All Episodes
Previous Next
June 21, 2017 - Project Camelot
01:19:52
DR. RICHARD DAVIS : U.S. ELECTION RESULT & AI
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, everyone.
I'm Carrie Cassidy from Project Camelot, and I'm here today with Richard Davis, Dr.
Richard Davis.
He has been on my show in the past.
He is representing Polmo, which is a software that does polling, as well as a few other things, from what I remember.
And he can tell you more about that in just a moment.
So we have him here.
And before we get started, I just want to give a shout-out about my conference coming up this weekend in Watford, England.
So I'm over here in the UK, as many people know, and we're going to be doing a two-day conference at the High Elms Manor.
And we've got a whole wonderful list of speakers, which you can find it on my website.
It's actually in the front of the website as well, but you can see it here with the banner, with all the speaker names, etc.
And we're having a lot of people that came from last year.
This time we're bringing some of the people that spoke in the England, the London, England conference to the Watford location.
So, you know, we're having people like Simon Parks, Maria Wheatley.
And many others.
So I'm not going to take a lot of time here to go into the details, but I do hope you'll visit my website and look under events.
There's a drop down menu for events.
And there's also on the right hand side you should be able to see it scrolling by.
And click on that and you can get tickets.
We do have a few tickets left for both the Saturday and the Sunday.
And it's going to be a lot of fun.
We will also be trying to do a sky watch on the Saturday night, weather permitting.
And then on Sunday we're having a panel discussion At an Indian restaurant with a very excellent Indian meal.
So it's going to be a lot of fun.
If you're in the UK area, I highly recommend that you stop by.
And it's always a fascinating series of lectures, etc.
And the people there that come, because it's quite an intimate gathering, it's not a gigantic stadium.
It's a small manor house.
And that lends itself to being a very kind of great way to network and meet other people that are like-minded, etc.
So if you're in the UK, and especially if you're in the London area, Watford should be easy enough to reach.
So just wanted to put that out there.
So tonight's guest, as I say, is Dr. Richard Davis, and he is here with me.
What I will do here now is just put the banner ad up really briefly so that you can see who he is and so that we can identify the show for YouTube.
At the same time, I'm going to just read a brief bio for him.
So what we're going to be talking about is the theory that Fraction Magic Technology, which was discovered by Bev Harris, And her website is called blackboxvoting.org, was used to hack into the AI voting system.
And we will be discussing Richard's theory on how this was countered by what he calls the good guys.
And so he is a short bio here.
And he is Dr.
Richard Davis, an aerospace engineer, synthetic bio-organic chemist, medical doctor and retired naval officer, CNO Commendations, it looks like two of those, and TIDY SEAL Team 5 doc.
Blue Angels slash BU. There's some abbreviations here that I'm not familiar with.
A flight surgeon, a level 1 ER trauma physician, serial entrepreneur.
He has had two IPOs, authored 400 patents and trademarks, and designed this original software for LendingTree.
He has also designed, well, been involved in the design, I guess, of the Polmo Software that has to do with accuracy in polling and voting.
So that's quite a resume, and you're quite a fascinating individual, no doubt about it, and really happy to have you on the show tonight, Dr.
Davis.
So if you would like to go ahead and kind of augment that introduction, and you are now on the air.
Thank you, Kerry.
I appreciate it very much.
A lot has happened since we talked last, and PollMoll is an active mobile app that people can download and participate in an array of different types of polls that are designed to provide information.
Instantaneous, transparent feedback to both the public as well as the people who are sponsoring the polls.
It's the most robust, the most powerful, the most hack-proof, and really foolproof system that's ever been developed to conduct polls.
There's nothing technologically like it in the world, and so we're very proud of PoleMole and what it's accomplished.
PollMoll was really just the entree, and people can go to look at pollmoll.vote, and they can read a lot about it from a voting standpoint.
We're also going to be bringing up a commercial site where we'll be able to provide market research to corporations on a for-profit basis.
And finally, we'll be able to have a social media component at pollmoll.net where people can author and sponsor their own polls for free.
You know, ask everyone in the United States a single question, get those answers back.
So it's a fascinating project.
We're probably about halfway through with the programming on the other pieces, but pollmall.vote is up and active and running.
People can go to, you know, the Google Store or Apple and download the app right now and participate in these polls.
But really not here to talk about pollmall.
Really talk about, you know, The election, what happened, what I strongly believe happened, and there has been some independent third-party corroboration of what I'm going to talk about.
And then we can talk about where things have gone since the election, which ties all these pieces together.
Now, if you recall, the polls began in mid-2015, and As we began to ramp up into the 2016 very active primary season and ultimately the race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
And people will go back and they'll look at the Wayback Machine.
They'll realize that even the very first polls were calling for a very close election.
And this is a standard ploy of something that we called skimming.
And Let's just sort of go back in time.
America has not had a legitimate election in decades.
The two major parties have been involved in electioneering and election theft, election fraud of all sorts.
For decades.
In fact, the beginning of this process was actually initiated with a consent decree against the Republican National Committee for electioneering fraud in several states in the early 80s.
And that consent decree continued through this election.
And basically what it said is the Republicans could not interfere, cause, or even suggest that the Democrats would be involved And any form of election fraud.
So it basically shuttered them and completely shut them down from being able to launch any kind of a protest or they would face stiff penalties.
I know it sounds a little crazy, but people can go and look it up.
You know, RNC consent decree began back in 1983 and continued certainly through the 2016 cycle.
Very, very severe consequences if they got involved And even suggesting that the Democrats might be involved in election fraud.
And of course they are.
Both sides are.
And they continue to be.
Because this is the status quo of the American elections.
What happened in this election really began back in 1964 after the Kennedy assassination.
And a company that's known today as Edison Research was born.
Now today Edison Research is owned by By the six major election announcing media outlets, ABC, CNN, CBS, Fox, NBC, and AP, they have the monopoly on being able to provide the polling data as it comes in on election day.
They get this from a single source.
They get it from Edison Research under contract.
What's interesting is that the six of them happen to own Medicine research.
It's a very cozy relationship.
I'm not suggesting that anything nefarious is going on, but there's certainly the appearance of impropriety with the people that are announcing the results are also in control of the company that's supposed to be gathering the data to put those results together.
So it's a very interesting web that's being formed here.
And if you were of a mind to take control of an election process, You want to commit election fraud and you want to commit voter fraud, one or both.
And there's a difference.
Voter fraud is people casting votes illegally.
They're either non-citizens or citizens voting multiple times or citizens assuming alternate identities of dead people or what have you.
Just this week, A poll out of the Washington Times was released, not a poll, a report out of the Washington Times was released that suggested that as many as 5.7 million unlawful votes were cast by non-citizens in 2016.
Now, if the popular vote was swung by 3 million votes, if 5.7 million illegals voting or non-citizens voting, that could certainly have turned the tide.
But because of the way that the elections are set up through Edison Research and through the polling systems as they operate today, this is within what's called the margin of error.
And if you were to go into a room of 100 people eating dinner, and you were to talk to all of them and ask them what their favorite meal was, you would have 100% response, and you could have 100% confidence that your poll was 100% accurate.
In major polls, you only interview a fraction of the people that are involved.
I mean, we had over 130 million people vote, and the exit poll had, you know, about 20,000 people.
The margin of error was, you know, about, you know, 3 or 4 percent.
And that translates to about 5 million people, 5 million votes.
So certainly you could hide 5.7 million votes Questionable votes within this margin of error of about 5 million votes so that no one would be able to detect or see that anything improper had been done.
This is done by design.
Polls could be done much more accurately.
Poll mall was designed to be able to poll everyone in the election.
I mean, we could have all 130 million people, you know, give an exit poll as they came out of the polls, and we would have a huge sample size, extremely accurate.
In real time with full transparency.
And this was the idea was to break the monopoly of Edison research to be able to provide the public with a real time window on how the voting was going.
That didn't materialize.
We were prevented from getting any kind of foundation within the media, both the left and right.
It was really interesting to see the way that that Backlash occurred, but that's a story for a different time.
But the bottom line is that there are systems that can be put in place, like Poll Mall and others, that can provide much more accurate information from an exit polling standpoint, or even the polls running up to an election, which are the things that set the stage for a steal.
So you have to understand that skimming is a three-part process.
You have propaganda and early polls that set an expectation that, oh my gosh, this is going to be a very close election, and it's going to come in probably within the margin of error.
Well, of course, because if you want to steal something, you want to make sure that nobody can see it.
And this is done very carefully and statistically and mathematically to hide these shenanigans within the margin of error.
The second thing you need to do is to control the exit votes on the day of the election to make sure that the results that are being reported are falling in these what they call battlefield states or whatever you might want to call them, swing states.
And these are the ones they've identified months before, which would be the ones that everybody needs to keep their eye on, because these would be the ones that would determine the course of the election and who would win.
Very critical for the election of Donald Trump.
Because of what happened that night.
The third thing that needs to happen is you need to have control over the collection of the actual official data, the collection of those votes, the transport of that data, the analysis and reporting back to the media outlets so that every night,
every election night, you can turn on your favorite and you can go to Fox and you can watch Megyn Kelly or Wolf Blitzer or whoever your favorite You know, television, you know, teleprompter reader is, and watch the results as they come in.
All of them get the same results from the same company that issues the same polls, and all of them get their same results from one company.
Now, you would think that an American election would have an American company with very tight controls overseeing this most critical data of who we're going to elect as president, and Congress and senators.
I mean, that should be, I think, an American process.
But in 2012, that process was subcontracted out to a Spanish company called SITL. S-Y-T-L. You can look it up.
SITL is a George Soros influence company.
He's a significant shareholder of this business.
You can see in their public documents to this effect.
And a lot of other globalist entities that are involved.
So they own the company that's collecting the data and transmitting that to your television set via one of the major media outlets.
So here you have it.
If you want to control the outcome of the result of an election, You'll control the people who are voting by getting as many non-citizens and other people who will vote your way to cast those votes.
You will then pump them into machines that have been rigged, and I'll talk about that because you mentioned Bev Harrison and Fraction Magic because that's a critical component to this.
That data is then uploaded to CITL, which is owned by these globalist factions, manipulated, turned around, and retransmitted Back to the media outlets for dissemination to the American public.
Nice, neat, tidy, all wrapped up in a nice big red bow.
So if you control the polls, you control the machines, you control the reporting, and you control the media that distributes that information to the public, You have a pretty good lock on what's going down.
And this is why even as late as about 10 o'clock at night on November 8th, all the pundits were still calling 85-90% chance that Hillary would win.
And then something happened.
But let me go back to that in just a second.
When Hillary was beating Bernie Sanders, she was doing it by all of these methods, both voter fraud as well as election fraud with the machines.
The machines, as Beth Harris discovered and announced publicly on YouTube and a lot of other things, I mean, very, very brave person.
I just admire her so much.
And she went on and showed how the machines were designed to capture votes in fractions.
Now, you would think that one man, one vote would be the norm where you would vote and you have your whole vote counted.
I voted for Donald Trump.
I voted for Hillary Clinton.
I voted for Jill Stein or whoever.
And that one vote would get registered to the candidate of your choice.
It doesn't work that way in a machine that is downloaded with Fraction Magic software.
In Fraction Magic, they can, on the fly, in real time, rid the vote so that I might get 96% of my vote counted and lop off 4% And that's thrown over into Hillary's side.
Well, that might not seem like a big deal, but if you do it a few hundred thousand times, that is a big deal.
If you do it a few million times, it's an even bigger deal.
And this is what Bev was trying to explain to people, is it's not hard to understand.
You know, if I have a hot dog and I want to eat the whole thing, But, you know, you come along and take a couple of bites for you.
Well, then I only have what's left for me.
And this is how fraction magic works in the machines.
So right at the precinct level where people are voting through these machines, believing that their vote is counted.
And by the way, Okay, okay, but...
Actually, I have to stop you there just to ask you, why isn't it counting every vote?
And what is the logic of this fractionalization?
In other words, is this legal or is this an illegal piece of software that she discovered?
You know, and I'm not familiar with her expose on that.
And perhaps my viewers aren't either.
So, just wondering.
Excellent question.
Absolutely illegal.
When you vote, Kerry, you should have one vote, one whole vote registered for the candidate of your choice.
If your vote internally in the machine is split so that a percentage, only a percentage of that whole vote, of that 100% of that vote, goes to your candidate, and another portion of that vote is siphoned off to somebody else, and if that's done Over and over and over again, thousands, millions of times, pretty soon that other person is going to have, if the machines, for example, were all set at the same, they're not.
They're iteratively done in real time in order to keep that margin of error, this fraud, hidden within that numerical no man's land.
What's going to happen is if it was all set at 96% of everybody that voted for Donald Trump, And 4% of those votes would go for Hillary.
Well, she would have a 4% lead before the voting was ever started.
This is, of course, entirely illegal.
But that's what Bev discovered.
And this is a portion of how she beat Bernie.
And this system is controlled in real time by all these machines and interactive where they're hooked to the web.
And when they're not hooked to the web, That data is then manipulated at the SIDL level before it's, you know, redistributed back to the media.
So it's a closed system.
There's no way you can actually find the truth because it's hidden in this margin of error and it's relatively small and people don't understand it and they don't dig into the details.
So does that answer your question?
It does, but it brings up sort of another question, which is, if they're doing this illegally, and, you know, what you talked to me originally, you referred to this as a sort of an artificial intelligence.
So my question is, is this certain software called, you know, an AI, and if it's an AI... How is it being manipulated?
And I understand that part of this discussion is going to actually say how it was countered.
And then the idea being that it was also countered by another AI. And so the question is, is that, I guess I would say, is Bev an AI expert, for one?
And number two, is she the only one who found this?
And was it on every, I don't know, Was it everywhere, or is it only at one place, or several key places, one state, that sort of thing?
So there's two questions there.
Let me ask you a question.
I don't know if Bev is an AI expert.
She's clearly an expert in voting methodologies.
There are over 180,000 precincts in the United States.
And everyone who's gone to vote walks in and they can see that there's 15 or 20 voting machines within their precinct.
So you can do the math.
There's an awful lot of machines in this country.
In order to be able to keep up with the tabulation of votes and be able to manipulate fraction magic in real time so that you're keeping these numbers very, very close, this can only be done through the algorithms that are expressed through an AI system.
And so the people who do the programming of the AI, the AI then goes into the machines, gathers that information, and manipulates that information second by second in order to make sure that as the votes filter through, the expectation of this close vote that we've been propagandized for months as part of the skimming process is found to be effective.
Now, that AI system is, of course, connected to the central server system that collects and analyzes and then reports the system back to the media channels, to the six media channels, who somewhere along the line, God, I guess, gave them the right to call the elections.
You know, private media companies calling the elections.
I mean, I find that just absurd.
I mean, the data should be in real time, and we should be able to see Who's winning and who's not?
And we shouldn't have to have this interpreted by a third party.
This is just a formula for fraud and manipulation and electioneering.
So here's what I can tell you.
And there's a couple of things that I can't tell you.
But I can tell you that on Friday evening at about 6 o'clock, After the election, which was on Tuesday, I received a phone call from unknown.
I usually don't answer, you know, calls on my phone from unknown.
But for some reason I did.
I don't know why.
I was just compelled to do it.
And a muffled male voice on the other end of the line that I did not recognize proceeded to talk to me for about two minutes.
First of all, he wanted to thank us at Poll Mall for being prepared to counter the election results, if necessary, by being able to launch a post-election poll to every American citizen and be able to demonstrate the true results of the election in case the election fraud was won by Hillary.
I mean, Donald Trump, I mean, it's been proven now without a doubt that he wasn't involved in any kind of election fraud.
He wasn't involved with the Russians.
I mean, this whole thing is complete fraud in and of itself in order to divert our attention from the larger issues, you know, the crimes of the Obama administration, the crimes of, you know, the Clinton Foundation, Petergate, and, you know, all these other things that are interrelated.
And so this is a fantastic diversion.
But this gentleman on the other end of the line that Friday evening said, I wanted you to be among those people who knew what happened at around 9.30 on November 8th in the evening.
I want everybody to go back and recall that the election had basically been called for imperialism.
And everybody was basically ready to pack up and go home.
And then...
Florida happened.
And then North Carolina happened.
And then Iowa.
And then ultimately Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, Pennsylvania.
The seven swing states that had been identified at the very beginning of the election cycle as being the ones that were critical for the candidates to win if they were going to take the presidency.
Totally unexpected.
And one of the real tip-offs that was going on is to see the faces of the teleprompter readers who were in on it.
They knew it was about to happen.
And when it didn't happen, they were shocked.
In fact, Megyn Kelly got up in the middle on live camera and went into the back where their computer guys were working to provide the displays and getting the input from SIDL and getting the input from Edison Research and You know, corroborating all this information.
She walked back there several times to basically say, what is going on?
What are you guys doing?
And they had no clue.
They were just, you know, tech guys, you know, compiling data, which was very obvious.
She was very concerned.
And everybody in the media was very concerned.
So here's what happened.
Here's what this gentleman told me.
There's something called an overlay.
An overlay is not a physical virus or trojan or bug that's actually uploaded into a computer in order to manipulate whatever it is that you're trying to do.
An overlay is actually a quantum process that actually involves manipulation of electron spin in the transmission of data.
Everybody knows It's electrons traveling through space or through a wire and they have a spin.
Up is positive, down is negative.
You can build an entire world with a digital format like this, a binary system.
An overlay sits over that and uses a quantum technology in order to alter this data flow.
And what this AI system was doing was detecting The flow of information coming in, in real time, from non-fractionated machines and the rest, and then interpolating what Donald Trump's true vote count should be.
And he told me that what they did was that they reinstated a portion, because that's all they needed, was a portion of his true vote into the reporting downstream of It was going to Megyn Kelly and Wolf Butcher and the rest of them.
And that data was showing up as a huge surprise as these swing states that should have gone for Hillary because they could have manipulated the vote to make that happen.
They weren't able to manipulate it because there was another anti-AI system, which was an AI system in and of itself.
that had been brought in to sit on top of this fraud and fix enough of it a portion of it so that those states again within the margin of error would go for Donald Trump and he predicted in this phone call he said you watch the Hillary campaign will go silent and they We'll not call for a recount in a single precinct in this United
States.
Why?
Because the discovery process of bringing something like that to light in a real recount where they rigorously look at the machines and reporting and all of the things that would have come out Would have clearly shown the process of scamming that the Clinton organization had put into place years before.
And spent literally tens of billions of dollars to make sure that the 2016 election would go the way that they wanted.
That's what he told me.
Alright, and let me, I have a couple questions.
One is, did you ever get the identity of the person?
No.
And number two is, I want to know, is this AI that came in, this so-called overlay, as you're calling it, which seemed to be what you called an anti-AI system, but an AI system in and of itself, who created that?
And do you know the exact parties?
Or is this, you know, other than being told that it exists...
Do you know anything more about it?
I was told that it was a group of patriots that were very concerned about the future of our country, and that they all had significant backgrounds in tech, both from the intelligence community, military-industrial complex, etc., and that they were highly sophisticated people who had sort of come together spontaneously.
And decided to see if they could make a change or at least prevent a significant fraud from occurring.
And some might suggest that what they did was illegal.
I think that trying to restore the legal vote is probably not illegal.
The fact that it was done surreptitiously and the fact that these people have not stood up and identified themselves, I don't think that anybody wants to be Arkham cited like Seth Rich.
And so I would recommend that they probably continue to remain the anonymous heroes of this election cycle.
They took a huge gamble.
I do not know who they are, no clue.
I've told you everything that I know from this phone call, but I have heard bits and pieces from other reports in other places that something like this had occurred.
But I'm not privy to really provide any more information Other than I can tell you that, you know, from my data experience, my programming experience, and from the things that I've done with Polmo, this is certainly possible.
It's certainly, you know, very, very feasible.
It's not science fiction.
This technology exists.
It could be used to do this.
It would not be difficult if you knew where those trump lines were being brought in and where the data was being pumped out, where it could be intercepted.
All of Very, very plausible.
Okay, now I'm going to actually ask you sort of from a different point of view because it may be a coincidence and it may not be a coincidence because I'm Project Camelot.
But I had a communication from a contact, who I won't name, who told me yesterday that actually The decision was made that Hillary was not going to win.
And this is at a very high level.
Now this is on the human level.
I can appreciate that the people who carried out this method you're talking about is actually the next piece on that trajectory.
But what I was told is that she...
Well, I think I can say this much.
That supposedly John Kerry...
Begged these people to let her win, but they had decided that she was not going to win and that Donald was going to be the winner.
And so it is very possible that the people you're talking about are working for the people that this person is talking about.
It's possible, sure.
Who is this person or who are these people?
And hopefully it's more than one.
You know, it's this kind of thing.
And that goes out to the community and for people that will watch this and in this type of thing.
It is quite fascinating because what you're talking about is a physical process, right?
It's a hands-on kind of intercession, you know, getting involved in In sort of the dirty work, so to speak, of making something change, making something happen.
But the decision comes from another place, which is obviously, you know, on a human, or in my case, you know, human possibly with even an alien component to it.
In other words, someone is making this executive decision at some level.
Now, I also had another piece of information, and, you know, for your purposes, this may be Something of a distraction to your through line that you're trying to convey.
But nonetheless, it's still important.
And that is that William Tompkins told me a while back that three men were responsible for Trump getting into office.
And so we know that Tompkins is backed by the military, his disclosures.
And we also know that the military portion is the Navy and that it is a portion of the Navy, not the full Navy.
And I also find it interesting that you yourself are a former Navy officer.
Isn't that correct?
Yes.
Right.
And it does appear that Trump has a somewhat sympathetic ear on the side of the Navy and maybe other of the military as well, which is rather interesting.
But I don't think it would be a hard guess to say that Uh, these people who, who got involved with this AI and, and creating the AI were working for a portion of the military.
You know, we have, what it, what it really means is what's going on politically in the United States is not, as much as it appears to be a civilian, you know, we're trying to elect a government and so on and so forth and they're supposed to report to the people, et cetera.
Um, you know, the, the truth is much deeper than that and, uh, Quite different, probably.
So I'm just throwing all of this out, and you're certainly welcome to comment.
Well, I think that it is much more complex than what we will ever know.
I think that there are coalitions of interests, and certain interests that would typically side.
Again, I think that the left-right paradigm, the Republican, Democrat, you know, I think that's a complete illusion.
And we have this tremendous political theater, which is a huge distraction from the people that you're talking about, the people that are actually making these kinds of decisions.
And whether they're being guided by, you know, other forces and entities beyond that, I couldn't comment.
I mean, I just have no, you know, I'm pretty much a solid data type of a guy.
And I think that the The important thing is that clearly I was told that the people that were involved in developing this AI system, anti-AI system that was AI itself, came from backgrounds, was the word he said, backgrounds, with intelligence, the intelligence community, and the military industrial complex.
Now, that doesn't mean that that necessarily was past tense.
You're correct.
It could be that these people were actively involved.
They're in active duty military right now.
They're in the NSA or the DIA or wherever.
And they could be working for interests within those organizations actively.
They're not mutually exclusive at all.
And so I think that your insights are good.
I just wish we had more solid information in order to make more than just You know, an accusation or speculation.
Sure.
Well, this gets into an interesting discussion.
I don't know if you want to go in this direction, but I'll throw it out there and, you know, you can sort of volunteer what you'd like.
The notion of what I have seen in the past and starting to seem seeming to move forward now in time is Which is what I call the battle of the AIs.
And so aside from the human component, there is, it is thought, certainly more than one AI operating on the planet.
And when we're talking about humans creating AIs, then if those humans are not in agreement on outcomes, right, then those AIs are going to reflect what the points of views of the humans are that, in theory, Send them on a mission, assuming that the AI doesn't turn against the people that created it, at least at this juncture, and so on.
So, you know, this is a very sophisticated level of, I don't know, investigation, I guess.
And I don't hear anyone going down this road, to be honest, but I think it's worth it, and I think it's very important because I think it's the wave of the future.
And, again, I would bring up, you know, Geordi Rose and the D-wave, you know, quantum computer that he references, the fact that he thinks it's accessing what he even called, I believe, a fifth dimension, and as well as a telepathic link-up.
And, of course, you can get into the Cliff High web bot and how it is pulling data, you know, from humans that are basically precognitive.
In other words, we see the future before it happens.
And that was proven during 9-11 at, you know, with the MIT study that was done and so on.
You know, so this is a whole package that is a level of inquiry.
And I don't know if you want to go down that level, whether you have, you know, pursued this.
You know, you came to me to pursue this show idea, and I think it's a good one.
So I don't want to distract you either.
But I'm wondering, have you considered going down these roads?
Well, absolutely.
I think that anybody in the tech field, as we are at Polmo, are certainly aware of AI and its potential, which, depending upon who your master is, it can either free humanity and provide us with an immense explosion of capability and really A whole brave new world that we never imagined,
or if it's in the fans of a nefarious tyrant, it can be that which enslaves us totally.
So I believe that the current state of AI that we at least are starting to learn about are still human-directed machines that have been given a degree of autonomy in terms of their decision-making capabilities.
But I do not believe that the machines that we're aware of are conscious.
I don't believe that we've reached that singularity point where they've actually become sentient, like Skynet in the Terminator series.
I don't believe that that's happened yet.
I don't see any evidence in my life or in other people or any of the companies that we see or whatever That that level of sophistication has been released.
It doesn't mean that it doesn't exist.
It just means that I don't think it's been released yet.
Are you familiar?
Have you seen?
It's on YouTube, but it's very easy to see.
I would think you have seen it.
Geordi Rose talking about D-Wave.
I have not seen that, no.
Okay.
Well, I highly recommend it, especially if you're in this field, because That would tend to perhaps put into question, you know, the state of the art as you see it at the moment.
It does look like...
We've gone beyond where at least you're consciously aware, which is interesting.
You know, that in itself would be worth the whole show in itself or a series of shows.
But given that and given the state as you see it, you know, you wanted to talk about this.
Is there something along these lines, you know, because you brought forward the notion that these people have in some way At least from your point of view, and obviously the people that are, you know, for Clinton would not see it your way.
But, you know, standing in sort of a semi-objective point of view here, for lack of a better place to stand at this moment with regard to the show, at least, I would say, you know, what are you...
How would you talk to the people out there on both sides of that camp?
And...
In light of what we've just talked about, in other words, you have a task force being given a certain mission to counter what would be a stolen election, I assume, from your point of view anyway, and from the evidence, I think you're looking at some evidence for that.
And certainly these people were convinced of it, so they put in place this other action.
And in a sense, what those two actions do, in theory, they would bring us back to zero, so then you would have maybe a balance, right?
Or back to at least what you would say is an election that was not interfered with at all, the ideal situation.
But it doesn't sound quite like that's what happened exactly.
And then, you know, there are other components to this.
Certainly, this notion that you're saying that the media, the very media that's in charge of the mainstream, also control the polling apparatus and the recording apparatus, if I understand it.
Correct?
So that's a political, you know, sway.
That's tilting the scales already because this is a PR thing.
So that when you have things like exit polls, I guess, is the place that it seems to be impact on the voter.
I'm guessing I may be wrong.
I don't know a lot about this.
But say an exit poll is skewed to say that Hillary is winning and somebody is going to place their vote.
I guess the logic is that they're thinking they're going to change their vote because it's going in a more positive, not positive, but a certain direction.
They're going to try to align themselves with the mainstream of the winner, you know, the winning side, let's say.
Is that the logic that you're working on?
Yes, I think that it's been shown in many studies that many people will wait until the very last minute to cast their votes.
And what you have are two different people, two different types of people.
If their candidate is losing...
People will turn out in order to try and support the candidate of their choice, when they may have initially said, well, I'm not going to vote today.
On the other hand, you have people that will pile on to the candidate that appears to be winning at the time.
And what I haven't seen is any good data to suggest that one outweighs the other.
I think that both human motivations to support the The candidate or the issues of your choice is powerful.
And I think that the idea of, well, I want to vote for the winner because I want to go down to the bar tonight and tell everybody I voted for the person who won and have those bragging rights, you know, whether they care about the issues or not, I think that's another human motivation.
But in terms of the deeper questions that you're really talking about, is...
What type of systems are in place today?
And what type of systems might we see tomorrow?
I happen to be an advocate of the belief that we have this breakaway civilization.
I think that there's a tremendous amount of evidence, you know, with Catherine Austin Fitz talking about the financial aspect and Richard Dolan and other people that spend a lot of time investigating.
And I think that there's a lot of support for that.
And clearly, if that exists, you would suspect that they would have AI systems that are vastly different than the ones that we're used to in our terrestrial real world.
I'm talking about what I see here and what I know and what I can look and evaluate and test.
I don't have any information, of course, about that which may be hidden from us.
You know, on a purposeful basis with a group of people that may have...
And I don't think that they're homogenous either.
I don't think that they're all good or they're all bad.
I think that there's probably a mix of people that are, you know, within that construct.
So I think it's a fascinating time to be alive.
I think we're going to learn an enormous amount of information probably within the next 10 years, you know, within our lifetime.
We're going to start to have some answers to...
These questions which have been buried forever.
Absolutely.
Well, along those lines, I also want to say that there's a way to look at this, which is assuming that we're at this juncture that you're talking about and that there are other levels, even beyond the ones that are sort of conventionally accepted.
In other words, there may be plenty of people willing to accept your premise.
That, you know, and Beverly's, you know, investigations for this kind of a software, what appears to be a software program, if I understand it correctly, called, what is it called?
Something magic?
Fraction magic.
Fraction magic.
Okay.
So she finds evidence of this, and you see a counter move, and you get a call, you know, basically kind of giving you a heads up that this move has taken place.
But the question would be, in a sense, is where do we go from here?
In other words, if you have that and you also have what I'm positing, which has to do with, you know, more sophisticated, as you brought up, what we call a rogue civilization, a parallel civilization running alongside us, what some people are calling nowadays the deep state.
And so on.
In other words, we know there's a lot of secrecy.
We know a lot of it is getting revealed at this time.
But we also know that, you know, that we're stuck with what we've got so far on a certain level.
Now, certainly, you're making an effort through Pomo, I assume, to kind of write the scales to be able to evaluate when election is being stolen, so to speak.
Right now.
So, of course, one would say that there's a lot of machinations behind the scene having to do with either getting Theresa May in, well, first to get her in office and now to get her out of office.
And then people backing Corbyn, feeling that Corbyn is the real winner in this latest, if you want to call it an election, whatever, and to form a government.
It's a different process here in the UK, as you know.
And so on.
But nonetheless, we're talking about the people having a view, having a point of view and wanting to participate.
And at the same time, we're having an artificial intelligence overlay, really managing that point of view and taking it over even, and so on.
So would you like to talk about that?
Sure.
I think that you asked me what would be the solution.
Given all of this very sophisticated digital skullduggery that's going on around us.
And I think that the answer is actually to go backward.
I think that most people, Bev Harris and others, support the simple idea of paper ballots that are controlled at the precinct level, you know, in a locked box where your precinct captains of all the different, you know,
party constituents, after the polls close, open the box, sit around and count the count until they all agree And that those numbers are then transmitted on a redundant basis in order to report the official results.
Now, as a tech person, I would like to add a digital interface like a scanner so that when the individual votes, they can actually run their Through a scanner, and the ballot then drops into this sealed vault, if you will, and that's what's opened at the end of the day.
But the scanner counts those votes and then tallies and submits them in real time.
And all of the different votes from all the different precincts, from the whole area, the county, state, nation, are then tallied in real time as they go forward so that people can have a real-time We don't have that now.
Now, we haven't had that in forever.
And so I think that to go back to a system like that, which can be made foolproof, you know, with, you know, know the comparison between what was scanned in a digital scanner and what was counted by the precinct captains you know and with a physical ballot that can be saved archived reviewed etc this is about as good as it gets I mean, I don't think that...
I'm not sure what's happening here.
Hello?
I'm sorry.
I'm sorry, I went offline for a second.
I was about to say that I don't believe that anything that human beings can be absolutely perfect.
But I think that what Bev Harris has suggested and others, in terms of the security of a paper ballot-based system, comes as close to election integrity as we can get.
And I think that going backwards to something like that, that has That doesn't have a digital basis, but we're not depending upon computers or talking heads to tell us what the results are.
We can see the results in real time and then we can get an official count based upon physical documents that can be reviewed.
I think that's the best way to go.
Okay.
You know, that strikes me as kind of a good logical request or thought, but under the circumstances, it doesn't Actually sound like something that's going to happen, as you may have guessed.
We are in a situation where it's actually not to the powers that be, so to speak, not to their benefit to get anything accurate from the people, at least not accurate in a public way.
And so they don't want the people to know what the people, what we, Because we are stronger together and divided, of course, we're apart and so on.
So the question, you know, is, and I'm going to ask, you know, bring questions from chat into the discussion, if you're okay with that, at this structure.
And certainly you're willing to, you know, you're welcome to say more about this subject if you have more to say about it before we do so.
But, yeah, I think that your solution sounds very solid, but it just doesn't seem to be the way it's going to go.
And I think we're in a digital age.
I think this is kind of where we're headed with everything.
And so...
I don't know.
It is really a good question.
Now, some people will say, well, assuming the Trump side is going to say this, that they got the good guy in at this point.
Of course, there are many people that are trying to get rid of him.
One of the key issues, of course, that could even be discussed here is the fact that he's planning to go after the pedophiles who've been at the top echelons of power In our government for a very long time and running things in the United States as well as in England.
But, you know, he doesn't have any control over what happens here in England.
But this is known information, Jimmy Savile, etc.
And so on.
So if that is indeed something he wants to go after, the child trafficking, etc., etc., then, you know, that's...
That would indicate that he is something of a good guy, certainly, on some level.
So it is interesting that he has gotten as far as he has.
Do you have anything you want to add?
And then we can open this up to questions.
I agree.
I think that if you had to pick a topic, that virtually every normal-thinking, non-psychotic person would agree is we don't want people tampering with our children.
And obviously pedophilia on the kind of levels that is much more horrific than simply child love or child fondling.
It obviously gets into kidnapping, rape, torture, and murder.
And this is something that most people find so appalling that their brains just shut down.
They just don't want to imagine that this is going on all around them.
And yet it's happening to millions of kids every year.
It has been going on for an awfully long time as we learn about what's going on.
Trump is very smart to go after something that everyone would support.
If he went after Hillary Clinton, for example, for You know, email servers or financial crimes or, you know, whatever.
I mean, a lot of people would just turn a deaf ear and go down the road.
But, in this example, if he were to go after Hillary Clinton, I was suggesting that she's a pedophile.
I have no information about that.
But let's say that he did.
Let's say that she was involved with this in some way.
And he went after her after that.
He would find...
Certain people in the media that are controlled by pedophiles at the top.
But you would find a groundswell of support if there was an initial disclosure of enough evidence for the public to get behind it.
Because whether you're Republican, Democrat, left, right, yellow, green, blue, I don't care.
No one wants their children tampered with.
And they would all support a legitimate investigation to anyone No matter how high and lofty an office that they've held or what kind of esteem that they've been involved in, because as we're getting bits and pieces of leaks from people involved in these investigations,
it sounds like it goes to the very top, that no one is immune, that, you know, what do they say, you know, half of Congress or more, um, And it would be brought down by this, Republicans, Democrats alike, crosses across all races.
It's a huge, huge problem if what we're being told right now is even a glimpse of being true.
So he's very smart to go after this particular and use the full power of his office and of the executive branch to identify these people, And bring them to justice.
I fully support that, and I think that anyone would do the same.
Any thinking person that has any conscience whatsoever would support this kind of activity, as long as it's not done in a political or malicious way, as long as it's simply justice, blind justice being served.
Okay.
Well, yes, and I think that, you know, obviously the viewers would agree with you.
I want to draw their attention to an investigative reporter who is, I guess, more in the mainstream, called Liz Crokin, that I have recent statements that she made in this regard.
Certainly, and some investigations she's done that indicate that Trump is moving along these lines to do, you know, to out these people.
And the recent shooting of the member of Congress Steve, the last name, Scalice, and his statement on YouTube, which came a week or two before he was actually, is an indicator to me that he was targeted for actually his statement.
So we do get this sort of thing going on constantly as well.
Now, people are asking questions, so I will try to get to one of the questions at least here.
What do you know about the Trump-Navy connection, someone is asking?
The Trump-Navy connection?
Yes, that's how they worded it.
I have no knowledge.
When I retired from the Navy in 1986, other than just keeping in contact with the people that I knew there, I haven't had any involvement from an operational or governmental position, so I'm not in a position to be able to comment.
I have no idea.
Okay, another question here is asking something about, I'm not sure whether it's the phrasing or what, but you can make up it what you will.
Someone is saying consciousness is being downloaded to us through AI. And of course, there are many AIs, so it's going to be a difficult question to answer, I mean.
But go ahead.
Well, if we have to be interfacing with an AI, I hope it's benevolent.
If it's not, if it's nefarious, God help us.
Right.
Okay, now, someone else wants to know, you know, I guess there are two questions and they kind of sort of support each other.
The bottom line is saying that the government needs to change first before voting rigging can never go away.
That's...
You know, kind of a no-brainer, and I would certainly agree.
Then someone else is basically saying, what type of systems do you think might be put in place?
Now, you've said what you think logically would work, and I've said that, and you seem to agree, that even though you've made an idea of what would be the way to go, it's highly unlikely we'll go back in that direction.
Can you look to the future and see what it is you think might be, at least positive or negative, do you want to look in the future and see what systems you think will be put in place?
Well, I have a couple of comments about that.
The first is that a gentleman by the name of Robert David Steele has developed what he calls the Election Reform Act of 2017.
And he has detailed 12 specific points within that, which is what you're talking about.
What are the things that can be done?
We can introduce the concept of referendum, of more direct democracy.
Getting the money out of politics, you know, putting that back into the public treasure chest of being able to have open access to primaries.
And, you know, we can go down the list of these, you know, very good suggestions.
I agree with most of them, not all of them.
But that would be a fantastic start.
But I want to challenge your listeners, because this is the most important thing.
We've been...
Brainwashed to believe that we are powerless.
This is not true.
Next year, 2018, the entire congressional delegation, all 435 of them, come up for re-election.
We the people Have the power if we come out in big enough numbers to change the course of at least the House of Representatives and a third of the Senate.
This is in our control.
What I mean by that is it's not about the AIs and the rest.
Remember the AIs can only operate if they can hide their fraud within a very narrow margin called the margin of error.
If you have an overwhelming A number of votes for a particular candidate.
The AIs can't hide that.
It becomes too obvious.
And, of course, with PollMoll out there providing accurate, real-time, fully transparent polling, we provide a counterforce to the establishment-controlled media of telling us what we think.
PollMoll will show us what we think.
Without any interference or any kind of manipulation whatsoever.
And we guarantee that because we have a challenge.
We say that anyone with requisite experience at any time just give us some notice and come in and completely audit our software.
It's completely an open architecture system that anybody can come in and see that one person gets one vote It gets registered right away and then goes and gets tabulated.
There's no funny business.
I've thrown this out to Edison Research.
I've said, your results to an audit, an independent third-party audit.
You've been around since 1964.
You've never done it.
We've been around since last year, and we're begging for anybody to come.
And audit our system because it was designed to be audited because we're not manipulating the system.
And so far, no one has stepped up because as they look at the system, they realize that the only condition that we have is that we get to go online and social media and publish their results.
They come in, they put whatever together, you know, and they look at the results.
We have the right to publish that.
That's why nobody's done it because they know what they're going to find.
And so POMOL is a great counterforce to what's been going on in terms of leading the blind over the cliff and telling us that this is fun.
That stops now.
We have a tool in place right now.
People can download the POMOL app and become part of this process.
And it stops now.
It's that simple.
Okay.
Now somebody, I don't know, somebody's saying that There's something called, I don't know, you could stress test with something called Chaos Computer Club.
Have you heard of that and have they made you an offer to stress test your software?
We use Chaos all the time.
Absolutely.
We stress our system constantly.
And every time we, you know, make a change to our software that's integrated into it, you know, Chaos is a great system to do that.
We also have the very best QA system, which uses real phones and iPads and things.
It doesn't use just a digital system to check for the integrity.
It actually uses real live phones and runs the system 24-7 Thousands and thousands and thousands of iterations of the software to see what occurs.
Now, first of all, we can only pull people that have a mobile smart device, whether that's some sort of a tablet or a phone.
We can't interface with PCs or anything else interterrestrial Macs because we can't implant our software that has the Level 5 encryption system into those systems level five is very sophisticated and in an NSA for example uses level four so we are one level beyond what even NSA is using currently now that being said the other weakness of the system is if you have one bar or you are
in a course you know a poor area where you have intermittent service you may not be able to either download formal or get an update Again, it's because it's protected by this level 5 system.
It has to have a strong signal in order to work.
So people that try and download POMO that, you know, are not in a good space, we simply recommend that you go to a place where you've got better reception and do it again.
Because it will work for you.
It just has to have enough signal strength.
And we've tested it against almost 8,000 different devices now in order to ensure that we have good backward compatibility.
All the way down to about mid-2013, late 2013.
Most of the devices after that, this will work for, except for some of the very, very inexpensive Android systems, because basically they don't have the capability of integrating the level file.
But those are the two fundamental weaknesses of our system.
All right.
Well, you know, that sounds very good.
I do want to raise one issue which has to do with sort of an...
It's a difficult subject, but it has to do with what we call mind control.
And certainly the polling and what they're doing now in the PR that is basically sold as so-called news and reporting on the mainstream...
And some of this could be classified as, in essence, propaganda, a form of mind.
And so what we're really dealing with here is you may be able to pull votes to a degree of accuracy and without, in theory, an AI interfering, at least at this short juncture, which I'm not sure how much it's going to hold for the future because as it gets more and more involved and more taken over by AI, all these systems that we're dealing with, There's a whole other ball game afoot.
But with that in mind, humans are also, you know, they are hackable, so to speak.
So what you get is you can get a mass mind control.
And it may be that the wave of the future, regardless of how tight the security is on voting, so to speak, may actually cause them and may even be happening at this time, To resort to a kind of a mind control that goes, you know, via the cell phone towers, etc.
And one that is also going quantum and is happening at this time.
And we're noticing more and more people sort of losing it, it seems.
And, you know, that's a very real problem.
So I appreciate what you're coming forward with.
But, you know, have you thought in this direction?
Of course, this changes the game.
There's no question that mind control exists.
It's been around for an awfully long time ever since MKUltra was introduced.
I'm sure that there are other systems that we don't know a thing about that are probably much more effective and sophisticated.
There's no question that the human mind being operated on Sort of an electrical circuit can be entrained.
People can look up entrainment, as you mentioned, you know, various frequencies from cell towers, etc., that the human mind can be manipulated.
There's no question medically about that whatsoever.
You know, there's also beginning to be talked about, although, again, I have no direct knowledge, but that there are nanotech capabilities that are part of the geoengineering effort That could be sprayed on a huge portion of the population, and that many of these people will be susceptible to the various changes that might be involved by this kind of technology.
So there's a lot of things at play.
Some things we know about, like entrainment.
Some things we think we know about, you know, which is nanotech.
And that are the things we have no clue about, which may be ever present in our lives every day.
And we have to be aware of what you just said, that if someone can mind-control you so that you can say you're the biggest Donald Trump supporter in the world, and you give them millions of dollars, and you walk into that ballot box, and as soon as you close that curtain, something triggers in your brain, and you go vote for Beelzebub.
This clearly can happen, and I think that it is a clear and present danger.
Again, these AI systems, if they're in control of benevolent people, can be the greatest boon for us ever.
If they're in control of the bad guys, we're really looking at huge trouble.
Okay.
You know, I'm going to have to cut this short here.
It's been great having you on the show.
I do want to ask you at the end here whether or not, given all of that, that you have a point of view towards the future and also actually two questions.
How much of a hands-on or deep understanding do you feel that you have about AI? Those two questions.
Okay.
As far as my own hands-on and AI, we don't have any AI in our system.
We keep it extremely simple so that the level of complexity is in our security.
And so my own interface with AI is zero.
Number two, my view of the future is optimistic.
I'm not a pessimist.
I believe that more and more people are waking up to the fact that We've been living in a form of Babylonian slavery for thousands of years, and that the dynastic rulers of this planet have been running a game on us.
More and more people are waking up to that reality, and we're seeing evidence of it all the time.
So I think that, you know, you mentioned consciousness earlier.
I think that the whole human consciousness is in the process of expanding.
And I think that we're looking at a deeper and more intense reality To try and divide us by the people who have always divided us.
And what I hope is, is that there will come a breaking point where we'll be able to assume control of these people.
And for our history, at least in recent history, that we'll have an opportunity to grow and become and reach our full potential.
All right.
Well, very, very good.
Thank you so much for coming on the show.
It's great to have you as always and fascinating discussion.
I think there's a lot of food for thought here and possibly we can have you back in the future with Bev.
She may have some thoughts of her own along these lines and certainly encourage her to watch this video and come back to me if she would like to have her say in this regard as well.
Certainly you're welcome And, you know, thank you again for your efforts on behalf of humanity, certainly to do with, you know, trying to get the truth out there and trying to get the truth in the vote, so to speak.
So thank you and take care and please give out your website and anything else you want here at the end.
Sure, it's polmo.vote And there's a lot of information out there, but the real action is in your hand, in your mobile app that you can download from either Apple or Android.
Just go to PollMall and download it and start participating in the polls.
We're about to unleash version 3, which will be able to run multiple polls simultaneously and have multiple questions per poll.
So we're going to be adding significantly to the complexity And the dimensions of what polo can offer.
And that will happen within the next couple of weeks.
All right.
Well, thank you very much.
Take care, and hopefully we'll see you again.
Thank you, Carrie.
Take care.
All right.
Good night.
Very, very interesting show here.
And thanks, everyone, for participating.
Thanks for your questions in the chat and participating in the chat in any capacity.
And I hope that if you are in England, you'll consider coming to our...
Hold on one second, because I have to hold.
I hope you'll consider our conference on Saturday and Sunday, the 24th and 25th.
And go to my website, to the Events tab, and you can buy tickets if you click on that and see all the names, videos of the speakers, etc.
And of course, I'll be speaking there as well.
So, thanks again for watching, and if you're on the air again this week, not sure.
Do you want to make a short announcement about the so-called alien sort of skeletons that have been found in NASCA, apparently being released through Jay Widener and Gaia TV. So, there's a six-minute video for free on YouTube about it.
It's quite interesting.
You might want to take a look.
I do think there's some question as to whether this is a legitimate find or not.
But they do have scientists that seem to be weighing in and doing some, certainly some analysis of the remains, etc.
So take a look at that and see what you think.
All right.
Thanks for watching and take care.
▲
Export Selection