reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0, Speaker 1, and Speaker 2 discuss Dominion’s access to election systems during the 2020 election period in Georgia, with Gwinnett County cited as a specific example. The dialogue confirms that the questioning period was during the 2020 election, and the focus is on whether Dominion remotely accessed election systems and whether such access occurred in Georgia. Speaker 2 asks if there is any indication of nonelection personnel remotely accessing a Dominion system. Speaker 3 responds that they have reviewed a series of emails produced by Dominion in which they’re discussing remoting into Gwinnett County, Georgia. Speaker 1 then notes that Speaker 0 had mentioned Dominion remote collection or connection to election systems but lacks evidence that it occurred in Georgia. Speaker 0 asserts that there was one county and that they have seen many Dominion emails, requiring translation from Serbian to English to verify technical questions and translations. Speaker 1 asks specifically: “So it's your testimony that there is evidence of dominion remotely accessing Georgia election equipment?” Speaker 0 answers: “Yes, on the one county. It was included with stuff that I was researching and reading through considering Colorado. Michigan was also involved and there were other ones.” Speaker 2 inquires about Dominion’s ability to remotely connect to these election systems and whether they could do so without detection. Speaker 0 responds: “Yes.” Speaker 2 then asks if the interviewee is aware of any instances in which that has occurred, and Speaker 0 confirms: “One would be the Denver, Colorado server was granted or requested to grant Belgrave, Only Belgrade. Did search. There is a Belgrade Montana.” The speaker questions why Montana would need to connect to a Colorado file transfer server as part of the election system, noting there are other components and things done in the background concerning the database and the configuration of the database server that still do not have an engineering change order. Speaker 0 explains that in operational environments, things sometimes break and need fixing, leading to the submission of a change request or, in this case, an engineering change order that is retroactive. The goal is to record the process to ensure change management and integrity of the system. If changes are not recorded, it leads to a bad situation, according to Speaker 0.

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.

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 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.

Speaker 0 mentions the possibility of printing out something. Speaker 1 asks if there is an explanation for the uncounted votes. Speaker 2 clarifies that there is no concrete explanation for why those votes were not counted by the machine in the first place. Speaker 1 confirms that they don't know why the votes didn't get scanned. Speaker 2 asks if the Dominion Tech guys have figured out the reason, but Speaker 0 says they are not allowed to comment. Speaker 1 believes it wasn't a memory card issue. Speaker 2 asks if memory cards can be ruled out, and Speaker 1 agrees. Speaker 0 suggests it may be human error, but they don't have evidence to confirm it. Speaker 2 questions if it could be a software issue, but Speaker 0 refuses to speculate. Speaker 2 acknowledges the lack of a definite answer.

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 election night, the results from tabulating machines appeared inaccurate. The board decided to conduct a hand recount to ensure accurate election results. The speaker questions this decision, stating they have advocated for hand recounts for twenty years.

The speaker reveals shocking information about the deletion of the entire database directory from the d drive of the machine called EMS primary. This deletion occurred approximately 10 days before the machines were handed over to the Senate. Deleting documents after being told to preserve them can have severe legal consequences. Additionally, the main database for the election management system software, which contains all election-related data from the November 2020 general election, is missing from the EMS primary machine. This suggests that it has been removed.

Speaker 0 mentions the possibility of printing out something. Speaker 1 asks if there is an explanation for why certain votes were not counted. Speaker 2 clarifies that there is no concrete explanation for why those votes were not counted by the machine. Speaker 1 confirms that they do not know why the votes were not scanned. Speaker 2 asks if the Dominion Tech guys have figured out the reason, but Speaker 0 says they are not allowed to comment. Speaker 2 asks if it could be a memory card issue, but Speaker 1 and Speaker 0 both say they don't think so. Speaker 0 suggests it could be human error, but they don't have evidence to confirm it. Speaker 2 questions if it could be a software issue, but Speaker 0 avoids speculation. They admit they don't have a definite answer yet. Speaker 2 acknowledges this and thanks them.

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.

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.

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.

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.

- The discussion centers on ballot processing in Maricopa County, with several shipments arriving after the initial belief that counting was near completion. Speaker 0 notes that the Wednesday before the Friday they quit voting, and ten days before they quit tabulating, more truckloads of ballots came in, leading to the question: “how can you not know how many ballots are still out there?” - Speaker 1 asks for clarification: “They thought they were done.” The conversation confirms multiple times that those running the counting rooms believed they were almost done, or would be done, on Wednesday morning, then Thursday morning, then Friday morning, and the process extended into the next week. - Trucks bringing ballots arrived on the third, fourth, and fifth days, continuing throughout the last week. The last day mentioned is the tenth, with ballots still arriving. The company involved is Runback, described as doing high-speed scanning and printing of duplications and military ballots. There was no observer presence at Runback, and Speaker 0 indicates she had not been called to work there; she does not know exactly what Runback was doing (printing vs. scanning). - It is stated that all high-speed scanning occurs at Runback, and the ballots go to Runback. There is uncertainty about off-site scanning and whether Dominion equipment was involved. Speaker 0 clarifies: “They were duplications, the ballots that wouldn’t read through the tabulation machines. They were ballots that came in from military and overseas.” The number of additional sources for ballots beyond military/overseas is unknown, and Speaker 0 suggests this is a question for county employees to explain. - About the counting process: Speaker 0 confirms that the ballots went through tabulation machines and that adjudication work took place for those late arrivals. They observed the ballots being processed, but did not know the exact totals for certain days. - Daily volumes are described. Speaker 0 estimates: one day a shift might handle 90,000 ballots, and some days had similar volumes across three shifts; other days had fewer. There were days when as few as 15,000 ballots were processed. The “back door” arrivals are contrasted with the front door, with Speaker 0 noting that all back door ballots were received through back entries, not the front door. The remaining ballots in the latter part of the period continued to come in and be tabulated, with ongoing full-time shifts through the eighth, ninth, and tenth days. - The episode concludes with Speaker 1 seeking further explanation, and Speaker 0 indicating that some of the details were not fully known and that a county employee should clarify where the incoming ballots came from during the latter part of the period.

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.

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 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.

We discovered 1.7 million missing original ballot images from the 2020 election, out of 5 million ballots cast. The issue is with memory card retention rules. Memory cards in scanners hold in-person ballot images, audit logs, and records. The proposed solution is to modify the rule to comply with federal and state election record retention laws. A motion was made and passed to initiate rulemaking procedures on this matter.

Speaker 0 mentions the possibility of printing out something. Speaker 1 asks about the reason for the uncounted votes. Speaker 2 clarifies that there is no concrete explanation for why those votes were not counted by the machine. Speaker 1 confirms that they don't know why the votes didn't get scanned. Speaker 2 asks if the Dominion Tech guys have figured out the reason, but Speaker 0 says they are not allowed to comment. Speaker 2 points out that it hasn't been confirmed if it was a memory card issue. Speaker 1 agrees and suggests it could be human error. Speaker 0 says the ballots didn't transfer over correctly, but they don't have a definite answer yet. Speaker 2 asks if it could be a software issue, but Speaker 0 refuses to speculate. They conclude that they don't have a pinpointed answer at the moment.

The director is awaiting clarification on a reported human error from the state board of elections. Concerns about a flash drive with votes are raised, but the director is unsure if it was read multiple times. Despite past issues, the director defends their oversight of elections. The state board is investigating discrepancies in election results, with canvassing ongoing for provisional and mail-in ballots.

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.

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."

In discussing the 2020 election, the speaker notes that a magistrate judge issued a warrant based on probable cause after evidence was submitted, emphasizing that the process involves a magistrate judge, not a Trump-appointed judge, and that this reflects how the law enforcement process works in America. The speaker then questions the characterization of 2020 as “perfect,” arguing that several irregularities were present in Georgia. - Drop boxes: Claimed to be “invented out of thin air” and not envisioned in Georgia law. - Mobile voting units: Reported to have moved through Fulton County to 80% (81% precisely) Democrat precincts, with the assertion that this was not envisioned in Georgia law. - Absentee ballots: Alleged that 6,800,000 absentee ballot request forms with a first-class stamp were sent to every registered voter in Georgia, a practice the speaker says was not envisioned in Georgia law. - Ballot counting and recount: A recount occurred, with 3,930 double-scanned ballots in Fulton County alone; thousands of those were confirmed by the state election board. Governor Kemp raised concerns about the Rossi report; even after double scanning, the numbers still did not match on the second recount, being off by 850 ballots. The speaker states that no one can answer how that happened. - Ballot images and test ballots: The speaker asserts that ballot images were deleted and test ballots were included in the recount process, with this confirmed. The speaker then discusses responses to legitimate questions about the 2020 election. A former constituent, Derek Summerville, a former FBI agent, worked with Mark Davis on data analysis of the 6,800,000 absentee ballot request forms (sent with first-class stamps). They identified reasonable cause to question the validity of 39,141 of those ballots that were cast. The speaker asserts that 160 people were registered to vote from a single UPS store, 2,138 from one church in Fulton County, and 1,391 from a shuttered 1,000-square-foot building in Fulton County. The claim is made that Fulton County has a messy voter roll, with thousands registered at UPS stores, storage units, pack mails, and homeless shelters that had not been open for over five years. When Summerville and Davis filed objections to these voters, Democrats responded by litigation: Stacey Abrams sued them in federal court, and they won—though the speaker clarifies it was Summerville and Davis who won, not Stacey Abrams. Judge Jones ruled in their favor. Regarding the 39,141 voters deemed questionable, the speaker asserts that twelve zero of them were removed from the voter rolls, and that 9,500 had updated addresses outside Fulton County, corroborating that those voters were ineligible. Ultimately, the speaker claims that 84% of the eligibility challenges made by Summerville and Davis were proven to involve invalid voters in the 2020 election. The remark concludes by urging an end to the narrative of the most perfect, most secure election in history and calls for Fulton County to clean up its voter rolls ahead of future elections.

The speaker witnessed multiple instances where the Delaware County Board of Elections did not follow proper procedures during the election. They personally saw the voting machine warehouse supervisor uploading USB cards into the machines without being observed. The speaker raised concerns to the deputy sheriff and the clerk of elections, but their objections were ignored. It was later revealed that the warehouse manager usually inserts a few USBs into the machines after each election, but the number observed was unusually high. Currently, 47 USB cards are missing and cannot be located.