reSee.it - Related Video Feed

The speaker, a political law attorney, explains that rigging a national election in the US is not possible due to bipartisan checks and balances at multiple levels. He dismisses the idea of collaboration between parties to rig an election. He also addresses concerns about hack attacks on electoral systems, emphasizing the presence of poll watchers from both parties. The speaker criticizes Donald Trump's claims of election rigging as poor political strategy. Trump's actions are compared to past attempts by Democrats to delegitimize election results. The speaker concludes that Trump should focus on encouraging voter turnout and delivering a winning message.

The speakers discuss the legitimacy of various elections, including the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections. They express concerns about Russian interference, voter suppression, and irregularities with electronic voting machines. Some speakers believe that the election outcomes were affected and that the presidents were illegitimate. They mention specific cases like Bush vs. Gore in 2000 and the 2004 Ohio election. Stacey Abrams' loss in Georgia is also mentioned, with some speakers claiming that her election was stolen. Overall, the speakers question the fairness and integrity of these elections.

The transcript discusses concerns about election irregularities and voting machines. One speaker claims a voting machine subtracted votes, displaying a negative number. Another speaker states that such subtraction cannot occur accidentally and that someone consciously tried to steal votes. A third speaker says that when they press the button next to their name, another person's name appears on the display, questioning the accuracy of the vote count. Another speaker asserts that the machines are working correctly, recording votes accurately, and that the results will be accurate and reliable. One speaker expresses concern about private corporations controlling the voting system and calls for a formal debate about election irregularities, warning that the democracy and republic are at risk.

They stopped counting votes on election night to determine how many mail-in ballots to add, which the speaker believes was fraudulent. The speaker insists it was a planned event, claiming it wouldn't happen in Texas. They express concern over the authenticity of mail-in ballots and assert that anyone could have filled them out. The other person questions the validity of these claims, but the speaker stands by their belief based on personal experience.

There is a discussion about the extent of election fraud, with one person believing it exists based on recent events in Arizona. Another person emphasizes that elections belong to the people and citizens should have transparency in the voting process. The first person expresses distrust in mainstream media. Both agree that something feels amiss, although the specifics are unclear.

Speaker 1 is asked about their previous tweets regarding Trump and Brian Kemp stealing elections. Speaker 1 dismisses the comparison as ridiculous and clarifies that they were referring to the threat to voting rights at that time.

The discussion centers on the legitimacy of elections, particularly focusing on claims of interference and manipulation. Many express the belief that Donald Trump is an illegitimate president due to Russian interference in the 2016 election and other factors. There are references to the 2000 election, where Al Gore is seen as the rightful winner, asserting that the Supreme Court's decision effectively stole the presidency from him. The conversation highlights concerns about voter suppression and the integrity of electronic voting systems, particularly in Ohio during the 2004 election. Participants emphasize the need for fair elections and express doubts about the legitimacy of current political figures, particularly in Georgia, where Stacey Abrams claims her election was stolen due to systemic issues. The overarching theme is the ongoing struggle for electoral integrity and the belief that many elections have been compromised.

Speaker 0: They reject the rule of law and the will of the people, refusing to accept the election results. Speaker 1: Nancy Pelosi, May 16, 2017, claimed our election was hijacked and there is no doubt about it. Speaker 2: Even if you run a great campaign, become the nominee, the election can still be stolen from you. Speaker 0: Trump did not truly win the 2016 election; he lost. Speaker 1: He knows he's an illegitimate president who didn't really win. How do we fight against him in 2020? He's illegitimate. Speaker 3: He's illegitimate, and my biggest fear is that he'll do it again with the help of his pal Vlad. We'll be stuck with him for 6 more terrifying years. Speaker 0: Would you be my vice presidential candidate? I agree. Speaker 1: Bush versus Gore, a court took away the presidency. Al Gore was the true winner. Speaker 4: I believe I won the last presidential election. They stole it. Speaker 0: Al Gore won that election, or at least I think he did. Speaker 5: Rolling Stone questioned if the 2004 election was stolen. Speaker 4: I witnessed troubling evidence that not every vote was counted in Illinois 4 years ago. Speaker 1: The November 2, 2004 election was not transparent or accurate. There are legitimate questions about our election system's accuracy. Despite the final tally, I have one affirmative statement to make.

The speakers discuss allegations of election interference and illegitimacy in past elections, particularly focusing on the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. They mention Russian interference, voter suppression, and issues with electronic voting machines. The overall sentiment is that elections have been stolen, leading to concerns about the integrity of the democratic process. The speakers express doubts about the legitimacy of certain election results, such as in Georgia and Ohio, and emphasize the need for fair and transparent elections.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 reminisce about questioning rigged carnival games as kids. Speaker 0 expresses distrust in computers, particularly voting machines, due to concerns about election integrity. Speaker 1 jokingly asks if this extends to other machines like sewing machines and ice machines. Speaker 0 clarifies that it specifically applies to voting machines, as they want fair elections. Speaker 1 humorously suggests melting down machines, but Speaker 0 insists on focusing on voting machines. Speaker 0 emphasizes the need for someone to examine the evidence regarding election fraud. Speaker 0 offers to provide evidence to Speaker 1 and mentions the financial cost of his crusade. The segment ends with Speaker 1 expressing support for Speaker 0.

The discussion centers on the 2020 election, which Speaker 1 claims was rigged due to fake ballots and other factors, including the influence of 51 intelligence agents. Speaker 0 counters that recounts in swing states and over 50 lawsuits found no widespread corruption or voter fraud, citing a potential case of voter fraud in six battleground states that uncovered fewer than 475 cases. Speaker 1 asserts Wisconsin has practically admitted the election was rigged and other states are doing the same. Speaker 0 questions how Speaker 1 will appeal to independent suburban women voters. Speaker 1 references polls showing him leading, including with women. Speaker 0 notes polls can change. Speaker 1 states he would like to be less combative but feels the press's dishonesty necessitates it to get his message across and win.

The speakers discuss the legitimacy of various elections, particularly focusing on the 2016 and 2020 US presidential elections. They express concerns about Russian interference and question the legitimacy of President Trump's victory. They also mention the 2000 election between Al Gore and George W. Bush, claiming that the Supreme Court's involvement made it illegitimate. The speakers highlight issues such as voter suppression, malfunctioning voting machines, and lack of paper trails. They argue that these factors undermine the integrity of elections and lead to disenfranchisement. They believe that elections have been stolen and express support for candidates like Stacey Abrams and Andrew Gillum. Overall, they assert that many elections have been tainted and not fair.

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 1 addresses the accusation of stolen elections by MAGA Republicans. Speaker 0 mentions a tweet and the claim that Brian Kemp stole an election. Speaker 1 acknowledges the question and dismisses the comparison as ridiculous. They clarify that they were referring to the threat to voting rights at that time.

Democrats have long criticized the vulnerability of voting machines and the potential for hacking. They argue that all voting machines need to be examined to ensure they are secure. They specifically mention Dominion voting machines as being susceptible to hacking. They claim that these machines can be easily hacked and that the results of elections have been questioned for a long time. They also highlight the issue of outdated and vulnerable machines in some states. However, they are accused of only raising these concerns when they lose elections. Republicans have also challenged election results in the past. The overall message is that there are doubts about the integrity of elections and the influence of powerful interests.

The speakers discuss concerns about election legitimacy, mentioning Russian interference, Al Gore's loss in 2000, and issues with electronic voting machines. They express doubts about the fairness of various elections, including Stacey Abrams' loss in Georgia. The overall sentiment is that elections have been stolen through voter suppression and flawed processes.

The Governor mentioned concerns about the upcoming November election and what would need to happen for the speaker not to accept the results. The speaker stated that if the secretary of state conducts an illegal election again, that would be an issue, and they hope it won't happen.

Al Gore and others express their belief that the 2000 presidential election was stolen from them. They claim that George W. Bush did not win and that the Supreme Court, along with individuals like Katherine Harris and Jeb Bush, tampered with the results. They argue that the election process was rigged and that there were issues with voting machines. They mention instances of machines malfunctioning and being hacked. They emphasize the importance of a fair and accurate vote count and express their objection to the election procedures. They also acknowledge that both Republicans and Democrats have been involved in election manipulation in the past.

Speaker 0 welcomes George Soros, emphasizing the need for active participation in America's future. Speaker 1 acknowledges that both Republicans and Democrats have manipulated elections in the past, highlighting the tendency of those in power to tilt things in their favor. Speaker 0 adds that voter fraud organizations have been extensive and inclusive in American politics.

In Ohio, having Democrats in charge of the voting machines is seen as an advantage. However, it's important to acknowledge that election manipulation has occurred in the past, not just by Republicans but also by Democrats. When people hold power, they often try to influence things in their favor. This has been observed in my hometown of Chicago as well.

Speaker 0 expresses gratitude for the audience's presence and states that they believe it is a sad day for America. Speaker 1 asserts that challenging an election should be allowed, as they believed the election was rigged and stolen. They mention other individuals who have also challenged elections in the past. Speaker 1 claims they did nothing wrong and accuses others of election interference. They thank the audience and reiterate their right to challenge what they perceive as a dishonest election. Speaker 0 concludes by thanking everyone and suggesting a future meeting.

Multiple speakers express concerns about the legitimacy of elections, focusing on the 2016, 2000, 2004, and 2018 elections. Several speakers claim that Russian interference affected the outcome of the 2016 election, leading them to view Trump as an illegitimate president. Some believe Trump is aware of this illegitimacy. The 2000 Bush v. Gore election is cited as an example of a court-appointed president, with claims that Al Gore won Florida but the Supreme Court halted the vote count. The 2004 election in Ohio is described as riddled with problems, including malfunctioning machines and allegations of voting rights violations. Some believe John Kerry privately thought the election was stolen. The 2018 Georgia gubernatorial election is also disputed, with accusations that Brian Kemp, then Secretary of State, suppressed votes and disenfranchised voters, leading to Stacey Abrams' loss. Speakers assert the election was not fair and that Abrams likely won. Concerns are raised about the integrity of electronic voting machines and the lack of paper trails.

Speaker 0 claims most people in the country voted for Trump and that he won the popular vote. Speaker 1 disputes this, stating it was a slim majority of voters and that too few people voted. Speaker 0 says those who cared about issues voted for Trump to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse. Speaker 1 counters that lots of voters were purged from voter rolls before the election. Speaker 0 accuses Speaker 1 of election denial. Speaker 1 accuses the "narcissist in that building" of gaslighting.

Speaker 0: I won, but they cheated. We were robbed of an election. Speaker 1: I don't think it's dangerous to use words like rigged and steal because we can back it up. Speaker 0: The election was stolen from the voters, not just from me. I won't concede because our democracy is being eroded. Speaker 1: The election was not free and fair. Thousands of Georgians had their voices stolen. We can't guarantee their votes will be counted in 2020. Speaker 2: Should the Democratic nominee concede if they can prove widespread voter suppression? Speaker 1: No, we shouldn't concede until we know the results. If it looks like cheating or rigging, it probably is. Speaker 0: We've been taught to accept defeat, but I refuse to concede. The process was not fair. Speaker 1: The election was stolen from Georgia voters. As long as eligible citizens can't vote, the system is rigged. I didn't lose, I just didn't win. Speaker 0: I didn't win officially. We don't know what really happened because of voter suppression. Speaker 1: He is the legal governor, but that doesn't mean he won legitimately. Speaker 0: Just because you win doesn't mean you won. We'll never know for sure if I got more votes. Speaker 1: I refuse to concede because it wasn't fair or right. He performed poorly and crassly against the people he represents. Speaker 1: Georgia voters were suppressed, their votes weren't counted. Brian Kemp dismantled our democracy. Speaker 0: I recognize I'm not the governor, but we won.

In Ohio, having Democrats in charge of the machines is beneficial. However, it's important to be honest about the fact that both Republicans and Democrats have manipulated elections in the past. When people are in power, they tend to try to sway things in their favor.