TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker discusses real-time election data from SIDL in multiple states, highlighting oscillations and deletions in vote counts. They question the accuracy of projections and media calls, emphasizing the need for transparency and accountability in the election process. The speaker also mentions legal challenges and concerns about the media influencing election outcomes.

The transcript discusses concerns about election irregularities and voting machines. One speaker claims a voting machine subtracted votes, displaying a negative number. Another speaker states that such subtraction cannot occur accidentally and that someone consciously tried to steal votes. A third speaker says that when they press the button next to their name, another person's name appears on the display, questioning the accuracy of the vote count. Another speaker asserts that the machines are working correctly, recording votes accurately, and that the results will be accurate and reliable. One speaker expresses concern about private corporations controlling the voting system and calls for a formal debate about election irregularities, warning that the democracy and republic are at risk.

They stopped counting votes on election night to determine how many mail-in ballots to add, which the speaker believes was fraudulent. The speaker insists it was a planned event, claiming it wouldn't happen in Texas. They express concern over the authenticity of mail-in ballots and assert that anyone could have filled them out. The other person questions the validity of these claims, but the speaker stands by their belief based on personal experience.

The speaker discusses the issue of inspecting ballots for signatures. They mention that the Voter Privacy Act prohibits inspectors from looking through a ballot to verify a signature. They also point out that many ballots have two different patterns of the letter "s" written for the signature, even though some of them don't even have an "s" in the voter's name. They state that out of the 104,820 ballots reviewed, 20,232 had mismatched signatures, which accounts for 20% of the total.

Linda McLaughlin and her colleagues present a data-focused argument alleging election fraud in Georgia, supported by multiple data analyses and demonstrations. - Linda McLaughlin introduces the data integrity group and states that data is numerical and non-partisan; she aims to remedy a lack of presented data in the discussion. - Dave Labou, a lead data scientist, explains that their analysis across precincts, counties, and the state identified over 40 data points of negative voting or vote switching across candidates totaling over 200,000 votes. Separately, machine learning algorithms used for anomaly detection in fraud detection flagged over 500 precincts with over 1,000,000 corresponding votes showing suspicious activity. He emphasizes that the process is scientific and not tied to political affiliations. - Labou uses a banking analogy to illustrate data integrity concerns: in hypothetical online banking, deposits or withdrawals being redirected or split would indicate fraudulent activity. He applies this concept to voting data, arguing that the voting system data aligns with the Secretary of State data used to certify results, yet exhibits patterns akin to transfers and reallocation not authorized by voters. - He states that the data are publicly available but require advanced programming to extract, parse, and join datasets. Their independent team has made all analysis, programs, and data public to allow replication and has produced videos to translate the analysis for broader understanding. - A key claim is that receiving over 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud; in Fulton County, more than 150 precincts voted 90% or more for Biden, and in the statewide race (decided by less than 13,000 votes), these 150 Fulton precincts accounted for 152,000 Biden votes, described as a clear indicator of suspicious or fraudulent activity. - Labou and team present a series of visuals and explanations indicating explicit vote count switching, e.g., in Dodge County, where Trump’s votes appear to be subtracted while Biden’s counts increase in tandem with county updates, leading to a shift in totals that would not appear in state totals due to timing of updates. - They reference adjudication as the review of ballots flagged during scanning, noting that only ballots with a contest causing questions about how the computer reads them are adjudicated. - In DeKalb County, they assert it is statistically impossible for nine out of ten voters to vote for Biden in 94 precincts. - They describe a data flow in Fulton County: poll pad check-in, ballot image saved on the machine, SD cards transported to drop-off locations, escorted to a warehouse, run through Democracy Suite, exported to a Dominion server, and inserted into a SQL Server database before transmission to the Secretary of State and data aggregators. - A critical point is the vulnerability within the county update data-entry process: the square box detailing data-entry options in the election software allows updating vote batches, projecting batches, and generating new or temporary batches that can be injected directly into the tally; these options can be validated and published, enabling potential manipulation before server upload. - They pose questions about validation: whether two observers from both parties were present during SD card transmissions and drop-off transmissions, and whether there is a public log of exchanges at drop-off points. They challenge why elected officials have not pursued these questions about voting integrity. - Labou notes the process is machine-to-machine and, by design, should not decrement sums; any decrement requires a robust explanation, and their data suggest negative drops are inconsistent with normal sequential processes. Speaker 2 clarifies the data sources (CITL election night data and Edison/New York Times data) and asserts that the process from poll pads to secretary of state is machine-driven, with no human entry of totals, thereby removing human entry error as an explanation for observed negative changes. Speaker 4 adds emphasis on the validation and potential vulnerabilities in the software options used for election administration, underscoring the need for transparency and inquiry into the electoral process.

Every election should be as accurate as a bank account, with no room for error. It's puzzling why we accept a 1% error rate in elections, especially when the margin of victory was only 0.506%. We can track the handling of every ballot and the exact time it entered the system. There are concerns about the selection of hand-audited ballots, as the majority of them favored Biden. Out of 1675 boxes, only 52 were properly sealed and protected. Some batches of ballots lack processing dates and their origin is unclear. Interestingly, these batches match the ones chosen for hand auditing. Despite claims of a backlog, half of the extra counting days had no ballots counted, and the counted batches were smaller than usual. It's also questionable how the election was called and certified with incomplete processes. A full forensic audit would provide answers.

The discussion revolves around the ballot counting process during the election. It highlights that while Democrats were allowed to count ballots after Republicans left, there were claims of ballot stuffing caught on video. The conversation touches on how absentee ballots were collected and the legality of the process, with suggestions that canvassers were paid to gather these ballots. There's speculation about why certain areas were targeted for vote manipulation, emphasizing the need to avoid raising red flags in historically red counties. The participants mention ongoing investigations and evidence from surveillance footage, indicating a belief that irregularities occurred during the election.

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.

The speaker describes irregularities observed in absentee/mail-in ballots. They claim that the ballot numbers and the last names on the ballots were in sequence, which should not happen with mail-in ballots because those ballots are supposed to arrive at different times and cannot be sequential like 2-2-3-2 next to 2-2-3-3. This pattern triggered the speaker’s concern, leading them to think something was wrong. The speaker states they began noticing that the numbers were almost adjacent to each other, with one hovering around the middle. This prompted them to raise questions about the process. They then asked the supervisor for clarification, but the supervisor reacted angrily, saying, “you’re not letting us do our job. You’re disturbing us.” Feeling hesitant to push the issue further for fear of being kicked out and wanting to stay in the room due to a lack of other observers, the speaker chose not to challenge the process more than they already had. They allege that the sequence of ballot numbers came from the same area, specifically Goddard Street in Downtown Detroit, and that the signatures on those ballots were all alike. The speaker notes several additional anomalies: envelopes had no date stamp, only the word “November 2020” without a more specific date, and there was no second or third numbering visible. They observed that none of these ballots were coming up in the voting system; instead, they were being entered manually. The speaker claims that the poll book or the system would not reflect these details, implying that the ballots were processed outside the normal electronic recordkeeping. In summary, the speaker alleges a pattern of sequential ballot numbers and similar signatures associated with absentee ballots from a single street area, envelopes without proper dating, and manual entry into the system rather than through standard digital processing, with the supervisor resisting questions about these irregularities.

On election night, the results from tabulating machines appeared inaccurate. The board decided to conduct a hand recount to ensure accurate election results. The speaker questions this decision, stating they have advocated for hand recounts for twenty years.

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 discussion centers on completing an audit of ballots to obtain a count and address concerns about the precinct. The participants emphasize that without counts, they cannot move forward. They insist that the audit piece must be completed first, not an investigation, so that a number of ballots can be established and the overall tally can proceed. Key points raised: - The need to finish the audit to determine how many ballots are in the ballot can, and to move forward with the numbers. “We need to move forward with the audit so we can get the numbers, so we can see how many ballots are here.” - A concern has been raised about the precinct, including the issue of multiple ballots with the very same signature. The team discusses handling this by counting the ballots and later addressing the concern, rather than delaying the process. “we will separate out and count those and add those in. We're there going to be an asterisk saying these ballots have the same.” - There is tension between continuing the presidential race audit and addressing potential irregularities. The instruction given is to complete the audit portion first and then review any issues. “the process right now is for you to put them in the piles where they belong and for the presidential vote and count the presidential votes… finish the presidential race audit, not separate them out, and then we'll move forward from there.” - The officials acknowledge the underlying concern about the precinct and previous issues with county ballots, but reiterate that, at this moment, the priority is to obtain a count and finish the audit. “We understand that there may be possibly an issue with this precinct. We understand that. But what I need for you to do right now is to finish the audit process.” - They clarify that the current activity is not an investigation, and that the aim is to produce a number for how many ballots were in the can when counting began, enabling progress based on the audit results. “This is not an investigation right now… not an investigation, not counting… what I need you to do is complete the audit so we can get a number.” In sum, the participants are focused on completing the ballot-count audit to establish a definitive tally, while acknowledging concerns about signatures and precinct irregularities, and planning to address those concerns after the audit yields a numeric result for the presidential ballots. The priority repeatedly stated is to finish the audit to obtain a count, then proceed with any further review.

On November 9th, there was a mysterious occurrence where 25,000 ballots went missing in the reported count. The next day, on November 10th, these ballots magically appeared, affecting the outcome of the race. This doesn't make sense and is completely wrong. The law exists to safeguard the integrity of the vote.

The video discusses concerns about the potential manipulation of votes in election software. It questions whether proper validation processes were followed, such as having observers from both parties present during the transmission of SD cards and the transportation of ballots. The speaker also mentions the use of election night reporting data and emphasizes that there is no human entry of totals, which eliminates the possibility of human error.

In the video, the speaker discusses discrepancies in the ballot recount process. They mention that while 782 ballots were initially counted, only 1,401 were recounted using machines. The speaker questions the disappearance of over 300 ballots between the counts. They also mention that military ballots are separated and not required to be mailed in, with 93% of them being submitted electronically. The speaker expresses concerns about verifying signatures on electronic and email ballots, as well as the lack of evidence linking military ballots to the individuals who cast them. They find it troubling that a majority of these military ballots went to Biden.

Tomorrow is January 6th, an important constitutional date. The speaker expresses frustration that the United States does not have a clear election outcome yet. They mention their experience in other countries, where they have helped run elections and encouraged those countries to follow their example. The speaker finds it embarrassing that their own country is facing election challenges. Another speaker agrees and mentions that according to U.S. law, if there are no poll watchers, the election should be redone. They ask for suggestions on what President Trump and the people should do. The first speaker suggests a 10-day pause to allow for recounts in select states, ensuring that the ballots are constitutional and not fraudulent. They mention issues like backdated ballots, phony ballots, and dead voters.

They stopped counting votes on election night to determine the number of real votes and how many mail-in ballots were applicable. The speaker believes this would have been done in Texas and considers it fraud. They are convinced it was planned and not just a water leak. The speaker questions if it is possible to stop counting ballots when everyone is watching. They have never seen it before and were suspicious because Trump was leading in several states. The speaker argues that anyone could have filled out the mail-in ballots, making it impossible to know their origin. They claim to have witnessed this happening.

A lady with blonde braids placed a table at 8:22 AM. The same person who cleared the place out under the pretense of stopping the count also put the table there. Four suitcases came out from underneath the table. A man in red pulled one of the suitcases out. The question is, why are these ballots separate from the others, and why are they only counting them when the place is cleared out with no witnesses? The machines can process about 3,000 ballots an hour, and there were multiple machines for two hours. The question is, how many ballots went through those machines in those two hours when no one was there to supervise, consistent with statutes and rules?

During the recount, the speaker noticed discrepancies in the number of ballots. They discovered that over 300 ballots had disappeared between counts. The speaker also questioned the handling of military ballots, stating that they were separated and not required to be mailed in. They expressed concerns about verifying the authenticity of electronic and email ballots, as there were no accompanying emails. The speaker found it troubling that a large majority of military ballots went to Biden. They expressed disbelief in this outcome and emphasized the importance of counting the votes of those who serve in the military.

The speaker discusses concerns about election fraud in Georgia, highlighting the duplication of 3930 ballots being scanned and counted twice intentionally. They call for accountability from Governor Kemp, former President Trump, the media, and Secretary of State Raffensperger. The speaker demonstrates how the duplication occurred and urges an independent investigation. They emphasize the importance of addressing the issue and providing factual evidence for further examination.

The speaker discusses a situation where an election result hinged on a single vote, which they find statistically improbable. They mention a previously uncounted vote that was discovered, potentially creating a tie or necessitating a recount. The speaker raises concerns about 800 canceled votes and questions the criteria and oversight involved in rejecting votes. They call for transparency and scrutiny of every rejected vote, suggesting potential errors or biases in the process. The speaker questions Elections Canada and whether they will review every single thing. They express the opinion that winning by one vote in this scenario suggests possible manipulation, implying someone may have arbitrarily decided the outcome.

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

The speaker emphasizes the importance of looking beyond what is shown on TV or in generic reports about elections. They explain that these are just interpretations and not official counts, making it difficult to prosecute any wrongdoing. To truly address the issue, one must delve into the intricate details of the process. The speaker mentions that they have only mentioned about half of the auditable touch points involved in elections, with many more unknown to the general public. These touch points are all documented with date and time stamps, similar to the 2,000 murals mentioned earlier.

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

It seems like there are concerns about election integrity and potential fraud. The speaker mentions the Mesa Docks and dropbox, suggesting that there may be issues with these. They also criticize the reporters on TV for not being truthful. The speaker believes that if there are more votes than voters, it should not be questioned. They mention Georgia Claws and ballot mules, implying that there may be manipulation happening. The speaker accuses those in power of not caring about the truth and suggests that lawsuits are being used to delay the process. They emphasize the importance of holding those responsible accountable.