these groups through links posted on Facebook. Speaker 1 emphasizes that their main focus is finding the individuals responsible for creating and participating in these groups, rather than accusing Dennis. Additionally, the video discusses how the speaker was led to various groups on Signal through provocative photos on Facebook. They mention that both boys and girls are being posted in these groups, with mainly women being posted in the videos. The age range of individuals in the groups is mostly teens and twenties. The speaker admits to clicking on links and seeing pictures and videos but claims to have quickly exited when uncomfortable. They mention that the groups are primarily in Spanish and that they have seen links with pictures and videos being posted. However, the frequency of inappropriate content being posted in the groups remains uncertain. The video also features a conversation between Speaker 1, Speaker 2, and Speaker 3. Speaker 1 confronts Speaker 2 about his alleged involvement in groups that post explicit content involving minors. Speaker 2 denies any knowledge or intent to view such content, but Speaker 1 presses for more information. Speaker 3, who is also present, shares that he has grandchildren and works in mental health. The conversation becomes tense as Speaker 1 accuses Speaker 2 of clicking on videos featuring young children. Speaker 2 admits to accidentally clicking on such videos multiple times. The conversation continues with Speaker 1 explaining their organization's work and Speaker 2's involvement. The video ends with Speaker 2 deleting evidence from his phone.