reSee.it - Related Video Feed

On February 11, 462 log entries were overwritten by a script, followed by 37,680 entries on March 3, and 330 entries on March 12, the day before the system was received. The EMS admin account was responsible for these actions. During an audit, having full context of the election is crucial, yet that was not the case here. Specifically, within the Dominion software used for results tallying and reporting, someone executed a command to purge all election results, successfully deleting all records and files from the NAS directory, which contained essential election data, just before the audit began.

On February 11th, a script overwrote 462 log entries. On March 3rd, the same script overwrote 37,686 log entries. On March 12th, the day before the system was received, 330 log entries were overwritten by the script. The EMS admin account performed these actions. A log file from the Dominion software for results tallying and reporting shows that someone purged all the results for the election. The action completed successfully, deleting all the files on the NAS directory, including results and images from the election. According to the transcript, an individual ran a program to clear all records in the system used to generate the official results the day before an audit started.

The speaker discusses the issue of Windows security logs being purged right before two audits were set to begin. They highlight the difficulty in determining who had access to the RTR admin account, which is shared among all accounts. The speaker questions why someone would delete all the results and records from the Dominion software, which is used for tallying and reporting election results, just before an audit. They mention that the deletion was successful and affected files on the NAS directory where election images and details were stored. Overall, the speaker emphasizes the lack of accountability and the need to understand the motives behind this action.

On 2/11, 462 log entries were overwritten by a script. On 3rd March, 37,686 log entries were overwritten by the same script. The day before we received the system, 330 log entries were overwritten by that script. The EMS admin account was responsible for this. The challenge is that this occurred before an audit, and it deleted all the records and files related to the election. Someone deliberately ran a program to clear all the records in the system used for generating the official results.

The speaker discusses a discrepancy in the vote count between Biden and Trump, stating that the actual results showed Trump with a significant lead. They explain that the voting machine is designed to generate errors, which then go to adjudication where thousands of ballots can be bulk adjudicated with one click. A high rate of 68% of the ballots needed adjudication, compared to the federal allowable rate of 1 in 125,000. The program is intentionally designed to generate errors and move votes from one candidate to another. However, on November 4, all system files, adjudication files, and internet files were deleted, which is significant.

The speaker discusses an incident where there were errors in the vote count for Biden and Trump. They explain that the voting machine generated a high number of errors, which were then sent for adjudication. The rate of ballots needing adjudication was 68%, much higher than the federal allowable rate of 1 in 125,000. The speaker suggests that this program is designed to generate errors and manipulate votes. They also mention that on November 4th, all system files related to adjudication were deleted. This is seen as a significant issue.

On February 11, 462 log entries were overwritten by a script, and on March 3, 37,680 log entries were also overwritten. The day before we received the system, 330 log entries were overwritten. The EMS admin account was responsible for these actions. It raises concerns about the audit's integrity, as one would expect to have complete election context for auditing. The log file from the Dominion software indicates that someone executed a command to purge all election results, successfully deleting all records and images stored in the NAS directory. This action was taken just before the audit began, which is troubling.

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 questions whether purging the 2020 election database in February is a standard practice for all elections. The response is uncertain, but they promise to provide an answer. The speaker further asks why data from previous elections was still present on the databases. Again, there is no clear answer, but they assure the congressman that they will find out. The chairman mentions limited server space as a reason for making room for new election data. The speaker raises concerns about the credibility of the recorder, who had criticized Adrian Fontes, the person in charge of the 2020 election. The speaker clarifies that they had a bipartisan board overseeing the election to ensure fairness.

Is it standard practice to delete files off a server after an election? I hope not. So, you admit Maricopa County deleted files after the election? Those files were archived. The auditors initially didn’t have access to those archived files, correct? They did not subpoena those, that's right. You didn’t feel obligated to turn them over? We responded to the subpoena. It’s laughable to suggest a county could delete files in response to a subpoena. Your Twitter mentions purging the 2020 election database in February as standard practice. Can you confirm that’s done for all elections? I cannot confirm that today, but we’ll get you an answer. Why was data from prior elections still present? I don’t have an answer now, but we will provide one. The recorder will answer questions in a timely fashion, but he previously criticized Adrian Fontes, who ran the 2020 election. Yes, we had oversight from both parties during the election.

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.

Speaker 0 asserts that there was direct access to the Antrim County election management system (EMS). They claim that on November 5, an anonymous user logged on to the EMS remotely with escalated privileges and made changes to the database while attempting to retabulate the election. This, they say, constitutes a significant development, proving that the machines were remotely accessed and that access was by an anonymous user with elevated system privileges. Speaker 0 also discusses ballots, referring to black boxes on the side of the ballot, noting that there are 59 such black boxes. They state that forensic images show that in Antrim County, blocks 15, 18, 28, 41, and 44 were intentionally modified. The modification involved altering the height, width, and shape of those blocks with the intention of generating errors. They describe the consequence of such modifications: by modding these specific blocks, they were able to cause rejections for Republican ballots. Specifically, they claim that if a ballot voted for Donald Trump and was fed into the machine, that ballot was rejected at a rate 20% higher than for Joe Biden ballots.

Is it standard practice to delete files off a server after an election? I hope not. So, you admit Maricopa County deleted files after the election? Those files were archived. Initially, auditors didn’t have access to those archived files, correct? They did not subpoena those, that’s correct. It’s laughable to suggest that a county can delete files in response to a subpoena while claiming they are archived. Your Twitter mentions purging the 2020 election database in February; is that standard for all elections? I can’t confirm that today, but we’ll get you an answer. Why was data from prior elections still present? I don’t have an answer now, but we’ll provide one. The recorder will answer questions timely. You hired someone to oversee the 2020 election due to concerns about Adrian Fontes, correct? We took back responsibility for election operations to ensure oversight.

Forensic copy bit for bit of everything that was on the Mesa County computer. Just to clarify, there were two forensic images taken of the Mesa County Election server. One, before the software update. Another image taken after. Everything that had been on that drive before this update was gone. Looks like a cover up. Low risk of being caught. Low consequence if they are caught. The reason we know it was deliberate is because of Tina Peters. Are those files important to elections? Critical. The federal voting system standards are very clear that the election records that are required to audit a voting system include the digital records that are all the log files generated by that voting system, especially when it's a complex computer system.

The Windows security logs were purged right before two audits were scheduled to begin. This makes it difficult to determine who had access to the RTR admin account, which is shared among all accounts. It is unclear why someone would delete all the records and files from the Dominion software, which is used for tallying and reporting election results, the day before an audit started.

Is it standard practice to delete files off a server after an election? I hope not. It’s appropriate to maintain files, and while we deleted some files, they were archived. The auditors initially did not have access to those archived files because they were not subpoenaed. It’s laughable to suggest that deleting files in response to a subpoena is acceptable. The subpoena should have covered all election-related records. I cannot confirm if purging the database after elections is standard practice, but limited server space may require it. If that is the case, why was data from prior elections still present? We will provide answers to these questions. It's important to note that we had oversight during the 2020 election due to concerns about the previous administration's competence.

On 2/11, 462 log entries were overwritten by a script. On 3rd March, 37,686 log entries were overwritten by the same script. On 12th, 330 log entries were overwritten. The EMS admin account is responsible for this. The challenge is that this occurred before an audit, which means the full context of the election is not available. The log file shows that someone purged all the results for the election, deleting all records and files. This happened right before the audit started.

Mr. Bennett questions if it's standard practice to delete files off a server after an election. Mr. Gates says they maintained files but deleted the ones that were archived. It is revealed that Maricopa County deleted files off the server after the election, which the auditors didn't have access to initially. The auditors didn't subpoena those files, and Maricopa County claims they responded to the subpoena. Mr. Bennett finds it laughable that the county would delete files in response to a subpoena, as the subpoena requested all records related to the election. The county interpreted the subpoena differently.

- "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.

There is a discussion about log files on two screens. One screen shows hundreds of log files from 2019 until May 22, 2021. The other screen only has three years of log files, which have mysteriously disappeared. It is mentioned that when a Dominion employee came in, the log files vanished. These files record all access to a specific machine. It is also mentioned that Dominion sent people around the country for software updates during that time. Some participants confirm this information.

The hard drive was cloned for forensic analysis, revealing deleted or altered election records. 29,000 records were affected, impacting election totals. Two forensic images were compared, showing data loss after a software update. The actions suggest a cover-up with low risk and consequences. Tina Peters' involvement indicates deliberate tampering. The missing files are crucial for elections. Translation: The hard drive was copied for investigation, uncovering changes to election records. A comparison of two images showed data loss post-update. The situation implies a cover-up with minimal risk and consequences. Tina Peters' role suggests intentional interference. The missing files are vital for elections.

On February 11th, a script overwrote 462 log entries. On March 3rd, the same script overwrote 37,686 log entries. On March 12th, the day before the system was received, 330 log entries were overwritten by the script. The EMS admin account performed these actions. A log file from the Dominion software for results tallying and reporting shows that someone purged all the results for the election. The action was completed successfully, deleting all the files on the NAS directory, which contained all the results and images from the election. An individual ran a program to clear all records in the system used to generate the official results the day before an audit started.

The Secretary of State and Dominion emphasize backing up election records, but this doesn't align with legal requirements. Election machines are supposed to be disconnected from the internet, yet evidence shows they can connect. There's a lack of training on how to ensure this disconnection. Additionally, crucial access and audit log files were deleted, preventing accountability for who accessed the system. In court, it was revealed that preserved evidence from these logs is being used against them, as the prosecution did not allow them to present their side. The indictment was structured to exclude any mention of election machines, indicating a deliberate omission in the case.

The speaker asserts that there was direct access to the Antrim County election management system (EMS). According to the forensic images, on November 5 an anonymous user logged on to the EMS remotely with escalated privileges and made changes to the database while attempting to retabulate the election. This is presented as a major development indicating remote access to the machines, and specifically remote access by an anonymous user with elevated privileges. Additionally, the speaker describes intentional modifications to ballot components. Ballots have black boxes along the side, with boxes 59 in total. The forensic images allegedly show that blocks 15, 18, 28, 41, and 44 were intentionally modified, altering their height and width to generate errors. The claimed consequence of these modifications is that errors were produced which led to ballot rejections. Specifically, ballots in which a voter chose Donald Trump and then fed the ballot into the machine were rejected at a rate 20% higher than ballots for Joe Biden.