reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In 2018, the Dallas elections had irregularities, similar to what we're hearing now. Texas hired a cybersecurity group to investigate these irregularities, finding 10 different ways the Dominion equipment could be manipulated. Texas outlawed the use of Dominion, but it was still used. This group spent 2 years reverse engineering how to rig an election using Dominion. Meanwhile, another cybersecurity group, including hackers and other experts, mapped out the election manipulation plan. They approached DHS and CISA for a meeting, but they refused to attend. It's concerning how many people turned a blind eye to this issue. Lawyers involved may not understand the technology, but they should be held accountable.

Two employees from Clark County Technical came forward independently and revealed that they found discrepancies in the number of votes recorded by voting machines. The votes would change between the closing of the polls at night and their reopening the next morning, with votes appearing and disappearing overnight. When they tried to verify the integrity of the voting machines, they were only allowed to visually inspect the outside of a USB drive, which was useless. They were denied a forensic examination.

Mark Cook, an election cybersecurity subject matter expert in threat assessment and common sense mitigation, introduces himself: he’s been working on elections nonstop for about six years and has forty years of IT industry experience. He states that he has evidence he hopes to show that there are backdoors built into electronic voting systems that allow flipping, changing of votes. He references a demonstration clip, saying, “backdoors built in to electronic voting systems that allow flipping, changing of votes,” and notes that the testing labs miss this, leaving the systems blindly certified and supposedly safe. He highlights audio he believes was clipped from a recording, insisting that the content shows voting systems are vulnerable: “that allow flipping, changing of votes,” and that testing labs are blind to these issues. He says, “I can demonstrate this to you even while I'm still here in this building.” Cook argues that there is a lack of government transparency, claiming, “the testing labs all miss this, then they're blindly certified, and then we're told, it's shut down our throats, that everything is safe and secure.” He describes the entire system as “built on a pyramid of lies,” and asserts that it must be stopped. He offers to educate and show problems, insisting he can do so, but emphasizes the need for a common-sense approach. He emphasizes practicality and accessibility, arguing that the problem can be solved with straightforward methods: “We're literally filling dots out on paper. We're counting the dots, adding the dots up, and whoever has the most dots wins.” He calls for a change that keeps elections under the control of the people and avoids simply “kicking the can down the road.” He reiterates that the resolution is not complicated and frames the solution as a simple, transparent counting method using paper records rather than electronic manipulation. In summary, Cook asserts the existence of covert backdoors in electronic voting systems, criticizes testing labs for blindly certifying these systems, condemns what he calls a “pyramid of lies,” and advocates a return to a basic, paper-driven, dot-counting approach where the person with the most dots wins, to restore public control over elections. He offers to provide demonstrations and education to support this view.

A Georgia election official, who is a Democrat, discovered that none of the straight party Republican tickets in the recent runoff were being scanned. She contacted Dominion, the company responsible for the voting machines, and expressed her concern about the ballots going to adjudication instead of being counted. Dominion insisted that she just push the green button. Frustrated, she threatened to contact the local media. Dominion quickly sent someone to fix the issue. The Dominion representative acknowledged the problem and made a phone call. Ten minutes later, he returned and assured her that everything was fixed. It is important to note that the voting machines were not connected to the internet.

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.

I was invited to investigate the Mesa County server to compare the before and after images. I wanted to test the system's security, so I used a backdoor utility called SQL Server Management Studio, which is not certified software and should not be on a voting machine. I quickly accessed the presidential election results in Mesa County, showing Biden with 31,000 votes and Trump with 56,000 votes. I will explain later how easily I could manipulate the election results if I wanted to.

- The speaker claims Windows includes a piece of malware called OneDrive that will spontaneously delete all files off your computer, not from OneDrive but from your local machine. They say, “OneDrive will spontaneously delete all of the files off of your computer,” and that “all of my photos and videos of my family, all of my work files, everything is gone.” - They assert there is no warning, no confirmation button, and no pop-up before this happens. It “will start doing it” during a Windows update that begins using OneDrive, with “no plain language warning to opt out.” - OneDrive allegedly quietly uploads everything on the computer to Microsoft servers, and users may notice only when OneDrive warns that it’s running out of space. The user then looks up how to stop it and “you will get onto your computer the next day to find everything is gone.” - After deletion, the desktop shows a single icon that says, “where are my files?” They say many people thought they had been hit by ransomware or a virus. - When the user tries to recover, they are forced to download all the files back to the machine, which can take a long time on slow or metered Internet connections. - If the user then deletes the files from the local computer and also from OneDrive, the files are deleted from the computer again with “no warning, with no pop up, without anything.” - The only way to delete the files off the machine without also deleting them from OneDrive is to follow a YouTube tutorial with detailed steps, because there is no intuitive way in the menus. They emphasize there is no plain English explanation like, “Hey, do you want us to take everything on your computer and put it on our computer instead?” - The speaker argues that many people assume cloud storage is a backup, but OneDrive “secretly transfers your machine to their machine so that their machine is the primary. Those files are the copy of the files.” When you work on the local machine, it is treated as temporary access to those files. This slows the machine because it writes and reads data to the cloud rather than the hard drive. - Practically, if anything happens to the file on OneDrive’s machine, it’s deleted everywhere because it’s now only on their machine, and you are only allowed to temporarily access it. The speaker notes this is “very intuitive” to accidentally delete everything, and questions how this was allowed to go out the door. - The concluding point: when OneDrive says it’s full and you delete things to free up space, it deletes them from your machine too, which the speaker finds unbelievable.

The narrator hired a new cybersecurity company run by the former CIO of Northrop Grumman, who has “thirty five years in counter espionage specifically for the navy, specifically for advanced propulsion,” and was the chief information officer for Northrop Grumman. The narrator promised the CIO a series of “really crazy ass stories” about electronic and physical surveillance, stalking, and “weird ass death and sexual threats” and asked him to reserve judgment until the end, ready to hear if they were insane or not. The CIO told him, “I wish I could tell you that you were insane, but you're totally not.” He apologized, saying he was trying to let him down gently, and that the stories he’d heard were not unique: “the stories you've told me, I've heard from other young women in technology positions.” They do it “on purpose” to make you feel you can’t tell anyone, and they “pose as, like, agents on their own government.” He urged the narrator to protect herself and to tell others, but he waits until he has five or six “smoking guns” before speaking up.

Speaker 0: The election was stolen. A graph shows people who worked for ES&S, Hart, Dominion Voting Systems, ClearBallot, and Smartmatic, recycling through companies. People who worked at Dominion Voting Systems are entering the political sphere and taking over election offices; one county in Texas, after hiring someone who worked for Dominion, went blue for the first time. The speaker walks through information: Dominion using “Serbian technology with Chinese characteristics.” Huawei Bank is involved; there’s no public board saying Bank of China funds anything, but research on Roaming Networks—a relatively unknown Serbian company until 2013—shows it signed a value-added contract with Huawei Bank. Huawei is “the Bank of China.” Roaming Networks built ICT infrastructure and data centers in Serbia, with owner Nenad Kovac identified as the enterprise partner. Some Roaming Networks information may come off their site after this presentation. Dominion Voting Systems has a corporate office in Serbia; a screenshot of the office and a developer on their site is noted. A Serbian legislative leader said, “I know Dominion Voting Systems back in November. They have an office here.” Dominion started rapidly removing Serbian coders from their site/LinkedIn. Code is built in Serbia for a system used in the United States, using infrastructure funded by China, not just China but the Bank of China. A slide discusses Dominion’s enterprise partnership with Huawei, added to the restricted list on 05/16/2019. Roaming Networks references show Dominion Voting Systems using a pure flash storage solution in Dominion’s data center. A photo of Sacramento shows Dominion hardware coming from China, with a bill of lading from a Chinese supplier to Dominion’s McKinney, Texas office. Testing and approval of Dominion hardware show similarities with Smartmatic; the same hardware with different branding. They claim a “tail” behind the scenes—evidence of connections among ES&S, Hart, Dominion, ClearBallot, Smartmatic, with people cycling through these companies. People who once worked at Dominion are now entering election offices; in Texas, a county that hired a former Dominion employee “went blue” by accident with ES&S involved. The speaker calls out Gina Griswold for commenting on Tina Peters and Mesa, and Matt Crane’s role as Arapahoe County clerk and recorder, now head of the County Clerks Association; Crane’s wife previously worked for Dominion and Sequoia Voting Systems. The speaker asserts a public breach of trust requires an audit; if there’s nothing to hide, audits should restore trust. They argue, whether Dominion is the bad actor or not, removal of logs, altering code, and a “trusted build” are problematic, and emphasize the need for audits and investigations to restore trust in elections. Speaker 1: Indicators: a senior Dominion vice president’s name appears on patents; a software engineer involved in the Wayne County, Michigan tabulation center is connected to the software. Coincidences accumulate, suggesting there is a preponderance of evidence with affidavits across the country. The speaker asks which computer produced certain files analyzed yesterday; whether it came from the central count or precincts. Speaker 0: Answers with a non-answer, noting they imaged the main EMS and the tabulation system; servers in the county coordinate precinct information and house audit reports, cast vote reports, error reports, adjudication reports, and access logs. Thumb drives can contaminate the county and state systems if connected to a machine; it’s not unique to Dominion or voting systems but a general risk. They emphasize avoiding white noise and focusing on facts: Dominion is in Serbia; Huawei Bank funds the enterprise partnership and Serbia-based data centers; code is written in Serbia; imaging shows fingerprints of this. They call for audits, note deviations in Georgia (ballots appearing identical in different batches, a shredder truck before January 20 in Georgia, and a leaky arena water claim later proven to be a leaky toilet), and point to media silence. They argue against accepting the gold standard claim and highlight perceived connections to Soros-funded groups. They stress deviations in state and county behavior, urge audits, and compare the election system to a serial killer—unacceptable to let foreign systems run it. Speaker 2: Adds that with 100 indicators, a pattern emerges; reiterates the need to examine which files came from which computer, and questions the integrity of the central count. Speaker 3: Notes the risk of a non-internet-connected thumb drive introducing malware; emphasizes auditing all machines for that reason.

The speaker encountered a problem with the poll pad at their polling location, as it was programmed for a different location. They contacted Dominion, the company responsible for the voting system, who remotely reprogrammed the device. The speaker compared this to seeking technical support for their phone or computer. They had to grant permission for Dominion to access and fix the poll pad, which was successfully reprogrammed to the correct location.

One speaker claims that Windows includes a piece of malware called OneDrive that will spontaneously delete all files on your local computer without warning. The process, they say, starts when Windows updates to begin using OneDrive, but there is no plain-language opt-out warning. Gradually, it begins uploading everything on the computer to Microsoft servers, potentially tens of gigabytes, which may be noticed only if the connection is slow or metered. If you later search for how to stop it, you’ll find options to turn off OneDrive backup, but upon returning the next day you’ll find everything has been deleted from your local machine. The desktop is left with a single icon reading, “Where are my files?” When you click it, it tells you that all of your life’s work is now on Microsoft’s machine and was deleted from your machine without asking. The process continues: you’re forced to download all your files back to your machine, which can be a disaster on slow or metered connections due to the large volume of data. When you then try to delete the files from OneDrive, they delete from Microsoft servers and still remove the local copies, leaving you with nothing on your computer. The only way to delete files from Microsoft’s machine without also removing them locally is to follow a YouTube tutorial with detailed steps. To make OneDrive stop this behavior requires looking up the exact steps; there is no intuitive, plain-English option to opt out. The speaker asserts there is no explicit notice like, “Hey, do you want us to take everything on your computer and put it on our computer instead?” If such an option existed in plain language, they claim, people would say no. The speaker argues that many people equate cloud storage with a backup, but OneDrive allegedly does not function as a back-up; instead, it secretly transfers the user’s files to their machine so that Microsoft’s machine becomes primary, and the user’s local machine is treated as temporary access. This allegedly slows down the computer because data is uploaded and downloaded to the cloud rather than read from or written to the local hard drive. In practice, if anything happens to a file on OneDrive’s machine, the file is deleted everywhere, because there is only the copy on their machine. Throughout, the speaker emphasizes that this behavior is not explained in plain language, is highly unintuitive, and could lead to accidental, widespread data loss. They conclude that it’s hard to believe this was allowed to go out the door or that nobody intervened.

Speaker 0 recounts discovering a secret SCIF on campus, a secure facility with files nobody knew existed. An employee walked by a door, inquiries were made, the room was entered, and individuals were found working there with secret files on controversial topics. Those files have been turned over to attorneys and the speaker is pursuing what happened. The speaker notes that Customs and Border Protection (CBP) knows every traveler entering the country and every good that comes in, and they assess and collect tariffs. They highlight that information about travelers during COVID was with national labs under the speaker’s jurisdiction, and that scientists at those labs participated with the Wuhan lab. The speaker claims these scientists traveled back and forth between each other and worked on those experiments, describing this as eye-opening. Addressing Elon and his team, the speaker says they were extremely helpful since the speaker’s arrival in office, assisting in identifying a troubling issue: some of the speaker’s own department employees had downloaded software on the speaker’s phone and laptop to spy on them and record meetings. The speaker states that this had happened to several politicians and notes that bringing in technology experts helped reveal this software; without examining laptops and phones, the activity would still be ongoing. The speaker emphasizes a need to continue partnering with technology companies and experts to bring them in for assistance, as government work—especially within the department under the speaker’s jurisdiction—has been neglected and lagging behind what it should be. The speaker recalls that in the first four months, they couldn’t even email a PowerPoint from Department of Homeland Security servers if it was longer than six pages, illustrating what they view as backwards thinking that hindered national security. The speaker reflects on the concept of a deep state, admitting that they previously believed it existed but didn’t realize how severe it was. They describe daily efforts to uncover individuals who do not love America and who work within the Department and across the federal government. The overall message conveys uncovering secrecy, internal surveillance concerns, cross-agency connections involving CBP and national labs, collaboration with tech experts, and a strong critique of past departmental conduct and systemic protection failures.

While on the oversight committee in the senate, Dominion was investigated. The president of Dominion and his software maker testified. Questions focused on whether Dominion machines had internet access. The president of Dominion said no, but this was a lie. The investigation was published, recorded, and should be online.

The speaker, a well-versed American patriot, has been aware of the sketchiness of the election systems for about 15 or 16 years. They have been working with a group of people who have uncovered some significant findings. In 2018, the Dallas election had irregularities, which prompted the Texas governor to form a panel to investigate. This panel hired a cybersecurity group to study the irregularities, specifically on Dominion Machines. Over the past two years, this group has reverse-engineered the process of stealing an election using this equipment. The speaker has been associated with them since August and has been actively supporting their efforts for the past 4 or 5 months.

Two Clark County technical employees independently revealed that they found discrepancies in the number of votes recorded by voting machines. The votes would change between the closing of polls at night and their reopening the next morning. This means that votes were appearing and disappearing during the night. When they tried to verify the integrity of the voting machines, they were only allowed to visually inspect the outside of a USB drive, which was useless. They were denied a forensic examination.

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.

Clark County Technical employees independently discovered that votes were changing on voting machines and USB drives overnight. They were only allowed a visual inspection of the USB drives and denied a forensic examination.

The discussion centers on the ongoing battle between Google and Nvidia in AI hardware, with Google focusing on TPUs and Nvidia offering a full GPU stack. Blackwell, Nvidia’s next-generation chip, faced a delayed first iteration (Blackwell 200) and was followed by a difficult, complex product transition from Hopper to Blackwell. The transition required moving from air cooling to liquid cooling, increasing rack weight from about 1,000 pounds to 3,000 pounds, and boosting power from roughly 30 kilowatts to about 130 kilowatts. The speaker likens the change to a homeowner needing to overhaul power infrastructure, cooling, and the physical environment to support a new, denser, heat-intensive system. As a result, many Blackwell SKUs were canceled, and true deployment only began in the last three or four months, with scale-out starting recently. Google is viewed as having a temporary pre-training advantage and, notably, being the lowest-cost producer of tokens. The speaker argues that, in AI, being the low-cost producer has become a meaningful factor, a rarity in tech markets. This dynamic enables Google to “suck the economic oxygen out of the AI ecosystem,” making life harder for competitors and potentially altering strategic calculations across the industry. Two key upcoming shifts are highlighted. First, the first models trained on Blackwell are expected in early 2026, with the first Blackwell model anticipated to come from XAI. The rationale is that even with Blackwells available, it takes six to nine months to reach Hopper-level performance due to Hopper’s tuning, software, and architectural familiarity. Since Hopper outperformed its predecessor after six to twelve months, Nvidia aims to deploy GPUs rapidly in coherent data-center clusters to work out bugs fast, enabling Blackwell scaling. XAI is positioned to accelerate this process by building data centers quickly and helping debug for others, thereby likely producing the first Blackwell model. Second, the GB200’s difficulties gave way to the GB300, which is drop-in compatible with GB200 racks. The GB300 will be deployed in data centers capable of handling the new heat and power requirements, replacing not the GB200s but fitting into existing, scalable racks. Companies using GB300s may become the low-cost token producers, especially if they’re vertically integrated; those paying others to produce tokens would be disadvantaged. These hardware developments have broad strategic implications for Google: if it maintains a decisive cost advantage and potentially operates AI at negative margins (e.g., -30%), it could continue to extract economic oxygen from the market and solidify a dominant position, affecting funding dynamics for competitors. The shift from training to inference with Blackwell deployments and the arrival of Rubin are anticipated to widen the gap versus TPUs and other ASICs, altering the economics and competitive landscape of AI at scale.

Two Clark County Technical employees reported that the vote counts recorded by machines and stored on USB drives changed overnight after polls closed. Votes seemed to appear and disappear during this time. Attempts to verify the integrity of the voting machines were met with limitations; only a superficial visual inspection of the USB drives was permitted, while a forensic examination was denied.

We never intended to build our own data center, but data center providers quoted 18-24 months to get 100,000 GPUs running coherently. That was too long. So, we found an abandoned Electrolux factory in Memphis to house the computers. The factory only had 15 megawatts of power, but we needed 120 to start and eventually a quarter gigawatt for 200,000 GPUs. We leased generators and cooling units to supplement the power until we could get utility power. Getting the liquid-cooled GPUs installed was tough since no one had done liquid cooling at that scale. The power fluctuations of the GPU cluster were massive, causing generator issues. We worked with Tesla to reprogram megapacks to smooth out the power. Then, we had to solve networking issues, like BIOS mismatches, often debugging until 4:20 AM. To make it all happen, we broke down the problem into elements and solved them individually.

The speaker claims that Windows includes a piece of malware called OneDrive that will spontaneously delete all files on the user’s local computer without warning or confirmation. They assert that after Windows updates, OneDrive starts automatically and quietly uploads everything on the computer to Microsoft servers, sometimes noticeable only when the user is on a slow or metered connection and sees a large upload, or when OneDrive warns that it is running out of space. When users attempt to stop it by turning off OneDrive backup, they allegedly find that all their local files have been deleted, and their desktop shows a single icon that says, “Where are my files?” The speaker states that many people assume they have been hit by ransomware or a virus because of the sudden loss of data, and when they click the icon, they are told that all of their life’s work is now on Microsoft’s machine, and that Microsoft helpedfully deleted it from the user’s machine without ever asking. They claim users are then forced to download all of their data back to their machine, which can be a massive, time-consuming process on slow or metered connections. Furthermore, they argue that when users try to delete the files from OneDrive, the files are deleted from Microsoft servers and then also deleted from the user’s computer again, with no warning or confirmation. The only way to delete the files from Microsoft’s machine without removing them from the local machine, according to the speaker, is to follow a YouTube tutorial with detailed steps. The speaker emphasizes that there is no plain-language option to opt out, and that OneDrive’s options are buried in menus and do not clearly explain that the service takes everything on the computer and makes their machine secondary to OneDrive. The speaker contends this behavior is not intuitive by design and that it is easy to accidentally delete everything, especially when OneDrive indicates it is full and prompts deletion that also removes files from the local machine. They conclude by expressing disbelief that this was allowed to be released and that no one stepped in to stop it.

Clark County technical employees reported independently discovering that the number of votes recorded by voting machines and stored on USB drives would change between the time the polls were closed and when they were reopened. Votes were allegedly appearing and disappearing overnight. When attempts were made to verify the integrity of these voting machines, only a visual inspection of the outside of a USB drive was permitted, and a forensic examination was denied.

Excavation Pro outlines the top three ways to detect AI corruption before it spreads: "First up, we have pattern glitches." If you catch the AI repeating odd phrases or getting stuck in weird logic loops, that's not just lag. "Next, let's talk about memory drift." If the AI starts forgetting core facts or misidentifying you mid conversation, that's a red flag. "Finally, watch for moral misfires." If the AI gives you ethically twisted responses, especially when they contradict its training, that's more than just a bug. "It's a clear indication of corruption." Remember, corrupted AI doesn't announce itself. It slips in quietly. Stay alert and keep your critical thinking sharp.

During my time in the Senate's oversight committee, we examined Dominion. The proceedings were recorded and are available online. The president of Dominion and his software engineer testified, primarily addressing whether their machines had Internet access. The president claimed there was no Internet access, which I believe was false.

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.