TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

Every election should be as accurate as a bank account, with no room for error. It's puzzling why we accept a 1% error rate in elections, especially when the margin of victory was only 0.506%. We can track the handling of every ballot and the exact time it entered the system. There are concerns about the selection of hand-audited ballots, as the majority of them favored Biden. Out of 1675 boxes, only 52 were properly sealed and protected. Some batches of ballots lack processing dates and their origin is unclear. Interestingly, these batches match the ones chosen for hand auditing. Despite claims of a backlog, half of the extra counting days had no ballots counted, and the counted batches were smaller than usual. It's also questionable how the election was called and certified with incomplete processes. A full forensic audit would provide answers.

There are concerns about duplicate ballots in the audit. The speaker mentions that there should be a lower count due to duplicates, but they are not seeing any reference to duplicates in the forms. Speaker 1 explains that duplicate ballots are created when the original ballot is damaged and cannot be processed. These duplicates should have a matching 6-digit serial number with the original damaged ballot, but they cannot find the matching originals. Speaker 2 confirms this, stating that they are finding duplicate ballots without corresponding serial numbers on the damaged originals. They are struggling to match the duplicated ballots with the missing originals.

We need the counts to move forward with the audit. Despite concerns about a specific precinct, the focus should be on completing the audit and getting the number of ballots. The process is to finish the presidential race audit without separating the ballots and then proceed from there. The former state representative's issues with county ballots can be addressed later. Completing the audit is the priority right now.

The discussion revolves around the ballot counting process during the election. It highlights that while Democrats were allowed to count ballots after Republicans left, there were claims of ballot stuffing caught on video. The conversation touches on how absentee ballots were collected and the legality of the process, with suggestions that canvassers were paid to gather these ballots. There's speculation about why certain areas were targeted for vote manipulation, emphasizing the need to avoid raising red flags in historically red counties. The participants mention ongoing investigations and evidence from surveillance footage, indicating a belief that irregularities occurred during the election.

We subpoenaed Fulton County for 518,000 ballot images from the recount, not from election day. There are 380,761 missing ballot images from election day. Fulton County has not provided an explanation for this discrepancy. It is important for every vote to have a corresponding ballot image. Translation: We requested ballot images from Fulton County for the recount, not for election day. There are 380,761 missing ballot images from election day that have not been explained. It is crucial that every vote has a corresponding ballot image.

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.

The speaker mentions the history of elections in Fulton County, Georgia. Another speaker brings up an interesting incident during a 99% audit on signatures. They found that many ballots did not have the required red initials, indicating approval. Once separated from the outer envelope, these ballots still had to be counted. This poses a problem as it undermines the accuracy of the audit. The speaker expresses concern about the lack of proper examination for dozens of ballots on Saturday. The conversation concludes with a thank you to Miss Fisher.

Yes, that needs to happen. There aren't enough votes left to change the election outcome, as confirmed by the Secretary of State. Megan, can you pull up document UJR X 1151? This shows that 99.5% of the votes have been counted, with only Fulton County remaining and just 13 precincts left. Typically, there are only a couple thousand votes left to count, likely around 1,000. Currently, Trump has a lead of about 101,000 votes with 99.5% counted. This aligns with the Secretary's earlier statements. The document was downloaded from the Secretary of State's site by Voter GA.

The discussion centers around ballot counting issues at the dome during the election. It was claimed that Democrats resumed counting after Republicans left due to reported leak problems. Video evidence allegedly shows Democrats pulling ballots from under tables during this time. There were concerns about ballot stuffing, with claims of individuals collecting absentee ballots and delivering them improperly. The conversation touches on how to manipulate vote counts without raising suspicion, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the appearance of legitimate voting patterns. There are mentions of ongoing investigations and evidence from surveillance footage that could reveal misconduct. The participants express familiarity with certain individuals involved and speculate on the implications of the findings.

We need to move forward with the audit to get the counts and see how many ballots are here. After the audit, we can address the issue of multiple ballots with the same signature. We will separate and count those ballots separately. Once the audit is complete, we can discuss the validity of the ballots. Right now, we need to focus on finishing the audit and counting the presidential vote. We understand there may be concerns with this precinct, but let's complete the audit first. The former state representative's issues with county balance can be addressed once we have the counts.

In the exchange, concerns are raised about mail-in ballots in Allegheny and Philadelphia counties and how they were counted. Speaker 0 notes that ballots were counted without observers, citing 682,770 ballots observed and asking about the 1,823,148 mailed-out ballots, contrasted with a final count showing 2,589,242 mail-in ballots. The core question is: what explains the roughly 700,000 mail-in ballots that “appeared from nowhere”? Speaker 1 responds that their cyber team uses white-hat hacking techniques to gather publicly available information from the secretary of state’s website, which has been updated as late as 11:16 this morning with provisional and mail-in ballots, though those numbers continue to change. He adds that the 2,500,000 figure is no longer on the website, and it has “just been taken off.” There is no annotation explaining why. Speaker 2 then describes an on-the-ground observation: a deputy sheriff, a senior law enforcement officer, was seen not being observed and walking in with baggies, with USBs being inserted into machines. The witness claims to have personally witnessed this 24 times, with additional witnesses including Democrat poll watchers. They were told by an attorney that every election leaves a couple of USB cards in the voting machines to be brought back by the warehouse manager, but this account is contradicted by law enforcement and other officials. The witness states that 47 USB cards are missing and “they’re nowhere to be found,” and that 32 to 30 cards uploaded were not present in the live vote update. The witness demanded timely live upload of vote results, which showed 50,000 votes; they assert those votes were for Vice President Biden, though they note that identifying who those votes were for should not matter to a computer scientist. Speaker 1 emphasizes that forensic evidence from the computers was not obtained: the procedure would involve turning off the computer, imaging the drive with BitLocker, under law enforcement observation, which would take about an hour for five machines. This forensic imaging was never performed, despite objections three weeks earlier. They later learned that virtually all chain-of-custody logs, yellow sheets, and forensic records in Delaware County were gone; a signing party attempted to recreate the logs with poll workers but was unsuccessful in recovering them all. The discussion concludes with a claim that there are 100,000 to 120,000 ballots, both mail-in and USB, in question, and that there is no remedy or “cure” within the local charter for certifying a presidential vote, leaving the speaker asserting that nobody could certify the vote in good conscience.

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.

- The discussion centers on ballot processing in Maricopa County, with several shipments arriving after the initial belief that counting was near completion. Speaker 0 notes that the Wednesday before the Friday they quit voting, and ten days before they quit tabulating, more truckloads of ballots came in, leading to the question: “how can you not know how many ballots are still out there?” - Speaker 1 asks for clarification: “They thought they were done.” The conversation confirms multiple times that those running the counting rooms believed they were almost done, or would be done, on Wednesday morning, then Thursday morning, then Friday morning, and the process extended into the next week. - Trucks bringing ballots arrived on the third, fourth, and fifth days, continuing throughout the last week. The last day mentioned is the tenth, with ballots still arriving. The company involved is Runback, described as doing high-speed scanning and printing of duplications and military ballots. There was no observer presence at Runback, and Speaker 0 indicates she had not been called to work there; she does not know exactly what Runback was doing (printing vs. scanning). - It is stated that all high-speed scanning occurs at Runback, and the ballots go to Runback. There is uncertainty about off-site scanning and whether Dominion equipment was involved. Speaker 0 clarifies: “They were duplications, the ballots that wouldn’t read through the tabulation machines. They were ballots that came in from military and overseas.” The number of additional sources for ballots beyond military/overseas is unknown, and Speaker 0 suggests this is a question for county employees to explain. - About the counting process: Speaker 0 confirms that the ballots went through tabulation machines and that adjudication work took place for those late arrivals. They observed the ballots being processed, but did not know the exact totals for certain days. - Daily volumes are described. Speaker 0 estimates: one day a shift might handle 90,000 ballots, and some days had similar volumes across three shifts; other days had fewer. There were days when as few as 15,000 ballots were processed. The “back door” arrivals are contrasted with the front door, with Speaker 0 noting that all back door ballots were received through back entries, not the front door. The remaining ballots in the latter part of the period continued to come in and be tabulated, with ongoing full-time shifts through the eighth, ninth, and tenth days. - The episode concludes with Speaker 1 seeking further explanation, and Speaker 0 indicating that some of the details were not fully known and that a county employee should clarify where the incoming ballots came from during the latter part of the period.

In Downtown Detroit at the TCF Center, a video discussion describes what a caller says happened during ballot processing. The account asserts that after precincts had counted ballots and were ready to close, three vehicles—a van, a Chrysler 300, and a Ferrari—arrived at about 4:00 a.m. with a claimed 130,000 ballots. The claim is that every one of these ballots were Biden ballots that had not been delivered to the precinct before its cutoff, constituting a “big irregularity” and suggesting voter fraud. The speakers say this is being contested by the president in a lawsuit for Michigan, with people who allegedly witnessed the event. Speaker 1 adds that back rooms at the facility enabled cars to drive in through a garage door, and that ballots appeared between 10:30 p.m. and 3:30 a.m. Approximately 38,000 ballots were said to have arrived in that window, with a reported count of 61 ballots described as being in USPS boxes. The boxes were not necessarily USPS-delivered; a white van with the city clerk’s emblem appeared to be delivering them, bearing the name Janice Winfrey and related tagline. The implication is that ballots arrived in an unverified, potentially improper manner. Speaker 2 notes possible additional vehicles present at the time and mentions that a mini panel truck with Detroit Elections Bureau regalia and a vehicle ID number was observed, with other people recording license plate information. The lack of verifiable chain of custody is emphasized: there was no confirmed Republican/Democrat presence during transfer, and seals on ballots were not verified. The speaker contrasts this with a suburbs experience where ballots were methodically processed, sealed, and tracked, implying Detroit’s process lacked similar controls. Speaker 3 explains that Gateway Pundit obtained video of the event after a delay, and that local media personnel claimed the event did not occur. The video shows an escort car and a lead car delivering items inside the facility, with the escort car reportedly from Pennsylvania and possibly a rental. The Michigan group, Patty’s group, counted drop-box ballots and reported about 1,340 to 1,400 ballots dropped in Detroit over the last two days. In contrast, after the shutdown, officials allegedly claimed 16,000 ballots were dropped in, with the question of where those additional ballots originated. Speaker 4 reinforces the Michigan group’s tally of roughly 1,340–1,400 ballots from drop boxes in Detroit in the adjacent period and points to the discrepancy between that count and the 16,000 ballots later cited, noting the eight-hour gap after the official closing time and the two separate deliveries to the TCF Center. The overarching claim is that these events indicate irregularities in ballot handling and raise questions about the source and legitimacy of the large ballot influx.

Speaker 0 presents a sequence of figures regarding Maricopa County’s 2020 election and asserts inconsistency between tallies and ballots. He begins: there were 2,595,272 registered voters; 2,089,512 voted at the close of business through election night and all counting; yet there were only 1,923,693 ballots existing. He notes, “They called the election at 2,089,512 votes,” but emphasizes that the closing canvas shows a different number, counting the actual codes on paper rather than pieces of paper, yielding 1,923,693 numbers that show up. After post-adjudication, he lists key observations. By the time voting closed, 165,819 ballots were missing, which he states is 7.94% of the votes in 2020, and they could not explain where they were. However, about a month later in Arizona, a new total was produced: 2,086,959, still leaving 2,553 ballots missing as of that adjustment. He notes that Biden was said to have won by 10,500 votes. He then describes a process he calls the “time hack,” alleged to have been used to gain extra counting time—a practice he claims is new to 2020 and has continued in subsequent elections. He asserts that they “picked up, i.e., manufactured 163,266 ballots that never existed.” He questions how ballots could enter the system after the fact if they did not exist beforehand, asserting this as evidence of manipulation. To support the claim, he cites machine outputs: “Maricopa printed 04/7968 ballots for Maricopa,” while there were only 2,595,272 registered voters, yet 4,027,968 ballots printed. He states these numbers come directly from the machines and argues that no one scrutinizes them deeply enough. He asks why Maricopa would print 1,432,696 overprints, suggesting that to fabricate missing numbers, “backwards ballots” are needed to fill those gaps during the time hack. The argument continues that ballots must be suspended from hitting the bottom line—“don’t let them hit the bottom line”—and, once the numbers are known, could be replaced with whatever is needed. He implies that such suspended ballots are not present in either the pre- or post-audit tallies. Finally, he asserts that a proper audit would have all numbers cross-referencing across every manifestation; otherwise, the cross-referencing would reveal the inconsistencies. The overall gist is a claim of missing ballots, late adjustments, a large number of overprints, and a so-called time hack used to manipulate counts, with an emphasis on the need for cross-referenced auditing.

In recounting votes, I've noticed that simply comparing hand counts to machine counts doesn't address the origin of the ballots being counted. Often, we don't even know which precinct a ballot came from, especially when dealing with two-sided ballots. We focus solely on the vote itself without considering the front of the ballot. Additionally, the image quality of these questionable ballots in Pennsylvania and Arizona is not being examined during the recount process.

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 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.

- The discussion centers on Fulton County’s ballot-seizure case and the implication that the affidavit relied on was built from recycled conspiracy theories by a known conspiracy figure. It is asserted that the judge was not told these issues had already been relitigated, and that the administration appears intent on applying the same approach elsewhere. - Question raised: can these efforts be stopped, given the underlying pattern and what the other side is pursuing? And what is their plan for 2026 if they lack the 2020 conspiracies to lean on? - Jen notes her role as counsel in the Fulton County matter and declines to comment further on the specifics. - Jessica forecasts that Trump-aligned actors will pull out 2020 ballots and photos, arguing that the numbers don’t add up and that the machines were faulty and the people fudged because, allegedly, in Fulton County they did. She emphasizes that there is no evidence that the irregularities would have changed the outcome in Georgia, but acknowledges there were thousands of irregularities, with records destroyed and chain-of-custody issues, and that the recount and audit were of poor quality. She warns that in 2026 the same approach could be used again with untrustworthy machines and flawed audits, and warns that even if actual facts are shown, they would highlight known errors. - Marilyn adds the point that a Barack Obama-appointee judge confirmed the unreliability of the machines and notes a demonstrator at DEFCON Voting Village showed how easily a Dominion machine can be hacked. She cites a view that Biden still won Georgia, despite the “fudged audits,” and argues that the intent behind the questionable procedures was to obscure errors. - Jessica identifies Raffensperger as the official who chose the machines and funded the expansive spending on them, suggesting he did not want critical issues to be exposed. She asserts that the process was designed to avoid scrutiny and that the results were obtained by running ballots through the machine multiple times to adjust numbers, including using test ballots to influence results. - The conversation concludes with a focus on the importance of recounts and audits, and the need for a transparent process in 2026. Jessica argues that Georgia’s issues stemmed from an audit with bogus processes and a recount conducted through machines rather than a hand count at counting tables with observers from both campaigns and the clerk. She asserts that the transparency of the counting process could have mitigated much of the controversy and that the lesson for 2026 is to implement a transparent system.

A series of witnesses describe a large-scale movement of ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, claiming that hundreds of thousands of completed ballots were shipped and later disappeared. One witness asserts that “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.” The narrative emphasizes that the ballots were transported in a trailer from New York to Pennsylvania and subsequently vanished. Another witness recounts events on October 21, describing “a series of unusual events that cannot be a coincidence.” This person says, “I saw ballots with return addresses filled out, thousands of them, thousands, loaded onto my trailer in New York and headed for Pennsylvania.” While initially believing the task was beneficial for the presidential race and feeling it was “cool,” the witness later reflects, upon things getting weirder, on why they were driving “complete ballots from New York to Pennsylvania,” and states that they decided to speak up about it. A third participant broadens the scope, estimating “It could be a 144 to over, to a quarter million ballots.” This witness adds that the investigation indicates “there was a number, as in like a bunch of different trucks which engaged in this.” Reflecting on the potential impact, they note the magnitude of votes that could appear “the night of the election after midnight,” suggesting that an “artifact” would be necessary to explain this phenomenon. They further state that, when something is impossible to reconcile, “whatever remains must be the truth.” They claim that “the truth is ballot showed up. They were counted. They do not match necessarily the records of who should have voted,” and that “in some instances, the stats don't add up, and we continue to analyze that.” Collectively, the speakers contend they have evidence of “a massive transfer of of completed curated ballots ready to be injected into counting centers.” The statements emphasize a coordinated movement of completed ballots from New York to Pennsylvania, the disappearance of the ballots and their trailer, and allegations that ballots appeared, were counted, and did not necessarily align with expected voting records, with ongoing analysis indicating a substantial, orchestrated transfer intended to inject ballots into counting centers.

I want to find missing documents for proper vote counting in Fulton County. We couldn't find ballot images but have the ballots. Someone is preventing access to paper ballots. I'm focused on data and numbers.

I called for a signature audit, but the Secretary of State has not ordered it yet. I believe it should be done, especially considering what we witnessed today. Transparency is crucial, and I urge for it. Hopefully, in the next 24 hours, we will learn more from the legislative hearings and determine the next course of action. The ongoing recount in the state allows for a thorough examination of these matters.

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 emphasizes the importance of looking beyond what is shown on TV or in generic reports about elections. They explain that these are just interpretations and not official counts, making it difficult to prosecute any wrongdoing. To truly address the issue, one must delve into the intricate details of the process. The speaker mentions that they have only mentioned about half of the auditable touch points involved in elections, with many more unknown to the general public. These touch points are all documented with date and time stamps, similar to the 2,000 murals mentioned earlier.

The speaker acknowledges the chairman's hard work and thanks him. Another speaker mentions an interesting incident during the 99% audit on signatures. They explain that many signatures did not have the required red initials, indicating approval. Once the ballot is separated from the outer envelope, it must be counted regardless. This poses a problem as dozens of ballots on Saturday had not been properly reviewed. The speaker concludes by expressing concern about the audit. Miss Fisher is thanked for her input.