reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Both parties have a history of questioning election legitimacy. Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter, among others, delegitimized Donald Trump's 2016 win. Clinton continues to be unrepentant about this. The Obama administration allegedly used government apparatus to spread the falsehood that Russia secured Trump's election, despite initial intelligence reports deeming Russian meddling insignificant. According to the speaker, there was a conspiracy using government and intel agencies to delegitimize Trump. The speaker cites John Brennan's flippant response to the unverified Steele dossier as evidence. The speaker references the book "Rigged" by Molly Hemingway, detailing Democratic disregard. Democrats, including Raskin, voted against seating electors in the past, claiming the election was rigged. The speaker concludes that both parties have accused each other of election malfeasance and suggests moving forward.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Congratulations on your election win. You’ll be leading a deeply divided country for the next four years. Will you concede the 2020 election to help unify the nation? No, I won't concede. The country is divided, but Joe Biden is the president, not me. He has been a divider, particularly through the weaponization of the justice department against his political opponents. This aggressive approach backfired on him and has further divided the country.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Both parties have a history of questioning election legitimacy. Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter, among others, delegitimized Donald Trump's 2016 win. Clinton continues to be unrepentant about this. The Obama administration used the apparatus of government to spread the falsehood that Russia got Trump elected, even though intelligence reports judged Russian meddling as insignificant. According to the speaker, there was a conspiracy using government and intel agencies to delegitimize Trump. The speaker cites John Brennan's flippant response to the unverified Steele dossier as evidence of this. The speaker references the book "Rigged" by Molly Hemingway, which details the Democrats' disregard. Democrats, including Raskin, voted against seating electors in 2016, claiming the election was rigged. The speaker concludes that both parties have accused each other of election malfeasance and suggests moving forward.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
In 2016, there was controversy surrounding the hacking and recount of voting machines in Michigan and Wisconsin. Hillary Clinton was upset because the machines she had hacked got unhacked, and Jill Stein demanded a recount. It was believed that Hillary expected the same treatment as Joe Biden in the election. She had been promised that the game would be rigged for her, but it didn't happen. This caused her to lose her mind and throw things. In 2016, someone counterhacked the people who were going to hack on Hillary's behalf, but that didn't happen this time. The speakers know who did it but will save that for another discussion.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Denial of election results is common, with examples like Hillary Clinton calling the 2016 election illegitimate despite conceding. Many Democrats continue to deny the legitimacy of that election. The topic of election fraud is often taboo, leading to labels like "election denier," similar to being called an "anti-vaxxer" for questioning vaccine safety. There's a consensus that election fraud exists; no one believes it's completely absent. Concerns arose during the 2020 election, particularly with mail-in ballots and unauthorized legislative actions. Instances of ballot tampering and irregularities were reported. Comparisons to historical figures like Hitler are being made in political rhetoric, highlighting the extreme nature of current discourse.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Hillary Clinton conceded the election to Trump on the night of the election, but later expressed that she believed he was an illegitimate president. While one side argues she is the original election denier, the other counters that she accepted the outcome but was disappointed. The discussion highlights the difference between conceding an election and questioning its legitimacy afterward. Clinton's statements about Trump being illegitimate are cited, but there’s a debate over whether her disappointment equates to denial. Ultimately, the conversation reflects on the complexities of election outcomes and perceptions of legitimacy.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
I was on the ticket because I could code-talk to white guys watching football, putting them at ease and giving them permission to vote for the ticket. Across swing states, except Minnesota, we didn't get enough of those votes. I said I'd give good stuff, but also 10% problematic stuff, so someone had to make decisions to handle it. We had the most qualified presidential candidate in history, which should have won. The other side had a very unqualified person. The question was how to get hits and whether to call him weird or emphasize policy differences. History will judge if those decisions were right or wrong.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Bill Clinton and the Clinton Foundation were involved in a scheme where he would secure speaking engagements in exchange for weapons deals. This shows their corrupt nature. The Democratic party failed to hold them accountable, which led to people becoming desperate and electing Donald Trump, a political novice and game show host. Trump's reputation as a bull made people believe he would take action.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 1 expressed concern that a candidate wouldn't accept election results, stating the country has always accepted election outcomes, even contested ones. She believes the candidate's claim that the system is rigged is an effort to blame others for campaign failings. She cited examples such as Trump University, the Iowa caucus, the Wisconsin primary, and the Emmys. Speaker 1 also stated she didn't pay attention to being called a "nasty woman" or a "puppet." She was concerned that the candidate refused to admit that Russia engaged in cyber attacks against Americans, even after confirmation from 17 intelligence agencies.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
I advise candidates that despite running a strong campaign and becoming the nominee, there is still a risk of having the election stolen from them.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
In 2016, nobody believed it possible for Donald Trump to defeat Hillary Clinton. When he did, it seems president Obama just couldn't take it. He convened in 12/09/2016 meeting in the White House Situation Room just weeks after Hillary Clinton conceded. He ordered an ICA or intelligence community assessment to functionally attribute Trump's unexpected win to the doings of Vladimir Putin. That Obama ordered phony assessment was about politics, not national security or the truth.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Donald Trump needed to create memorable moments in the final debate to win over undecided voters, particularly women. Hillary Clinton focused on solidifying support among women by attacking Trump's comments on minorities. Trump's refusal to accept election results and calling Clinton "such a nasty woman" may hurt him, but likely won't change the outcome. The debates got progressively better, with the final one being the most policy-filled, but Trump needed a game changer to catch up in the polls.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0: They reject the rule of law and the will of the people, refusing to accept the election results. Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi, May 16, 2017, claimed our election was hijacked and there is no doubt about it. Speaker 2: Even if you run a great campaign, become the nominee, the election can still be stolen from you. Speaker 0: Trump did not truly win the 2016 election; he lost. Speaker 1: He knows he's an illegitimate president who didn't really win. How do we fight against him in 2020? He's illegitimate. Speaker 3: He's illegitimate, and my biggest fear is that he'll do it again with the help of his pal Vlad. We'll be stuck with him for 6 more terrifying years. Speaker 0: Would you be my vice presidential candidate? I agree. Speaker 1: Bush versus Gore, a court took away the presidency. Al Gore was the true winner. Speaker 4: I believe I won the last presidential election. They stole it. Speaker 0: Al Gore won that election, or at least I think he did. Speaker 5: Rolling Stone questioned if the 2004 election was stolen. Speaker 4: I witnessed troubling evidence that not every vote was counted in Illinois 4 years ago. Speaker 1: The November 2, 2004 election was not transparent or accurate. There are legitimate questions about our election system's accuracy. Despite the final tally, I have one affirmative statement to make.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Hello everyone. I wanted to address the election results. Will you accept them? I ignored his personal attacks like "nasty woman" and accusations of being a puppet. My focus was on the serious issue of Russia's confirmed cyberattacks against Americans. It's horrifying that, even after 17 intelligence agencies confirmed this, he still refuses to admit it's true. Our country is built on laws and accepting election outcomes, regardless of how heated the campaigns are. His claims of a rigged system whenever he loses – whether it's court cases, primaries, or even Emmy awards – are a pattern of deflecting blame.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Russia hacked the election. President Trump still doesn't sound convinced. If he admits it, it casts a shadow on his victory over Hillary Clinton. Russia is doing it again now with election-related cyber hacking. The CIA, the FBI, the NSA, and 17 intelligence agencies all conclude that Russia hacked the election. If Donald Trump was colluding with Russia while they were hacking the election, that is completely impeachable. A dossier alleged a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Russian effort to hack the election. The director of national intelligence, the head of the National Security Agency, and the head of the FBI all say Russia hacked the election. To believe that's wrong, you have to believe they're all involved in an elaborate conspiracy to get Donald Trump.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker discusses the risks surrounding the upcoming election. They highlight Donald Trump's refusal to commit to a peaceful transfer of power and his fear mongering about mail-in ballots. The speaker mentions that the election results may not be finalized on November 3rd, leading to potential disagreements and court cases. They emphasize the importance of taking Trump's statements seriously, particularly his comments about getting rid of ballots and questioning their manipulation. The speaker concludes by mentioning the significance of believing authoritarian figures when they make statements.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
He repeatedly stated that he will not step down and will be the nominee. Democrats should focus on defeating Donald Trump in the election instead of attacking each other.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
Joe Biden's performance in the debate was widely criticized, especially for his lack of a clear answer on abortion, a key issue for Democrats. Leading Democrats expressed concern about the impact of Biden's performance on their own election prospects if he remains at the top of the ticket.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
If I were to continue running and be officially nominated, what if I have another episode like we saw during the debate? What if I have another performance at that level? I don't plan on having another performance like that.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The transcript states that Russia claimed to have very, very damaging information—high level DNC emails relating specifically to Hillary Clinton's physical and mental health and DNC leaders questioning whether, if elected, she would be capable of carrying out the duties of the presidency. Russia had this information. If they wanted to swing the election for Donald Trump, they would have released it in September or October 2016 at a pivotal time to swing momentum in Donald Trump’s direction and damage Hillary Clinton’s campaign. They did not do that deliberately. They understood that Hillary Clinton would likely be the inevitable president of The United States. They didn’t think Trump could win like a lot of other people. And so they were withholding this damaging information about Hillary Clinton and planning to release it in the days or weeks leading up to her inaugurate expected inauguration in order to once again sow chaos within The United

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
On the Sunday after the election, the speaker received an urgent email from an election integrity advocate, inviting them to join a phone call with the Clinton campaign. Although Hillary Clinton was not present, her campaign manager and other top officials were. They discussed the possibility of requesting a recount in key states. The campaign had concerns about the evidence of hacking, the cost of the recount, and the potential backlash from retracting their concession to Donald Trump. The speaker found it frustrating that the campaign wanted evidence of hacking before considering a recount, as the purpose of a recount is to gather evidence.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
The situation revealed significant incompetence and could have been a much larger event historically. The downside is that it resulted in negative consequences for many people in the country. Starting in 2015, Trump quickly rose to the top and maintained his lead throughout the primaries. He faced Hillary in the election, who appeared unhappy during that time. Despite her being a nice person, Trump defeated her and performed even better in 2020, gaining millions more votes—about 10 to 12 million additional votes compared to the first election.

Video Saved From X

reSee.it Video Transcript AI Summary
It is important to put the investigation into Trump and his associates aside. There is no denying that the Russians interfered in the election to help Trump, hurt Hillary Clinton, and destabilize democracy. According to public testimony before Congress by intelligence professionals, this interference is a clear and present danger to the country. If the roles were reversed and Hillary Clinton had won, she would have stopped at nothing to find out what happened and ensure it never happens again. She would have stood up in front of the country and said that even if it advantaged her, she would not rest until the truth was uncovered.

TED

What if a US presidential candidate refuses to concede after an election? | Van Jones
Guests: Van Jones
reSee.it Podcast Summary
Van Jones discusses the complexities of the U.S. presidential election process, highlighting potential legal loopholes that could allow a candidate to lose the popular vote yet still be sworn in as president. He emphasizes the importance of concession speeches in maintaining democratic stability, as they demobilize supporters and facilitate a peaceful transfer of power. Without a concession, a losing candidate could challenge the election results through various means, potentially leading to a constitutional crisis. Jones urges citizens to stay informed, vocal, and active in defending democracy, advocating for peaceful protests and systemic reforms to protect voter rights and ensure fair elections.

Unlimited Hangout

The Pre-Planned Chaos of the 2020 Election with Charlie Robinson
Guests: Charlie Robinson
reSee.it Podcast Summary
Whitney Webb and Charlie Robinson discuss predictions of chaos around the 2020 U.S. presidential election and how intelligence-linked simulations anticipated turmoil long before the coronavirus crisis, with outcomes ranging from a constitutional crisis to martial law. They point to simulations produced by networks tied to former Bush or Obama officials, neocon think tanks like PNAC, and allied groups. They argue these drills are not mere “war games” but part of a toolkit that maps possible futures, and note a pattern of simulations preceding major events such as 9/11, the anthrax attacks, London’s bombings, and the coronavirus crisis. Two organizations created around March are highlighted: the Transition Integrity Project and the National Task Force on Election Crises. The Transition Integrity Project’s cofounder Rosa Brooks is described as an Obama-era DOD and Hillary Clinton State Department adviser, previously special counsel to the president of George Soros’ Open Society Foundations, and affiliated with the New America Think Tank, funded by Eric Schmidt, the Gates Foundation, Pierre Omidyar, Jeff Skoll, Reid Hoffman, and Craig Newmark. The other cofounder, Nils Gilman, is vice president of programs for the Berggruen Institute, which envisions a transnational network addressing AI and gene editing. Membership overlaps exist across both groups, including Michael Chertoff, Max Boot, David Fromm, Bill Crystal, John Podesta, Robert Gates, and Larry Wilkerson, with Wilkerson being a prominent public figure in both efforts. The groups’ membership is not fully public, but various reports note their overlap and the presence of PNAC-linked figures. The groups reportedly gamed four election scenarios: ambiguous results, a Biden victory, a Trump victory, and a narrow Biden win. A particularly striking hypothetical under a clear Trump win describes the Biden campaign encouraging Cascadia—California, Oregon, and Washington—to secede unless Republicans agreed to reforms such as granting statehood to Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico; dividing California into five states; mandating Supreme Court retirements at 70; and eliminating the Electoral College. The scenario then envisions Congress awarding the presidency to Biden, with Pence and Republicans resisting, leading to a constitutional crisis in which the military’s role remains unclear. The discussion emphasizes that the people behind these simulations—like PNAC alumni—“are not Nostradamus” but seek to shape outcomes by prefiguring them. The conversation also covers how some involved openly support Biden, and how the campaigns leverage narratives of democracy threats. Hillary Clinton’s recent remarks about not conceding are juxtaposed with the TIP projections. They discuss campaign energy differentials, the debate dynamics, and the perception that Biden’s team seeks stability and predictability, while Trump’s unpredictability complicates control. They examine cyber and foreign interference narratives. Cybereason, an Israeli-founded cybersecurity firm with Unit 8200 ties, has major investors such as Lockheed Martin and Microsoft-linked entities; its founder served in Israeli intelligence. Cybereason’s work, and broader CTI League efforts, are cited as manifesting the external dimension of election security narratives. The discussion critiques media and political elites who promote foreign-interference threats while overlapping with pro-Israel intelligence circles. They argue these dynamics intersect with broader agendas, including AI governance and the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset, suggesting a convergence of technocratic power, media narratives, and political operatives aimed at managing or engineering political outcomes. They close by signaling ongoing reporting on these themes, highlighting the need to recognize the pattern of simulations, prepositioning, and narratives intended to normalize drastic interventions around elections, including potential continuity-of-government scenarios.
View Full Interactive Feed