TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Who determined the number 420,987,987 regarding failed signatures from the 2020 election? That figure comes from analyzing a quarter of the 1,900,000 mail-in ballots in Maricopa County. We had 150 trained workers review the envelopes based on the secretary of state's guidelines, examining each voter record individually. After analyzing 25% of the ballots, we extrapolated the data to arrive at the final number. It's important to note that this analysis only pertains to Maricopa County, which had over 2 million ballots in total, with around 1.9 million being mail-in votes. Yes, that is correct. Thank you. Proceed.

Eric Spakine, a forensic chemist and document analyst with nearly 30 years of experience, presents his background. He has worked on various election cases, examining documents, computers, fingerprints, and voting systems. Trained by his father, a retired Chief Document Analyst for the Michigan State Police, and Richard Burnell, a retired deputy director of the National ATF Laboratory, Eric specializes in question documents, paper, and ink. He works at a private consulting firm in Fort Lauderdale, affiliated with a main office in Michigan. With a focus on documents, inks, and related data, Eric is ready to begin his presentation.

During an election integrity conference, a citizen journalist spoke with Reynaldo Valenzuela, the director of elections at Maricopa County, Arizona Recorder's Office and Elections Department. Valenzuela allegedly explained how to vote twice by moving from a state that uses the ERIC system to one that doesn't. The journalist tried to record the conversation but failed. They also engaged in conversations with three other individuals, including Bill Gates. The journalist became a citizen journalist to uncover the truth and is motivated by their love for their country.

I found that there were approximately 25,000 ballots in Maricopa County that were not printed from the official Dominion PDF ballot. These ballots had imperfections in the lines and circles, unlike the perfect PDF printing. The imperfections were consistent across all the ballots, suggesting they were not genuine. These 25,000 questionable ballots alone exceed Joe Biden's margin of victory by over double.

We provided our data to Dr. Walter Dougherty, a qualified expert in computer sciences and engineering. He reviewed the declarations and analytic data we presented and concluded that there were 99.99 signatures that could have been introduced into the 2022 election due to the broken system. This information is detailed in exhibit 4. Dr. Dougherty will explain the scientific math he used, which is industry standard.

The speaker, a well-versed American patriot, has been aware of the sketchiness of the election systems for about 15 or 16 years. They have been working with a group of people who have uncovered some significant findings. In 2018, the Dallas election had irregularities, which prompted the Texas governor to form a panel to investigate. This panel hired a cybersecurity group to study the irregularities, specifically on Dominion Machines. Over the past two years, this group has reverse-engineered the process of stealing an election using this equipment. The speaker has been associated with them since August and has been actively supporting their efforts for the past 4 or 5 months.

The speaker asks who determined the number of failed signatures in the 2020 election. Speaker 1 explains that their organization reviewed a quarter of the 1,900,000 envelopes from the election using 150 trained workers. They followed the guidelines in the secretary of state manual and analyzed each voter record individually. The statistics from the first 25% of the ballots were extrapolated to determine the final number, which is specific to Maricopa County. Speaker 0 acknowledges that Maricopa County alone had over 2 million ballots, with about 1.9 million of them being mail-in ballots. Speaker 1 confirms this and the conversation continues.

During the Arizona audit, Maricopa County made it clear that signature verification was off-limits. However, it's easy to understand why they didn't want us to examine the signatures because, in reality, they don't match.

The speaker was contacted to assist with examining ballots during the audit in Maricopa County. However, they were only able to examine photographs of the ballots, not the actual ballots themselves. They noticed that many of the ballots had a counterfeit protection system (CPS) code, but the photographs were not clear enough to determine what the code said. The CPS code is a series of yellow dots that can determine when and where a document was printed. It is visible to a trained eye or with magnification, but not to the naked eye. The code can provide information about the machine and date of printing. However, without access to the actual ballots, the speaker cannot draw any conclusions.

I was responsible for the traffic forensic portion of the audit and the quality control of the ballots. I handled damaged, large print, braille, and special ballots, including the UOCAVA ballots for overseas voters. These ballots are actually just regular 8.5 by 11 white sheets of copy paper. In 2016, there were 1,600 UOCAVA ballots, but in 2020, there were nearly 9,600. As an eyewitness, I can say that 95% of these ballots went to one candidate. This resulted in a net gain of 8,000 votes for that candidate, who won the state by just over 10,000 votes. This increase in UOCAVA ballots was due to the pandemic and the return of military personnel.

I am Eric Spikin, a forensic chemist and document analyst with experience in over 2,000 cases worldwide. I specialize in examining questioned documents for authenticity, alterations, and ink age. I was called to Arizona to analyze election-related printing processes, machine copied marks, and CPS code with my team.

Dr. Walter Doretti, an expert in computer science and engineering, presented his credentials and experience during a hearing. He mentioned his education at Oklahoma Christian University and Harvard, where he obtained master's and doctorate degrees. With 37 years of teaching experience, including 32 years at Texas A&M University, he has also worked as a consultant for various corporations and government agencies, including classified projects. Dr. Doretti specializes in analyzing election data, particularly from the 2020 and 2022 Arizona elections, as voting machines are essentially computers and election data involves math. His expertise directly relates to the previous presentation by Ms. Bush.

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.

Jacqueline Greger testifies to a preliminary finding report on activities impacting Arizona’s election integrity, focusing on the 2020 and 2022 general elections. She outlines a multi-year pattern beginning in 2017, alleging that “accents points” were used to change vote totals and election results, with illegal transfers moving money to candidates through phantom entities and for-profit and non-profit PACs created by Brittany Ray Chavez. She claims that during the 2022 election, ballot scanners and printers at 70 precincts had their printer settings changed through computer infiltration after being tested the night before the election, leading to uncontrollable ballots being placed in Box 3 and allegedly driven to Runbeck’s office. Witness information from October 2020 is cited, including more than 100,000 filed-in ballots and more than 13,000,000 identified in two unmarked rental cars used to move ballots and cash to Runbeck’s office. Runbeck is described as operated by Robert Runbeck, with deeds for Runbeck provided in the materials. Greger asserts a planned strategy involving Hobbs and Fontes: Hobbs would receive the Democratic nomination for governor, Fontes would run for secretary of state to replace Hobbs, and both would be bribe recipients evidenced by “Britney deeds.” She argues the fix for 2020 and 2022 started in 2017 with appointments to election positions of individuals bribed through a mortgage scheme and money laundering via phantom appointments. She emphasizes “the problems with these documents are many” and connects money laundering to drug cartel activity and human trafficking, arguing cartel investment aims to place reliable figures in key positions to advance their objectives. The report titled Preliminary Findings of Activities Impacting Arizona’s Election Integrity with specific focus on the 2020 and 2022 general elections is introduced by Greger, who provides her background: she has a master’s in marketing and honors degrees in finance, accounting, statistics, economics, and business strategy; resident of Scottsdale since 1997; owner of Finebreder Insurance Agency; principal investigator with Harris Thaler Law Firm since 2019. The team, led by John Harris Thaler (a 32-year attorney), investigates racketeering and corruption across multiple states. Thaler’s past work includes uncovering laundering of cartel money through real estate in Illinois, Idaho, and Iowa; real estate agents, escrow companies, and title insurers indicted for racketeering; investigations into money laundering through Arizona real estate; and a broader operation intertwining narcotics trafficking, tax evasion, payroll theft, bankruptcy fraud, insurance fraud, and election fraud. Greger states that more than 120,000 documents have been reviewed and that 47 filings exist in the report. She outlines a pattern of money laundering through single-family residences, inflated construction invoices, fake charitable donations, fictitious students in private schools, and fake bankruptcies. Wells Fargo and other banks are alleged to have opened accounts for phantom people; municipal and state systems in Mesa, including a private police force, are said to be compromised to support racketeering. She claims numerous forged or altered documents, including falsified deeds of trust and notary acts, with signatures forged or copied, often associated with Brittany Chavez and Donna Chavez. Key individuals and entities are named as bribe recipients and conspirators: Kathleen M. Hobbs and Patrick T. Goodman appear in a series of deeds with signatures and notarizations that Greger says are fraudulent; Brittany and Donna Chavez are identified as principal preparers of documents; the Maricopa County Recorder’s Office and relevant courts are alleged to have been infiltrated to upload falsified documents and remove legitimate ones. Greger discusses targeted election service providers, including Runbeck, and asserts that “the county database” has “no integrity whatsoever,” with backdoor access enabling document upload or deletion. She describes bribes to judges, prosecutors, and public officials across the state, including 25% of active judges in certain jurisdictions, and claims that elections including the governor, attorney general, and other offices were affected. Greger notes investigations are not limited to Arizona; FBI, IRS, US attorneys’ offices, and attorney generals in California and New Mexico have engaged with the findings. She emphasizes that the final report will be a 300-page book with about 3,000 attachments, to be published as Report to the Governor, and that excerpts and documentation will be available at reporttothegovernor.com. She clarifies that she and Thaler do not represent political candidates or parties, and that Thaler had not voted or donated in 2022. She closes by describing the data’s potential utility for enforcement agencies and asks for questions; a constituent video is requested to be played.

I'm Eric Spikin, a forensic chemist and document analyst with extensive experience in examining questioned documents. I have worked on over 2,000 cases across 5 continents and my expertise has been recognized by various media outlets including the Wall Street Journal, America's Most Wanted, Forensic Files, and Good Morning America. Recently, I was asked to investigate election-related matters in Arizona, focusing on printing processes, machine copied marks, and the CPS code used for counterfeit protection. I traveled to Arizona with three colleagues from my office to conduct the analysis.

Performance in both Iraq and Afghanistan. I've provided security services to the president of The United States and other high ranking members in the United States government. I've protected diplomatic persons, high net worth corporate clients, media personalities, investigative journalists, and the general public. I continue that work today as a SWAT team leader and executive protection specialist. I've been recognized on numerous occasions for my high level professionalism, proficiency, and knowledge of all security measures while working in those fields. As I analyze what happened and

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?

Eric Spakin, a forensic chemist and document analyst, examined ballots from the Arizona audit. He found that approximately 25,000 ballots did not match the official Dominion PDF printing, showing imperfections in their lines. This discrepancy exceeds Joe Biden's victory margin of 10,457 votes. Additionally, Spakin noted a statistical anomaly where 61 groups of 200 ballots showed over 90% support for one candidate, with 58 favoring Biden and only 3 favoring Trump. This suggests potential manipulation in sorting ballots. Arizona's early voting process allows ballots to be counted weeks before election day, raising concerns about election integrity and the need for safeguards to ensure accurate results that reflect voters' choices.

The speaker asks who determined the number of failed signatures in the 2020 election. Speaker 1 explains that their organization reviewed 25% of the 1,900,000 envelopes from the election and analyzed each voter record individually. They extrapolated the statistics from the first 25% to determine the final number, which is specific to Maricopa County. Speaker 0 points out that Maricopa County alone had over 2 million ballots, and their group analyzed 25% of the mail-in ballots to arrive at the 420,987 failed signature verification number. Speaker 1 confirms this.

I worked with around 80 coworkers who were instructed to backdate ballot packages at the election headquarters. Different false dates were used each day, totaling about 10,000 false documents created per day for approximately 10 days. Multiple supervisors were involved in giving instructions. The false dates were entered into the system as the mailing date.

- The evidence, through eyewitness testimony corroborated by others, shows that a 130,000 to 280,000 completed ballots for the twenty twenty general election were shipped from Bethpage, New York to Lancaster, Pennsylvania, where those ballots and the trailer in which they were shipped disappeared. - On October 21, there was a series of unusual events that cannot be a coincidence. I know I saw ballots with return addresses filled out, thousands of them, thousands, loaded onto my trailer in New York and headed for Pennsylvania. At first, I didn't think it was a big deal. In fact, I thought it was really awesome. I was like, sweet. I'm doing something for the presidential race. You know? This is cool. But as things became weirder, I got to thinking and wondered why I was driving complete ballots from New York to Pennsylvania. I didn't know why, so I decided to speak up. And that's what I'm doing today. - It could be a 144 to over, to a quarter million ballots. Part of our developing investigation indicates that Jesse wasn't alone. There was a number, as in like a bunch of different trucks which engaged in this. So when you think about the magnitude of potential votes showing up the night of the election after midnight, you have to have an artifact. So if you eliminate the impossible with all things being equal, whatever remains must be the truth. The truth is ballot showed up. They were counted. They do not match necessarily the records of who should have voted. In some instances, the stats don't add up, and we continue to analyze that. - With that said, I believe beyond a shadow of a doubt, we have evidence of a massive transfer of completed curated ballots ready to be injected into counting centers.

- "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."

I'm calling out the recent news story as a setup for a time hack. In Maricopa County during the 2020 election, they had 10 tally machines counting over 140,000 ballots daily. Yet, on election day, they claimed they needed 10 extra days to count, processing only 89,000 ballots the day after and then dropping to just a few thousand. A month later, they counted 140,000 ballots again. This indicates they are creating excuses and using various hacks to interfere with the election. It's crucial to maintain chain of custody for forensic audits, which is costly but necessary to prevent disqualification of evidence. We learned from 2020, and it's vital to preserve this information for future legal actions. Barcodes are scanned using a laser that checks columns for light reflection, translating them into binary code for computers.

I worked with around 80 coworkers at the election headquarters, where we were instructed to falsify ballot package dates. Different supervisors told us to backdate the documents, creating about 10,000 false documents per day for 10 days, totaling around 100,000 false documents. Sometimes we completed up to 14,000 packages per day.

Speaker 1, an expert in handwriting and signatures, believes that it is impossible to compare signatures for consistency in less than 3 seconds. They have extensive experience in this field and consider themselves to be at the top of their profession. Speaker 1 also explains that comparing signatures means carefully examining the similarities and differences between two items, in this case, signatures. They mention that Arizona statute 16,550 states that signatures should be compared for consistencies or inconsistencies. Speaker 1 emphasizes that the word "compare" is commonly used in their industry and has a clear meaning.