reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker raises concerns about the security of the tabulation machines and the process of transferring votes. They question whether the votes can be manipulated before being saved on a flash drive and if the flash drive can be swapped. They also mention the issue of trusting the county commissioner to not edit the contents of the flash drive. The speaker highlights the importance of the digital devices that hold cryptographic keys, emphasizing that if these keys are lost, the entire precinct's security is compromised. They give an example of a theft in Philadelphia before the election, where USB drives and a laptop were stolen from a key precinct, potentially impacting the legitimacy of the election results.

The text has been adopted, but the suspense lies in whether there is a majority without the votes of the National Rally. It shouldn't even be a question. Emmanuel Macron's narrative shouldn't necessarily be ours. We don't have to accept it. But if there is a majority with the National Rally's votes, we start again. It's significant. Do we realize what we're talking about? Our job is also to highlight the gravity of this arithmetic. There is no democracy in the world where the results are read without considering all the votes. If that's how it is, I'll go to Brussels and request an Article 7 procedure for violation of the rule of law against France. Let's imagine for a moment that we are here, talking in these terms, in Hungary. Translation: The text has been adopted, but the suspense lies in whether there is a majority without the votes of the National Rally. It shouldn't even be a question. Emmanuel Macron's narrative shouldn't necessarily be ours. We don't have to accept it. But if there is a majority with the National Rally's votes, we start again. It's significant. Do we realize what we're talking about? Our job is also to highlight the gravity of this arithmetic. There is no democracy in the world where the results are read without considering all the votes. If that's how it is, I'll go to Brussels and request an Article 7 procedure for violation of the rule of law against France. Let's imagine for a moment that we are here, talking in these terms, in Hungary.

The speaker questions why the post office shut down ballot imaging and stopped keeping the images for the required 6 years. They highlight that the post office only kept the images for 30 days and then resumed keeping them for 6 years once Biden became president in 2021.

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.

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.

We have concerns about mail-in ballots in Clark County, with reports of ballots found in trash cans and multiple ballots sent to one address. Signatures were supposed to prevent fraud, but we haven't been able to verify them. We suspect there are ineligible voters, including deceased individuals and those who have moved. A voter was turned away due to someone else casting their ballot. We're taking legal action to stop the counting of improper votes. Thank you.

Our current voting systems are complicated and messy. Votes are not reconciled and verified at the precinct level in many states. Instead, they are sent to third party entities or counted at centralized locations without public oversight. Mail-in ballots are not secure and can lead to fraud. We need to return to hand counting at the precinct level to ensure accurate accounting and transparency. This system worked for years before 2000 and is still used in France because it is secure. Our current system invites fraud and distrust, so we must act now to restore faith in our elections. Demand hand counting at the precinct level to stop fraud and build back trust in our elections.

The speaker claims to have personally witnessed a man inserting USB drives into voting machines on over 24 occasions, which they reported to a deputy sheriff and the clerk of elections. They were told that leaving USBs in voting machines is normal, but later learned this was not the case. The speaker alleges that 47 USB cards are now missing. They demanded that vote counts be updated live, and when they were, the count showed 50,000 votes, which they claim were for Vice President Biden. The speaker says they asked multiple law enforcement agencies to examine the computers for forensic evidence, but this was not done. The speaker further claims that chain of custody logs, records, and yellow sheets are gone, and that poll workers were invited to recreate the logs. They state there are 100,000 to 120,000 ballots in question and that there is no remedy for this regarding the presidential election. They do not believe anyone could certify the vote in good conscience.

The speaker raises concerns about a bill and the governor's office being connected to a vendor. They question why certain information wasn't released earlier and express curiosity about the lack of a fiscal note. They mention that cybersecurity experts and voters are against the bill for various reasons. Speaker 1 highlights instances of hacking and anomalies in previous elections, emphasizing the lack of paper trail and source code access. They also mention the encryption of timestamps, which could compromise the secrecy of votes. The speaker concludes by mentioning a recent flaw discovered in the machines.

Jordan Conrad from Gateway Plumbing questions Miss Hobbs about the election in Arizona, specifically mentioning secret machine testing in Maricopa County and discrepancies in mailing ballot signatures. He asks if she authorized the testing and if she is aware of the signature issues. Jordan criticizes Miss Hobbs for overseeing elections in Maricopa County and Arizona.

The speaker questions Monsieur Darmanin about the removal of citizen control over elections and the difficulties in verifying the results. They mention that the annexation of proxy lists to the voting records has been eliminated, making it technically impossible to verify the elections. They highlight instances of dishonesty and errors in previous elections and ask how the government plans to address these issues in the upcoming European elections.

Speaker 0 asked Speaker 1 to explain what they wanted to get from the board if they had been allowed to continue. Speaker 1 mentioned that since 2019, voters have no way of knowing if their vote was counted properly because they can't read the QR code. Even if the words on the ballot match their vote, the QR code remains unreadable. Speaker 1 believes the board panicked when they were about to discuss this issue.

The speaker claims they were prevented from adequately observing ballot procedures, and that supervisors dismissed their concerns. They allege ballots were backdated from November 4th to November 2nd, and that data was entered into computers for these mail-in ballots. According to the speaker, poll workers entered ballot information from new mail-in ballots, including dates of birth of 01/01/1900, into electronic poll books and processed those ballots for tabulation, even though the information was not previously in the electronic or paper supplement book. The speaker also claims to have emailed Republican senators and House representatives information about dead people voting, referencing a website listing 17,327 randomly checked Michigan voters over 80 who voted in the 2020 election and are listed in online obituaries. The speaker believes this is the most important election and urges legislators to fulfill their oath to defend the US and state constitutions, asserting there is massive evidence of voter fraud.

The speaker noticed irregularities with the ballot numbers and names on absentee and mailing ballots. The numbers were almost consecutive, and some envelopes lacked a date. When the speaker questioned this, they were met with resistance. The ballot numbers were all from the same area, with similar signatures and no date stamp. None of these details were entered into the system, and they were being manually entered. The speaker suspected something was amiss but didn't challenge further to avoid being kicked out.

There are concerns about noncitizens potentially voting in elections due to lack of citizenship verification. Democrats oppose a bill requiring proof of citizenship to vote. Loopholes exist, allowing noncitizens to vote without consequences. Democrats are accused of exploiting this for political gain. The issue is seen as election interference and a threat to American voters. The conversation highlights the impact of illegal voting on citizens' rights.

I have some questions about the election in Arizona, specifically Maricopa County. I'm asking about the secret testing done on the machines. As Secretary of State, you're supposed to oversee election procedures and conduct additional testing. Did you authorize this? And what about the signatures on the mail-in ballot updates? Are you aware that they don't match the voter signatures? As Secretary of State, you oversaw elections in Maricopa County, so are those elections the best?

I came to meet Emmanuel Macron and talk about his lies. He lied about Covid, the war, and retirement. He has put the country in chaos. I got vaccinated because he said he was vaccinated, but now people, including lawmakers, are saying he isn't. I want to ask him if it's true. Mr. Macron, can you answer? He will probably say he will go through the process without empathy. I don't think he cares about the French people. There is a deputy in the National Assembly who says he isn't vaccinated, so we want to know the truth. Are you vaccinated or not? If you don't want to answer, the French people will judge.

Do any Democrats want to explain how this isn't election fraud? In New York, voters don’t need to show ID to vote, except for first-time voters. This means anyone can claim to be someone else and vote without verification. It’s concerning that ballots can be received a week after the election, delaying certification and allowing late ballots to influence results. A secure election should have all votes counted by election day. Additionally, why request a mail-in ballot if you’re just going to drop it off in person? How can poll workers verify identity if ID isn’t checked? This raises serious questions about election integrity. Remember to vote early and in person, and ensure your ballot remains secure.

The speaker discusses foreign interference in elections and questions why the president is not pursuing this avenue. They mention evidence of votes being sent overseas and foreign actors meddling in elections. The speaker then explains how voter rolls are kept in foreign nations, such as Pakistan, and how fake ballots are attributed to registered voters who have not yet voted. They reveal that 171,000 blank fake ballots were dropped into the system and attributed to different people, ultimately benefiting the Democratic candidates. The speaker concludes by stating that there are other aspects of foreign involvement in elections.

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.

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.

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.

Nederlandse samenvatting: Al dingen mee doen die leiden tot verstoringen en dan misschien dus niet tot geslaagde verkiezingsfraude, dat is het allerergste, maar wel tot bijvoorbeeld onrust in het proces en daarmee mogelijk verlies van het vertrouwen in het proces. De Kiesraad zegt dat het veilig is, maar wat zeg jij dan? "Ja, dat is dezelfde Kiesraad die de stamcomputers in 2006 ook goed vond." De spreker vraagt: "Wat is jouw antwoord tegenover dan ik vertrouw je niet, maar hoe vind jij het niet veilig?" Hij noemt ontbrekende details: "Ik zie helemaal niks over bijvoorbeeld gedetailleerde eisen en normen over hoe de systemen ingericht moeten worden, waar die software op draait." Toezicht ontbreekt; "Je moet dat toch heel gedetailleerd en fanatiek inregelen." "En wie zijn dat dan?" "Als een gemeente IT grotendeels heeft uitbesteed, worden de computers die de stemmen tellen ingericht door medewerkers van een privaat bedrijf?" De zorg: zonder toezicht en zonder oplossingen voor eenvoudige softwarebugs "kunnen ... leiden tot heel veel risico's" en ons vertrouwen in dit proces. English translation: Doing things that lead to disruptions and then maybe not to successful election fraud, that is the worst, but also for example unrest in the process and thereby possible loss of trust in the process, and that is nearly as bad as fraud. The Electoral Board says it is safe, but what do you say? "Yes, that is the same Electoral Board that the stamcomputers in 2006 also found to be good." The speaker asks: "What is your answer to I don’t trust you, but how do you find it not safe?" He cites missing details: "I see nothing about, for example, detailed requirements and standards for how the systems should be configured, where the software runs." Oversight is missing; "you have to arrange this in very detailed and rigorous manner." "And who are those people then?" "If a municipality largely outsources IT, are the vote-counting computers then set up by employees of a private company?" The concern: without oversight and without solutions for simple software bugs, "they can lead to a lot of risks" and our trust in this process.