reSee.it - Related Video Feed

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes with identical markings. They point out a little tail and the word "Republican" written on both. They mention that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't go through all of them. The speaker doesn't remember the exact numbers, but they mention that the batches were fairly close. They highlight one image with a little bubble and mention that it matches another image with the same batch number. The conclusion is that there are duplicate ballots in the entire batch that were scanned multiple times.

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes, scanner 5,162, batch 2,304, image 59 and scanner 5,162, batch 2,305, image 19. They point out that both batches have the same little tail and the word "Republican" written on them. The speaker mentions that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't have a chance to go through all of them. They also mention that there are duplicate ballots in the batch, with one example being scanner 5,162, batch 2,305, image 92, which matches scanner 5,162, batch 234, image 33. The conclusion is that the entire batch has been scanned multiple times.

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes, scanner 5,162, batch 234, image 59, and scanner 5,162, batch 235, image 19. They point out similarities between the two batches, such as the same little tail on a vote and the word "Republican" written in the same way. The speaker mentions that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they haven't gone through all of them yet. They don't know the exact numbers of the total batches, but they believe that the duplicates occurred. The speaker concludes that the entire batch of ballots has been scanned multiple times.

The speaker points out duplicate ballots in the video, showing examples where the word "Republican" is written the same way on different ballots. They have a total of 62 images showing similar instances. The batch numbers for the duplicate ballots are provided as well. It is clear that the same batch was scanned multiple times, resulting in duplicate ballots.

The speaker discusses tally sheets from the Georgia audit, noting that many of them show fraudulent numbers. They mention that the sheets are signed by the person who filled them out, but the information is redacted. They then shift focus to the ballot images obtained through a lawsuit, pointing out that there are over 4,000 duplicate images. They mention a spreadsheet with 40,000 line items comparing original election numbers to the recount, which has an error rate of 59.5%. The transcript ends abruptly.

The speaker discusses tally sheets from the Georgia audit, noting that some sheets show fraudulent numbers, such as 100 to nothing or 150 to nothing. They mention that the sheets are signed by the auditors, but the person responsible for the fraud remains unknown. The speaker then shifts focus to the ballot images obtained through a lawsuit, pointing out that there are duplicate markings on different ballots. They mention that over 4,000 duplicate reports were found, with an error rate of 59.7% according to a spreadsheet with 40,000 line items comparing original election numbers to the recount.

The speaker discusses tally sheets from the Georgia audit, noting that many of them show fraudulent numbers, such as 100 to nothing or 150 to nothing. They suspect that the people conducting the audit filled out these sheets with incorrect counts. The speaker also mentions that the sheets are signed by unknown individuals, making it difficult to determine who committed the fraud. They then shift focus to the ballot images obtained through a lawsuit, pointing out that there are over 4,000 duplicate scanned ballots. They mention a spreadsheet with 40,000 line items that shows an error rate of 59.5% between the original election and the recount.

There are two batches of votes being examined. The speaker points out that there are identical markings on different ballots, suggesting duplication. They show examples of the same markings and even a dot in the same spot. The speaker mentions having a total of 62 images, but didn't go through all of them. The numbers of the batches are not remembered, but it is clear that duplicate ballots were scanned multiple times.

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes with identical markings. They point out a little tail that appears on both batches, as well as the word "Republican" written in the same way. The speaker mentions that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't have time to go through all of them. They highlight one specific image with a little bubble and mention the batch numbers that match. The conclusion is that there are duplicate ballots in the entire batch that have been scanned multiple times.

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes with identical markings. They point out a tail-like mark on one ballot and explain that it appears on another as well. They also mention the presence of the word "Republican" on both ballots and a dot in the Fannie Willis. The speaker states that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they haven't reviewed all of them yet. They don't remember the exact numbers, but they mention that the batch numbers and scanner numbers match for some of the duplicate ballots. The conclusion is that the entire batch has been scanned multiple times.

In this video, the speaker shows two batches of votes with identical markings. They point out a little tail and the word "Republican" written on both. They mention that there are 62 images in total, but they only highlight a few. The speaker doesn't remember the exact numbers, but they mention that the batches were fairly close. They also mention specific image numbers that match in both batches. The conclusion is that there are duplicate ballots and the entire batch has been scanned multiple times.

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.

There is a discussion about 17,852 ballots that lack corresponding ballot images in the second machine count. The speakers acknowledge the significance of this number but express their inability to explain how it occurred. They mention the hope of receiving more information on Tuesday regarding this matter.

The discussion centers on completing an audit of ballots to obtain a count and address concerns about the precinct. The participants emphasize that without counts, they cannot move forward. They insist that the audit piece must be completed first, not an investigation, so that a number of ballots can be established and the overall tally can proceed. Key points raised: - The need to finish the audit to determine how many ballots are in the ballot can, and to move forward with the numbers. “We need to move forward with the audit so we can get the numbers, so we can see how many ballots are here.” - A concern has been raised about the precinct, including the issue of multiple ballots with the very same signature. The team discusses handling this by counting the ballots and later addressing the concern, rather than delaying the process. “we will separate out and count those and add those in. We're there going to be an asterisk saying these ballots have the same.” - There is tension between continuing the presidential race audit and addressing potential irregularities. The instruction given is to complete the audit portion first and then review any issues. “the process right now is for you to put them in the piles where they belong and for the presidential vote and count the presidential votes… finish the presidential race audit, not separate them out, and then we'll move forward from there.” - The officials acknowledge the underlying concern about the precinct and previous issues with county ballots, but reiterate that, at this moment, the priority is to obtain a count and finish the audit. “We understand that there may be possibly an issue with this precinct. We understand that. But what I need for you to do right now is to finish the audit process.” - They clarify that the current activity is not an investigation, and that the aim is to produce a number for how many ballots were in the can when counting began, enabling progress based on the audit results. “This is not an investigation right now… not an investigation, not counting… what I need you to do is complete the audit so we can get a number.” In sum, the participants are focused on completing the ballot-count audit to establish a definitive tally, while acknowledging concerns about signatures and precinct irregularities, and planning to address those concerns after the audit yields a numeric result for the presidential ballots. The priority repeatedly stated is to finish the audit to obtain a count, then proceed with any further review.

The speaker discusses tally sheets from the Georgia audit, noting that many of them show fraudulent numbers, such as 100 to nothing or 150 to nothing. They suspect that the people conducting the audit intentionally filled out these sheets with incorrect numbers. The speaker also mentions that the ballot images obtained from Dominion machines show duplicate markings on different ballots, with over 4,000 instances of duplication found so far. They highlight a spreadsheet with 40,000 line items comparing original election numbers to the recount, revealing an error rate of 59.5%.

The discussion centers on moving forward with a ballot audit to obtain a count, despite concerns about a particular precinct. Speaker 0 emphasizes that without counts, progress is impossible and asserts that this moment is not the time for an investigation into the precinct. The goal is to complete the audit to determine how many ballots are present. Speaker 1 asks for clarification about whether there is additional focus or findings beyond the current audit. Speaker 0 reiterates the need to proceed with the audit and produce a tally of ballots, indicating that delaying is not an option at this point. A key point arises about how to handle multiple ballots that show the same signature. Speaker 0 and Speaker 2 acknowledge the concern and discuss that while the primary process is to complete the audit, there will be a method to account for these potentially problematic ballots. Speaker 2 suggests that an asterisk can be added to indicate that certain ballots share the same signature, and that those ballots will be separated out and counted in the work. Speaker 0 continues to stress that the precinct’s concerns are understood, but the immediate instruction is to finish the audit portion, not to conduct an investigation or to engage in counting beyond the audit. The immediate task is to produce a number for how many ballots were present at the start of counting and then proceed from there. Speaker 2 confirms that a number will be produced, though there is an acknowledgment that there may be questions about the validity of some ballots. Speaker 0 clarifies that the current process requires ballots to be put into the correct files and that presidential votes must be counted, while not engaging in separate, non-audit counting at this stage. Throughout, Speaker 0 reiterates the need to complete the audit portion first, to obtain the count, and then address any subsequent concerns or issues, including potential validity questions. The conversation closes with an acknowledgment that there may be issues with the precinct and that, once the audit is completed, they can move forward with the results while addressing the concerns that have been raised.

There are concerns about duplicate ballots in the audit. The count should be 3 lower due to duplicates, but they are not accounted for. Logan explains that duplicate ballots are created when the original is damaged and cannot be processed. Each duplicate should have a 6-digit serial number matching the original, but they cannot find the corresponding originals. They have found duplicate ballots with a unique identifier, but no matching serial number on the original. This creates difficulty in matching duplicated ballots with their originals. The concern is that the numbers do not add up and the reality does not match the sheets.

The speaker discusses tally sheets from the Georgia audit, noting that many of them show fraudulent numbers. They reveal that the sheets are signed by unknown individuals, making it difficult to determine who committed the fraud. The speaker then shifts focus to the ballot images obtained through a lawsuit, pointing out over 4,000 duplicate ballots. They mention a spreadsheet with 40,000 line items comparing original election numbers to the recount, which shows an error rate of 59.5%. The conversation ends abruptly.

Both ballots show identical markings, including a distinctive tail and the word "Republican." The speaker points out the same dot in each image. They have a total of 62 images showing duplicates, with one example being batch 5162. The speaker highlights specific instances where the same batch was scanned multiple times, revealing duplicate ballots.

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes with duplicate ballots. They point out specific similarities, such as a tail and the word "Republican" written on both. The speaker mentions that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't go through all of them. They highlight the occurrence of duplicate ballots and mention the batch numbers and image numbers that match. The conclusion is that the entire batch was scanned multiple times.

In the video, the speaker discusses the issue of 17,852 ballots that lack corresponding ballot images. This is a significant number, and while the speaker can explain the number, they cannot explain how this situation occurred. They mention that they hope to receive more information about it on Tuesday. The ballots were counted in the second machine count, but there is no associated ballot image for each of them.

In the video, the speakers discuss the issue of 17,852 ballots that lack corresponding ballot images. Speaker 0 acknowledges the significance of this number, prompting Speaker 1 to explain it. Speaker 1 clarifies that while they can explain the number, they cannot explain how it occurred. They express hope that more information will be provided on Tuesday regarding this matter.

The speaker discusses tally sheets from the Georgia audit, noting that they contain fraudulent numbers and are signed by unknown individuals. The speaker then mentions that over 4,000 duplicate ballot images were found, with a spreadsheet showing a 59.5% error rate between the original election and the recount.

There are two different batches of votes being discussed in the video. The speaker points out that there are similarities between the ballots in these batches, such as a little tail and the word "Republican" written on them. They mention that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't have time to go through all of them. The speaker doesn't remember the exact numbers of the batches, but they mention that duplicate ballots were scanned multiple times.

In this video, the speaker shows two different batches of votes with duplicate ballots. They point out similarities between the ballots, such as a little tail and the word "Republican" written on them. The speaker mentions that there are a total of 62 images in the batch, but they didn't have a chance to go through all of them. They confirm that the batch numbers for the duplicate ballots are 235 and 304, both from scanner 5162. The speaker concludes that the entire batch has been scanned multiple times, indicating a potential issue.