reSee.it - Related Video Feed

They found a loophole in paperwork despite seeming stupid.

A person may not with the intent to influence an election knowingly cause something to be published, distributed, or broadcast. If an office holder causes something to be published or republished from someone else, they could be guilty of a class A misdemeanor. If someone is knowingly spreading disinformation, they are culpable. Knowledge and intent matter. After this conversation, it would be hard to say someone didn't know what the law was.

According to the speaker, Gavin Newsom signed a document that makes it a crime to ask a voter for identification. The speaker believes this action indicates a desire to cheat on elections. The speaker claims that while identification is required for other activities, it is now virtually a crime to ask for it when voting, which the speaker considers the most important act. The speaker asserts the only reason for this is to enable election cheating and insists this should not be allowed to happen.

Speaker 0 claims their actions are legal because their dad is a lawyer and that they are doing it for the money. They also claim there is no radar and "they" don't know that. Speaker 2 says "Got it. Here. Thank you. At school."

An expert was asked their opinion on the validity of election numbers certified by the secretary of state and the governor. The expert stated that if they were an executive at a publicly traded company, they would never sign off on those numbers, citing the risk of jail time and financial penalties from lawsuits. They concluded that they would never have certified the results and would have resigned instead.

The speaker states that the data does not align with normal legal voting processes and lacks consistency. They mention that the certified data, which is also reported by the New York Times and networks, shows negative errors and fraudulent votes. They suggest that either the secretary of state's office is certifying flawed results or someone is providing them with incorrect information. They emphasize that the certified votes for Georgia contain negative swings and decrements, which are errors and do not accurately represent the state's voters. No blame is assigned, but the focus is on highlighting the discrepancies in the certification process.

The speaker explains that they were asked to investigate President Obama's birth certificate due to suspicions of fraud. They clarify that their investigation was not about where the president was born, but about the authenticity of the document. They express their hope that the document would be valid, but after examining the evidence, they conclude that it is a fraudulently created document. They mention the criticism they faced for questioning the document and emphasize that their goal was always to uncover the truth. They introduce a video presentation that reveals evidence of forgery in the birth certificate, including identical angles in date stamps and copied elements from another birth certificate.

The speaker questions the certification of the election results, stating that the margin of victory is less than 1%. They mention testimony from the secretary of state's counsel, who sent letters to 8,000 people who voted illegally, advising them not to vote in the US senate race. This number is almost three-fourths of the margin of victory. The speaker also points out that there is a 10% margin that is not accurate. They ask how the senate and house can stand by the certification.

They discovered a loophole in paperwork. Despite seeming foolish, they excel at paperwork. It's an interesting anomaly.

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.

Speaker 1 believes there's an open legal challenge regarding the use of an AutoPen for pardons. The typical AutoPen approval process requires signatures from at least five people, including attorneys, policy makers, and the president. Speaker 1 claims President Trump stated that there are no records of these required signatures, and it's unknown who used the AutoPen. Speaker 1 agrees with President Trump that this is a problem. Speaker 1 suggests testing the legality of the pardons by indicting someone who received one.

The speaker states that their investigation into President Obama's birth certificate has concluded that it is a fraudulently created document. They express their initial hope that the document was valid, but as evidence stacked up, they had to follow the evidence. They mention working with document examiner Reed Hayes and forensic digital technicians from 4 Labs in Italy. They show examples of forgery in the birth certificate, including copied words, letters, and date stamps. The speaker emphasizes that their investigation was not about Obama personally, but about the document itself. They conclude by saying that the findings are new, profound, and disturbing.

Speaker 0 presents a very quick briefing and discusses the credibility of the different things they've seen. They say, "these files were made up by the sea. They were made up by Obama. They were made" as a claim about the files’ origin, with the sentence trailing off in the transcript.

The speaker discusses the investigation into Barack Obama's birth certificate. They mention working with forensic document examiners and digital technicians to analyze two birth certificates from Hawaii. The speaker claims that nine points of forgery were found, including copied words, letters, and date stamps. They focus on the similarity of the angles of the date stamps on both birth certificates, suggesting intentional alteration. The speaker concludes that the birth certificate belonging to Johanna Ani was used as a source document for Obama's birth certificate. They emphasize the significance of these findings and the disturbing nature of the situation.

The speaker is convinced that Barack Obama's birth certificate released by the White House is altered. They demonstrate this by showing the layers in the document and how some parts disappear when certain layers are turned off. They mention that the background, which is the safety paper, remains intact while other information appears to be altered. The speaker questions why there would be a need to cover up the document and concludes that it is indeed altered. They leave it up to the viewers to decide.

We are facing a constitutional crisis. This is a genuine constitutional crisis.

Speaker 1 believes there's an open legal challenge regarding the use of an AutoPen for pardons. The typical AutoPen approval process requires signatures from at least five people, including attorneys, policy makers, and the president. Speaker 1 claims President Trump stated that no such signatures exist and the origin of the AutoPen use is unknown. Speaker 1 agrees with President Trump that this is a problem. Speaker 1 suggests testing the legality of the pardons by indicting someone who received one.

The Georgia legislature is presenting a set of facts to the court asserting widespread voting irregularities in Georgia. They claim: - 2,506 felons voted illegally in Georgia. - 66,248 underage and therefore ineligible people were illegally registered to vote before their seventeenth birthday, when the law requires 17 years old. - At least 2,423 individuals voted who were not listed as registered. - 1,043 individuals cast ballots who had illegally registered to vote using a post office box. - 4,926 individuals voted in Georgia who had registered to vote after their Georgia voter registration date, thereby canceling their Georgia voter registration. - 10,315 or more individuals voted who were deceased by the time of the election. - 395 individuals voted in Georgia who had cast ballots in another state, which is illegal in both states. - 15,700 individuals voted in Georgia who had filed a national change of address with the United States Postal Service prior to 11/03/2020. - 40,279 individuals voted who had moved across county lines at least thirty days prior to election day and had failed to properly re-register to vote in their new county, also in violation of Georgia law. The petition to contest will include affidavits of more than one hundred Georgia voters sworn under penalty of perjury, attesting to and confirming multiple violations of the Georgia election code. You will hear from several of those witnesses today. They also assert there are issues of outright lies and potential fraud. The speakers contend that the actual results of legal ballots cast in the November election in compliance with the Georgia election code cannot be known ever, not by the secretary of state, not by the governor downstairs, not by the voting public, and not by this Georgia legislature.

Any local certifier thinking of skirting the law and not certifying the vote should not even think about it because they will be held accountable.

The speaker argues that the Protocols of Zion are not a hoax, asserting that after months of in-depth research they are not merely slightly ordered but real. They state that the 24 protocols describe a vision of the world, its population, and an ultimate goal: absolute world dominance and a one-world government, with “their king, the king of kings,” crowned on the throne of Zion to rule forever. The speaker mentions theories that the protocols were copied from nineteenth-century works, such as Maurice Jolie’s Dialogue in Hell between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, and from Jacob Venedet’s writings, as well as Baruel’s four books about the French Revolution linking secret societies to the culprits. A court case declaring the Protocols a forgery is noted, but the speaker insists their study found many similarities with Jolie’s work, though not a direct conclusion that the protocols were copied; rather, they are connected and not new when published in Russia in 1905. The claim is made that the protocols were not the minutes of a recent Zionist meeting. The speaker, presenting themselves as a linguist with paleography expertise, critiques the court verdict as based on an unprofessional approach and argues the problem with the Protocols is their emotional surroundings, shaped by the reader’s beliefs about Jews. They claim bias: those who blame Jews for world ills tend to see the protocols as genuine, while those who have Jewish ties may view them as a 1905 fraud. The speaker contends the protocols are very old and may be the source text for later works, not the other way around, and they reference Adam Weishaupt (founder of the Illuminati) and Rothschild, suggesting the latter’s power and possession of original documents and protocols. They speculate the protocols could have been given to Weishaupt by Rothschild, potentially tying Khazar/Jewish lineage to the creation of the text and aiming to use it as anti-Semitic propaganda during upheavals like the Russian Revolution and world wars. The content of the protocols is laid out as portraying how a cabal would control through all means: controlling the masses, “we shall move the mobs by want envy and hatred,” turning “Goyim” into a manipulated population, and making presidents puppets. The text describes how liberalism, freemasonry, and secret lodges would be used as intelligence networks, with most high-level agents within police and secret societies. The protocols allegedly advocate using the press to manipulate public opinion, create economic crises, raise wages while increasing prices, distract the public with amusements, and infiltrate all layers of society. The aim is to establish a centralized, global administration where law and education are redesigned, freedom is erased, religion suppressed except for a particular faith, and a new, merciless regime enforced by fear and surveillance. Details include plans to absorb state forces gradually, implement a covert coup, punish or exile dissent, and place a single, all-powerful authority above all nations. The king of the world would become both ruler and pope of a universal church, with a transition to despotism where freedoms disappear and loyalty to the state is enforced. The speaker notes that the “chosen king” would destroy opposition once in power, and that the “new kingdom” would centralize control, eliminate alternative religions, and prohibit freedom of press, association, and conscience. They conclude by foreshadowing part five and contemplating whether the Khazarian king’s rise is imminent.

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.

The first speaker asserts that a large number of ICE agents are actually IDF soldiers, describing this as "crazy as fuck" and urging viewers to save the video in case it is taken down. They say they recently posted a video and attempted an appeal that was not approved. They claim to have presented identities of ICE agents located specifically in Chicago. A group the speaker associates with reportedly examined public records and found over 2,000 ICE agents, among whom 121 had experience as ex-IDF soldiers. They mention that scanning the list reveals last names that all point back to one particular location with no other job experience, suggesting the individuals are not U.S. citizens. The speaker implies there is a list of these people, describing it as consisting of people who "look the same," and suggests that this is why the faces are hidden. The speaker asserts that looking into the background of these specific individuals would reveal non-U.S. citizenship, claiming this would prove everything and explain their behavior. The second speaker asks if the IDF trains American police officers and ICE officers in Israel. The third speaker confirms that they train with US agencies (ICE, Homeland Security, NYPD) through a SME program (subject matter exchange), where police and related personnel train with Israeli counterparts. They state that National Guard soldiers who are or will be in Chicago have trained with Israel for years, and that many components operating on the streets of Portland, New York, DC, and Chicago have trained hand in hand with the IDF or the Israeli Ministry of the Interior, referred to here as "Jean Demaree paramilitary police." The speakers imply a long-standing collaboration and exchange of training between U.S. and Israeli security forces. The first speaker adds that there is antisemitism training in addition to physical training for these personnel, describing it as "brainwash training" for them. The overall implication is that there is a close, ongoing relationship between U.S. security forces and Israeli training programs, with claims of ex-IDF background among ICE personnel and concerns about citizenship status and potential hidden identities.

The speaker asks if the person is aware that the outer envelope of a ballot must have the date, time, and signature of the town clerk. The person admits they were not aware of this. The speaker then questions if the person instructed the absentee ballot moderator about this rule, to which the person says they did not. The speaker shows examples of envelopes with and without the clerk's signature, and asks if the one without should have been counted. The person agrees that it should not have been counted. The speaker asks if the person ever checked for the clerk's signature on envelopes, and the person says it never came up in their training.

Any local certifier thinking of skirting the law and not certifying the vote should not even think about it because they will be held accountable.

The speaker discusses the discrepancies in the date stamps and other elements of Barack Obama's birth certificate. They explain that the stamps on the document do not match exactly, indicating that it may be a forgery. They conducted extensive investigations and consulted forensic experts who concluded that the birth certificate is fraudulent. The speaker also mentions their attempts to validate the document with the state of Hawaii and Kapiolani Medical Center, but they were met with resistance. They emphasize the need for thorough vetting of documents presented by public officials and call for standardization of security paper for birth certificates.