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.

The speaker discusses the issue of bleed through on ballots and its potential impact on voting. They mention that if the bubbles on the ballot bleed through, it can cause an overvote or result in voting for a different candidate than intended. They refer to a newsletter from Maricopa County stating that they use VoteSecure paper, which is thick and has a special coating to prevent bleed through. However, the speaker points out that they have observed bleed through on actual ballots, which raises concerns. They mention the need for further analysis to determine the extent of the impact on votes. The second speaker seeks clarification and confirms that Maricopa County's newsletter stated they only use secure paper that does not allow bleed through. The first speaker affirms this and adds that paper experts have confirmed the thickness of the paper should prevent bleed through, but they have observed thin paper stock being used on Election Day.

The speaker discusses the issue of inspecting ballots for signatures. They mention that the Voter Privacy Act prohibits inspectors from looking through a ballot to verify a signature. They also point out that many ballots have two different patterns of the letter "s" written for the signature, even though some of them don't even have an "s" in the voter's name. They state that out of the 104,820 ballots reviewed, 20,232 had mismatched signatures, which accounts for 20% of the total.

The transcript discusses several election-related issues in California. First, it highlights a controversy with the voting envelopes: in some counties, how a ballot is inserted into the envelope can reveal the voter's choice. Specifically, if a voter selects no, the hole aligns with the “no” vote, making the vote visible through a window in the envelope. The speakers suggest this could be used to see how someone voted, and question whether it could affect the outcome if a small percentage of ballots are read differently. Speaker 1 notes that voters wonder whether, after submission, someone might handle the ballot on the processing side, calling it a legitimate question to ask. Speaker 0 explains that the state says it does not know how many ballots are affected because counties print the envelopes, and acknowledges that Shasta, Tulare, and Sacramento have already admitted the mistake and told voters how to fix it. Speaker 2 proposes a solution: fold the envelope in the opposite direction to create a blank page so nothing on the ballot envelope is visible. The state GOP has released a video showing voters how to avoid the problem. The conversation then broadens to mention additional election issues. It is stated that the state spent nearly $300,000,000 mailing out the wrong redistricting map, which required a corrected mailer to be sent. There is also a warning that even ballots mailed on election day may not be counted due to slow mail service. Regarding the holes in the envelope, the explanation given is that the holes exist so blind voters can know where to sign the envelope by touching two areas and signing there, though the speakers question how blind voters would know which exact box to fill in on the document. The overall discussion centers on concerns about transparency and reliability in the voting process, including envelope design, the handling of ballots after submission, and the impact of mailing errors on the election.

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.

We've identified 74,243 mail-in ballots lacking a clear record of being sent. In Arizona, EV32 forms track ballots sent, and EV33 forms track those received. Ideally, the number of EV32s should exceed EV33s. These ballots are tied to specific individuals, so it's concerning that we have 74,000 returned ballots without corresponding EV32 records. This discrepancy, revealed through FOIA data from the county's EV32 and EV33 forms, suggests potential documentation errors or clerical issues. While some variance between sent and returned ballots is expected, these specific ballots lack matching records. The EV32 and EV33 forms should match up with each other, and the large number merits further investigation, like door-to-door validation.

We found around 25,000 ballots in Maricopa County that were not created from the usual PDF used for elections. The ballots are tailored to different neighborhoods and come in English and Spanish versions. These ballots are pre-made for mail-in voting and early voting locations. However, we discovered that the quality of these pre-made ballots was significantly lower than expected, indicating a potential issue with the printing process.

The speaker was contacted to assist with examining ballots during the audit in Maricopa County. However, they were only able to examine photographs of the ballots, not the actual ballots themselves. They noticed that many of the ballots had a counterfeit protection system (CPS) code, but the photographs were not clear enough to determine what the code said. The CPS code is a series of yellow dots that can determine when and where a document was printed. It is visible to a trained eye or with magnification, but not to the naked eye. The code can provide information about the machine and date of printing. However, without access to the actual ballots, the speaker cannot draw any conclusions.

We have concerns about mail-in ballots in Clark County, with reports of ballots found in trash cans and multiple ballots sent to one address. Signatures were supposed to prevent fraud, but we haven't been able to verify them. We suspect there are ineligible voters, including deceased individuals and those who have moved. A voter was turned away due to someone else casting their ballot. We're taking legal action to stop the counting of improper votes. Thank you.

Approximately 25,000 ballots were not created from the PDF. The PDF files used for preprinted and vote center ballots are similar, with minor differences in wording. The same configuration and layout are used, but some areas may have extra words. The speaker used an acetate overlay to mark breaks in the circle lines on the computer screen, which were consistent across multiple ballots. This indicates that the anomalies were not due to poor printing but rather degradation of the image over time. The anomalies included breaks in lines, unusual formations of characters, and jagged vertical and horizontal lines. These anomalies were found in many ballots, suggesting a consistent printing issue. The degraded print quality was observed in early ballots as well.

Seth Rich from the DNC asks how to improve access to data on rejected and provisional ballots in order to develop better training guides for voters. He wants to know if election officials have collaborated with parties or other groups on this issue.

The speakers observed irregularities in the ballots, suspecting that they were not filled out by hand but rather printed. They noticed that the bubbles were perfectly filled and not aligned correctly. The paper used for the ballots was very thin, with some ballots having more than 50% missing or torn off. This raised concerns as it seemed intentional and could affect the voters' intent. The speakers emphasized that someone else was determining the voters' choices, effectively voting on their behalf.

There is a significant issue with the recount process I witnessed firsthand. During the first recount, many mail-in ballots appeared to be printed rather than marked by hand. I was present in Fulton County at the Georgia World Congress Center and documented this with photographs. On the second day of the recount, most monitors left, and only one monitor was allowed for every ten tables. At noon on Sunday, a table was set up in a lunch area, away from security cameras, where ballots were counted unsupervised. I have evidence, including video and photographs, to support these claims.

My wife and I went to vote in Morgan County after updating our voter registration. Upon arrival, we found our names missing from the system. Poll workers mentioned they were experiencing significant issues with both new and long-time voters. We were allowed to vote provisionally, but our votes won't be counted for several days. This raises concerns about how this might affect the overall voting process. If this is happening in a small, predominantly red county in Alabama, what issues might be occurring nationwide? Let's discuss.

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 is a nationwide issue with Dominion voter access terminals affecting straight party voting. This programming problem was discovered during the testing period and early voting, causing concern among those using Dominion machines. Efforts are underway to hold Dominion accountable and inform voters about the need to vote in every section of the ballot. This issue is particularly significant in Michigan, where voters can cross over in ways not allowed in many other states. Colleagues in other states share similar frustrations regarding the situation.

I have some questions about the election in Arizona, specifically Maricopa County. I'm asking about the secret testing done on the machines. As Secretary of State, you're supposed to oversee election procedures and conduct additional testing. Did you authorize this? And what about the signatures on the mail-in ballot updates? Are you aware that they don't match the voter signatures? As Secretary of State, you oversaw elections in Maricopa County, so are those elections the best?

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.

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.

There are significant issues with the programming of Dominion voter access terminals, specifically affecting straight party voting. This problem has emerged recently and is a nationwide concern for counties using these machines. During the testing period and early voting, it became clear that voters must be informed about this programming issue, which requires them to vote in every section of the ballot. This is particularly important in Michigan, where voters can cross over in ways not allowed in many other states. Many colleagues from other states share our frustration and surprise regarding this situation, and we are actively working with Dominion for accountability and ensuring voters are aware of the necessary voting procedures.

I was surprised to learn that there was no signature verification done for the ballots. I questioned how ballots without signatures were handled, and the response was they were just sent back out. This made me uncomfortable certifying the results.

The speaker noticed a batch of absentee ballots that stood out because they were in pristine condition, unlike the others which were worn. These ballots had no folds and felt different. One ballot had a white eclipse in the bubble where it should have been filled. As they sorted the ballots, they realized that a significant number of them were exactly the same, with no folds. One ballot in the stack was also misaligned. Additionally, instead of the usual 100, this batch had 110 ballots, which was unusual.

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.

Excuse me, how many ballots are you turning in? You're only supposed to submit one ballot per person. Do you have an affidavit for all those? It's with the post office. That seems suspicious. There's someone in Northampton County dropping off an excessive number of ballots right at the deadline after the office has closed.