- - video Dailymotion

TrumpReposter

2 days ago

Transcript

00:00Owes President Donald J. Trump an apology.

00:07President Trump has been indicted by Fulton County.

00:10May I remind you that Fulton County has been found to be in violation of election law,

00:17not once for the hand audit, but twice for the machine count.

00:22And now we can prove that they had intentional human intervention,

00:31which is the predicate for election fraud.

00:35You all know our case is SEB 2023-25.

00:42In that case, you know that it involved 17,852 votes counted without ballot images.

00:54You also know that for the first machine count,

00:5920,713 ballots were counted with what I like to call receipts.

01:08I guess the fancy word is tabulator tapes.

01:10And I always like to say you can't get out of Walmart these days without showing your receipt.

01:16But for some reason, you can count 20,000 votes without a receipt.

01:21The last part of this complaint perhaps is the most concerning

01:26because we've uncovered some recent information that makes it so.

01:32In addition to proving that 3,930 ballots were scanned and counted,

01:43I want to say that again, and counted.

01:47And I sure hope that Ms. Charlene McGowan is listening.

01:52Ms. McGowan, on May 7th, you and your team got up before the board

01:57and said, yeah, I think Mr. Rossi's right.

02:01These ballots were scanned twice,

02:05but we're not sure if they were counted twice.

02:10That is a lie.

02:12And we know that because the data that shows they're counted twice

02:17is on the cast vote records

02:20and that is available to the Secretary of State.

02:25Other experts know that those ballots were counted twice.

02:32Media sources know,

02:35I saw Mr. Nisi from the AJC just walk up here not to get him in trouble,

02:39but he recently reported he thinks they were counted twice also.

02:46And that's from the AJC.

02:50Sorry, Mark.

02:51If I'm going too far, just say,

02:53stop, Joe, you're going to get me in trouble.

02:56Okay.

02:56So they were counted twice for the second machine count.

02:59We know with certainty that this duplication of ballots was not,

03:09I want to repeat, was not an administrative error.

03:15And I'm going to demonstrate to you how we know that shortly.

03:19Rather, the duplication process was due to intentional human intervention.

03:28And I'm not a lawyer, but when I ran this by a few lawyers,

03:35they told me this is the phrase.

03:38Human, intentional human intervention is the predicate for election,

03:46I'm going to use the F word, fraud.

03:51Okay.

03:52You're going to hear me say that several times.

03:55At the heart of this presentation.

03:56I said that the ballots were tabulated twice, counted twice,

04:02and it was not done accidentally.

04:07This slide shows that a ballot on the right over here

04:11was scanned and counted, creates a file.

04:16Some of the experts in the room like Garland know this,

04:18but if it's scanned again, it creates another file,

04:22which means it is counted twice.

04:26So how did this happen?

04:28This is a very complicated slide that has taken months for technical experts

04:38to develop and explain.

04:41It's also very difficult to explain still.

04:44But it basically shows that ballots were scanned on one day,

04:49and then they were randomly picked these batches of ballots

04:55and created new batches

04:58and scanned a second day on a different tabulator.

05:04So you probably can't understand this slide.

05:06So I'm going to show you how it was done very crudely.

05:09So on that first chair, you have a stack of ballots.

05:15You see them over there?

05:17Again, my props are not professional.

05:19I'm just doing what I can to get the message out.

05:23On the second chair, you have a second stack of ballots

05:25that were scanned, let's say, December 2nd, Wednesday,

05:30when the midnight deadline was for doing the election recount.

05:35On the third chair, you have a third stack of ballots

05:39that were scanned on Wednesday.

05:43Now, someone or some group, I don't know who,

05:47but this is not accidental, what they did.

05:50They went to one stack of ballots,

05:53randomly grabbed a few stacks from that.

05:56No order.

06:08I got a random group, okay?

06:10Some of them I flipped around

06:12so that they count backwards this time.

06:15Then they went to another stack of ballots

06:16that were already scanned.

06:18You notice I'm not necessarily picking them from the top, right?

06:32I'm just grabbing randomly.

06:35And one more time, I'll do it for example.

06:37They went to another stack.

06:38And then, the next day, they came back

06:52with that randomly selected stack,

06:56and guess what they did?

06:57That last chair over there is a tabulator.

07:09They ran them through, on a second day,

07:12through a different tabulator.

07:14And they did that for 3,930 ballots.

07:18Who in the room thinks that's accidental?

07:20Raise your hand.

07:24I don't think so.

07:27I'm going to skip that part.

07:30All right, I'm going to close

07:32with how I started this little talk here.

07:36I'm going to read it one more time, if you don't mind.

07:39It says,

07:40In addition to proving

07:42that 3,930 ballots were scanned

07:46and counted two times

07:47for the second machine count,

07:49which was the certified count,

07:52we now know with certainty

07:54that this duplication of ballots

07:56was not a mere administrative error.

08:00Rather, the duplication process

08:02was due to intentional human intervention.

08:09And I said,

08:10the lawyers tell me that.

08:12That is the predicate for election fraud.

08:16And now,

08:18in closing,

08:20I remind you about

08:21Mr. Raffensperger's ex-post

08:23of August 1st.

08:24If you have the data,

08:25bring it to him.

08:27Mr. Secretary,

08:28we're bringing the data to you.

08:30And we are counting on you

08:31to do the right thing

08:32and investigate independently,

08:36independently is critical,

08:38SEB 2023-25.

-

Category

Transcript

Be the first to comment

Recommended