Forensic Exam Indicates Georgia Vote Tabulating Machine SENT RESULTS to CHINA, Then Changed Result

Video Transcript:

Thank you, Ross, for joining Zooming in today. Happy to do it. Glad to see you. Let's first talk about the situation in the Maricopa County in Arizona. What's the latest? Have they given you guys permission to look at the machines? No, we have not yet received permission. As you know, Maricopa has defied their own legislature that issued a subpoena. I guess it was a week ago Monday, maybe. Yes, it was a week ago Monday. They issued a subpoena to allow us to see the ballots, the machines, the whole deal. And Maricopa County has struggled very hard to make sure that no one gets to look at it. What do you mean by this struggle really hard not to get anybody to look? Well, they've launched a counter-suit against their legislature to try to block the subpoenas so that they don't have to show anyone anything. What's going to happen next? I mean, are they going to be successfully blocking your guys who can't examine the machines? Well, I think the legislature launched their own legal initiative today, or maybe it was last night, to override that. And we'll see what happens. I don't think we've heard the last story yet in Maricopa County. Their numbers are so bad. There are so many bad things that we saw. There are so many bad witnesses that I would be surprised if ultimately the legislature doesn't prevail. But of course, what they're really trying to do is they're really just trying to play for time and install this process long enough that it takes it beyond the presidential seating time. Right. Like you said, they just try to run out the time. I mean, one is going to be too late. Right. Well, I guess January 7th is going to be too late. You know, at some point, it may be that either the Arizona legislature says, okay, we've had it. We're going to desertify. Or it may even be that the U.S. Congress has to say, we're sorry. All these states, there are so many questions. There are so many people who are concerned about the integrity of this election. And U.S. states have been so irresponsible in letting people have some transparency into your voting that we just can't accept your votes. And that would be fine. That would absolutely be fine because if states are going to have elections and then claim that nobody gets to look at them or audit them, or find any transparency on them, then they should be desertified because almost by definition, it's an illegal election. And we're now seeing polls for probably half the American people no longer believe that this election was without significant fraud. So are you saying one of these two must happen? One, you guys look at the machines and two. They disertify the state legislature, disertify the election results. Would you say one of these two will happen? I think it probably will. You know, at some point or another, legislators are going to have to step up to the plate. And not everyone can just sit back and let an illegal election flow by, or this country is not going to be happy. I know that there are a lot of Democrats that are very concerned about this. They realize that it's not just about who's the president. They realize it's about whether or not our votes are really over going to count in this country. And there are a lot of Republicans who are concerned about this. And they should be. I'm personally concerned about this because I've got kids and I want them to grow up in a country where every person's vote is counted that is a legal vote. And everyone is treated on an equal basis in that regard. Their vote should all be equal as long as they're illegal voter. Have you ever encountered any Democrats who also won a open and free access and they support you, support your effort to look at the machines? Absolutely. Absolutely. In fact, in the latest polls, I saw that a fair number of Democrats had started moving that direction. Because as I say, this is not a Democrat versus Republican issue anymore. Exactly. This is now an issue as to just whether we're going to have guns away luck as our future, or we're going to remain the United States of America. It seems like the Antrim County report you guys did was not the complete report. It was redacted and some very important information was deleted. Tell me about that. Well, the information that was deleted were actual screenshots from the logs that we found there for the computer. And not all the logs were there, by the way. Some of the most important logs have been arranged. So they had already the evidence had already disappeared. And that's very concerning. But what we did see in the logs proved several things. And that's why we originally had them in the report. But the Michigan Secretary of State wanted those logs redacted. They said, oh, well, that's part of the source code. It'll reveal source code. That's garbage that's ridiculous. But that's what the judge said. He said, OK, fine. We'll delete the logs. So we did. But the logs had three very important things and the people need to understand in order to understand why they were important. So let me just step back for a second. When you voted one of these machines, your boat either goes into a bucket that said, OK, this is a good boat. And if you vote counted or it goes into a computer bucket that says, no, this is called adjudication. And for whatever reason, we cannot read or understand this battle. Now, when a vote goes into adjudication, you turn loose of any and all power that you have to have your vote count the way it was cast. And because in adjudication, the operator can vote that any way he wants to. So you could even put a stack of blank ballots in there. And the operator then could just vote them all for Joe Schmoh. So adjudication, you really don't want ballots to go into very much. It was originally designed to be there for when a ballot was unreadable or spoiled or whatever. So it was great that it's supposed to go in there as a teeny, teeny, teeny, tiny fraction. Well, what we found was very alarming because there were about 15,000 events in the event log and 10,000 of them were errors. That doesn't mean 10,000 out of 15,000 votes went. No, no, no, that's a misconception. What what it means is that there were 15,000 events and in those events, 10,000 errors were reported and roughly one to two to sometimes even three errors can accrue to simply one vote that gets moved over. For instance, if you had a format error on a ballot, there might be three error messages that you would have seen before that vote would actually move into adjudication. So we saw 68% error rate. Well, if just let's take the most conservative case, let's assume that it took four error messages to move a vote there. That's still 17% of the votes that went to adjudication. That's horrible. Now here's what's even worse. The log file for adjudication in missing. We could see it for previous years. It's there for previous year. For whatever reason this year, that file's not there. So the thing that was concerning was that in the logs, you would see that a lot of those error messages had to do with the fact that the ballots that were being fed in there were on the wrong size paper. How does that happen? And then we saw other error messages that the ballots that were being fed in there had the wrong format. Again, that's that shouldn't happen. What does that mean? What do you mean by a wrong size paper? I mean, are they using a different size of a ballot to vote? Is that what? So they're not using the official ballot to vote? That would be one of the worrying questions that you would want answered. And of course they wouldn't let us see any of the ballots. We didn't actually get to see the paper ballots, but you've exactly hit the right question. Were these really legal ballots? Well, China just, you know, we just saw the video China, underground factories saying China printed five million ballots for the US elections. So that's a side note to that news. Pardon? That's a note. I mean, side note to that partial proof to that news, I guess. That's that's right. It certainly raises that question, doesn't it? The other thing that was concerning is that we not only did we see the format errors and we saw the paper size errors, but since the adjudication section logs themselves were gone, we don't know how they treated them. And we don't know who voted them. And we don't know whether it was outside people who broke into the machine and voted them, or whether it was the operator there that voted. There's just so many questions when you've erased all the logs. The other thing that you want to see and so they didn't ask you guys, they didn't let you guys to look at the orange loan ballots. And they didn't even let you look at the adjudicated ballots. They just gave you the results. That's the worst of the worst. Valets pretty much the way we looked at it, but even at that rate, what we know is that way too many ballots went into adjudication, probably a minimum of 17% of the total election was decided by someone besides the voter. And it could have been as much as 30 or 40% of the election. If they had the adjudication logs, we could tell you that, but they're gone. They're not there. They're there for previous years, but not this year. So that too is very worried. There was a lot of grief that the CEO of Dominions said, oh, there's no algorithm that was used and blah, blah, blah. Well, actually the CEO of Dominions argument isn't with me. It's with his own users manual because in the user manual itself in chapter 11, it tells you all about the RCB algorithm that can be used in voting and RCB algorithm. It's it's stings for ranked choice voting. And what it comes from is it it originally started as a way. If you had five or six or seven people in a contest, it's a way of saying, okay, these are all the votes, but they got spread out among five people and we just want to pick one winner using the computer. What the computer does is it puts all the votes in into a single bucket and it allocates some out according to whatever formula it's been told to use. That formula is called an algorithm. Well, what we don't like about that is and we know it was used in a lot of cases is that you can set that algorithm up to do anything you want. And so what I don't like about it is it no longer says this vote goes for this person, this vote goes to this person. What the algorithm does is it says no, all the votes go into one bucket and we're just going to allocate them out according to percentages and formulas. In other words, we're no longer counting votes. We're awarding points and that's not good. And we know it was used in certain races there because you could see it in the logs that the RCB was used. So when the Dominion CEO said, oh, it wasn't used. He needs to read his own laws because it was used. And the same thing is true with the fact that there is such a thing as the algorithm. It's in chapter 11 of his own user manual. And the other thing is he said, well, you know, we don't decide really votes and we can't send votes anywhere else. But they can't re-chapter it in the adjudication files. So his argument one with me is already was with his own user manual and the own logs that were still there that we were able to see. So you are saying there's not all right wrong to use this kind of algorithm, but this algorithm is not a shouldn't be used in this race. Well, I don't even think the algorithm should be used at all because you no longer are counting votes. You can end up with, for instance, a guy having 1.32 votes. I don't know about you, but I don't get to vote 1.4.32 times. I just get to vote once and I expect it to be counted for whoever I voted it for. And if they have to ever run off, they have to ever run off. But you can abuse this algorithm. And so it shouldn't be used in my opinion. How would it be abused? Well, since I could say out of every four votes, I want it to go to this particular guy. And that's just wrong. The algorithm itself came from what was called the smote algorithm. And that stands for synthetic minority over sampling technology. And what that really meant was, OK, if there's an area, for instance, let's say that there was an area where there were a whole bunch of Asians, a whole bunch of Hispanics, a whole bunch of blacks, and a whole bunch of whites. Excuse me, but there were very few Hispanics. There were lots of Asians, lots of blacks, lots of whites, and very few Hispanics. You could set the algorithm up and it could actually give more weight to a Hispanic vote than to a black or an Asian or a white vote so that they wouldn't be underrepresented. Well, you can imagine when you can do that kind of thing, you can get into a lot of mischief with that kind of thing as well because it doesn't necessarily have to be an underrepresented group. You can set it up to do anything you want. You could say, for instance, if you vote Democrat, the vote counts 1.5. But if you're voting Republican, the vote only counts 0.5. OK, that's how the... So the... what about the... OK, yeah, I mean, this is... I don't think anybody would think this is how we should run our election. Let's go back to the original topic we are discussing. So they deleted some logs. What are those logs? Those were the logs that would tell you when a vote went to adjudication. Those were the logs that would tell you what happened to it there. OK. Did an operator change it? Did how many of them got changed? What did they get changed to? They all get changed to Trump? Did they all get changed to Biden? That would have been in those logs, but the logs are gone. Well, there is... there was a report yesterday and we're looking into it, but it looks like it's going to prove out to be correct that in Savannah, Georgia, there is a... excuse me, a smart thermostat in one of the tabulation rooms that is talking to a tabulation server and reporting the votes back to China. And that was traced by a Microsoft engineer and he brought it to our attention yesterday. So that's being monitored. We already knew that there was a huge overseas problem and it's not just social media. Your votes in 29 different states, your votes were going to Frankfurt, Germany. They were ending up on a server owned by clarity elections in Frankfurt, Germany. And what's so disturbing about that is that we could see in that server area, we could see that there was a harvester, a piece of malware that was collecting their credentials from all the counties that reported to it. Well, if it collects all their credentials and the votes go there, you can change the votes there and back load them right back down into the counties. And it's easy to do because going back to Antrim, while Antrim wasn't connected directly to it, the point is in Antrim, the passwords that they were using were so old. Some of these passwords were like 10 and 12 years old. Well, everybody knows them, the publish. Well, that means anybody could go into the adjudication files and they could use a fake, you know, the same password. And you would know who's actually in those files playing around with because the passwords are known there by the credentials are known. It's like your email. If 2000 people knew your email log in and they knew your password, everybody get into your email. Well, that's the same situation you have in some of these voting comes. Okay. This is very alarming. I have two questions. Number one, you said the Frankfurt server have credentials and people there can change the votes. Yeah. That's just so alarming. I mean, this is a new finding. What about the, you can say rumor that the US military seized the machine in server in Frankfurt and did something with it. I mean, is that true? I mean, does it have anything with to do with what you just said about the. Well, the original reports were that they had seized a server over there that belonged to a company named CITLE. CITLE is the parent company of clarity elections that I talked about that had the server there. And we don't know who seized it. We don't know. It doesn't make sense if it was truly where we thought it was in Frankfurt. It doesn't make sense that the American military did it, but it could have been it could have been Delta could have been someone like that. What we didn't know is that the server went down because we were watching it at the time when apparently the raid took place. We didn't know at the time that there had been a raid that reported and come out for about 48 hours. We just suddenly saw the server go down and go dark and it it was gone. So something did happen. We just don't know what. Okay, you don't have any further knowledge about that server or anything come out of that raid, you know, analysis or anything. No, we've seen lots of discussions about it on the internet, but we have not been able to prove or disprove any of those. All we know is there was over there with all these votes on that we know for absolute cold hard track. And we know it went down cold hard back other than that we don't know. Okay, so I mean theoretically if that's true, they could have found something on the server. If the credentials are there and if they can change things and send it back to the US. Theoretically, something could be find on the server in Frankfurt. Is that right? Absolutely. Yeah. So the bottom line is the Frankfurt server has the capability of change vote and theoretically if it sees that something could be found on those servers. Yes. True. Okay. All right. Another question is about the China connection. So you said that the server, those machines are connected to China. Tell me more about the nature of that connection is that I mean we talked about the Frankfurt server, you know, it's server that's in Frankfurt. What about the China connection? What are they trying to do? You know, what is the China connection does? Well, we don't we don't know what the China connection is. Here's what we do know. We do know because we can see the networks all around the world. It's like it's kind of like a road map. If you see a city here in a city there, the city there and you see the roads connecting them. Well, you can create that same kind of map on the worldwide networks. And so we can see what networks are touching each other for me. Dominion voting. It has a direct connection to Belgrade and Serbia. That means that Serbia can get into Dominion. Dominion can get into the server and Serbia. That shouldn't be there. We know that they're direct connections and through the voting system, we know they're direct connections and to Lichtenstein and Serbia and to Pakistan on. We have seen a connection into China, into Canada. All these people have ways of coming through the back door and getting in to our election system. Okay. Is there any real reason this is just so crazy to hear? I mean, the server, the US election server is connected to all these countries. Is there any reason for them to be connected to those countries? No. Okay. No, it wouldn't be. I mean, I can't even speculate. I mean, so many countries. What are they trying to do? Like, I mean, what's your rate? Well, in the case of Dominion's connection to Serbia, it's because a lot of their programmers are in Serbia. Oh. And that creates a huge vulnerability. In the case of, there's a voting company called Smartmatic that does a lot of business with Dominion and things like that. A lot of their programmers are in Benzawala. At least the ones they list publicly are in Benzawala. And so you get all these connections and it's just not secure. It's not safe. It shouldn't be going on and it shouldn't be happening. Okay. So those are, I mean, it's still very alarming. Those programmers for US elections are in Serbia and Venezuela. But what about China? What kind of a function that's China have in this election? Well, I don't, I don't know of any direct China connection other than the one that we saw out of that one thermostat that was brought to our attention. But that doesn't necessarily mean very much because China's modus operandi is generally to go through other countries and do what are called one or two hops before it appeared in a server over here.