TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0, Speaker 1, and Speaker 2 discuss Dominion’s access to election systems during the 2020 election period in Georgia, with Gwinnett County cited as a specific example. The dialogue confirms that the questioning period was during the 2020 election, and the focus is on whether Dominion remotely accessed election systems and whether such access occurred in Georgia. Speaker 2 asks if there is any indication of nonelection personnel remotely accessing a Dominion system. Speaker 3 responds that they have reviewed a series of emails produced by Dominion in which they’re discussing remoting into Gwinnett County, Georgia. Speaker 1 then notes that Speaker 0 had mentioned Dominion remote collection or connection to election systems but lacks evidence that it occurred in Georgia. Speaker 0 asserts that there was one county and that they have seen many Dominion emails, requiring translation from Serbian to English to verify technical questions and translations. Speaker 1 asks specifically: “So it's your testimony that there is evidence of dominion remotely accessing Georgia election equipment?” Speaker 0 answers: “Yes, on the one county. It was included with stuff that I was researching and reading through considering Colorado. Michigan was also involved and there were other ones.” Speaker 2 inquires about Dominion’s ability to remotely connect to these election systems and whether they could do so without detection. Speaker 0 responds: “Yes.” Speaker 2 then asks if the interviewee is aware of any instances in which that has occurred, and Speaker 0 confirms: “One would be the Denver, Colorado server was granted or requested to grant Belgrave, Only Belgrade. Did search. There is a Belgrade Montana.” The speaker questions why Montana would need to connect to a Colorado file transfer server as part of the election system, noting there are other components and things done in the background concerning the database and the configuration of the database server that still do not have an engineering change order. Speaker 0 explains that in operational environments, things sometimes break and need fixing, leading to the submission of a change request or, in this case, an engineering change order that is retroactive. The goal is to record the process to ensure change management and integrity of the system. If changes are not recorded, it leads to a bad situation, according to Speaker 0.

When I started recording ballot numbers and names from mail-in ballots, I noticed they were in sequence, which is unusual. The envelopes had no date, just "November 0-2020." When I questioned this, I was told not to interfere. The ballots were all from the same street in Detroit, with similar signatures and no date stamp. They weren't in the system and were being entered manually. It seemed suspicious.

We have a problem with the election due to the influx of mail-in ballots. Trump was initially winning in Pima County, but more ballots were suddenly poured in. The issue lies in the fact that some mail-in ballots lack signatures, indicating a broken system. Regardless of who wins, we need to ensure a fair election. Election officials were rewriting rules instead of following the legislature's authority. We don't trust the media, as they have their own agenda. People witnessed irregularities during the election and want a fair vote. We can provide a forensic audit report for further information. The deletion of a million files before the audit was debunked.

The speaker, Jordan Conrad, questions Miss Hobbs about authorizing additional testing and the signatures on mail-in ballot updates. He accuses her of being unaware that the signatures do not match those of the voters. Miss Hobbs, as the secretary of state, oversaw elections in Maricopa County and Arizona. The conversation becomes heated, with the speaker using profanity and asking if Miss Hobbs said something disrespectful.

The speaker asks who determined the number of failed signatures in the 2020 election. Speaker 1 explains that their organization reviewed a quarter of the 1,900,000 envelopes from the election using 150 trained workers. They followed the guidelines in the secretary of state manual and analyzed each voter record individually. The statistics from the first 25% of the ballots were extrapolated to determine the final number, which is specific to Maricopa County. Speaker 0 acknowledges that Maricopa County alone had over 2 million ballots, with about 1.9 million of them being mail-in ballots. Speaker 1 confirms this and the conversation continues.

Excuse me, how many ballots are you turning in? You're only allowed to submit one ballot per person. Do you have an affidavit for all those? It's the post office. That seems suspicious. Someone is dropping off a large number of ballots in Northampton County right after the office has closed.

Maggie Pesaro, a resident of Kingman, raises concerns about the use of electronic voting machines in elections. She shares a 53-minute video featuring Tori Morris, a credible contractor with expertise in gathering and analyzing foreign intelligence. Morris highlights her qualifications and provides detailed evidence that the machines have not been lawfully accredited since 2017. The hardware of the machines in Michigan, for example, has not been examined since then. Maggie urges viewers to watch the video before making any decisions regarding the use of electronic machines.

Jordan Conrad from Gateway Plumbing questions Miss Hobbs about the election in Arizona, specifically mentioning secret machine testing in Maricopa County and discrepancies in mailing ballot signatures. He asks if she authorized the testing and if she is aware of the signature issues. Jordan criticizes Miss Hobbs for overseeing elections in Maricopa County and Arizona.

The video discusses the 2022 general election in Maricopa County, Arizona, which saw record-breaking turnout and a close race for governor. Controversy arose when candidate Katie Hobbs refused to debate her opponent, Carrie Lake. Issues with tabulators and printers caused delays in counting the ballots, leading to an undecided governor's race one week after election day. Despite claims of voter fraud, the election was deemed secure. Concerns were raised about the accuracy of the tabulation process due to incorrectly printed ballot images. The trial between Lake and Hobbs focused on allegations of misconduct with ballot printers and handling. The video highlights the need for transparency, hand counting at the precinct level, and restoring faith in the electoral system. Viewers are urged to take action to demand change.

In this video, the speaker discusses the issue of Dominion machines and their accuracy in counting ballots. They question why in heavily Democratic areas, the mail-in ballots are always on target and within 1 mic, while in Republican areas, the mail-in ballots are often out of calibration. The speaker suggests that the machines allow human intervention, where a person can interpret the ballot if the machine is unsure. This raises concerns about the accuracy and integrity of the voting process.

The speaker asks the woman if she is aware that Cobb County has passed multiple audits, including a recent signature audit with a 99.99% accuracy rate. The woman confirms her awareness and mentions a press conference where they received recognition. The speaker then asks if she knows that the audit was supervised by the secretary of state and the Georgia department GBI. The woman acknowledges this and recalls being present when the GBI brought back boxes of ballots, including an unmarked one that she believes contained military ballots. The speaker mentions that both the secretary of state and GBI certified the 99.99% accuracy rate, but the woman expresses skepticism due to the lack of observers during the audit. The conversation ends with gratitude.

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

The speaker questions Miss Hobbs about the alleged intentional failures during the election that caused disenfranchisement of Republican voters. They mention ongoing lawsuits and express concern about her decision-making on Arizona's water future. Another person brings up the issue of signature verification in the 2022 election, where employees were allegedly clicking through signatures too quickly. Miss Hobbs states that she doesn't have a comment on it as it's not under her jurisdiction. The speaker insists that she should answer election questions since a majority of Arizonans believe the election was unfair. Miss Hobbs is reminded that she is not a reporter.

Kari Lake has been fighting to have the Arizona election case reviewed on its merits. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the trial court to investigate the issue of signature matching. Maricopa County officials, who have been accused of being biased against Lake and other MAGA candidates, are refusing to cooperate. The bigger issue is that on election day, the tabulators broke down during crucial voting hours, potentially disrupting the Republican vote. An expert witness suggests that intentional changes were made to the printers, affecting the ballots. Lake is confident that she will prevail if there is an honest accounting of the signatures. She is determined to fight for the governor's office, believing she was denied the position through fraud. Maricopa County delegates signature verification to a third-party company with low standards. Lake demands a proper legal remedy.

I have some questions about the election in Arizona, specifically Maricopa County. I'm asking about the secret testing done on the machines. As Secretary of State, you're supposed to oversee election procedures and conduct additional testing. Did you authorize this? And what about the signatures on the mail-in ballot updates? Are you aware that they don't match the voter signatures? As Secretary of State, you oversaw elections in Maricopa County, so are those elections the best?

The director is awaiting clarification on a reported human error from the state board of elections. Concerns about a flash drive with votes are raised, but the director is unsure if it was read multiple times. Despite past issues, the director defends their oversight of elections. The state board is investigating discrepancies in election results, with canvassing ongoing for provisional and mail-in ballots.

Two Clark County Technical employees revealed that votes on voting machines and USB drives changed overnight. They were only allowed a visual inspection of the USB drives and denied a forensic examination.

The election supervisor wants to vote for Jason Shaw. During adjudication, the supervisor states they want to vote for Biden, overriding the original marks on a ballot. The supervisor decides someone "don't deserve no votes" and chooses not to count votes on that ballot. The supervisor then declares another ballot should be blank. The supervisor admits to scanning the same batches of ballots repeatedly.

- "The electoral systems of The United States can be manipulated by foreign agents or third parties." - "Are you in danger, physical danger, if your true identity is known?" - "Yes." - "We configured the transmission systems and the tally systems." - "I was the national coordinator for voting machines." - "You examined the forensic image of the election management server, that was used in the Mesa County twenty twenty election." - "In the case of Mesa, Colorado, all evidence, all log, all of that was deleted." - "We saw both images, the old one and the new one." - "And the structure changed, the structure of the program changed as compared to the version 5.5." - "Whoever gave the authorization for the system to be updated would be the person responsible for all the files that were deleted." - "It's easy to rig an election with it, and it's hard to audit."

Katie Hobbs, who is running for governor, certified election results despite significant discrepancies, specifically a 21% issue that raises questions about her competence. The responsibility also lies with Adrian Fontes, the Maricopa County recorder during this time, who attempted to send out 200,000 unsolicited ballots and faced legal challenges for various election-related actions. Both Hobbs and Fontes are implicated in potential data manipulation regarding the election results. Their actions have led to concerns about the integrity of the election process in Maricopa County.

Speaker 0, Jordan Conrad from the Gateway Funded, asks Miss Hobbs about the secret testing and additional testing on the James in Maricopa County, Arizona. He questions whether she authorized it and if she is aware of the discrepancies in the signatures on the mail-in ballot updates. Miss Hobbs, as secretary of state, oversaw the elections in Maricopa County and Arizona. Jordan persists, but Miss Hobbs tells him to give it a rest as she is at the gym.

The speaker asks if the person is aware that the outer envelope of a ballot must have the date, time, and signature of the town clerk. The person admits they were not aware of this. The speaker then questions if the person instructed the absentee ballot moderator about this rule, to which the person says they did not. The speaker shows examples of envelopes with and without the clerk's signature, and asks if the one without should have been counted. The person agrees that it should not have been counted. The speaker asks if the person ever checked for the clerk's signature on envelopes, and the person says it never came up in their training.

An individual questions people collecting mail-in ballots, asking if they are official election personnel. The collectors confirm they take the ballots to the Raleigh County election site in the government building. The individual inquires if there are many ballots and expresses concern about the speed at which the state was called. They also point out that one of the collectors is not wearing a mask.

Excuse me, how many ballots are you turning in? You're only supposed to submit one ballot per person. Do you have an affidavit for all those? It's with the post office. That seems suspicious. There's someone in Northampton County dropping off an excessive number of ballots right at the deadline after the office has closed.

I have questions about the election in Arizona, particularly in Maricopa County. Did you authorize the secret testing on the machines, considering the election procedures manual states you should oversee additional testing? Also, are you aware of the signatures on the mail-in ballot updates and how they don't resemble the voter's signatures? As Secretary of State, you oversaw elections in Maricopa County and Arizona. Is it true you told someone to give it an "effing rest?"