TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

According to the speaker, Gavin Newsom signed a document that makes it a crime to ask a voter for identification. The speaker believes this action indicates a desire to cheat on elections. The speaker claims that while identification is required for other activities, it is now virtually a crime to ask for it when voting, which the speaker considers the most important act. The speaker asserts the only reason for this is to enable election cheating and insists this should not be allowed to happen.

During the discussion, Speaker 1 mentions an interesting observation regarding the voter rolls. They found that 11,326 individuals who were not listed on the November 7th version of the voter rolls appeared on the December 4th version, despite showing as having voted in the recent election. Speaker 0 seeks an explanation for this discrepancy, emphasizing that they are not implying fraud but simply seeking answers. Speaker 1 admits they cannot think of a logical explanation and suggests reaching out to the county for clarification. The conversation ends there.

The scene described is a reaction in a packed room at the Saint Paul Armory following the governor’s signature, which is described as making a “driver’s license for all the law of the land.” The speaker questions whether presenting a driver’s license at the polls would suddenly make those individuals eligible to vote. Mister Lanell responds to the chair, explaining the policy regarding voters whose registration had been incomplete. He states that if such a person presents the election judge with an acceptable identification document, that would clear the challenge from the roster, and they would be permitted to cast a ballot.

You're able to register even if and cast a vote if you don't live in the in the country as evident of his brother in Pakistan. I think we have some evidence of two or three other people out of the country that voted. Is that correct? Yeah. Approximately two or three other people out of the country as well as people residing outside the district. Okay. The online voter registration system, it seems to be an honor system. Anybody can put information in there to to register a vote. All you have to do is click a box and say that you're not lying, and then you'll get an email from the secretary of state or something in the mail saying thank you for registering to vote, and there you are. Once you're on the voter rolls, anytime an election comes around, guess what? You get mailed a ballot. Right? You get mailed something to vote. So we found that a little bit problem

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.

I felt compelled to share my experience after working at a polling station for the November 5th election in Iowa. During training, I learned that illegal immigrants can vote using driver's licenses that look identical to those of US citizens. If their citizenship is questioned, they can still vote using a provisional ballot, which is later verified. They have until November 12th to provide proof of citizenship, but documents like utility bills do not confirm citizenship. I'm concerned about the integrity of the voting process and who verifies these provisional ballots. It's crucial for US citizens to be informed and vote responsibly. I encourage everyone to educate themselves and engage in the electoral process. This is about raising awareness of what’s happening. Please keep negative comments to a minimum; I'm sharing this to inform, not to offend.

They go to the New York City Board of Elections office at 200 Varick Street, 10th Floor, in New York, NY, planning to pose as a non-citizen, Canadian green card holder to see how far they can get in the voter registration process. They note that a clerk initially says you must be a citizen to fill out the registration, but another clerk claims they “accept anything that comes over the counter” and that there are people who have legal situations and registered when they weren’t a citizen. The first clerk’s behavior raises concern: he does not tell them it would be illegal to complete the application as a noncitizen, only that he wouldn’t recommend it. The participants press for clarity. The first clerk admits that “we can’t stop you from submitting the application and if it goes through, but most likely because they don’t do like a full background check,” and adds that “once in a while, you know, we have people who come in here and they have legal situations and they registered, they weren’t a citizen, boom, boom, boom.” The participants quote that as a direct admission that non-citizens are in fact registering to vote. One participant asks if they can fill out the form, and the clerk responds: “Up to you. That’s right. I can’t tell you what to do. You wanna fill that, fill it out. But everything is clear clearly stated, especially at this bottom, it says American citizens.” The participant asks if the clerk would report them; the clerk says “No. No. No. I’m not, no. I’m not that’s not my job to report anyone. My job is just to collect the application and put it and submit it to the department.” The clerk adds that they “accept anything that comes over the counter, you know.” Under New York election law, section 17-106, it is stated that “any election officer who willfully violates any provision of the election law relative to the registration of electors is guilty of a felony.” The participants note it would be a criminal offense for the worker to process their voter registration after admitting to being a noncitizen. They ask if they can take materials with them and the clerk confirms they can “take one of these.” The participants are told that they can fill out the form, and if it comes back or doesn’t, they will submit it; the clerk reiterates that they “can’t do our background check on you. We just collect it.” On leaving, they decide not to submit any application, since doing so would be illegal. They later return to gather more information, but the worker becomes suspicious, consults a coworker, and then changes his stance and refuses to accept the application. They observe that at these centers, there is no requirement to show ID, Social Security, or any proof of identification; all you have to do is sign an affidavit stating you are an American citizen. They describe this as a potential threat to the integrity of the U.S. electoral system. They conclude with the implication that non-citizen registrations have occurred and question how many such forms have been processed.

The video documents an undercover-style investigation at the New York City Board of Elections on the 10th Floor at 200 Varick Street, focusing on whether noncitizens can register to vote. Speaker 0 plans to pose as a noncitizen Canadian green-card holder and attempts to engage a staffer about voter registration. In the first encounter, Speaker 2 tells Speaker 1 that “Everything you fill out, you’re swearing an affidavit that everything you’re putting down is true,” and notes that “you gotta be a citizen to fill it out.” Speaker 1 identifies as “a green card holder from Canada.” The staffer initially signals uncertainty about whether to fill out the form, saying, “I wouldn’t fill it out,” but also suggests the possibility that noncitizens have previously registered. Speaker 0 observes that the staffer does not state it would be illegal to complete the application as a noncitizen, only that the staffer “doesn’t recommend it.” The conversation reveals that the staffer acknowledges noncitizens have registered before: “We have people who come in here and they have legal situations and they registered, they weren’t a citizen, boom boom boom.” The staffer also admits that they “can’t stop you from submitting the application,” and that there is generally no full background check; “we can’t do our background check on you. We just collect it. That’s it.” Speaker 2 reinforces that the staff’s role is to collect and submit, not to verify citizenship, stating, “we accept anything that comes over the counter,” and reiterating that “if it comes back to you, it comes back to… If it doesn’t, it doesn’t.” When Speaker 1 asks if they will report the noncitizen, the staffer responds, “No. No. No. I’m not… that’s not my job to report anyone. My job is just to collect the application and put it and submit it to the department.” Speaker 0 cites New York election law—“Under New York election law, section seventeen one zero six, any election officer who willfully violates any provision of the election law relative to the registration of electors is guilty of a felony”—to argue that processing a noncitizen registration would be a criminal offense. After leaving the office, the pair return to request more information, but the staffer becomes suspicious, consults a coworker, and then refuses to accept their application. The video notes that, according to the staff, “we get registrations come to the mail. We, you know, we whatever comes through, we accept and then it’s submitted,” and emphasizes the absence of ID or proof of citizenship requirements at registration, solely requiring an affidavit asserting citizenship. The segment concludes by highlighting concerns about potential threats to electoral integrity, asserting that there is no requirement to show ID or documentation to register, and that all that is required is signing an affidavit claiming American citizenship.

Concerns have arisen about noncitizens voting in Arizona's elections, particularly regarding 218,000 voters who were improperly recorded as having provided proof of citizenship. This issue stems from long-time residents who obtained driver's licenses before citizenship requirements were enforced. The Arizona Supreme Court has ruled that these individuals are eligible to vote. Addressing the belief that noncitizens are voting in large numbers will be challenging, and it's likely this narrative will continue to surface after the election, regardless of the outcome.

We allow people without addresses to use our address for voting and getting state IDs. This caused suspicion during the election, but no issues arose. Having an address is crucial for getting an ID, so we've been providing this service for years. Recently, we discovered thousands of people using our address as their mailing address.

The speaker mentions a strange occurrence where a person named Michael appeared in the voter records, even when the speaker entered their Social Security number. They express confusion and ask for help to understand who made the mistake. Even after re-entering the Social Security number and address, the person in question is still not identified as a woman. The speaker concludes that Michael is likely the driver.

I just finished voting, but there was an issue. When I presented my ID, the clerk informed me that their records showed I had requested, received, and returned a mail-in ballot, which I hadn't done. As a result, I had to cast a provisional vote and sign an affidavit stating I never received or returned an absentee ballot. Now, I need to call a number after election day to check if my vote was counted. It makes me wonder how many others faced similar issues, raising questions about the fairness and reliability of the voting system.

Speaker 0 explains that under that scenario, someone could get their driver's license again because they register to vote. If the Social Security number doesn’t match, they’re flagged, but as long as they have an ID (the driver’s license) and sign that they’re eligible to vote, they can vote, and they’re no longer flagged. They would be on the system, correct, Mister Lanell. Speaker 1 responds: Madam chair, if I could add, and maybe stepping back from those that are flagged as CID on the roster, for anyone presenting documentation to register to vote, that is an affirmation of their identity. The driver’s license has not been used as proof of citizenship for the purposes of registering to vote—affirming that they are who they say they are. So in any of these cases where someone were to cast a ballot if they were ineligible to vote, there are also reports that are generated post election for voters that are challenged. Counties will run to show status of voters that had been updated due to the fact that they’ve now cast a ballot, and that can be reviewed and referred to the county attorney. Speaker 0 concludes: Okay. So the answer is yes to my question.

Speaker 1 outlines a plan to revisit all 50 states and 'clean up voter rolls' and 'ensure as best they can that people are citizens when they're registering to vote in a federal election.' He notes letters have been sent to states under two statutes: 'Help America Vote Act' and 'NVRA, National Voter Registration Act.' States must maintain data, keep rules up to date, and have procedures for federal registrations to safeguard citizenship. He says many states are 'sloppy, cutting corners, not doing this, certainly not doing the list maintenance required,' and not properly ensuring people are on the rolls. The goal is that 'every citizen, whatever their party, whatever their views are, they should feel confident in the outcome of the election.'

Speaker 0 discusses registering and voting from outside the country, citing Pakistan as an example. He mentions evidence of two or three other people out of the country who voted, as well as people residing outside the district. He describes the online voter registration system as an honor system, saying anybody can enter information to register to vote. He states, “All you have to do is click a box and say that you're not lying,” after which you’ll receive an email from the secretary of state or something in the mail saying, “thank you for registering to vote,” and there you are. Once you're on the voter rolls, anytime an election comes around, “guess what? You get mailed a ballot. Right? You get mailed something to vote.” He concludes by noting, “So we found that a little bit problema.”

It is against the law for noncitizens to vote in federal elections. However, some states are not requiring proof of citizenship when noncitizens register to vote. Governor Glenn Youngkin in Virginia issued an executive order to clean up voting rules. The Biden administration's Department of Justice sued the governor and the Commonwealth of Virginia to try to prevent them from cleaning up their voter rolls. This creates doubt and concern because everyone should want the law to be followed.

The speaker describes a situation in which registration and voting can occur even when a person does not live in the country, citing an example involving a brother in Pakistan to illustrate the point. According to the speaker, there is evidence of two or three other people who are outside the country voting, as well as people residing outside of the district. This is presented as a factual observation about who has voted, including individuals located abroad and not within the local district boundaries. The speaker then critiques the online voter registration system by characterizing it as an honor system. The claim is that anybody can enter information into the online system to register and vote, relying on the promise of truthfulness. The process alleged by the speaker is described as follows: a person would place information into the system and then simply click a box stating that they are not lying about the information provided. After doing so, the person would receive an email from the secretary of state or a similar official channel in the mail, indicating acknowledgment or thanks for registering to vote, effectively confirming their registration. Following this registration, the speaker notes a procedural consequence: once an individual is on the voter rolls, they are mailed a ballot for each election. In other words, the pattern described is that being on the voter rolls automatically leads to receiving a mailed ballot for every election that occurs, according to the speaker’s account of how the system operates. The speaker emphasizes a continuity of this process across elections, implying that the mailed ballot would be a recurring consequence of enrollment on the voter rolls. Throughout the account, there is an emphasis on what the speaker views as the potential vulnerability or problematic nature of the system. The speaker asserts that the combination of an online registration process that relies on an honor system, the possibility of registering with false or unverified information, and the automatic mailing of ballots to those on the rolls creates a situation that the speaker finds problematic. The overall narrative connects the initial observations about individuals voting from abroad and outside the district to a broader critique of the online registration and ballot distribution processes, underscoring concerns about eligibility verification and the integrity of the voting system as described by the speaker.

Speaker 0 states they can help the individual register when they get their ID. Speaker 1 asserts that an ID does not prove citizenship. Speaker 0 says they moved the individual from citizens in 2013 and that they had IDs in multiple states. The individual acknowledges this.

Speaker 0 warns that what you’re doing is extremely dangerous, and questions why it is dangerous. Speaker 1 challenges this by asking why it would be dangerous, and clarifies that they are not saying people are voting in certain places, but that people are currently registered to vote there. Speaker 2 interjects, referencing a recent sweep around Fulton County. Speaker 1 reiterates: they see that people are currently registered to vote in places like empty lots and homeless shelters that closed ten years ago, and asks what the other speaker would do if they became secretary of state to address that. Speaker 0 responds that the other party will have to reply to conspiracy theories. Speaker 1 counters that it is not a conspiracy, describing it as a current situation: people are currently registered to vote there, and it’s possible to purchase voter rolls for $45 to verify this. They insist they are not saying people are voting there, but that people are currently registered to vote there, and they reference Jason as the person who can verify that. They further state they will gladly take the other speaker to see if it’s true, arguing that if someone is running for secretary of state, they are in charge of maintaining the voter rolls. Speaker 0 continues to label the claim as dangerous and as conspiracy theory. Speaker 1 again emphasizes that they are not alleging people are voting there, but that people are currently registered to vote there. They reiterate that it took $45 to purchase the voter rolls, and that the same could be done for Fulton County. They mention specific locations where people are allegedly registered to vote: empty lots and a MARTA bus station, and ask whether the other speaker will address that instead of labeling it conspiracy theories. They reference the existence of a death address, 205 Elm Street Northwest, described as an empty lot that one could visit to verify the claim. They ask whether the other speaker, as an elected official who might become secretary of state, cares about ensuring clean voter rolls in a county considered one of the most important in the United States. Speaker 0 maintains that the other party’s approach is dangerous. Speaker 1 repeats the core assertion: it’s not a conspiracy, it’s a current condition where people are registered to vote in empty lots, a MARTA bus station, and other locations, and stresses that the issue is about maintaining clean voter rolls. The exchange cycles through insistence that “people are currently registered to vote there,” the availability of voter-roll data for verification, and the imperative for someone who could be secretary of state to address the integrity of the rolls rather than dismissing the claim as conspiracy theory.

A crowd gathered at the Saint Paul Armory after the governor signed a measure making driver's licenses available broadly, described as “driver’s licenses for all,” effectively serving as a photo ID for all residents, regardless of citizenship. The discussion then centers on how these licenses interact with voting and registration processes. One speaker notes that if someone comes in with a driver’s license, they would receive a photo ID and register accordingly, even if their social security number is incorrect or missing. The concern raised is whether that person, after obtaining a driver’s license, could then cast a vote despite incomplete registration information. The dialogue explores the potential for a non-citizen who possesses a driver’s license to participate in elections. In response, another participant—referred to as the chair—addresses the procedure for handling incomplete registrations. The chair explains that the designation on the roster for someone whose registration is incomplete can be resolved if the person presents an acceptable identification document. In such a case, the challenge from the roster would be cleared, and the individual would be permitted to cast a ballot. A subsequent aside acknowledges the potential problem inherent in this approach, with a speaker named Anderson prompting clarification. The core question remains: could a person who is not a citizen, but who presents a driver’s license at the voting point, be permitted to vote? The chair provides a definitive statement regarding eligibility: at both the time of registration and at the time of submitting a ballot, every voter signs an attestation affirming their eligibility to vote, including that they meet all eligibility requirements that they are a US citizen. This underscores the requirement that, despite the availability of driver’s licenses to a broad population, the attestation of citizenship remains a binding condition for voting. The exchange highlights a tension between broad ID access and the constitutional requirement of citizenship for voting, with the chair reiterating that citizenship is required to vote, even if driver’s licenses are issued more inclusively.

Voting illegally happens frequently, despite penalties. In California, registering to vote online doesn't require ID. The DMV is registering people to vote, even illegal immigrants, with immunity from prosecution. Safeguards against voter fraud are lacking.

I've discovered how ineligible voters are added to voter rolls. The source is the Electronic Registration Information Center, or ERIC, led by David Becker. Becker was previously involved in a scandal as a US attorney. With funding from George Soros, Becker created ERIC, which contracts with states to access DMV records. This sensitive data, protected under the Driver's Privacy Protection Act, is used to identify unregistered individuals. ERIC's membership agreement forbids disclosing citizenship status, so they add these names to voter rolls and circulate the data. This information is then shared with the Center for Election Innovation and Research, another organization founded by Becker, which received funding from Zuckerburg in 2020.

In California and New York, it is illegal to ask for or show ID when people vote. According to the speakers, there is no logical reason for this law other than to facilitate election fraud. To commit fraud, one would eliminate the need for ID and allow mail-in ballots.

Some believe that many millennials, dreamers, and undocumented people, who contribute to the country, are fearful of voting because they worry immigration will find them and deport their families. One speaker claims that this is untrue because voting is confidential and voting rolls are not transferred for investigation. Another speaker expresses disbelief, stating that the President is questioning whether an illegal person is voting, and reminding people that only citizens can vote. The speaker believes the President is saying not to worry about being caught for illegal voting. The speaker emphasizes that undocumented people cannot vote because they are not citizens.

You need to fill out paperwork to vote, even without ID or a driver's license. Just provide your name, date, and signature. No registration is required to vote.