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.

During the discussion, Speaker 1 mentions an interesting observation regarding the voter rolls. They found that 11,326 individuals who were not listed on the November 7th version of the voter rolls appeared on the December 4th version, despite showing as having voted in the recent election. Speaker 0 seeks an explanation for this discrepancy, emphasizing that they are not implying fraud but simply seeking answers. Speaker 1 admits they cannot think of a logical explanation and suggests reaching out to the county for clarification. The conversation ends there.

There are concerns about duplicate ballots in the audit. The speaker mentions that there should be a lower count due to duplicates, but they are not seeing any reference to duplicates in the forms. Speaker 1 explains that duplicate ballots are created when the original ballot is damaged and cannot be processed. These duplicates should have a matching 6-digit serial number with the original damaged ballot, but they cannot find the matching originals. Speaker 2 confirms this, stating that they are finding duplicate ballots without corresponding serial numbers on the damaged originals. They are struggling to match the duplicated ballots with the missing originals.

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.

Speaker 0 mentions the possibility of printing out something. Speaker 1 asks if there is an explanation for the uncounted votes. Speaker 2 clarifies that there is no concrete explanation for why those votes were not counted by the machine in the first place. Speaker 1 confirms that they don't know why the votes didn't get scanned. Speaker 2 asks if the Dominion Tech guys have figured out the reason, but Speaker 0 says they are not allowed to comment. Speaker 1 believes it wasn't a memory card issue. Speaker 2 asks if memory cards can be ruled out, and Speaker 1 agrees. Speaker 0 suggests it may be human error, but they don't have evidence to confirm it. Speaker 2 questions if it could be a software issue, but Speaker 0 refuses to speculate. Speaker 2 acknowledges the lack of a definite answer.

We subpoenaed Fulton County for 518,000 ballot images from the recount, not from election day. There are 380,761 missing ballot images from election day. Fulton County has not provided an explanation for this discrepancy. It is important for every vote to have a corresponding ballot image. Translation: We requested ballot images from Fulton County for the recount, not for election day. There are 380,761 missing ballot images from election day that have not been explained. It is crucial that every vote has a corresponding ballot image.

In this video, the speaker shows two batches of votes with identical markings. They point out a little tail and the word "Republican" written on both. They mention that there are 62 images in total, but they only highlight a few. The speaker doesn't remember the exact numbers, but they mention that the batches were fairly close. They also mention specific image numbers that match in both batches. The conclusion is that there are duplicate ballots and the entire batch has been scanned multiple times.

Speaker 0 mentions the possibility of printing out something. Speaker 1 asks if there is an explanation for why certain votes were not counted. Speaker 2 clarifies that there is no concrete explanation for why those votes were not counted by the machine. Speaker 1 confirms that they do not know why the votes were not scanned. Speaker 2 asks if the Dominion Tech guys have figured out the reason, but Speaker 0 says they are not allowed to comment. Speaker 2 asks if it could be a memory card issue, but Speaker 1 and Speaker 0 both say they don't think so. Speaker 0 suggests it could be human error, but they don't have evidence to confirm it. Speaker 2 questions if it could be a software issue, but Speaker 0 avoids speculation. They admit they don't have a definite answer yet. Speaker 2 acknowledges this and thanks them.

In the exchange, concerns are raised about mail-in ballots in Allegheny and Philadelphia counties and how they were counted. Speaker 0 notes that ballots were counted without observers, citing 682,770 ballots observed and asking about the 1,823,148 mailed-out ballots, contrasted with a final count showing 2,589,242 mail-in ballots. The core question is: what explains the roughly 700,000 mail-in ballots that “appeared from nowhere”? Speaker 1 responds that their cyber team uses white-hat hacking techniques to gather publicly available information from the secretary of state’s website, which has been updated as late as 11:16 this morning with provisional and mail-in ballots, though those numbers continue to change. He adds that the 2,500,000 figure is no longer on the website, and it has “just been taken off.” There is no annotation explaining why. Speaker 2 then describes an on-the-ground observation: a deputy sheriff, a senior law enforcement officer, was seen not being observed and walking in with baggies, with USBs being inserted into machines. The witness claims to have personally witnessed this 24 times, with additional witnesses including Democrat poll watchers. They were told by an attorney that every election leaves a couple of USB cards in the voting machines to be brought back by the warehouse manager, but this account is contradicted by law enforcement and other officials. The witness states that 47 USB cards are missing and “they’re nowhere to be found,” and that 32 to 30 cards uploaded were not present in the live vote update. The witness demanded timely live upload of vote results, which showed 50,000 votes; they assert those votes were for Vice President Biden, though they note that identifying who those votes were for should not matter to a computer scientist. Speaker 1 emphasizes that forensic evidence from the computers was not obtained: the procedure would involve turning off the computer, imaging the drive with BitLocker, under law enforcement observation, which would take about an hour for five machines. This forensic imaging was never performed, despite objections three weeks earlier. They later learned that virtually all chain-of-custody logs, yellow sheets, and forensic records in Delaware County were gone; a signing party attempted to recreate the logs with poll workers but was unsuccessful in recovering them all. The discussion concludes with a claim that there are 100,000 to 120,000 ballots, both mail-in and USB, in question, and that there is no remedy or “cure” within the local charter for certifying a presidential vote, leaving the speaker asserting that nobody could certify the vote in good conscience.

The investigation confirms 380,761 missing ballot images from election day. Fulton County was subpoenaed for recount images, not election day ones. It's unclear why the election day images are missing. Fulton County should ensure every vote has a corresponding ballot image. Translation: The investigation found 380,761 missing ballot images from election day. Fulton County was asked for recount images, not those from election day. The reason for the missing images is unknown. Fulton County should ensure that every vote has a corresponding ballot image.

The investigation confirms missing ballot images - 380,761 from election day not available. Subpoenaed 518,000 ballot images from Fulton County for recount, not election day. Fulton County does not have images for 380,761 election day ballots. County does not know why. Should every vote have a ballot image?

The investigation confirms that there are missing ballot images. Specifically, 380,761 ballot images from the election day machine count are not available. We subpoenaed Fulton County for all ballot images and received about 518,000, but these pertain to the recount, not the election day count. Thus, the missing images are a result of the focus on the recount rather than the original election day data.

- The discussion centers on ballot processing in Maricopa County, with several shipments arriving after the initial belief that counting was near completion. Speaker 0 notes that the Wednesday before the Friday they quit voting, and ten days before they quit tabulating, more truckloads of ballots came in, leading to the question: “how can you not know how many ballots are still out there?” - Speaker 1 asks for clarification: “They thought they were done.” The conversation confirms multiple times that those running the counting rooms believed they were almost done, or would be done, on Wednesday morning, then Thursday morning, then Friday morning, and the process extended into the next week. - Trucks bringing ballots arrived on the third, fourth, and fifth days, continuing throughout the last week. The last day mentioned is the tenth, with ballots still arriving. The company involved is Runback, described as doing high-speed scanning and printing of duplications and military ballots. There was no observer presence at Runback, and Speaker 0 indicates she had not been called to work there; she does not know exactly what Runback was doing (printing vs. scanning). - It is stated that all high-speed scanning occurs at Runback, and the ballots go to Runback. There is uncertainty about off-site scanning and whether Dominion equipment was involved. Speaker 0 clarifies: “They were duplications, the ballots that wouldn’t read through the tabulation machines. They were ballots that came in from military and overseas.” The number of additional sources for ballots beyond military/overseas is unknown, and Speaker 0 suggests this is a question for county employees to explain. - About the counting process: Speaker 0 confirms that the ballots went through tabulation machines and that adjudication work took place for those late arrivals. They observed the ballots being processed, but did not know the exact totals for certain days. - Daily volumes are described. Speaker 0 estimates: one day a shift might handle 90,000 ballots, and some days had similar volumes across three shifts; other days had fewer. There were days when as few as 15,000 ballots were processed. The “back door” arrivals are contrasted with the front door, with Speaker 0 noting that all back door ballots were received through back entries, not the front door. The remaining ballots in the latter part of the period continued to come in and be tabulated, with ongoing full-time shifts through the eighth, ninth, and tenth days. - The episode concludes with Speaker 1 seeking further explanation, and Speaker 0 indicating that some of the details were not fully known and that a county employee should clarify where the incoming ballots came from during the latter part of the period.

In recounting votes, I've noticed that simply comparing hand counts to machine counts doesn't address the origin of the ballots being counted. Often, we don't even know which precinct a ballot came from, especially when dealing with two-sided ballots. We focus solely on the vote itself without considering the front of the ballot. Additionally, the image quality of these questionable ballots in Pennsylvania and Arizona is not being examined during the recount process.

There are concerns about duplicate ballots in the audit. The count should be 3 lower due to duplicates, but they are not accounted for. Logan explains that duplicate ballots are created when the original is damaged and cannot be processed. Each duplicate should have a 6-digit serial number matching the original, but they cannot find the corresponding originals. They have found duplicate ballots with a unique identifier, but no matching serial number on the original. This creates difficulty in matching duplicated ballots with their originals. The concern is that the numbers do not add up and the reality does not match the sheets.

We discovered 1.7 million missing original ballot images from the 2020 election, out of 5 million ballots cast. The issue is with memory card retention rules. Memory cards in scanners hold in-person ballot images, audit logs, and records. The proposed solution is to modify the rule to comply with federal and state election record retention laws. A motion was made and passed to initiate rulemaking procedures on this matter.

Speaker 0 mentions the possibility of printing out something. Speaker 1 asks about the reason for the uncounted votes. Speaker 2 clarifies that there is no concrete explanation for why those votes were not counted by the machine. Speaker 1 confirms that they don't know why the votes didn't get scanned. Speaker 2 asks if the Dominion Tech guys have figured out the reason, but Speaker 0 says they are not allowed to comment. Speaker 2 points out that it hasn't been confirmed if it was a memory card issue. Speaker 1 agrees and suggests it could be human error. Speaker 0 says the ballots didn't transfer over correctly, but they don't have a definite answer yet. Speaker 2 asks if it could be a software issue, but Speaker 0 refuses to speculate. They conclude that they don't have a pinpointed answer at the moment.

A series of witnesses describe a large-scale movement of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, claiming that hundreds of thousands of completed ballots were shipped and later disappeared. One witness asserts that “130,000 to 280,000 completed ballots for the twenty twenty general election were shipped from Bethpage, New York to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, where those ballots and the trailer in which they were shipped disappeared.” The narrative emphasizes that the ballots were transported in a trailer from New York to Pennsylvania and subsequently vanished. Another witness recounts events on October 21, describing “a series of unusual events that cannot be a coincidence.” This person says, “I saw ballots with return addresses filled out, thousands of them, thousands, loaded onto my trailer in New York and headed for Pennsylvania.” While initially believing the task was beneficial for the presidential race and feeling it was “cool,” the witness later reflects, upon things getting weirder, on why they were driving “complete ballots from New York to Pennsylvania,” and states that they decided to speak up about it. A third participant broadens the scope, estimating “It could be a 144 to over, to a quarter million ballots.” This witness adds that the investigation indicates “there was a number, as in like a bunch of different trucks which engaged in this.” Reflecting on the potential impact, they note the magnitude of votes that could appear “the night of the election after midnight,” suggesting that an “artifact” would be necessary to explain this phenomenon. They further state that, when something is impossible to reconcile, “whatever remains must be the truth.” They claim that “the truth is ballot showed up. They were counted. They do not match necessarily the records of who should have voted,” and that “in some instances, the stats don't add up, and we continue to analyze that.” Collectively, the speakers contend they have evidence of “a massive transfer of of completed curated ballots ready to be injected into counting centers.” The statements emphasize a coordinated movement of completed ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, the disappearance of the ballots and their trailer, and allegations that ballots appeared, were counted, and did not necessarily align with expected voting records, with ongoing analysis indicating a substantial, orchestrated transfer intended to inject ballots into counting centers.

In the video, the speaker discusses the issue of 17,852 ballots that lack corresponding ballot images. This is a significant number, and while the speaker can explain the number, they cannot explain how this situation occurred. They mention that they hope to receive more information about it on Tuesday. The ballots were counted in the second machine count, but there is no associated ballot image for each of them.

In the video, the speakers discuss the issue of 17,852 ballots that lack corresponding ballot images. Speaker 0 acknowledges the significance of this number, prompting Speaker 1 to explain it. Speaker 1 clarifies that while they can explain the number, they cannot explain how it occurred. They express hope that more information will be provided on Tuesday regarding this matter.

Speaker 0 states that 682,770 ballots in Allegheny County and Philadelphia were counted without observation. Speaker 0 questions the discrepancy between the 1,823,148 mailed ballots sent out and the final count of 2,542,242 mail-in ballots, asking how to account for the 700,000 mail-in ballots that "appeared from nowhere." Speaker 1 says their cyber team uses white hat hacking techniques and gathers publicly available information from the Secretary of State's website, which is continually updated with provisional and mail-in ballot information. Speaker 1 notes that the 2,500,000 number is no longer on the website. Speaker 0 asks if there is any explanation for why it was taken off, and Speaker 1 responds that there are no annotations.

There are two different batches of votes being discussed in the video. The speaker points out that there are similarities between the ballots in these batches, such as a little tail and the word "Republican" written on them. They mention that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't have time to go through all of them. The speaker doesn't remember the exact numbers of the batches, but they mention that duplicate ballots were scanned multiple times.

We asked Fulton County for all ballot images, but only received about 518,000 for the recount, not the 380,761 from election day. The focus was on the recount, not the original election. It's unclear why the election day images are missing. Shouldn't every vote have a valid image?

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes with duplicate ballots. They point out similarities between the ballots, such as a little tail and the word "Republican" written on them. The speaker mentions that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't have a chance to go through all of them. They confirm that the batch numbers for the duplicate ballots are 235 and 304, both from scanner 5162. The speaker concludes that the entire batch has been scanned multiple times, indicating a potential issue.