TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

When I started recording ballot numbers and names from mail-in ballots, I noticed they were in sequence, which is unusual. The envelopes had no date, just "November 0-2020." When I questioned this, I was told not to interfere. The ballots were all from the same street in Detroit, with similar signatures and no date stamp. They weren't in the system and were being entered manually. It seemed suspicious.

In Georgia, over 200,000 mail-in ballots were found to have been voted but never marked as returned. About 96,000 of these ballots were never marked as returned but were still voted. This issue was not limited to just a few counties, as it was seen across the board. Additionally, some ballots were shown as voted before they were even received back by the county, which is not supposed to happen. These irregularities raise concerns about the legality of these votes.

Linda McLaughlin and her colleagues present a data-focused argument alleging election fraud in Georgia, supported by multiple data analyses and demonstrations. - Linda McLaughlin introduces the data integrity group and states that data is numerical and non-partisan; she aims to remedy a lack of presented data in the discussion. - Dave Labou, a lead data scientist, explains that their analysis across precincts, counties, and the state identified over 40 data points of negative voting or vote switching across candidates totaling over 200,000 votes. Separately, machine learning algorithms used for anomaly detection in fraud detection flagged over 500 precincts with over 1,000,000 corresponding votes showing suspicious activity. He emphasizes that the process is scientific and not tied to political affiliations. - Labou uses a banking analogy to illustrate data integrity concerns: in hypothetical online banking, deposits or withdrawals being redirected or split would indicate fraudulent activity. He applies this concept to voting data, arguing that the voting system data aligns with the Secretary of State data used to certify results, yet exhibits patterns akin to transfers and reallocation not authorized by voters. - He states that the data are publicly available but require advanced programming to extract, parse, and join datasets. Their independent team has made all analysis, programs, and data public to allow replication and has produced videos to translate the analysis for broader understanding. - A key claim is that receiving over 90% in a precinct is a marker for fraud; in Fulton County, more than 150 precincts voted 90% or more for Biden, and in the statewide race (decided by less than 13,000 votes), these 150 Fulton precincts accounted for 152,000 Biden votes, described as a clear indicator of suspicious or fraudulent activity. - Labou and team present a series of visuals and explanations indicating explicit vote count switching, e.g., in Dodge County, where Trump’s votes appear to be subtracted while Biden’s counts increase in tandem with county updates, leading to a shift in totals that would not appear in state totals due to timing of updates. - They reference adjudication as the review of ballots flagged during scanning, noting that only ballots with a contest causing questions about how the computer reads them are adjudicated. - In DeKalb County, they assert it is statistically impossible for nine out of ten voters to vote for Biden in 94 precincts. - They describe a data flow in Fulton County: poll pad check-in, ballot image saved on the machine, SD cards transported to drop-off locations, escorted to a warehouse, run through Democracy Suite, exported to a Dominion server, and inserted into a SQL Server database before transmission to the Secretary of State and data aggregators. - A critical point is the vulnerability within the county update data-entry process: the square box detailing data-entry options in the election software allows updating vote batches, projecting batches, and generating new or temporary batches that can be injected directly into the tally; these options can be validated and published, enabling potential manipulation before server upload. - They pose questions about validation: whether two observers from both parties were present during SD card transmissions and drop-off transmissions, and whether there is a public log of exchanges at drop-off points. They challenge why elected officials have not pursued these questions about voting integrity. - Labou notes the process is machine-to-machine and, by design, should not decrement sums; any decrement requires a robust explanation, and their data suggest negative drops are inconsistent with normal sequential processes. Speaker 2 clarifies the data sources (CITL election night data and Edison/New York Times data) and asserts that the process from poll pads to secretary of state is machine-driven, with no human entry of totals, thereby removing human entry error as an explanation for observed negative changes. Speaker 4 adds emphasis on the validation and potential vulnerabilities in the software options used for election administration, underscoring the need for transparency and inquiry into the electoral process.

I found that there were approximately 25,000 ballots in Maricopa County that were not printed from the official Dominion PDF ballot. These ballots had imperfections in the lines and circles, unlike the perfect PDF printing. The imperfections were consistent across all the ballots, suggesting they were not genuine. These 25,000 questionable ballots alone exceed Joe Biden's margin of victory by over double.

In my examination of the photographs, I found that there were approximately 5,000 different ballots produced by the election subcontractor for each zone or district in Maricopa County. These ballots were specific to the issues relevant to each area. However, I discovered that around 25,000 ballots were not printed from the official Dominion PDF ballot. These ballots had imperfections in the lines and breaks in the circles or ovals, which were consistent across all of them. These 25,000 unidentifiable ballots alone represent more than double the margin of Joe Biden's 10,457 vote lead.

Around 80-90% of the votes seemed to be going to Joe Biden, which made me increasingly uneasy as the day went on. Every time I saw another batch of votes, it was all for Biden. This seemed statistically impossible to me.

There were odd patterns in the ballots, with repeated anomalies over multiple days. Some ballots had a pattern of 7 for Biden and 1 for Trump, which is statistically unlikely. The patterns were reported, but it's unclear if they were included in the final report. The physical recount aligned with the claimed numbers, but behind the scenes, there were over 17,000 duplicate mail-in ballots. The audit suggests that over 60,000 counted ballots may be illegal, which could significantly impact the election outcome. Voting is considered the most important right in the United States, and having it stolen is devastating.

The speaker, who has experience with ballots, describes their observation of pristine and clean ballots. They noticed a slight eclipse on the bubble for Joseph R. Biden, which appeared on 107 out of 110 ballots. Every vote on every ballot, including referendums, was exactly the same, which the speaker finds statistically impossible. They believe these were preprinted ballots and suspect that some test ballots from before the election were mixed in. Out of 800 ballots, less than 40 were for Trump and 7 for Jorgensen. The speaker emphasizes the unusual cleanliness of the ballots, as there were no creases or signs of wear. They question how these ballots were not folded and express disbelief at the anomaly.

I was responsible for the traffic forensic portion of the audit and the quality control of the ballots. I handled damaged, large print, braille, and special ballots, including the UOCAVA ballots for overseas voters. These ballots are actually just regular 8.5 by 11 white sheets of copy paper. In 2016, there were 1,600 UOCAVA ballots, but in 2020, there were nearly 9,600. As an eyewitness, I can say that 95% of these ballots went to one candidate. This resulted in a net gain of 8,000 votes for that candidate, who won the state by just over 10,000 votes. This increase in UOCAVA ballots was due to the pandemic and the return of military personnel.

In Georgia, over 96,000 mail-in ballots were voted but never marked as returned. This issue was found across multiple counties, indicating a widespread problem. Additionally, some ballots were voted before being received back. These irregularities suggest potential illegal votes.

There were 138,000 votes that came in all at once, and they all went to Biden, which is statistically improbable. In any election, even in the most Democratic areas, you'd expect some votes for the opposing candidate. This situation raises concerns about the counting process, especially since it appears this spike occurred around 4:30 AM. Additionally, Nevada has unexpectedly stopped counting votes during the day, which is illogical and raises further questions about the transparency of the process. It’s unusual for counting to halt when there should still be workers tallying votes.

The speaker stated: "I estimated that somewhere between 80-90% were going to Joe Biden." "Throughout the day, it kept making me sicker and sicker." "Every time I saw another Biden, Biden, Biden, and then I'm going through batches." "Batches, 100% of the batches were Biden." "I find that statistically impossible."

There are six affidavits from veteran election officials alleging that up to 30,000 of the 147 ballots in question are counterfeit. The evidence includes different paper used for these ballots, the absence of folds despite being absentee ballots, the same bubble mark on a large number of ballots, and the claim that the marks were made by a machine, not a pen or pencil. Additionally, an analysis of 950 military mail-in ballots showed that all 950 votes went to Joe Biden, while none went to Trump, and they were in sequential order. These findings are considered highly unlikely and raise questions about the integrity of the election.

In Gwinnett County, there was a ballot drop box with a chain of custody document noting 1,962 ballots. This is unusual as we usually see around 10 times fewer. After analyzing the GEO data, we found that only 271 people approached the drop box during a 25-hour period. This raises questions about how 1,962 ballots were deposited. Video evidence shows election officials removing two full duffle bags containing the ballots from the drop box.

Joe Biden could not have received more votes than Barack Obama, and it’s improbable that we lost the presidency while gaining 12 House seats. We didn’t win 19 out of 20 bellwether races and still lose. There were fraudulent ballots created for non-existent voters, which is why envelopes were discarded. Trump announced he was leading by 800,000 votes in Philadelphia, insisting they wouldn’t be blocked from counting. There was confusion when it was suggested counting would stop for the night, but when counting resumed the next morning, the results changed, indicating a shift in the outcome.

I witnessed multiple instances where a person was inserting USBs into the voting machines without being observed. I reported this to the deputy sheriff and the Clerk of Elections. I personally saw it happen over 24 times, and there are other witnesses, including Democrat poll watchers. I was told that a few USBs are usually left in the machines after each election, but I later found out that this was not true. 47 USB cards are now missing. When I demanded to see the live vote count, it showed an increase of 50,000 votes for Vice President Biden. As an American and a patriot, I find it shocking that this could happen.

During the examination, it was discovered that there were 61 groups of 200 ballots that had over 90% support for one candidate. This is unusual in a close race unless it is due to a specific geographical area. However, these groups were not specific to any particular area as they came from the central collection center for mail-in and early voting ballots. What's even more surprising is that there were 58 groups for one candidate and 3 for another that had 90% support. This suggests that someone may have sorted the ballots beforehand. The distribution of such high percentages for one candidate is not expected, and the ratio of 58 to 3 is particularly strange.

I noticed that the ballot numbers and last names on the absentee and mail-in ballots were in sequence, which is unusual because these ballots should come in different numbers. This raised my suspicion. I asked about the date on the envelopes, but there was only November 0, 2020, with no second number. When I questioned this, the supervisors became angry and accused me of disrupting their work. I didn't want to be kicked out, so I didn't challenge anything further. The ballot numbers were all from the same area, with similar signatures, and there was no date stamp after 0. None of these ballots were showing up in the system and were being manually entered, even though they knew these details wouldn't be in the poll book or system.

During the recount, the speaker noticed discrepancies in the number of ballots. They discovered that over 300 ballots had disappeared between counts. The speaker also questioned the handling of military ballots, stating that they were separated and not required to be mailed in. They expressed concerns about verifying the authenticity of electronic and email ballots, as there were no accompanying emails. The speaker found it troubling that a large majority of military ballots went to Biden. They expressed disbelief in this outcome and emphasized the importance of counting the votes of those who serve in the military.

A Georgia drop box averaged 60,000 ballots a day. Over Columbus Day weekend, 19,000 votes were counted from that drop box. However, surveillance showed only 24 people visited the drop box. This discrepancy suggests potential illegal ballot harvesting in Georgia.

3% of pre-election voting ballots were changed using the HAMR and ScoreCard software programs, potentially causing a significant nationwide shift in the vote. An algorithm was also used to calculate additional votes for Mr. Biden in specific areas, like Michigan, where a computer glitch resulted in a 5,500 vote change in favor of President Trump in one district. Similar issues may have occurred in other states. Hundreds of thousands of ballots mysteriously appeared for Mr. Biden, which defies statistical probability.

In Georgia, over 200,000 mail-in ballots were found to have been voted without being marked as returned. Around 96,000 of these ballots were never shown as received back by the county. This issue was seen across multiple areas, indicating a widespread problem. Additionally, some ballots were voted before being received back by the county, which is not supposed to happen. These irregularities suggest potential illegal votes being counted.

I estimated that around 80-90% of the ballots I saw were for Joe Biden, which seemed statistically impossible to me. Normally, the way military ballots are cast reflects the voting patterns of the areas they come from. In Cobb County, Georgia, where I live, we are traditionally conservative, so it was surprising to see such a high percentage of military ballots favoring Biden, ranging from 80% to 90%. Fulton County also reported a separate category for military ballots, with 93% of them going to Biden, which again seemed statistically impossible.

Around 80-90% of the votes seemed to be going to Joe Biden, which made me increasingly uneasy as the day went on. Every time I saw another batch of votes, it was all for Biden. This seemed statistically impossible to me.

I found that there were 5,000 different ballots created for specific districts in Maricopa County. Additionally, approximately 25,000 ballots did not match the official Dominion PDF ballot, with consistent imperfections around an oval on each one. These 25,000 unidentifiable ballots alone exceed Joe Biden's 10,457 vote margin.