reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In June 2021, we informed them about 25,000+ suspected counterfeit ballots. Despite having over a year to address the issue, they failed to prevent it from happening again in 2022. The GOP spread propaganda to discredit our findings, but everyone knew about it beforehand.

In 2018, the Dallas elections had irregularities, similar to what we're hearing now. Texas hired a cybersecurity group to investigate these irregularities, finding 10 different ways the Dominion equipment could be manipulated. Texas outlawed the use of Dominion, but it was still used. This group spent 2 years reverse engineering how to rig an election using Dominion. Meanwhile, another cybersecurity group, including hackers and other experts, mapped out the election manipulation plan. They approached DHS and CISA for a meeting, but they refused to attend. It's concerning how many people turned a blind eye to this issue. Lawyers involved may not understand the technology, but they should be held accountable.

The speaker states they are in litigation with 18 states across 19 different lawsuits over these states’ alleged refusal to comply. They say objections raised include privacy, noting they are requesting information such as the last four digits of individuals’ Social Security numbers and whether someone is in the country legally or a citizen, which they describe as a matter of federal records. The speaker asserts that the concept of this being a privacy issue is “total nonsense,” and argues that those states have no right to be on the voter rolls. They express an expectation to win these cases, even if it takes going to the Supreme Court. The speaker indicates they started this effort earlier in the year to give states a chance and mentions targeting jurisdictions like Fulton County, Georgia, which still has custody of some ballots from the 2020 election that they would like to examine, along with a couple of other jurisdictions. They say they reached a settlement with North Carolina, which is cleaning up its voter rolls with 100,000 records that were incorrect and needed updating. They mention they waited on behalf of Wyoming’s voter ID law and helped them win a case in court against liberal efforts to push it back. The speaker outlines an overall expectation for 2026: cleaner voter rolls, with many election officials, as noted by John, doing their job after receiving these letters. They anticipate hundreds of thousands of people in some states being removed from the voter rolls correctly. The speaker notes a past hesitation to act, suggesting it was because the DOJ and some left-wing organizations would sue when states attempted to do their job, framing it as “damned if you do, damned if you don’t.” They conclude that for the remainder of this administration, they will be supporting states in cleaning their voter rolls as required by federal law and emphasize that they are just getting started.

In June of 2021, we informed them about our suspicion of over 25,000 counterfeit ballots. The GOP and conservative operatives spread propaganda to undermine our credibility. Despite having ample time to prevent a repeat in 2022, they chose to do nothing. As a result, the same fraudulent activities occurred again in 2020.

In this video, secretaries of states from Colorado, Connecticut, Michigan, and Maine are seen discussing the biggest threats to democracy. They mention election sabotage, voter suppression targeting black and brown voters, the need for federal standards, and an organized campaign to discourage people from participating in democracy. They emphasize the importance of fighting back to protect our democracy and everything it stands for.

Dominion, a company with Democratic ties, is suspected of potentially allowing late votes to be added to favor Biden. Lawsuits in Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Michigan are being closely watched for potential constitutional violations and vote discrepancies. The administration may have a chance of prevailing in these states.

Over 1,500,000 fraudulent votes counted, and the spread is less than 82,000 votes. These fraudulent votes come from dead voters, ballots that were received before they were supposedly mailed out, and over 330,000 electronic spikes from the voting machine. 205,000 over votes, meaning there were 205,000 more votes than registered voters, and 682,000 ballots that were illegally processed without any oversight whatsoever. More than 1,500,000 votes in Pennsylvania is apparently what it took for Joe Biden to steal the state. Georgia has a similar phenomenon that Democrats are failing to account for. 66,248 underage voters voted in Georgia. 10,315 dead people voted. 2,500 convicted felons voted. Nearly 200,000 votes were fraudulently inserted into the vote instantaneously. 4,500 votes come from unregistered voters. These numbers show a clear pattern that a variety of types of fraud occurred in this election and that Democrats are desperately trying to cover it up. They're going to great lengths to change the narrative of the election fraud in an effort to run up the clock to 01/20/2020. In addition to president Trump's team, many independent groups have completed research on the fraud and the results are staggering. Totaling across the country, millions of votes were fraudulently covered up, changed, or deleted in favor of Joe Biden. The governors and secretaries of state have actively participated in the cover up. Removing information from their website that is normally easily accessible to the public and depriving conservatives a chance to audit or review the results are just some of their tactics. In Arizona, the final result is only a difference of 10,457, yet 36,400 non citizens voted in the state. Arizona also experienced phantom spikes from the voting machines to the tune of roughly 50,000 additional votes going to Joe Biden. These numbers come from information that is publicly available, whether from the secretary of state's website before the content was removed or from the raw data that was pushed out on election night.

In June of 2021, we informed them of suspected counterfeit ballots. Despite warnings, GOP propaganda cast doubt on the legitimacy of the ballots. Officials knew about this but failed to prevent a repeat in 2022. Their inaction enabled the same issue to occur in 2020.

Looking at the landscape of election-related issues, several key themes emerge. One major concern is the potential for a self-coup, where pressure is exerted on state election officials to alter results. In Georgia, there's a worry that Trump loyalists appointed to the state election board might manipulate rules to challenge legitimate election outcomes if Biden wins. Another theme involves disinformation and racist tropes used to undermine voting legitimacy, reminiscent of 2020 tactics targeting urban areas with large minority populations. We're seeing cases in Arizona and Texas using undocumented migrant voting as a false premise. Finally, there's a push for court supervision of Trump's post-election activities, similar to past oversight of the Republican Party. The NAACP is advocating for this due to concerns about potential misconduct, and a case is currently before Judge Tanya Chetkin.

Nicole Shanahan and Harmeet Dhillon discuss a broad critique of how culture, law, and politics are shaping America today, focusing on cancel culture, political power, and the fight over election integrity, free speech, and American ideals. - On cancel culture and authenticity: The conversation opens with a claim that pursuing political or cultural conformity reduces genuine individuality, with examples of how people are judged or pressured to parroting “woke” messaging. They argue that this dynamic reduces people to boxes—race, gender, or immigrant status—rather than evaluating merit or character, and they describe a climate in which disagreement is met with denunciation rather than dialogue. They stress the importance of being able to be oneself and to engage across differences without being canceled. - Personal backgrounds and the RNC moment: Nicole Shanahan describes an impression of Harmeet Dhillon speaking at the RNC, highlighting the sense of inclusion across faiths, races, and women in the party. Dhillon emphasizes that this is not about a monolith “white Christian nationalist” stereotype, recounting her own experiences from Dartmouth, where she encountered hostility to stereotypes and where merit-based evaluation (writing, argumentation) defined advancement rather than identity. - Experiences with California and liberal intolerance: Dhillon notes a pervasive intolerance in California toward dissent on topics like religious liberty and climate justice, describing a glass ceiling in big law for pro-liberty work and a culture of signaling rather than substantive engagement. Shanahan adds that moving away from the Democratic Party to independence has induced personal and professional consequences, such as colleagues asking to be removed from her website due to investor concerns, reflecting broader fears about association in liberal enclaves. - Diversity, identity, and national identity: They contrast the freedom to define oneself with the coercive “bucket” approach to identity. They argue that outside liberal coastal enclaves, people feel freer to articulate individual identities and values, while California’s increasingly prescriptive DEI training is criticized as artificial and limiting. - The state of discourse and the danger of intellectual conformity: The speakers warn of a culture where questioning past work or adopting new ideas triggers denouncement and self-censorship. They cite anecdotal experiences—loss of board members, fundraising constraints, and professional risk for those who diverge from prevailing views—claiming this suppresses valuable work in fields such as climate science, criminal justice reform, and energy policy. - Reform efforts and the political landscape: They discuss the clash between incremental, evidence-based policy and a disruptive, progressivist impulse. Shanahan describes attempts to fix infrastructure of the criminal justice system through technology and data (e.g., Recidiviz) that were undermined by political dynamics. They emphasize the importance of practical, measured reform and cross-partisan cooperation, the need to focus on American integrity and governance, and the risks of pursuing “disruption” as an end in itself. - Election integrity and lawfare: A central theme is concern about how elections are conducted and contested. Dhillon outlines a view of targeted irregularities in swing counties and cites concerns about ballot counting, observation, and legal rulings. She argues that left-wing funders have built a sophisticated, twenty-year, lawfare apparatus, using nonprofits and strategic lawsuits to influence outcomes, notably pointing to the Georgia ballot-transfer activities funded by Mark Zuckerberg and his wife. She asserts that there is a broader pattern of using C3s and C4s to push political objectives while leveraging the law to contest elections. - The role of money and influence: They discuss the influence of wealthy donors, political consultants, and media in shaping party dynamics, suggesting Republicans should invest more in district attorney races, state-level prosecutions, and Supreme Court races to counterbalance the left’s long-running investment in the electoral apparatus and litigation strategy. They acknowledge that big donors and activist networks can coordinate to advance policy goals, sometimes at the expense of on-the-ground, local accountability. - Tech, media, and corporate power: The dialogue covers the Silicon Valley environment, James Damore’s case at Google, and the broader issue of woke corporate culture. Dhillon highlights the disproportionate power of HR in big tech and how employee activism around identity politics can influence careers and policy. Shanahan notes that Google’s founders are no longer central decision-makers, and argues for antitrust and shareholder-rights actions to challenge what they see as woke monopolies that do not serve shareholders or society. - The path forward: Both speakers advocate for courage to cross party lines, work for principled governance, and engage in issue-focused collaboration. They emphasize the need to reform infrastructure—electoral, health, educational, and economic—through competency, transparency, and bipartisan cooperation, rather than through dogmatic, identity-driven politics. They close with a mutual commitment to continuing the conversation, finding common ground where possible, and preserving the core American ideal that individuals should be free to define themselves and contribute to the country’s future.

We live in polarized times, and election challenges are likely to persist after election day. The results may take time, especially in close elections where absentee and mail-in ballots can significantly impact outcomes. Issues may arise on election day, such as power failures at polling places, which can be exploited by those suggesting a conspiracy. Both sides are preparing for legal challenges, and while courts can act quickly on preliminary matters, the overall process is slow. This was evident leading up to January 6, when over 60 court cases dismissed claims of widespread fraud, yet some individuals disregarded these rulings entirely.

Milwaukee's election director, Claire Woodall Bogg, was fired by the Democrat mayor without explanation. A tweet claimed that Woodall Bogg admitted under oath to printing 64,000 ballots in City Hall for the November 3, 2020, election and having city employees fill some out. This is presented as an admission of cheating in the 2020 election, where Trump lost by 20,682 votes. In 2020, Republican lawsuits challenging election results were dismissed based on latches, because they were filed after the election. It is claimed that judges avoided scrutiny by dismissing the cases. In 2024, Republicans have filed lawsuits before the election in all the swing states. This is expected to guarantee a trial, depositions, and review of the ballots if similar issues arise.

A memo for record, a letter from state legislators to the American people, references the 2020 presidential election. State legislators claim they are vested with the plenary power by the US Constitution to oversee the election of the president. They state that an audit of 2.1 million ballots in Arizona, complemented by an in-depth canvas of votes, along with multiple data reviews by independent experts, shows that the representative republic suffered a corrupted 2020 election. Sworn affidavits have accumulated from many states detailing rampant corruption and mismanagement in the election process. They claim fraud and inaccuracies have been shown through multiple audits and canvases in multiple states, as well as through lawsuits challenging the validity of election results in several counties in multiple states. They conclude that all 50 states need to be forensically audited and scrubbed with a canvas of the voters.

The speaker asserts the voting system is antiquated and difficult to understand due to state-by-state differences. Georgia's hand-counting of ballots exacerbates this and creates opportunities for misinformation. Differences in vote counting and announcement times were used to sow doubt on the election outcome, as seen in the January 6th committee findings. Average Americans, after being misled, engaged in political violence on January 6th. The speaker believes we must prepare for potential election challenges, noting numerous lawsuits already filed concerning various aspects of voting, suggesting a foundation is being laid to contest the election outcome.

We are impressed by the election integrity efforts already underway and want to highlight recent victories. Early this morning, it was reported that Republican poll watchers in several Pennsylvania counties were initially turned away. However, after deploying attorneys and engaging with local officials, all Republican poll watchers have now been allowed access. This shows that when we stand up, we can achieve results. In contrast to 2020, we are prepared this time with a strong legal team led by RNC Chairman Michael Watley and Trump’s general counsel David Warrington. We have a robust army of lawyers and election workers ready to ensure that any attempts to undermine the process will not succeed again.

During Trump's time in office, Ronna Romney McDaniel, head of the Republican Party, played a role in sending fake electors to Congress and trying to overturn election results. She directed Michigan officials not to certify the vote and told them not to sign it. The goal was to use the party's power to reject election results and hold onto power. The current project is to convince Americans that the 2020 election was not legitimate and to undermine trust in future elections.

Before the 2020 election, a group involving DHS, NATO, and DNC planned a mass censorship campaign on social media with 4 Pentagon-linked institutions. They aimed to prevent questioning of mail-in ballot legitimacy. The group coerced tech companies to censor content through threats and pressure, resulting in millions of posts being banned or limited. The campaign was set up months before the election to avoid a crisis if the election results were disputed. The group's actions were based on the belief that a Biden victory would rely on mail-in ballots.

The majority of election jurisdictions in the US use outdated software that is vulnerable to hacking. States like Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Michigan, Florida, Iowa, Indiana, Arizona, North Carolina, and even Georgia (despite recent legislation) are at risk. If a small percentage determines the election outcome and people perceive it as unfair, it could seriously damage our democratic system. Experts argue that without a thorough forensic analysis, it is impossible to confirm that no votes were altered in the 2016 election. Additionally, 43% of American voters use machines with security flaws, and some companies refuse to disclose their cybersecurity practices. Five states lack a paper trail, making it impossible to verify the accuracy of voting machine results.

President Trump and his legal team are investigating irregularities in the 2020 election. They have two main avenues to secure his second term: state legislatures and the Supreme Court. State legislatures have the authority to select the correct electors for their states, and hearings have been held to address concerns about the selection of electors. President Trump needs three states to invalidate Democrat electors or select Republican electors. The Supreme Court is another option, with cases from Pennsylvania, Arizona, Wisconsin, and possibly Georgia potentially combining. Congress could also play a role if electors are uncertain or contested. Many citizens are questioning why local leaders are preventing access to voting machines, and they are encouraged to contact their state and local leaders for transparency.

Milwaukee election director Claire Woodall Bogg was fired without reason. Allegations suggest she printed 64,000 extra ballots for Joe Biden in the 2020 election. Concerns arise about future elections, but Republicans have already filed lawsuits in swing states to ensure legal review if irregularities occur again. This proactive approach differs from the past when lawsuits were dismissed before evidence could be heard due to legal technicalities.

Before the 2020 election, a group involving DHS, NATO, and the DNC planned a mass censorship campaign on social media to prevent disputing mail-in ballot legitimacy. They partnered with Stanford, University of Washington, Graphika, and the Atlantic Council, all linked to the Pentagon. Using threats and pressure, they forced tech companies to ban content questioning mail-in ballots. This was done to ensure public acceptance of a potential Biden victory due to mail-in ballots. The group aimed to control the narrative and prevent election crisis.

Speaker 0 says he began in 2020 to combine the most successful coup fighters with experts who helped study or defeat autocracy internationally, visiting Hungary, Poland, Brazil, Czech Republic, and forming a plan over four years. "twice as many protests in 2025 as there were in 2021." Speaker 2 outlines Norm Eisen’s "democracy playbook" with seven pillars: "controlling elections, controlling the courts, fighting corruption, basically, painting Trump as an autocrat, reinforcing civic and media space," and pillar six: "controlling disinformation," noting that "states may find partners in allied regulators over social media such as the EU and Brazil." Eisen recruited people for his new blob shop from folks who overturned basically regimes that he called autocratic. "All these people get paid to fight autocracy abroad through the State Department, USAID, the US Institute of Peace, the Department of Defense, Civil Military." The playbook cites USAID "37 times," funding "media allies for the blob" and projects like "the corruption reporting project in Ukraine" and "a billion dollar USAID loan guarantee" to remove Victor Shokin. It also discusses "designating elections as critical infrastructure" and a "slush fund" to pay state secretaries, plus "strategic non cooperation."

Speaker 0: I want to ask about what if you've changed position on what happened in the twenty twenty election. Speaker 1: Oh, I think it was rigged. Speaker 0: You think it was rigged? Speaker 1: Yeah. I know more now than I did then. What you'd have to do is in February 2021, was a Time Magazine article that was published, it was about Mark Zuckerberg investing $500,000,000 in a get out the Democrat vote campaign. And they focused on the swing states, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Georgia, Arizona. And they focused in what they did is they basically did what I would refer to as agency capture. And they went in and they captured the, the county clerks and the secretaries of states in these states. They basically said, we have a get out the vote campaign program, and if you will implement it exactly the way that we say that you must implement it, we will give you massive amounts of money to run your elections. But if you do not run it the way that we say, then we can claw all that money back. Well, think about it. If you're a small county in Wisconsin and you get $300,000 from Mark Zuckerberg's foundation to make sure that there are drop boxes in your, in your Democrat heavy areas, that there are, that you've got a, an RV going around and hauling people into the, into the polling places to vote. When you do that, if, if you do not carry out, you take that money, you sign that contract and you do not do exactly what that foundation said, you were gonna have to use public money to pay it back. You most likely would have ended up in prison. I mean, that's just one example of the way that the election was rigged. The Mark Zuckerberg money was huge. $500,000,000 concentrated in Democrat counties for the purpose of getting out the Democrat vote. Speaker 0: How do you know it was to get the Democrat vote out? Because how does exactly do what are the mechanics of that? Of how it was You Speaker 1: I have to read the article. And what the article does is it lays it out, and the title is something along the lines of how a secret group of people were able to save the twenty twenty election, meaning how were they able to get Joe Biden elected.

After finishing a book just before the election, Speaker 1 was approached by Democratic state AGs to address concerns about the upcoming election. This led to the formation of a bipartisan group, including governors, former DOJ officials, US attorneys, prosecutors, sheriffs, law enforcement, and state AGs, aimed at defending the election against anticipated attacks. The group was active in 25 states leading up to the election. Speaker 1 believes the election was free and fair, the votes were freely and fairly counted, and the margins in key states are clear. While acknowledging potential turbulence, disinformation, and litigation, Speaker 1 assesses that the election results will withstand challenges, in part because the margin of victory will be sufficiently large. Speaker 1 expresses hope that the country will return to normal and anticipates remarkable achievements.

Before the 2020 election, a coordinated censorship campaign was launched. This involved the Department of Homeland Security, NATO, and the DNC, leveraging institutions like Stanford University, the University of Washington, Graphica, and the Atlantic Council—many with ties to the Pentagon. These groups, many staffed by former intelligence officials, worked together to suppress discussion questioning the legitimacy of mail-in ballots. They used a multi-step plan to pressure social media companies into adopting a new policy banning content undermining public confidence in the election process. This involved threats of government action and leveraging media allies. Millions of posts across multiple platforms were censored or suppressed. The goal was to prevent questions about the election outcome, anticipating a potential crisis if initial results appeared to favor Trump before shifting to Biden.