reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes with identical markings. They point out a little tail and the word "Republican" written on both. They mention that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't go through all of them. The speaker doesn't remember the exact numbers, but they mention that the batches were fairly close. They highlight one image with a little bubble and mention that it matches another image with the same batch number. The conclusion is that there are duplicate ballots in the entire batch that were scanned multiple times.

The speaker points out duplicate ballots in the video, showing examples where the word "Republican" is written the same way on different ballots. They have a total of 62 images showing similar instances. The batch numbers for the duplicate ballots are provided as well. It is clear that the same batch was scanned multiple times, resulting in duplicate ballots.

The speaker shares their experience with a whistleblower who gave them four notes regarding ballot discrepancies. They describe witnessing ballots with different signatures being entered into the system and stacks of 50 ballots being put through tabulators multiple times. The speaker mentions the supervisors preventing them from getting closer to the tabulators and the issue of signing in but not out. They also mention the presence of only Biden's name on duplicated military ballots and express their belief that the election was fraudulent.

The speaker explains that when a ballot jams in the tabulating machines, an error message appears with the options to discard or recount. However, instead of following the correct procedure of discarding the entire batch and rescanning the already tabulated ones, they were repeatedly rescanning the jammed ballots without discarding them. This led to the ballots being counted 8 to 10 times, indicating a lack of understanding and confusion among the individuals involved.

Ballots were allegedly found under a table in a video presented. The person who placed the table there is said to be the same person who cleared the area and claimed to stop counting. Four suitcases were seen being taken out from under the table. These separate ballots were counted when there were no witnesses present. The machines used can process 3,000 ballots per hour, and they were running for 2 hours. This raises concerns about the number of ballots processed without supervision. The video continues until around 1 a.m., showing the ongoing operation. The speaker asks if everyone has seen enough and proceeds to fast forward to 12:55 a.m.

There are two batches of votes being examined. The speaker points out that there are identical markings on different ballots, suggesting duplication. They show examples of the same markings and even a dot in the same spot. The speaker mentions having a total of 62 images, but didn't go through all of them. The numbers of the batches are not remembered, but it is clear that duplicate ballots were scanned multiple times.

A table was placed by a lady with blonde braids at 8:22 am. The same person who cleared the place later put the table there. Four suitcases were seen coming out from under the table, and one was pulled out by a gentleman in red. These separate ballots were counted when there were no witnesses and the place was cleared. Multiple machines were present for two hours, capable of processing 3,000 ballots per hour. It is unclear how many ballots went through the machines during that time without supervision.

An observer in the duplication room witnessed the preparation of a new ballot because the original was soiled. The observer read a Trump Republican ballot to their Democratic partner. When the partner entered it into the system, the ballot defaulted to a Biden Democratic ballot on the screen. This was reported to supervisors, and others claimed to have witnessed the same manipulation. No corrective action was communicated. The next day, the observer was scolded for saying the machines were not working correctly and was told not to discuss anything. Many people were threatened with being removed from the room or not being allowed to work there again if they spoke out. The observer believes it is their duty to speak the truth.

A poll worker states that while observing the duplication of a spoiled ballot, she read a Trump Republican ballot to her partner, but the system defaulted to a Biden Democratic ballot when entered. She and others reported witnessing the same manipulation to supervisors. The witness says she was scolded for suggesting the machines were not working correctly and was told not to discuss what was happening. She also claims many people were threatened with removal from the room or job if they spoke out. She believes it is her duty to speak the truth.

A table was placed by a lady with blonde braids at 8:22 am. The same person who cleared the place later put the table there. Four suitcases were seen coming out from under the table, and one was pulled out by a gentleman in red. These separate ballots were counted when there were no witnesses and the place was cleared. Multiple machines were present for two hours, capable of processing 3,000 ballots per hour. The lack of supervision and adherence to rules raises questions about the number of ballots processed during that time.

In the duplication room, the speaker and their partner observed a new ballot being prepared because the original one was damaged. They read a Trump Republican ballot, but it automatically changed to a Biden Democratic ballot on the screen. They reported this manipulation to the supervisors, but were not informed of any corrective action. The next day, the speaker was scolded by a supervisor for questioning the machines. They were told not to discuss the issue, as others had been threatened with suppression and removal from the room. The speaker believes it is their duty to speak the truth.

The speaker expresses frustration about a blank ballot that was not voted on. They mention being able to stop adjudication and scan and adjudicate all ballots, including the blank one. Misty asks if a ballot can be scanned more than once, and the speaker confirms that they have done it. They explain that they kept scanning the same batches of ballots. The speaker mentions that they have set the system to handle ambiguous marks and overvotes, but it should also handle blank ballots. They scan a blank ballot and accept it into the system, noting that the system does not know who touched the ballots during adjudication.

Melissa Carone, a freelance IT worker contracted by Dominion Voting Systems, witnessed numerous city workers running batches of ballots through tabulators without discarding them first. The tabulating machines would jam frequently, and the correct process would be to remove the problem ballot and rescan the batch. However, instead of discarding the batch, they were rescanning it multiple times, resulting in counting the same ballots and votes 9 to 10 times. Carone estimated that at least 30,000 ballots were counted multiple times.

The speaker observed that when people received Republican straight ticket ballots, they often ignored them or circled Donald Trump's name and put them back in the envelope. The speaker noticed USPS boxes filled with these ballots on the floor. They questioned the legitimacy of the process, as it seemed impossible to count all the votes accurately. The speaker mentioned that only a small number of ballots were counted at a time, with each pile containing no more than five ballots. They expressed concern about the removal of many Trump vote ballots.

The speakers observed irregularities in the ballots, suspecting that they were not filled out by hand but rather printed. They noticed that the bubbles were perfectly filled and not aligned correctly. The paper used for the ballots was very thin, with some ballots having more than 50% missing or torn off. This raised concerns as it seemed intentional and could affect the voters' intent. The speakers emphasized that someone else was determining the voters' choices, effectively voting on their behalf.

A table was placed by a lady with blonde braids at 8:22 am. The same person who cleared the area later put the table there. Four suitcases were seen coming out from under the table. A man in red pulled out one of the ballots. These separate ballots were counted when there were no witnesses. The machines can process 3,000 ballots per hour, and they were there for 2 hours without supervision. The number of ballots processed during that time is unclear.

The speaker shares their experience with the election process, mentioning receiving four notes with incorrect dates. They describe witnessing three individuals entering ballots into the verified voter system, and one person, later identified as Jesse Jacobs, showing them a signature on a laptop screen that didn't match the signature on the ballot. The speaker also claims to have seen stacks of 50 ballots being put through tabulators multiple times. They mention the supervisors keeping them at a distance from the tabulators and not allowing them to get closer. The speaker notes that only Biden's name was selected on duplicated military ballots, with no down-ballot selections for Trump. They express their belief that the election was fraudulent.

This is the duplication room. I observed the preparation of a new ballot because the original was soiled and wouldn't go through the tabulators. I read a Trump Republican ballot, and when it was entered, the system defaulted to a Biden Democratic ballot. We reported this to supervisors, and others confirmed they witnessed similar issues. We were not informed of any corrective actions taken. The next day, the supervisor reprimanded me for raising concerns about the machines, and I was told I could not discuss the situation. Many were threatened with being removed from the room if they spoke up. I feel it is my duty to share the truth.

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.

During the election, there were damaged mail-in ballots that couldn't be read by scanners. The board decided to duplicate these ballots using pink highlighters. However, the highlighter couldn't be read by the scanners either, so all the duplicated ballots had to be fixed. The solution was to give workers stacks of blank mail-in ballots to individually fill in the correct ovals with a dark pen. This process went on for hours without observation until the observers confronted the deputy commissioner. Eventually, thousands of mail-in ballots were counted this way. This raises concerns about the integrity of the process.

I noticed that the ballot numbers and last names on the absentee and mail-in ballots were in sequence, which is unusual because these ballots should come in different numbers. This raised my suspicion. I asked about the date on the envelopes, but there was only November 0, 2020, with no second number. When I questioned this, the supervisors became angry and accused me of disrupting their work. I didn't want to be kicked out, so I didn't challenge anything further. The ballot numbers were all from the same area, with similar signatures, and there was no date stamp after 0. None of these ballots were showing up in the system and were being manually entered, even though they knew these details wouldn't be in the poll book or system.

The speaker describes observing absentee/mail-in ballots and recording details from the ballots. They wrote down the ballot numbers and the last names of the person named on each ballot. The ballots appeared to be in sequence, which, according to the speaker, should not happen with mail-in ballots, since mail-in ballots come in at different times and numbers. The speaker recalls that when they noticed the numbers were almost next to each other—one in the middle, then another—they became suspicious. The speaker asked the supervisor about this, noting there was not even a date on the envelopes. The envelopes were marked November 2020, but there was no second number or other identifying date visible. When the speaker inquired about the date on a specific envelope, the response was hostile: the supervisors became angry and told them they were not letting them do their job and that the speaker was disturbing them. To avoid being kicked out, the speaker and the others in the room chose not to challenge the process further, since they did not want to be removed and there were only a few people present. The speaker also observed that the sequence of ballot numbers all originated from the same area—Guarded Street in Downtown Detroit. The ballots’ signatures looked alike, and none of the envelopes had dates stamped on them. The envelopes appeared to be missing a second or third date, or any date, and none of the ballots were appearing in the voting system. Additionally, the speaker notes that these ballots were being entered manually, and they asserted that none of these details would be present in the poll book or the system. The overall implication is that there was irregularity in the handling of these absentee ballots, with sequential numbers, indistinct dates, signatures resembling each other, and manual entry outside the expected process, raising concerns about whether the ballots were being processed consistent with standard procedures.

In the duplication room, the speaker witnessed a new ballot being prepared because the original one was damaged. However, when a Trump Republican ballot was entered into the system, it automatically switched to a Biden Democratic ballot. The speaker reported this manipulation to the supervisors, but it is unclear if any action was taken. The next day, the speaker was scolded by a supervisor for questioning the machines' accuracy and was warned not to discuss the issue. The speaker believes it is their duty to speak the truth.

The speaker noticed a batch of absentee ballots that stood out because they were in pristine condition, unlike the others which were worn. These ballots had no folds and felt different. One ballot had a white eclipse in the bubble where it should have been filled. As they sorted the ballots, they realized that a significant number of them were exactly the same, with no folds. One ballot in the stack was also misaligned. Additionally, instead of the usual 100, this batch had 110 ballots, which was unusual.

A person placed a table at 8:22 AM, under which 4 suitcases of ballots were found. The ballots were counted without witnesses present, raising concerns about the process. With machines capable of processing 3,000 ballots per hour, multiple machines ran for 2 hours without supervision, violating rules and statutes.