NO.... But Team Trump called it a suitcase so that is what I called it. They used that term to make it sound more nefarious.

Again.... I DID NOT CALL them suitcases.... Team Trump did

@Recalibar that video as been explained , I’m not sure why you keep persisting with it

Again, no affidavit claims that.

Ruby is the lady with the Blond braids... that is the term Team Trump used to describe her. I had simply never heard her name.

They claim: specifically: someone told them

Get over it

Explained by a media with a vested interest in obscuring the truth.

bro again you didnt read a word i said lmao

you’re literally a Bot

Idk how you can watch that video and not think "Damn, she just finessed the entire state of Georgia."

People will just listen to any narrative overlaid on top of a video and because it satisfies your desire to see fraud and they assume there is fraud

Its like you cant read than one more sentence with “woman stands in front of room ready to give statement,” DEBUNKED. FALSE.

Sworn testimony* FTFY

The affadavits came forward before the video. The video justifies the claims made by the affidavits. Easy.

@Recalibar everything was on tape . Most workers were asked to leave. The poll watchers for confused. They had a election investigator watch hours of footage yet no one is satisfied. They just want to hear what the want to hear.

@Recalibar yes the affidavits of people being confused

You can clearly see a woman, stand in front of the room. She leans back, as if shes about to start speaking to a group of people. She stands there for a moment, moving her arms. She goes out of frame. Shortly after, election workers/cutters leave, they’re done. Counters start to leave, packing things up, and its claimed thats how those ballots got there, under the table. They stop packing up. The observers leave. They wait. And then moments after everyone is out, they begin counting again. Phone calls or no phone calls to officials, this was wrong. Very wrong.

Why did the poll watchers and the media leave? Why did the poll watchers submit affidavits claiming they were asked to leave before having knowledge of the video?

Sworn testimony is garbage if there is nothing to verify

All bs aside security cameras rarely tell the story, typically you cannot look at the video and find it unless you already know about it, even then you may not find what you are looking for.

You're clearly incapable of discernment.

Does THIS look like a woman with blond(e) braids to you?

based off of the frame by frame analysis, not trumps analysis

@Recalibar you know the answer to that

That’s a tremendous amount of hair

What, because they had "seen the video" that was requested only weeks after the airing of the video?

Oh don’t forget the time they said they “already showed the video” to observers after leaving.

@Recalibar do you read everything I write. You keep asking the same questions that have already been addressed

reported by fox.

It’s a wig

@DrSammyD - the container is important, tho. Because had those ballots been in suitcases then you would have to ask why. But they were not. They were stored in the correct containers. Team Trump said "suit cases" because that sounds very sketchy. It simply wasnt true. They were in proper containers.

As to counting them, or rather scanning them after the watchers had left. I dont see that as a huge problem and here is why:

1. The primary function of the watchers at that location were to watch the ballots being taken out of the envelopes. This is when the signatures are match for a 2nd (technically 3rd time).

2. Those ballots in the "suitcases" (just using this word so we know were are still talking about the same ballots) had already been removed from the envelopes. All that was left was to scan them.

3. No one told the watchers to leave. No one told them that they were finished counting (per the SoS Office.

4. GA law does not require watchers at that stage. They could be there if they wished. They did not have to leave.

5. There was a monitor there, the entire time, per the SoS Office.

Oh thats a great video

Ballots with no addresses

I like the part where she sits at the desk and begins counting the- yeah.

Very great stuff

No return addresses.

In a cubicle

@Recalibar they had someone investigate that very video in question. Everyone involved in the election process knew that narrative was trash. . The investigation was done prior to the ladies overlaid narration

I would say that "maybe that ballot was the only one with missing return addresses" but then again, those mail-in ballots are in perfect condition.

It seems rather unusual that that would be the first in the stack, just as well.

With no observers