reSee.it - Related Video Feed

There were problems with the 2020 election, and I have been clear about that. I forwarded an email that presented an argument from a former inspector general for Donald Rumsfeld, who is an accomplished lawyer. The argument was based on the Federalist Papers.

In June 2021, we informed them about 25,000+ suspected counterfeit ballots. Despite having over a year to address the issue, they failed to prevent it from happening again in 2022. The GOP spread propaganda to discredit our findings, but everyone knew about it beforehand.

Who determined the number 420,987,987 regarding failed signatures from the 2020 election? That figure comes from analyzing a quarter of the 1,900,000 mail-in ballots in Maricopa County. We had 150 trained workers review the envelopes based on the secretary of state's guidelines, examining each voter record individually. After analyzing 25% of the ballots, we extrapolated the data to arrive at the final number. It's important to note that this analysis only pertains to Maricopa County, which had over 2 million ballots in total, with around 1.9 million being mail-in votes. Yes, that is correct. Thank you. Proceed.

The speaker claims that real-time Edison data reveals election data manipulation. According to the speaker, Seidl receives raw election data directly from election officials in at least nine states. The speaker alleges that an additive process should show more votes, not deletions, in each interval report. However, a video of Edison reports allegedly shows pauses, oscillation, and deletions in total, in-person, and mail-in votes. The speaker claims this is the algorithm trying to figure out the math problem. The speaker points to North Carolina and Georgia counties as examples, noting Seidl directly contracts with Georgia. The speaker then plays a clip of someone discussing estimated vote percentages dropping, suggesting the reported results are not actual results. The speaker questions the calling of races with razor-thin margins, particularly Arizona, based on projections and alleged impossible data anomalies. The speaker asserts that historically, those counting votes called races, but now machines and news outlets do, deterring challenges.

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.

An expert witness confirmed that the voting machines, certified for nine years, are lawful and in good working condition. However, on election day, over half the machines malfunctioned, leading to significant disenfranchisement of Republican voters. A whistleblower from Runback revealed that approximately 300,000 ballots were illegally inserted into the tally, not from authorized drop boxes or polling locations, but brought in by employees without following the lawful chain of custody. This situation presents substantial evidence of wrongdoing in the election process.

The speaker states that the data does not align with normal legal voting processes and lacks consistency. They mention that the certified data, which is also reported by the New York Times and networks, shows negative errors and fraudulent votes. They suggest that either the secretary of state's office is certifying flawed results or someone is providing them with incorrect information. They emphasize that the certified votes for Georgia contain negative swings and decrements, which are errors and do not accurately represent the state's voters. No blame is assigned, but the focus is on highlighting the discrepancies in the certification process.

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 questions the certification of the election results, stating that the margin of victory is less than 1%. They mention testimony from the secretary of state's counsel, who sent letters to 8,000 people who voted illegally, advising them not to vote in the US senate race. This number is almost three-fourths of the margin of victory. The speaker also points out that there is a 10% margin that is not accurate. They ask how the senate and house can stand by the certification.

We provided our data to Dr. Walter Dougherty, a qualified expert in computer sciences and engineering. He reviewed the declarations and analytic data we presented and concluded that there were 99.99 signatures that could have been introduced into the 2022 election due to the broken system. This information is detailed in exhibit 4. Dr. Dougherty will explain the scientific math he used, which is industry standard.

Governor mentioned concerns about the upcoming election and what would make him not accept the results. He stated that if the secretary of state conducts an illegal election, that would be an issue. He hopes that won't happen.

In this video, the speaker refers to declarations from signature verification workers in 2022. One worker named Andrew mentions that the numbers on the whiteboard for the ballots to be verified didn't add up. They were processing around 60,000 signatures a day, but only receiving about 1,000 envelopes for review the next day, instead of the expected 12,000 to 15,000. The rejection rates were consistent at 20% to 30%, but the math didn't seem to match the actual numbers.

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.

Eric Spakane, a forensic chemist and forensic document analyst, testified that there were about 25,000 ballots not printed from the official Dominion PDF ballot. He said the printing process and appearance are completely different than what you would get from a first generation PDF printing. He explained that in Maricopa County there were approximately 5,012 or a little over 5,000 different ballot permutations and combinations due to different races and districts, and this is multiplied by two because there is a Spanish version for each ballot. In total, about 5,000 different ballots are created ahead of time and are created in PDF. These PDFs are prepared in advance for mail-in ballots and for early voting, which uses vote on demand, allowing someone to vote in a downtown location using a ballot from their area. He noted that PDFs are high quality, and when printed they should look roughly the same as the PDF, but he found that the quality of these ballots degraded when printed, compared to on-demand or third-party provider printing. Spakane stated that in the group of ballots he examined, the election subcontractor Minion produced ballots for each zone or district involved in the area he looked at in Maricopa County. He reiterated that there were about 5,000 approximately different ballots, reflecting the various races and jurisdictions (e.g., two different senator races, multiple house races, and all permutations and combinations). He claimed that about 25,000 ballots were not printed from the official Dominion PDF ballot, and that the printing process produced marks that did not align with the perfect lines and breaks seen in the PDFs. He observed that early voting ballots and election-day ballots from various polling locations showed printing with breaks in all the same places around an oval, indicating imperfections in the lines at the same spots on every ballot. Speaker 1 stated that these 25,000 unidentifiable ballots alone represent over double Joe Biden's 10,457 vote mark. He framed this as a comparison to the election results. Speaker 2 claimed that in July 2021, and even in June earlier, they suspected that there were 25,000 plus counterfeit or inauthentic ballots. He attributed this to propaganda by the GOP’s attorney and other conservative operatives who allegedly planted the seed that “you can't trust that.” He asserted that everyone up there knew this in advance, even before the hearing, and criticized those involved for not reacting to prevent duplication in 2022, saying they did nothing and allowed it to be done again.

The report claims Georgia’s 2020 election should not have been certified, arguing that election data entered by counties and the Secretary of State was never proved or verified as accurate, and that Georgia counties and the Secretary of State blocked open records requests for paper ballots. The report says Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office, “through Ryan Germany,” instructed counties to refuse requests. It asserts the voting system was intended to provide an auditable paper trail via paper ballots and that state wording about making scanned ballot images available for public ballot counts was copied from Dominion marketing materials. It also claims Georgia counties deleted ballot images and references “a Franken count” in which a hand recount was required because “one million seven hundred thousand ballot images” were deleted. It reports open records request results from all 159 counties, stating 1.7 million missing ballots, and says a voter image tool and “Voter GA” reinforce that 74 counties could not produce original ballot images. It further claims that 48% of counties destroyed ballot images or refused to comply, six admitted having none, 22 admitted to having only recount images, and 28 admitted to partial originals (some mail-in, some in-person) with shortages. It claims Raffensperger counted 300,000 too many votes statewide and cites a Today Show appearance where Raffensperger said 4.7 million votes had been cast with “about two percent left to go.” The report says the video feed cut out as those numbers were being discussed. It also claims that at the time Raffensperger said 4.7 million ballots, 158 of 159 counties had reported, with Fulton County the only one still incomplete, and that official certification later showed roughly 4,998,482 votes (about 5 million). It argues this implies additional votes came in from Fulton County precincts, and raises a question about where “three hundred thousand extra ballots” came from, asserting that the paper ballots cannot be checked without access. The report focuses on Fulton County missing ballot images and authentication files. It claims Fulton County is missing 374,000 ballot images from the November 3 ballot count and 315,000 ballot images from advance voting, confirmed by county attorney Steven Rosenberg. It describes scanning outputs: a TIFF image, a results page attached to the TIFF, and a SHA authentication file meant to prove the image was not altered. It states Fulton County is missing 59,000 election-day ballot images and alleges ballot imaging was not required for the November 2020 election, though it claims Dominion’s contract required ballot images and SHA creation. It further claims Fulton County is missing nearly all SHA files: of 527,000 ballots, it alleges Fulton County provided only 16,000 SHA files to authenticate 527,000 ballots, and that it had 148,000 absentee-by-mail ballot images but far fewer SHA files. It also claims the December 9 final recount still lacked 18,000 ballot images. Next, the report alleges “unsigned tabulator tapes” for 315,000 votes certified by Fulton County. It presents claims that tabulator tapes printed without signatures and witnesses’ sign-offs were used to certify votes affecting 315,000 ballots, including duplicated serial numbers supposedly “impossible.” It references rules requiring tabulator tape verification, printing at least three tapes per scanner, and witness signatures or written reasons for non-signing. The report then alleges problems in Georgia’s “risk-limiting audit” process, calling it a “Franken count.” It cites a Secretary of State document stating that from November 11 to November 19 officials conducted a risk-limiting audit requiring a full manual count. The report quotes Philip Stark describing Georgia’s decision as a “Frankencount,” and it cites Carter Jones, a Fulton County consultant, alleging errors in the audit spreadsheet and claiming duplicates and miscounts. It states the report’s work found duplicate ballot counts and vote totals that resulted in “too many” votes for Biden and too many for Trump within a sample of absentee-by-mail ballots, and it argues that multiple counted batches did not match. The report says it also found recount problems and missing images in Fulton County after a December 9 recount, alleging 17,724 missing ballot images and that 3,125 ballot images were counted twice, while another statewide tool purportedly shows duplication across other counties. It further claims an “election day lie” about turnout in Fulton County. It contrasts the county’s reported 59,143 election-day votes with Carter Jones’s screenshot claiming about 21,843 election-day votes as of a specific timestamp (November 5 12:49 AM) and with meeting testimony from Dwight Brouwer asserting around 14,152 votes cast by about 5 PM, plus 598 provisional ballots. The report claims the math implies tens of thousands of additional votes were added quickly and contrasts that with purportedly low crowding and claims about the absence of long lines. It alleges precinct-level vote count mismatches between the initial count (November 3) and the December 9 recount by comparing ballot images for specific precincts and races, claiming ballots were removed and inserted. It lists examples of precincts where it claims large proportions of ballots differed between counts. The report also alleges that in the statewide recount Georgia still lacked over 500,000 ballot images, arguing this makes the vote count unverifiable without paper ballots. Additional claims include: - Logic and accuracy testing allegedly completed after early voting ended (it states testing should have been completed by October 5 but was completed October 31). - Allegations of ballot trafficking shown in videos and requests to view specific clips. - Claims that ballots can be changed or votes ignored via machine vulnerabilities, including a reference to “unclear ballot” demonstrations and an example of QR code signature mismatch affecting scanner handling (leading to misreads as provisional and missing subsequent ballots). - A quoted audit expert (Philip Stark) asserting the lack of basic accounting controls makes it impossible to determine who really won and that this is not limited to Fulton County. The report ends by asserting Georgia’s 2020 results are “totally unverifiable,” referencing archived official counts for late certification moments, and concludes with calls for Raffensperger and Brian Kemp to step down.

42,000 people in Nevada voted more than once, 1,500 were deceased, 19,000 didn't live in Nevada or attend college, 8,000 voted from a non-existent address, 15,000 were registered to vacant addresses, and 4,000 were noncitizens. The speaker asks if there are any ongoing prosecutions for voter fraud in Nevada, given the 130,000 instances identified in the 2020 election. The response is that there are currently no prosecutions.

A 23-page forensic report released by Allied Security Operations Group (ASOG) concluded that the Dominion voting system is intentionally and purposefully designed with inherent errors to create systemic fraud and influence election results. The report examined Dominion voting systems in Antrim County, Michigan, following a dispute over election equipment integrity. The report states that on election night, Antrim County switched 6,000 votes from President Trump to Joe Biden, allegedly due to an unexplained glitch. Poll workers reportedly tried to report problems with the Dominion machines, but local officials, including the Secretary of Michigan State, turned down requests, claiming the issues were the result of user human errors. After Antrim County resident William Bailey filed a lawsuit in early December, Judge Kevin Elzenheimer of the 13th Circuit Court ordered forensic imaging of the Dominion voting tabulators and related software, while also imposing a protective order restricting use and distribution of forensic findings. On December 14, the judge agreed to lift the protective order and allow release of the report. ASOG’s Dallas-based team conducted the investigation on Bailey’s behalf, taking forensic images and reviewing the county’s 22 Dominion tabulators, along with thumb drives and related software. ASOG reported that, out of 15,676 lines or events, there were 10,667 critical errors or warnings—an over 68% error rate. The report states that this high error rate shows the Dominion voting system is flawed and does not meet state or federal election laws. It claims the Federal Election Commission allows a maximum error rate of 0.0008% for computerized voting systems, and that Dominion’s error rate of 68.05% is 85,000 times higher than the threshold. ASOG concluded that the system intentionally generates an “enormously high number of ballot errors,” leading to bulk adjudication of ballots “with no oversight, no transparency, and no audit trail.” The report also states that Antrim County’s computer system maintained records of adjudication for previous elections, but records for the 2020 election were missing, which it says prevents audit accountability. The report further states: “We must conclude that the 2020 election cycle records have been manually removed.” Separately, one month before the election, it was exposed that Dominion’s parent company received $400 million from an investment bank in Switzerland with ties to China. Speaker 3 said ASOG’s evidence was “astonishing,” asserting the obvious conclusion that the Dominion voting system was designed to cheat, referencing error rates cited as 81.96% in Everett and Central Lake Township and claiming Dominion’s error rates were 85,000 to 224,000 times higher than the federal standard. Speaker 2 said there was “certainly foreign meddling” in the 2020 U.S. presidential election and warned that unresolved problems could lead to “unimaginable” future problems.

The speaker asks who determined the number of failed signatures in the 2020 election. Speaker 1 explains that their organization reviewed 25% of the 1,900,000 envelopes from the election and analyzed each voter record individually. They extrapolated the statistics from the first 25% to determine the final number, which is specific to Maricopa County. Speaker 0 points out that Maricopa County alone had over 2 million ballots, and their group analyzed 25% of the mail-in ballots to arrive at the 420,987 failed signature verification number. Speaker 1 confirms this.

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

The Governor mentioned concerns about the upcoming November election and what would need to happen for the speaker not to accept the results. The speaker stated that if the secretary of state conducts an illegal election again, that would be an issue, and they hope it won't happen.

- "The electoral systems of The United States can be manipulated by foreign agents or third parties." - "Are you in danger, physical danger, if your true identity is known?" - "Yes." - "We configured the transmission systems and the tally systems." - "I was the national coordinator for voting machines." - "You examined the forensic image of the election management server, that was used in the Mesa County twenty twenty election." - "In the case of Mesa, Colorado, all evidence, all log, all of that was deleted." - "We saw both images, the old one and the new one." - "And the structure changed, the structure of the program changed as compared to the version 5.5." - "Whoever gave the authorization for the system to be updated would be the person responsible for all the files that were deleted." - "It's easy to rig an election with it, and it's hard to audit."

A senior law enforcement officer witnessed unauthorized individuals inserting USBs into voting machines multiple times. Despite demands for forensic evidence collection, no action was taken. Chain of custody logs and records in Delaware County are missing, leaving 100,000-120,000 ballots in question with no remedy available. The speaker believes certifying the vote would be unconscionable. Translation: A senior law enforcement officer saw unauthorized people inserting USBs into voting machines multiple times. Despite requests for forensic evidence collection, no action was taken. Chain of custody logs and records in Delaware County are missing, leaving 100,000-120,000 ballots in question with no solution available. The speaker believes certifying the vote would be unethical.

I was surprised to learn that there was no signature verification done for the ballots. I questioned how ballots without signatures were handled, and the response was they were just sent back out. This made me uncomfortable certifying the results.

Are you prepared to say under oath that Donald Trump lost the presidential contest to Joe Biden in 2020? President Biden is the president of the United States, having been duly sworn in after a peaceful transition of power. Trump left office and was overwhelmingly elected in 2024. Do you have any doubts that Joe Biden had the necessary electoral votes to be elected president in 2020? As a prosecutor, I accept that Joe Biden is the president. I witnessed many things during my time in Pennsylvania as an advocate for the campaign. While I accept the results, I believe we should all want election integrity and ensure our elections are free and fair, following the rules and laws. I think that question deserves a yes or no, and your lengthy answer suggests you weren't prepared to answer yes.

Was there massive fraud affecting the 2020 election results? The response focused on observations in Pennsylvania, but did not directly answer the question. The inquiry about massive fraud was met with a refusal to provide a straightforward yes or no. Instead, the discussion shifted to other topics, indicating an inability to address the question clearly.