reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speakers discuss the legitimacy of various elections, including the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections. They express concerns about Russian interference, voter suppression, and irregularities with electronic voting machines. Some speakers believe that the election outcomes were affected and that the presidents were illegitimate. They mention specific cases like Bush vs. Gore in 2000 and the 2004 Ohio election. Stacey Abrams' loss in Georgia is also mentioned, with some speakers claiming that her election was stolen. Overall, the speakers question the fairness and integrity of these elections.

Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of being a corrupt politician. Speaker 1 responds by mentioning that 50 former national intelligence officials and the heads of the CIA have dismissed the accusations as false. Speaker 0 dismisses this as another Russia hoax. Speaker 1 tries to steer the conversation back to the issue of race.

The discussion centers on the integrity of the 2020 election processes and how Georgia’s handling of audits and recounts could shape reforms for 2026. Speaker 0 argues that ensuring elections represent the will of the people is fundamental, noting that Trump and his allies made a spectacle in 2020 by pursuing audits and recounts and even the Capitol insurrection, yet Georgia, among other states, would not have allowed Trump to win even without Georgia’s results. They claim Democrats and progressives avoided touching the issue in 2024 despite Trump’s unexpected nationwide sweep, and criticize the inability to conduct a proper recount. Speaker 1 warns that Trump’s team is likely to present ballots and photographs from 2020 to claim irregularities, arguing that there were thousands of irregularities in Fulton County, with miscounts and ballot manipulation possible, though there is no evidence that these irregularities would have changed the Georgia result. They contend that irregularities occurred both ways and tended to offset, but many records were destroyed and the recount and audit lacked quality. The speaker asserts that 2026 must avoid untrustworthy machines and inadequate audit/recount processes. The speakers discuss the possibility that Trump’s supporters will use information from the DOJ to misrepresent the facts, stating that even if facts were presented, they would expose known errors in the certified processes. They allege that ballots were counted multiple times during the recount, including counting some ballots two or three times and even introducing fake test ballots to force outcomes. Marilyn is cited as noting that a Barack Obama appointee judge confirmed the unreliability of Dominion machines, and that a demonstration at DEF CON Voting Village showed how easily a Dominion machine could be hacked. Jessica is referenced as discussing Phil Davis, a pro-Trump election integrity figure who admitted that Biden won Georgia despite his broader views. The point is to emphasize that, even among election integrity experts with conservative leanings, there is belief that Biden won Georgia. The conversation returns to Raffensperger, who selected the machines and the audit/recount method, spending approximately $150 million on machines and avoiding transparency about errors. The guests argue that the law required a hand count at tables with representatives from both campaigns and the clerk, instead of a machine-only recount. Bypassing this process enabled the perception of fraud and contributed to the January 6 insurrection’s fuel in Georgia. A key lesson for 2026, they assert, is to implement a transparent process with hand counts and representative participation at counting tables, preventing the bypass of proper procedures and reducing the political pressure that distorts outcomes. They critique the atmosphere surrounding the 2020 aftermath as vilifying and pressure-filled, predicting a similar environment in 2026 unless genuine transparency and nonpartisan verification are pursued.

Speaker 1 questions why radical transparency in elections wasn't proposed four years ago and accuses the former president of trashing the system for four years, stating there were dangerous consequences to the president's lies and that people died on January 6th. Speaker 0 claims the only person who died on January 6th was Ashley Babbitt, who was murdered. Speaker 1 acknowledges there were injuries. Speaker 0 asserts people who broke into the Capitol are responsible for their actions, not Donald Trump. Speaker 1 says they don't have to yell.

The speaker claims to have won the 2020 election "by a lot." They suggest reviewing tapes and "truth to vote" which allegedly shows ballot box stuffing. They also mention "51 agents" and "FBI Twitter." The speaker alleges cheating in the election, citing "all of the stuff ballots" and the "51 intelligence agents." They claim recounts were not "real recounts." They state Wisconsin "practically admitted it was rigged" and that other states are doing the same. When told a case review found fewer than 475 cases of voter fraud in six battleground states, the speaker claims "they didn't look at the right things," alleging fake ballots. They maintain the election was "very rigged." The speaker believes they are "winning very well" in the upcoming election, citing a recent poll.

Speaker 1 is asked about their previous tweets regarding Trump and Brian Kemp stealing elections. Speaker 1 dismisses the comparison as ridiculous and clarifies that they were referring to the threat to voting rights at that time.

Speaker 0 cautions that what you’re doing is extremely dangerous. Speaker 1 asks why it’s dangerous and replies that it’s not a conspiracy theory, and questions whether the person has $45. Speaker 1 emphasizes they are not saying people are voting there, but that people are currently registered to vote there. They state they went around Fulton County in the last few weeks and found that people are currently registered to vote in places like empty lots and homeless shelters that closed ten years ago. Speaker 1 asks what would you do if you become secretary of state to address that. Speaker 0 responds by saying they will reply to conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 reiterates that it’s not a conspiracy theory, and argues that there is a current act of voter rolls: “It’s a current you can currently go on the voter rolls, purchase them for $45, and go there with us.” They offer to take the other person to verify claims. Speaker 0 pushes back, saying they won’t respond to conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 asks how it’s a conspiracy theory, labeling it an act of voter rolls. Speaker 0 says, “If you're gonna be running for secretary of state, you're … in charge of maintaining the voter rolls. Don't you care about if people are registered to vote from empty lots?” Speaker 1 continues questioning, asking if it’s a conspiracy theory that people are registered to vote from empty lots and mentions they have the ability to go wherever they want. They reiterate that people are currently registered to vote in empty lots, MARTA bus stations, and elsewhere in Fulton County, and asks if the other person will not do anything about that, calling back the accusation of conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 asks for the exact addresses and notes: “205 Elm Street Northwest. That’s an empty lot. You can go there right now and see it for yourself.” They press: do you not care about that? You’re an elected official, and you don’t wanna address that? They argue that as a potential secretary of state, one should address maintaining clean voter rolls in one of the United States’ most important counties. Speaker 0 repeats that what you’re doing is extremely dangerous. Speaker 1 insists it’s not a conspiracy theory and repeats that people are currently registered to vote there, highlighting the $45 purchase of voter rolls and the need to clean the rolls, including registrations from empty lots and a MARTA station. The exchange ends with Speaker 1 noting that they are trying to have the rolls cleaned, and pointing to the claim of conspiracy theory, and suggesting to actually verify the situation.

Speaker 0 asks if Democrats risk playing into the president's hands by focusing on the Kilmaro Burgo Garcia case. Speaker 1 responds that they don't know of any Democrat who defended Garcia. They claim Garcia was falsely arrested and removed from the country. They allege "they" are making up things about Garcia, such as associating him with MS 13 or claiming he coordinated the January 6 attack, even though he has never been prosecuted or convicted of any crime.

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

The speaker claims that there was widespread fraud in the 2020 election, with many votes being purged and deleted. They suggest that this fraud was enough to secure a Republican victory. They criticize Joe Biden and the Democrats for opposing efforts to investigate this alleged fraud, accusing them of wanting to cancel any discussion about the election. The speaker believes that the Democrats are afraid of being caught in their wrongdoing.

The speakers discuss allegations of election interference and illegitimacy in past elections, particularly focusing on the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. They mention Russian interference, voter suppression, and issues with electronic voting machines. The overall sentiment is that elections have been stolen, leading to concerns about the integrity of the democratic process. The speakers express doubts about the legitimacy of certain election results, such as in Georgia and Ohio, and emphasize the need for fair and transparent elections.

The speakers in the video discuss various instances where they believe elections were stolen or illegitimate. They mention Russian interference in the 2016 election, voter suppression in Georgia, and issues with electronic voting machines. They express doubts about the fairness and integrity of these elections and call for reforms to ensure a more transparent and secure electoral process. The speakers also mention specific cases such as the 2000 election between Al Gore and George W. Bush and the 2018 gubernatorial race in Georgia between Stacey Abrams and Brian Kemp. They emphasize the need to address these concerns to protect democracy.

Speaker 0: Jim Jordan played a significant role in Trump's attempt to challenge the election results. Speaker 1: Trump requested a vote recount, which is not the same as overthrowing the government. However, some believe the media's continuous portrayal of this narrative is influenced by project Mockingbird. Regardless, everyone involved is part of it.

The discussion centers on the 2020 election, which Speaker 1 claims was rigged due to fake ballots and other factors, including the influence of 51 intelligence agents. Speaker 0 counters that recounts in swing states and over 50 lawsuits found no widespread corruption or voter fraud, citing a potential case of voter fraud in six battleground states that uncovered fewer than 475 cases. Speaker 1 asserts Wisconsin has practically admitted the election was rigged and other states are doing the same. Speaker 0 questions how Speaker 1 will appeal to independent suburban women voters. Speaker 1 references polls showing him leading, including with women. Speaker 0 notes polls can change. Speaker 1 states he would like to be less combative but feels the press's dishonesty necessitates it to get his message across and win.

I won the election, but I didn't get the job because of cheating. The election was stolen from us. I don't think it's dangerous to use words like "rigged" and "stolen" because we have evidence to back it up. I won't concede because our democracy is being eroded. Thousands of voters in Georgia had their voices stolen and their votes may not be counted in 2020. If an election is rigged, it should not be conceded. The election was stolen from Georgia voters and the process was unfair. I refuse to call it a loss. I can't prove I would have won, but Brian Kemp's actions affected the outcome. He is the legal governor, but not the legitimate one. The election was tainted and thousands of voters were disenfranchised. I still stand by my decision not to concede. The election was not fair, right, or proper. Brian Kemp dismantled our democracy, making free and fair elections impossible.

Speaker 0 asks for reassurance that the upcoming election won't be rigged or stolen. Speaker 1 responds by mentioning that having Democrats in charge of the voting machines in Ohio is helpful. However, they also acknowledge that both Republicans and Democrats have manipulated elections in the past. Speaker 1 explains that those in power tend to try to tilt things in their favor.

Speaker 0 claimed the former president was illegitimate for 4 years. Speaker 1 argued about conceding the election and potential violence in the future. They debated about the Capitol attack and the death of Capitol Police officer Brian Sicknick. Speaker 1 denied that anyone died during the attack, but Speaker 0 mentioned Sicknick's death.

Speaker 0 asks Speaker 1 if they believe white people should pay reparations, claiming Speaker 1 tweeted in January 2020, "Yes, the North. Yes. All of us. Yes. America. Yes. Our original collective sin and unpaid debt. Yes. Reparations. Yes. On this day." Speaker 1 denies the tweet referred to fiscal reparations. Speaker 1 states the tweet referenced owing much to those who came before. Speaker 0 calls this a bizarre framing of the tweet.

Speaker 1 discusses their involvement in the post-election efforts and their relationship with President Trump. They express concern about the election and claim that voting machines were tampered with. When asked about Smartmatic's involvement, Speaker 1 is unsure of the exact numbers but believes it was more significant than reported. Speaker 0 challenges Speaker 1's allegations and points out that Smartmatic only operated in one county in California. Speaker 1 refuses to accept this fact and ends the interview. Speaker 0 questions Speaker 1's credibility and mentions Rudy Giuliani's misrepresentation of facts. Speaker 1 disagrees and claims that voter rolls were cleaned after the election. They assert that there is evidence to support their case.

The speaker claims to have won the election but was robbed of the job due to cheating. They believe the election was stolen from the people of Georgia and that thousands of voters had their voices stolen. They refuse to concede because they believe the process was unfair and the result was not true or right. They acknowledge that their opponent won an adequate number of votes but do not consider them the legitimate governor. They still believe their opponent won through voter suppression. The speaker emphasizes that the election was not fair and accuses their opponent of dismantling democracy in Georgia. They do not consider themselves the governor of Georgia.

Speaker 1 questions the legitimacy of the 2020 election and refuses to concede in 2022. They accuse an Arizona official of election fraud and defamation. When confronted, Speaker 1 deflects, claiming they are in the middle of a lawsuit. They deny responsibility for inciting violence and criticize the interviewer for lack of understanding. Speaker 1 refuses to commit to conceding if they lose in November. The interview ends with Speaker 1 dismissing the interviewer.

The speakers discuss concerns about election legitimacy, mentioning Russian interference, Al Gore's loss in 2000, and issues with electronic voting machines. They express doubts about the fairness of various elections, including Stacey Abrams' loss in Georgia. The overall sentiment is that elections have been stolen through voter suppression and flawed processes.

Speaker 0 expresses gratitude for the audience's presence and states that they believe it is a sad day for America. Speaker 1 asserts that challenging an election should be allowed, as they believed the election was rigged and stolen. They mention other individuals who have also challenged elections in the past. Speaker 1 claims they did nothing wrong and accuses others of election interference. They thank the audience and reiterate their right to challenge what they perceive as a dishonest election. Speaker 0 concludes by thanking everyone and suggesting a future meeting.

Speaker 0 claims most people in the country voted for Trump and that he won the popular vote. Speaker 1 disputes this, stating it was a slim majority of voters and that too few people voted. Speaker 0 says those who cared about issues voted for Trump to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Speaker 1 counters that lots of voters were purged from voter rolls before the election. Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of election denial. Speaker 1 accuses the "narcissist in that building" of gaslighting.

Speaker 0: I won, but they cheated. We were robbed of an election. Speaker 1: I don't think it's dangerous to use words like rigged and steal because we can back it up. Speaker 0: The election was stolen from the voters, not just from me. I won't concede because our democracy is being eroded. Speaker 1: The election was not free and fair. Thousands of Georgians had their voices stolen. We can't guarantee their votes will be counted in 2020. Speaker 2: Should the Democratic nominee concede if they can prove widespread voter suppression? Speaker 1: No, we shouldn't concede until we know the results. If it looks like cheating or rigging, it probably is. Speaker 0: We've been taught to accept defeat, but I refuse to concede. The process was not fair. Speaker 1: The election was stolen from Georgia voters. As long as eligible citizens can't vote, the system is rigged. I didn't lose, I just didn't win. Speaker 0: I didn't win officially. We don't know what really happened because of voter suppression. Speaker 1: He is the legal governor, but that doesn't mean he won legitimately. Speaker 0: Just because you win doesn't mean you won. We'll never know for sure if I got more votes. Speaker 1: I refuse to concede because it wasn't fair or right. He performed poorly and crassly against the people he represents. Speaker 1: Georgia voters were suppressed, their votes weren't counted. Brian Kemp dismantled our democracy. Speaker 0: I recognize I'm not the governor, but we won.