TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

A plot to cover up an attempted presidential assassination involving multiple agencies failed. To evade detection, the same company hired by the Democratic National Committee for Russian collusion investigation also serviced various governmental agencies. This allowed access to update code on servers used by the FBI and Department of Homeland Security, potentially aiding in covering tracks.

The speaker claims that top law enforcement officials expected Hillary Clinton to win the 2016 election and manipulated the law to ensure her victory and Trump's defeat. He cites James Comey's alleged admission of operating in an environment where a Clinton victory was expected. The speaker discusses the alleged intrusion into the Democratic National Committee (DNC), pointing to "telltale signs in Cyrillic" and the name "Felix Dzerzhinsky" as either sloppy or overly clever attempts to implicate Russia. He alleges that the persona "Guccifer 2.0" is a fraud, based on forensic analysis of metadata by former NSA technical directors. The speaker criticizes Bob Mueller, claiming he falsified intelligence before the Iraq War and approved of torture and wiretapping. He recounts an encounter where he questioned Mueller about "parallel construction," the practice of using illegally acquired information in prosecutions without revealing its source. The speaker describes James Comey's leaking of a conversation with President Trump to prompt the appointment of a special prosecutor, Bob Mueller. He questions Comey's decision not to seize the DNC computers after the alleged Russian hacking, relying instead on CrowdStrike, a firm with a "disastrous record of veracity." The speaker claims that the DNC blamed Russia for the hacking to divert attention from the content of the leaked emails. He references Jennifer Palmieri, Hillary Clinton's PR person, allegedly pushing the "Russians hacked" narrative. Chuck Schumer is quoted as saying the intelligence community has "six ways to Sunday" to get back at Trump. The speaker discusses the Steele dossier and claims that the FBI also paid for it. He alleges that the intelligence community assessment on Russian hacking was based on handpicked analysts and that Obama stated the conclusions of Russian hacking getting to WikiLeaks were inconclusive. He claims NSA collects everything and there is no evidence of Russian hacking. The speaker references Peter Strzok and Lisa Page's text messages, where they expressed support for Hillary Clinton and a determination to "stop" Trump. He claims Strzok, who led the investigation of Hillary Clinton's emails, later said there was "no there there" regarding Russia gate. The speaker claims Julian Assange released documentation of the CIA's cyber tool to hack into systems and leave telltale signs giving the responsibility to someone else. He concludes that a "deep state" within the FBI, CIA, and Justice Department acted to ensure Hillary Clinton's victory and undermine Trump.

A Microsoft certified security expert provided evidence of a Dominion vote counting machine in a swing state with a wireless card connected to a thermostat's wireless network. The IP address traced back to a city in China, linked to a Chinese corporation involved in questionable dealings with American politicians. There is a thick binder of documented evidence showing foreign access and interference in the election, including public statements from the FBI and DHS warning about Iran's involvement. The evidence is undeniable, and those questioning it should argue with the FBI and DHS. The photographs and IPs provide conclusive proof of foreign interference in the voting systems.

Seth Rich was asked to image the DNC server, which he did. The RNC was also hacked to frame Trump. Rich realized he was wrong and tried to expose it. He contacted Sean Lucas, who died soon after. Rich had portions of the DNC server. CrowdStrike investigated and blamed Russia. The Ukrainian president was asked for CrowdStrike servers. Many connected to the Russian dossier and impeachment. Trump was targeted.

The speaker discusses an email mentioning Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was murdered. The email refers to Julian Assange's claim that Rich was a WikiLeaks source and may have been killed for leaking DNC emails. The FBI denies specific involvement but admits awareness of the reporting. There is mention of squashing the inquiry, possibly involving a media outlet. The speaker questions why the FBI didn't investigate Rich's murder despite public suggestions of his involvement in the leaks. They compare it to the FBI's investigation into Donald Trump based on rumors. The speaker finds it interesting how the FBI decides what to investigate and the basis for their decisions.

A former Bernie Sanders supporter who worked for the DNC leaked information to WikiLeaks, exposing the rigging of the primary against Sanders. He was subsequently murdered. The speaker emphasizes that this is not a conspiracy theory, but a fact. They also discuss Julian Assange and the consequences of sharing information with WikiLeaks. The speaker suggests that the CIA wants Assange and controls various organizations to achieve their goals. They mention the possibility of more revelations related to Seth Rich and the number of people connected to the Clintons who have been killed.

A federal investigator told Fox News that Seth Rich, a DNC staffer murdered in July, contacted WikiLeaks through Gavin McFadden, providing over 44,000 emails. WikiLeaks then published DNC emails showing efforts to undermine Bernie Sanders, leading to resignations. Julian Assange alluded to risks faced by WikiLeaks sources, referencing Rich's murder. Some suggest Rich leaked the DNC emails to WikiLeaks and was killed because of it. The timing of the Fox News story, which was later retracted, coincided with the appointment of Mueller and the Comey firing, allegedly deflecting from the Russia investigation. It's claimed the FBI never investigated the DNC hack, instead relying on CrowdStrike. Some DNC members believed Rich was murdered for political reasons. One speaker alleges Hillary and Bill Clinton initiated a "civilian coup" by co-opting various government agencies. A "counter-coup" was allegedly initiated through Julian Assange and WikiLeaks by members of the intelligence community to undermine the Clintons and expose corruption. The speaker claims this was a peaceful effort to ensure a transition without pardons or acts of treason.

The transcript presents a series of claims about foreign interference, voting-system vulnerabilities, and alleged cover-ups related to the 2020 U.S. elections. - A 2020 FBI intelligence memo warned that China might have been sending fake driver’s licenses into the U.S. to produce fake mail-in ballots to help Joe Biden win. The memo’s integrity was questioned because the FBI reportedly called the intelligence back, and the agencies were asked to destroy the report, allegedly to avoid negative optics for Trump and Biden. The claim is that the licenses intercepted by Customs and Border Protection in Chicago corroborated the intel, yet no investigation followed. It is further stated that the FBI’s handling was intended to prevent leak before the election that China preferred Biden. - A 60 Minutes segment featuring Chris Krebs, then head of Homeland Security Cybersecurity Division, purportedly stated there were no foreign intrusions in the 2020 election and that it was a perfectly clean election. The transcript asserts this was later shown to be false, noting: - A 2021 indictment of Iranians in Manhattan for interfering with the election and hacking a state database to obtain voter IDs for an influence operation against the U.S. election. - Colorado-specific allegations include: - From June onward, passwords (seventy-six of them) from 63 of 64 Colorado counties’ secretary of state bios/passwords were publicly accessible on a site, implying broad exposure. The speaker accuses Secretary of State Jenna Griswold of knowing about the leak during a trial and not informing clerks, and asserts she should be held to account. - The speaker asserts ongoing concerns about leaked passwords for Dominion machines, suggesting potential compromises across other states and tying this to a broader cartel narrative involving Arizona, Michigan, and Dominion’s Colorado headquarters in Denver, with a note that Dominion is also connected to Serbia. - Mentions a video by Gary Brunson and references to a 30-year CIA whistleblower, linking the events back to Venezuela (Hugo Chávez) and to Patrick Byrne, suggesting a broader international corruption thread. - The transcript then asserts a second, explicit foreign operation: - In August 2020, three and a half months before the votes, the FBI believed China had begun a mass operation to produce fake U.S. driver’s licenses, arrange to bring Chinese citizens into the U.S. with the intent of obtaining fake mail-in ballots to vote for Joe Biden. The intelligence purportedly came from a Chinese intelligence source handled by the FBI, and the operation aimed to help Biden beat Trump. The claim emphasizes that the operation’s intention was to assist Biden. - Additionally, there are various related claims and items: - A claim of sensational evidence about a factory in Guangdong producing 500,000 blank American ballots, with an asserted link to a source (Vanessa Olivarez, claimed as a third-generation member of the Chinese Communist Party) and a purported translated phone recording between a caller and a ballot-printing company, circulated by Gateway Pundit. - An assertion that 20,000 fake driver’s IDs were intercepted by Customs and Border Protection, corroborating the intelligence, while the Biden administration and FBI (Chris Ray) allegedly covered this up, with the information sent to Chuck Grassley by Kash Patel. - An assertion that, since 2020, tightening voting laws in several states increased voter confidence, but China viewed mail-in voting as a vulnerability to exploit. - Individual testimonies and incidents: - Arrests reported by Speaker 5 (HSI Miami and partners) of a permanent resident Haitian national convicted felon for unlawful voting and casting a false ballot. - Speaker 6 claims 130,000 to 280,000 completed ballots were shipped from Bethpage, New York to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, with the trailer disappearing. - Speaker 7 describes witnessing thousands of ballots with return addresses loaded onto a trailer in New York headed for Pennsylvania, and questions the purpose. - Speaker 8 notes tens of thousands of fake voters and illegally cast ballots in the November election, asserting impacts across down-ballot races. - The speakers reference broader connections among Venezuela, U.S. election irregularities, and international actors, tying together various claims about foreign interference, domestic vulnerabilities, and alleged concealment or delay of intelligence reports.

DNC staffer Seth Rich was murdered in July, and the case remains unsolved. Police initially reported it as a robbery gone wrong, but nothing was stolen from Rich. Private investigator Rod Wheeler claims Rich was in contact with WikiLeaks and provided them with DNC emails. Wheeler says a federal investigator saw an FBI report showing Rich transferred over 44,000 emails and 17,000 attachments to Gavin McFadgen of WikiLeaks before May 21, 2016. Twelve days after Rich's death, WikiLeaks published DNC emails. McFadgen died of lung cancer shortly before the election. Wheeler believes Rich's laptop holds the answers, but its whereabouts are unknown. The FBI denies having the laptop and refers questions to the DC police, who Wheeler says have been unhelpful. Another unusual death was that of former UN president John Ashe, who died from a crushed windpipe days before testifying with a Chinese businessman accused of funneling money to the DNC. One American News and others have offered money for information on Rich's murder, but the DNC has not offered a reward.

A Bernie Sanders supporter who worked for the DNC leaked information to WikiLeaks, exposing the rigging of the primary against Sanders. He was subsequently murdered. The speaker emphasizes that this is not a conspiracy theory, but a fact. They also discuss Julian Assange and the consequences of sharing information with WikiLeaks. The speaker believes that Assange is being targeted by the CIA. They mention the possibility of the Ecuadorian embassy being blown up and suggest that more information, like the Seth Rich case, will continue to come out. The speaker acknowledges that some connections to the Clintons may be coincidental, but believes there are many suspicious deaths associated with them.

Seth Rich, a DNC employee, imaged the DNC server as requested. The server was hacked to manipulate data, implicating Trump. Rich shared the data with Sean Lucas, who later died. The FBI never examined the server. CrowdStrike, linked to Russian intelligence, investigated the hack. Obama's lawyer later sought information on Rich, but it was too late. The narrative suggests a conspiracy involving the DNC, Hillary Clinton, and Trump. The involvement of CrowdStrike and the Ukraine call by Trump are highlighted as suspicious.

The conversation centers on the Seth Rich murder and its alleged connection to WikiLeaks and the 2016 DNC email controversy. An FBI forensic report purportedly found that Rich contacted WikiLeaks through a London-based WikiLeaks director, Gavin McFadden, and Rich allegedly provided McFadden with more than 44,000 emails and nearly 18,000 attachments. Rich was killed near his DC home on July 10, but his wallet, phone, and watch were not taken. WikiLeaks published internal DNC emails twelve days later, showing top DNC officials discussing ways to hurt Bernie Sanders at the polls, which contributed to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz as DNC chair and the DNC’s top three officials. Speaker 1 questions whether there is an “October surprise” and whether material is being held. Speaker 2 of the Helix group states that they do not sit on material and emphasizes that whistleblowers take significant risks; they note Rich’s murder as an example of high stakes and risk to sources, asserting that sources seek anonymity with them. When Speaker 1 asks if Rich was a source, Speaker 2 declines to comment but says they are investigating what happened to Rich and are concerned about it, though no conclusion has been reached. Speaker 3 argues that Rich was a Bernie Sanders supporter who worked for the DNC and asserts that the DNC rigged the primary against Sanders; he notes that Rich was aware of this and was involved as it happened, with Donald Brazil also involved. He describes Rich as idealistic and patriotic, and recounts his murder after leaking information to WikiLeaks, insisting that this is not a conspiracy theory but a fact-based concern. He challenges others to acknowledge the alleged corruption within the Democratic party and suggests that those who ignore the facts are engaging in denial. He also critiques media portrayals and online accusations about his own credibility. Speaker 4 discusses Assange and WikiLeaks, criticizing the idea of a conspiracy theory and labeling Assange as a key figure who exposed corruption. He mentions that Assange now “works for Russia” and questions the Ecuadorian embassy situation, describing it as heavily manipulated by interests around Hillary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. He connects the Seth Rich disclosures to broader allegations of a coordinated effort to undermine Clinton and her circle, while acknowledging that some related claims may be questionable. Speaker 6 notes that hacking of the DNC and the role of CrowdStrike remain controversial and points to the subsequent murder of Rich as a focal point for questions that have not been fully explored by the media. Speaker 7 echoes concerns about the timeline, the FBI’s involvement, and past inquiries that were not pursued, emphasizing a sense that the case and the broader narrative around the DNC emails have been inadequately examined. Speaker 8 presents a long, conspiratorial narrative alleging that on 11/01/2016 Hillary and Bill Clinton orchestrated a civilian coup through corruption and co-option of key institutions, while a countercoup through Julian Assange and WikiLeaks was initiated to undermine Hillary and the Clinton machine. The speaker claims a silent countercoup across the Internet, led by members of the intelligence community, to stop the Clintons from gaining power and ensure Obama leaves without pardon, framing the moment as a major transitional event and a second American revolution conducted without guns.

The war right now happening between Russia, Ukraine, and the West support of it actually was an extension of Russiagate. "Russiagate desensitized the Democrat party to hate Russia." The Russia narrative "came ex nihilo." "Putin became an acceptable villain for the Democrat party." "That all goes back to Russiagate." Our intel services are actually more about picking winners and losers in American elections and to thwart the will of pop sovereignty. "Obama personally ordered an intel report"—"Russia behind this election?" The report said no. "Russia was not behind this election, did not manipulate votes." FBI and CIA seem to be working on the same page. "The insurance policy" and "Dossier paid for by the Democrat party with Clinton funds to then illegally be able to spy on the Trump campaign." Rod Rosenstein was running the entire DOJ. This is the fourth branch of government—"unelected, unaccountable."

Speaker 0 argues that sowing seeds of doubt about the legitimacy of our elections undermines democracy, calls it dangerous, and says it is work that benefits adversaries because democracy depends on people knowing that their vote matters and that those who occupy power were chosen by the people. Speaker 1 states that every intelligence agency in the federal government arrived at a consensus that the Russians hacked the DNC, and that the information released was the consequence of a decision by Russian intelligence and Russian officials at the highest levels; the CIA assesses that it was done purposefully to tilt the election toward a particular candidate, which is not a surprise, and this was helping the Trump campaign and hurting the Hillary campaign.

News alert discusses Tulsi Gabbard releasing a report alleging a conspiracy by a sitting president, Barack Obama, and U.S. intel agencies to undermine Donald Trump’s presidency and the 2016 election. The report claims there is irrefutable evidence that Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment they knew was false, promoting a narrative that Russia interfered in 2016 to help Trump win. Gabbard says she obtained a House Intelligence Committee report that had been locked away in a CIA vault for nearly a decade, and investigators spent over two thousand hours interviewing 20 CIA and FBI officials. The assertion is that the Obama administration doctored intelligence to imply Putin and Trump colluded to steal the election, with a highly unusual, rush-developed assessment produced a month after Trump’s victory. John Brennan allegedly handpicked five CIA analysts to write the assessment, who were siloed and not aware of each other’s work, with only one analyst in charge of drafting. The process was described as a rush job with no coordination with other intelligence agencies, essentially “home cooking” for Obama. The four key elements repeated in the assessment, forming the basis of the Russia hoax and the Mueller investigation, are: 1) that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win; 2) Putin took actions to help Trump win; 3) the Russians had blackmail on Trump (the Steele dossier); and 4) that the Russians tried colluding with the Trump campaign. The claim is that none of these were true, and there was no reliable intelligence to support them. Senior CIA officials allegedly refused to propagate these allegations, but were overruled by CIA Director Brennan and FBI Director Comey, who pressed for them despite lacking verifiable evidence. The report alleges the Obama administration cherry-picked intelligence, misquoted sources, did not corroborate claims, suppressed counter-evidence, and even used anonymous internet postings. Rank-and-file CIA personnel allegedly admitted that these actions violated tradecraft standards, with a pressure campaign emanating from political appointees, the CIA director, and Obama himself. Speaker 1 asserts that Donald Trump knows Russia helped him win in 2016. Speaker 2 suggests Putin’s preference for Trump came from his dislike of Hillary Clinton, who was running, while Speaker 3 states Russia sought to interfere systematically to advance Trump’s prospects. The conversation notes that at one point, 60% of Democrats believed Russia hacked voting machines to aid Trump, yet the report contends Russians aimed to create chaos and undermine faith in democracy, with solid intelligence indicating Putin had no clear preference between Clinton and Trump but had dirt on Clinton that was not released. The discussion questions why the dirt from the DNC emails and claims about Clinton’s health, including tranquilizers, were not leaked to aid Trump, and whether the information about Clinton’s health is credible. The panel suggests that if Russia sought to influence the election, more damning information would have been released. The speakers claim Obama and top intelligence leaders mischaracterized intelligence and relied on dubious sources to craft a narrative of Putin’s preference for Trump. They contend Obama continued pushing the hoax after the election, describing it as undermining democracy. Towards the end, there is mention of potential criminal implications, with references to referrals to the Department of Justice and FBI for investigation, including possible liability for Obama. A tester voices that Brennan may have committed perjury before Congress. A final note asserts that the CIA did not rely on the Steele dossier for the intelligence community assessment, countering a claim made in the discussion. The segment closes with a call for accountability.

Speaker 0: The speaker alleges a cover-up by people including Bill Barr and Mike Pompeo. Bill Barr, described by Jeffrey Epstein as “CIA,” allegedly covered up Epstein’s murder in federal detention, with Barr saying publicly, “we gotta make sure everyone thinks this is a suicide.” The speaker asks why Barr isn’t being questioned about this. Mike Pompeo is accused of plotting to murder Julian Assange, head of WikiLeaks. The speaker notes that WikiLeaks released the first tranche of emails to the public, and that Assange suggested on Dutch TV that his source was Seth Rich, a DNC staffer who was found murdered in Washington in what was described as a robbery where nothing was taken. Assange hinted in the interview that his sources faced great risks, mentioning Seth Rich; the interviewer pressed whether Rich was murdered for the leaks, and Assange said he couldn’t reveal sources but that they faced risks. Shortly after, Assange was incarcerated, first in an embassy in London and then in Belmarsh Prison, without criminal charges, actions the speaker attributes to the CIA and Mike Pompeo. The speaker contends that someone should ask Pompeo about this. Speaker 1: The speaker expresses anger at what they see as broad, systemic cover-ups versus ordinary Americans facing jail for minor offenses. They reference Pizzagate and Epstein, asserting that cover-ups extend across other issues, including Benghazi and Hillary Clinton material, which they claim were never properly pursued with the appropriate parties. They point to a long list of alleged co-conspirators connected to the Epstein matter, including those revealed in a recent document drop and corroborated subsequently. The list reportedly includes ten co-conspirators: one named Leslie Wexner, pilots (three identified by name), and others such as Ghislain Maxwell and various assistants who recruited girls, as well as individuals trafficking models. The speaker asserts there were many people around Epstein who were deeply involved and deserve serious questioning. They also reference Ehud Barak as among those connected to the network. Overall: The conversation presents multiple allegations of high-level complicity and cover-ups involving Bill Barr, Mike Pompeo, Julian Assange, Seth Rich, and a broad network around Jeffrey Epstein, including named and unnamed individuals, with claims of documented co-conspirators and ongoing questions about accountability.

There is irrefutable evidence that detail how president Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment that they knew was false. The Obama administration doctored the intelligence to make it look like Putin and Trump stole the election. A month after Trump beat Hillary, Barack Obama wasn't satisfied with his intelligence reporting and ordered his CIA director to create a new assessment of how Russia interfered with the election. John Brennan handpicked five CIA analysts to write the assessment, and they were siloed. None of them knew what the other was doing, and only one analyst was in charge of drafting this report. There was a massive pressure campaign that came right from the top. Obama and his spy chiefs knew that Putin didn't prefer Trump over Hillary, but they cooked the intelligence to make it look like he did.

- Speaker 0 states they believe certain people are dishonest and crooked and that they may have to pay a price; they insist they are truly bad and dishonest people, and imply consequences may follow. - Speaker 1 discusses a criminal investigation into James Comey and John Brennan related to the so-called Russian collusion hoax, asserting they tried to ruin Trump’s life and that he prevailed. - Speaker 1 notes that for years, ranking members of Congress, the intelligence community, and the FBI claimed Donald Trump was colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election, and that this was continued through his first presidency. - Speaker 2 references emails suggesting Donald Trump Jr. was willing to collude with Russia, questioning how to know what happens when Trump and Putin meet, and suggests Trump’s repeated denials of collusion may have been truthful. - Speaker 3 asks if there has been any evidence of collusion, coordination, or conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia, and Speaker 2 disagrees, saying there is plenty of evidence of collusion or conspiracy in plain sight. - Speaker 1 cites a recently declassified CIA “lessons learned” document from John Ratcliffe noting that the investigation was messed up, aimed at preventing Trump from winning and then hampering his agenda, and mentions multiple procedural anomalies in the preparation of the ICA (intelligence community assessment). - They walk through the timeline: Christopher Steele, a former MI-6 officer with Russian intel expertise, was hired by Fusion GPS, which was paid by Perkins Coie for Hillary Clinton’s campaign (notably Mark Elias) to produce opposition research on Trump; this unvetted dossier was used to bolster the case and was shopped to media to create a narrative of Trump-Russia ties, then used as a legal hook to push a narrative. - Speaker 1 argues Hillary Clinton leveraged influence to funnel the unverified dossier into the FBI and into a FISA warrant for Carter Page, noting it was not disclosed that the dossier was funded by Hillary Clinton, which they view as a major omission. - Ratcliffe’s document is cited as saying including the Steele dossier in the ICA undermined credibility and ran counter to tradecraft principles. - A second parallel element involved Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Russian lawyer paid by Fusion GPS and Clinton campaign, who met Don Jr. at Trump Tower; Don Jr. texted during the meeting that he was unsure what was happening, and the meeting was publicly used to support the Steele dossier claims about Trump’s ties to Russia. - The Speaker covers Hillary Clinton’s classified server issue, including the use of BleachBit and hammers, and notes DNC servers were hacked by Russia; they frame these events as being used to shift focus to Trump collusion. - They describe Crossfire Hurricane as the investigation into Trump, calling it an “insurance policy” to deflect attention from Clinton’s classified server issues and to portray Trump as guilty, describing the investigations into Trump associates (Papadopoulos, Carter Page, Manafort, Flynn) as efforts to keep the narrative alive even after Trump’s election victory. - Speaker 1 asserts Mueller’s appointment was scope-limited but later expanded, allowing broad access and substantial taxpayer cost; Brennan and Comey are accused of feeding initial information for a political purpose, with high-level agency involvement and misrepresentation in Congress. - They claim there was never any actual evidence of Russian collusion charged against the Trump campaign. - They mention Charles McGonigal, a former FBI counterintelligence official, as someone charged in connection with Russia, implying the broader narrative was invalid and asserting that those involved lied. - The speakers conclude that the entire setup was a scam and express a desire for accountability.

Speaker 1 believes the unsolved murder of Seth Rich should still be under investigation by the DC police or the FBI's counterintelligence unit. Speaker 1 suggests a possible motive involving Imran Awan, a Pakistani intelligence asset who allegedly controlled DNC servers and servers of several members of Congress. Speaker 1 believes Pakistan's ISI would have a motive to target Seth Rich, fearing he possessed information on his laptop that could expose Awan. Speaker 1 states the FBI's involvement suggests they had also been tricked by Awan, who was also an asset of theirs.

The speaker discusses the hacking of the DNC and mentions someone named Seth who allegedly provided information. However, the speaker does not reveal their sources. They believe that the files were not hacked by Russia but rather leaked from within the building. The speaker mentions Bill Binney, a former NSA officer, who supposedly demonstrated this. They also mention that lies about the hacking led to tensions with Russia. The speaker admits to initially dismissing the conspiracy theories surrounding the issue but later realized the truth. They express frustration with the lack of transparency and understanding surrounding certain actions and question the motives behind them.

- "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."

Speaker 0 states that a federal investigator told Fox News that an FBI forensic report on Seth Rich’s computer showed he made contact with WikiLeaks through a London-based WikiLeaks director, Gavin McFadden, and that Rich provided McFadden with more than 44,000 emails and nearly 18,000 attachments. Rich was killed near his DC home on July 10; his wallet, cell phone, and watch were not taken. WikiLeaks published internal DNC emails twelve days later showing top DNC officials trading ideas on how to hurt Bernie Sanders at the polls, leading to the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz and the DNC’s top three officials because of the apparent conclusions in those emails. Speaker 1 asks if there is an October surprise and whether anything is known about what is being sat on. Speaker 2 replies that WikiLeaks never sits on material, noting that whistleblowers take significant risks to provide material. He references a 27-year-old DNC worker who was shot in the back in Washington two weeks earlier for unknown reasons, insisting there is no finding that it was a robbery, and questioning what is being implied. Speaker 1 presses, asking if the murdered man was one of their sources. Speaker 2 declines to comment on sources, reiterating that the stakes are high in the United States and that sources face serious risks, which is why they come to WikiLeaks to protect their anonymity. He acknowledges the seriousness of the murder and says they are investigating what happened with Seth Rich, though no conclusion has been reached, and that a variety of WikiLeaks sources are concerned when such events occur. Speaker 3 contends that Seth Rich was a Bernie Sanders supporter who worked for the DNC and implies the DNC rigged the primary against Bernie Sanders. He asserts Rich was murdered after leaking information to WikiLeaks, describing Rich as a young, idealistic patriot who wore American flag attire, and argues that the murder is connected to corruption in the Democratic Party. He reflects on his own experience with online detractors and acknowledges flaws in many political figures; he asserts that it is rare to find someone who wants to be “the king of the world” and notes his own perceived lack of reputation. Speaker 4 contributes with emotion, insisting that Seth Rich was murdered and that the claim of a botched robbery is unfounded, listing inconsistencies (wallet, watch, phone left behind). He references Julian Assange and Russia, calling Assange the “darling of the left” when Obama was in office and later noting that Assange is stuck in the Ecuadorian embassy. Speaker 5 and Speaker 6 discuss broader context: Speaker 6 notes that the week WikiLeaks coverage happened on Fox News coincided with Mueller’s appointment and Comey’s firing, suggesting Fox pivoted from Russia stories to Seth Rich to deflect. Speaker 7 explains DNC data release timing, claiming FAT (file allocation table) formatting changed last-modified times on files, implying data was downloaded to a physical device before publication, suggesting an inside job rather than a Russian hack. Speaker 8 links the chain of events to the FBI, CrowdStrike, and questions about the investigation, alleging possible media silence and questioning why the murder case wasn’t more scrutinized. Speaker 9 recalls a private investigator’s work and notes that the FBI came to possess Rich’s laptop, with some at the DNC suspecting political motivation behind his murder; he asserts a media lack of follow-up. Speaker 10 presents a much broader claim: on 11/01/2016, Hillary and Bill Clinton allegedly orchestrated a civilian coup through corruption and co-optation, and a counter coup through Julian Assange and WikiLeaks was initiated by intelligence communities to prevent Hillary from becoming president and to indict Obama administration figures, describing this as a silent, internet-based counter coup and promising a peaceful transition without violence.

Fox News alert: Tulsi Gabbard releases a report alleging a conspiracy by a sitting president, Barack Obama, and his intel agencies to sabotage the president-elect Donald Trump, brainwash the electorate, and undermine the legitimacy of an election. There is irrefutable evidence detailing how Obama and his national security team directed the creation of an intelligence community assessment they knew was false, promoting a narrative that Russia interfered in the 2016 election to help Trump win, selling it to the American people as true. Gabbard obtained a House Intelligence Committee report locked away in a CIA vault for almost a decade. Investigators spent over two thousand hours interviewing 20 CIA and FBI officials, and it shows the Obama administration doctored intelligence to make it look like Putin and Trump stole the election. A month after Trump beat Hillary, Obama wasn’t satisfied with intelligence reporting and ordered his CIA director to create a new assessment of how Russia interfered with the election. This was a highly unusual move. John Brennan handpicked five CIA analysts to write the assessment, and they were siloed; none knew what the others were doing, and only one analyst was in charge of drafting the report. It was not routine, and it was rushed to publish before Trump’s inauguration. Nothing was coordinated with other intelligence agencies. Basically, this was “home cooking” for Barack Obama. Four key elements were repeated to form the basis of the Russia hoax and the Mueller investigation: 1) that Vladimir Putin wanted Trump to win; 2) Putin took action to help Trump win; 3) the Russians had blackmail on Trump (the Steele dossier); and 4) that the Russians tried colluding with the Trump campaign. None of this was ever true; there was no reliable intelligence to support these allegations. Senior CIA officials repeatedly refused to traffic in these allegations, but were overruled by CIA director Brennan and FBI director Comey, who insisted they be pushed without verifiable evidence. The Obama administration cherry-picked intelligence, lied about sources, misquoted sources, did not corroborate claims, suppressed intelligence counter to their narratives, and even used anonymous Internet postings. Rank-and-file CIA admitted violations of tradecraft standards; a massive pressure campaign came from the top, with unusual directives from political appointees, the CIA director, and Obama himself. This is how the Russia hoax was born. Donald Trump knows that the Russians helped him win in 2016. Putin hated Hillary Clinton, with a noted preference for the opponent he disliked least. It was Russia in a systematic effort to interfere in the election and advance Trump’s prospects. The report notes that at one point, 60% of Democrats believed the Russians hacked voting machines to help Trump win, but the report shows Russians sought to create chaos and undermine democracy; solid intelligence suggested Putin had no preference, and expected Hillary to win, holding compromising dirt on her that he never released. If Putin wanted Trump to win, why didn’t he drop the dirt? There were high-level DNC emails detailing Hillary’s psycho-emotional problems, uncontrolled fits of anger, aggression, and a daily regimen of tranquilizers; Brennan and the intelligence community mischaracterized intelligence and relied on dubious sources to create a narrative of Putin’s preference for Trump, though Obama and intelligence leaders knew Putin did not collude with Trump and did not direct his people to help Trump win, yet they published it anyway. Obama and his intel spies purportedly cooked intelligence to look like Putin preferred Trump, undermining faith in elections and causing chaos. Do you believe this implicates Obama in criminal behavior? There is a referral of documents to the Department of Justice and the FBI to investigate criminal implications. Evidence points to Obama leading the manufacturing of the intelligence assessment. Even two years after the election, Obama pushed a hoax he knew wasn’t true. Brennan, Comey, and others may have liability. Trey Gowdy claims Brennan committed perjury for lying to Congress. When asked who commissioned the Steele dossier, responses indicate the CIA did not rely on it; it was not part of the intelligence community assessment. The broadcast concludes with the assertion that what happened to these officials is not revenge, but accountability, while noting ongoing questions about potential criminal action.

A former DNC staffer and Bernie Sanders supporter was allegedly murdered after leaking information to WikiLeaks about the DNC rigging the primary. The speaker questions why this is dismissed as a conspiracy theory, pointing out that the staffer's wallet, watch, and phone were not taken, contrary to a robbery gone wrong. Julian Assange, once favored by the left, is now accused of working for Russia after warning of consequences for sharing information with WikiLeaks. Assange is stuck in the Ecuadorian embassy because the CIA wants him. The speaker claims many people connected to Hillary Clinton, the Clinton Foundation, and Bill Clinton have died, some coincidentally, but the number is still stunning.

Speaker 0 presents a video focused on data and evidence of alleged irregularities in the 2020 election, asserting that there has been no comprehensive place to see widespread fraud until now. He states the video is “pure data” and invites viewers to consider the statistical anomalies in three states (Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia) in the early hours of 11/04/2020, when Biden received major vote spikes after trailing Trump. - He analyzes 8,954 individual vote updates and identifies a clear statistical pattern across nearly all updates, with four notably aberrant updates: two in Michigan, one in Wisconsin, and one in Georgia, all occurring in the same five-hour window in the middle of the night when counting reportedly stopped in some places. - In Michigan, a 06:30AM update shows Biden at 141,258 votes to Trump’s 5,968, described as the most extreme update in all datasets across all states, followed by a noticeable ratio change in nearby updates. In Wisconsin, a single update allegedly moved Biden from trailing by over 100,000 votes into the lead. In Georgia, a 01:34AM Eastern Time update shows Biden at 136,155 to Trump’s 29,115. They claim these four spikes exceed the states’ margins of victory, making the spikes not only abnormal by percentage but also by magnitude. They conclude that if these four unlikely updates had not happened, the presidency could have been different. - Detractors are cited as arguing human error, but the video questions where evidence of corrections is, and notes that California shows only one anomalous update in percentage, not enough magnitude to shift outcomes. - A “consistently identical ratio of Biden to Trump votes across time” is highlighted as allegedly impossible, with a Florida example showing 100 identical ratios over several days. The video asserts a computer algorithm is involved, termed a weighted race distribution, associated with Diebold voting machines (known as early as 2001), implying values rather than simple counts. - In California, a single update is shown with Biden receiving about 65% and Trump 32% for one vote, raising questions about how one vote could go to more than one candidate. Speaker 0 then links these patterns to alleged connections between Diebold and Dominion Voting Systems, claiming Dominion acquired ESNS in 2010, which had previously acquired Diebold, and that Dominion’s software is licensed from Smartmatic. They also note that forensic audits show errors and that the mainstream narrative claims these issues are misinformation. They reference NBC News and PBS findings on how easy it is to hack voting machines or cast fake votes. Next, Speaker 0 notes eyewitness and video evidence from Georgia: poll worker Ruby allegedly was filmed in the backroom with absentee ballots, and at 10:30PM on November 3, media and poll watchers were told to leave, yet Ruby and others remained, pulling ballots from under a table and distributing them to counting stations. They describe Ruby running the same stack of ballots to the machine three times, observing a large Biden surge after 01:34AM Georgia time, and question whether a ballot can be counted more than once, citing Coffey County, Georgia as an example of someone claiming to scan the same batches repeatedly. Speaker 0 references Raquel Rodriguez, arrested for election fraud in Texas over video evidence of ballot harvesting, and asserts that cybersecurity evidence indicates Dominion and Edison Research used an unencrypted VPN with easily accessible credentials allowing foreign access, asserting that China, Iran, and other countries accessed the servers, contradicting claims that Dominion machines were not connected to the Internet. They mention Dominion’s association with a Chinese-registered domain, and board members with Chinese nationality, alleging conflicts of interest through corporate ownership and licensing from Smartmatic. Speaker 0 highlights that Antrim County, Michigan audits found high error and adjudication rates in Dominion, with an 68 o 5% error rate far above federal guidelines, missing logs for 2020, and reprogramming of election event designer cards during the safe harbor period. They point to subpoenas and the lack of access to logs, and to affidavits from poll workers claiming illegal activities, non-equal treatment of observers, counting without proper oversight, shredding ballots, and other irregularities. Speaker 7 concludes with a claim that many Americans distrust the 2020 election and urges viewers to download and share the video, demand election reform, and notes that the video’s credits will continue with data readers, while warning of erasure or fact checks by tech platforms.