Google Whistleblower on How Search Engines Are Influencing Elections

Summary

The speaker passionately discusses the $7 million investment in a nationwide monitoring system to expose tech giants' manipulations, particularly Google's influence on elections since 2012. They recount personal experiences, including interactions with Google's tech team during Obama's campaign, highlighting how tech can sway votes. The speaker warns of the technological elite's control over public policy and the urgent need for a secure, self-sustaining monitoring system to ensure fair elections and protect against data manipulation by companies like Google.

Takeaways

• 💸 The speaker has spent $7 million to build a nationwide monitoring system to counteract manipulation by tech companies.
• 🔍 They claim to have found evidence of deliberate and systematic interference with elections, particularly since 2012.
• 🗳️ The speaker alleges that free and fair elections at the national level have been manipulated, with tech companies playing a significant role.
• 🤝 The speaker met a member of Obama's tech team who implied that tech manipulation influenced the election results.
• 📊 By 2016, the speaker calculated that Google could shift between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes, which correlates with the popular vote margin.
• 📉 The speaker believes that without Google's influence, the 2020 election would have been much closer or even a tie.
• 🏛️ The speaker suggests that the technological elite, like Google, have become too powerful and are controlling public policy without public awareness.
• 💡 The speaker proposes declaring Google's database a public commons to promote competition and prevent monopolistic control over information.
• 🛡️ The speaker's organization has been attacked by an unknown entity, possibly Google, highlighting the need for better security and funding.
• 🌐 The speaker calls for a large-scale, permanent monitoring system to keep tech companies accountable for their influence on society and elections.

Q & A

What is the main focus of the speaker in this transcript?

The speaker focuses on the manipulation of elections and public opinion through tech companies like Google. He argues that Google has been influencing elections since 2012, particularly through its control of search results and user data.

How much money has been spent on building the speaker’s monitoring system?

The speaker states that $7 million has been spent to build the world's first nationwide monitoring system to track the actions of tech companies like Google.

What evidence does the speaker provide about Google's influence on the 2012 election?

The speaker claims to have spoken to a member of Obama's tech team, who revealed that two of the four points by which Obama won were a result of the tech team's manipulation, suggesting Google played a role in swaying 2.5 million votes.

How does the speaker explain Google's potential impact on the 2016 election?

The speaker calculated that Google could shift between 2.6 and 10.4 million votes to Hillary Clinton in 2016. He claims that without Google's influence, the popular vote would have been tied.

What does the speaker claim about the outcome of the 2020 election?

The speaker claims that Google shifted at least 6 million votes to Joe Biden in the 2020 election, influencing the popular vote and the outcomes in swing states.

What warning does the speaker reference from Dwight D. Eisenhower?

The speaker references Eisenhower's warning about the rise of a 'technological elite' that could control public policy without the public knowing, stating that this has now become a reality with tech companies like Google.

What challenges has the speaker faced in maintaining the monitoring system?

The speaker describes challenges such as raising money and facing sophisticated cyberattacks, including one that temporarily shut down access to their data for almost two weeks.

What does the speaker believe is the 'business model' of companies like Google?

The speaker argues that companies like Google use free apps to trick users into giving up personal data, which is then monetized and used to control users.

What does the speaker propose as a solution to Google's dominance?

The speaker suggests that Google’s search database should be declared a public commons, allowing others to create niche search engines and increasing competition in the search industry.

What does the speaker claim Google is doing with voter registration reminders?

The speaker claims that Google is sending 'register to vote' reminders to Democrats at a rate 2.5 times higher than to Republicans, which he believes could evolve into partisan voting reminders.

Outlines

00:00

🔍 Surveillance and Election Manipulation

The speaker discusses the development of a $7 million nationwide monitoring system designed to counteract manipulation by tech giants, particularly Google. They claim that since 2012, free and fair elections have been compromised through tech manipulation, citing personal experiences and interactions with a Google tech team member who implied their influence in past elections. The speaker alleges that Google could shift millions of votes and points to a video of Google employees expressing their determination to prevent a particular election outcome, suggesting a bias against democracy. They also express frustration with the public's lack of awareness and their own exhaustion from fighting this issue for over a decade.

05:01

💔 Personal Struggles and the Need for Security

The speaker shares their personal struggles, including feelings of disillusionment and loneliness following the death of someone named Misty. They discuss the challenges of raising funds for their monitoring project, which has been attacked by sophisticated means, presumably by Google. The attack involved overwhelming their system with activity, leading to a temporary loss of access to their data. The speaker emphasizes the need for a secure facility, servers, and a security team to protect both their data and personnel. They express a desire to reach out to Elon Musk, hoping that he might be interested in and supportive of their cause, given his recent experiences with Twitter and concerns about free speech.

10:01

🛡️ Strategies to Counter Tech Monopolies

The speaker proposes a strategy to challenge Google's dominance by declaring their search database a public commons, similar to how governments have intervened in essential services like electricity and telecommunications. This would allow for the creation of niche search engines, fostering competition and innovation in the search industry. They also suggest that monitoring systems are necessary to keep tech companies accountable for their influence on public opinion and elections. The speaker points out that such systems can provide real-time data to counter the manipulative tactics of tech giants, and they call for the establishment of permanent, large-scale monitoring systems to ensure transparency and fairness in elections and public discourse.

Keywords

💡Nationwide monitoring system

A nationwide monitoring system refers to a comprehensive network or framework designed to observe and track activities across an entire country. In the context of the video, the speaker discusses the creation of such a system to monitor and counteract the alleged manipulative actions of tech giants. The system is said to provide evidence of deliberate interference in elections and societal affairs, highlighting the speaker's concerns about the influence of technology on democracy.

💡Surveillance

Surveillance is the act of carefully watching someone or something, typically for an extended period, often associated with monitoring activities for security or investigative purposes. The video script mentions that the monitoring system is surveilling tech companies to uncover their alleged interference in elections, suggesting a reversal of the typical dynamic where these companies are often the ones conducting surveillance on users.

💡Manipulation

Manipulation, in this context, refers to the act of covertly influencing or controlling someone or something, often to one's advantage. The speaker alleges that tech companies are manipulating election outcomes and public opinion through their platforms, which is a central theme of the video as it underscores the perceived threat to democratic processes.

💡Tech team

A tech team is a group of individuals with technical expertise who work together to develop and implement technology solutions. The video references a tech team associated with a political campaign, suggesting that their work had a significant impact on election results. This term is used to emphasize the role of technology in shaping political outcomes.

💡Google's influence

Google's influence refers to the power and control that Google, as a major technology company, wields over various aspects of society, including information dissemination and public opinion. The video script discusses how Google could allegedly shift millions of votes in elections, indicating the speaker's belief in the company's outsized impact on democratic processes.

💡Partisanship

Partisanship is the state of being strongly committed to a political party or cause. In the video, the speaker suggests that tech companies are exhibiting partisanship by favoring certain political groups over others, which is seen as a threat to the impartiality of elections and the democratic process.

💡Data monetization

Data monetization is the process of converting data into revenue. The speaker in the video claims that tech companies offer 'free' services that trick users into surrendering their personal data, which is then monetized. This concept is central to the speaker's argument about the business model of tech giants and their influence over individuals and society.

💡Democracy

Democracy is a system of government where power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or through elected representatives. The video script repeatedly emphasizes the threat to democracy posed by tech companies, suggesting that their actions undermine the free and fair election process, which is a cornerstone of democratic societies.

💡Ephemeral experiences

Ephemeral experiences are temporary or short-lived events or phenomena. In the context of the video, the speaker mentions preserving 1.5 million ephemeral experiences, which likely refers to capturing fleeting digital interactions or content that could be used as evidence of tech companies' influence. This term highlights the importance of real-time monitoring to document and analyze the actions of tech platforms.

💡Security breach

A security breach is a security incident where unauthorized access is obtained to a system, often with the intent of stealing or corrupting data. The speaker describes a sophisticated attack on their monitoring system by an unknown entity, possibly Google, which resulted in a denial of service and loss of access to their own data. This incident underscores the vulnerability of even well-intentioned monitoring efforts in the face of powerful adversaries.

💡Public Commons

The term 'public commons' refers to resources or areas that are shared by the general public and managed for collective benefit. The video suggests that Google's database should be declared a public commons, which would allow for more equitable access and use of the data it contains. This concept is presented as a potential solution to the monopolistic control that Google is accused of exerting over information and search.

Highlights

Investment of $7 million in building the world's first nationwide monitoring system to counteract manipulative actions.

Overwhelming evidence of deliberate and systematic interference in elections, particularly since 2012.

Belief that free and fair national elections have been manipulated since 2012, influenced by tech teams.

Revelation of Google's tech team's role in the 2012 election, claiming to have influenced two out of four winning points.

Estimation that Google could shift 2.6 to 10.4 million votes in the 2016 election.

Post-election video of Google leaders vowing to prevent a similar outcome, implying control over democratic processes.

Monitoring data showing Google shifted at least six million votes to Joe Biden in 2020.

The illusion of free and fair elections from 2012 onwards due to technological manipulation.

Dwight D. Eisenhower's warning about the rise of a technological elite controlling public policy.

The current technological elite's control over public policy and the lack of public awareness.

The business model of tech companies involving the collection and monetization of personal data for control.

The struggle of raising funds for a secure and self-sustaining monitoring system.

Sophisticated attack on the monitoring system by an unknown entity, suspected to be Google.

The need for a secure facility and security team to protect data and people from tech company attacks.

Proposal to declare Google's database a public commons to encourage competition and innovation in search.

The potential for the EU to implement regulations on Google due to their data centers being within the union.

The necessity of permanent large-scale monitoring systems to keep tech companies in check.

Transcripts

the jogan experience I need

help I desperately need pe people's help

so we have spent $7 million building the

world's first

Nationwide monitoring system that is

doing to those bastards what they do to

us and our kids 24 hours a day we are

surveilling them for the first time we

are

finding overwhelming evidence that they

are very deliberately and systematically

messing with us and our elections

especially I personally have believe

that as of 2012 the free and fair

election at least at the national level

has not

existed it's just been manipulated it's

just been manipulated since

2012 I say this in part because I met

one of the people on Google's uh Tech

team on on Obama's Tech Team either I

should say which was being run by Eric

Schmidt head of Google at the time I

talked to him at Great length about what

the tech team was doing they had full

access to all of Google's Shenanigans

all those

manipulations uh and one member of that

team asked by a reporter how many of the

Four Points by which Obama won how many

of those points did he get from the tech

team and the guy said Elon creal I

believe his name is his he was actually

quoted and he said two of the points

came from us now Obama won by 5 million

votes roughly and two out of four points

came from the tech team that's two and a

half million

votes by 2016 I had calculated that

Google could

shift uh and it would be toward Hillary

Clinton of course whom I supported at

the time that Google could shift between

2.6 and 10.4 million votes to Hillary

Clinton in that election with no one

knowing she won the popular vote by 2.8

million votes if you take Google out of

that election the popular vote would

have been

tied couple days after that election

everyone every all the leaders in Google

get up on stage this this I'm sure

you've seen this it's an amazing video

and they're talking to all of Google's

100,000 employees and they're one by one

they're going up to the mic and saying

we are never going to let that happen

again yeah we are never going to let

that happen again which is democracy

they're never going to let democracy

happen again exactly that's what

it's so crazy to be blatantly and openly

talking about that and 2020 we didn't

it's a virtue we already had a pretty

big monitoring system we preserve 1.5

million ephemeral experiences our data

show that Google shifted at least six

million votes to Joe Biden who won the

popular vote by about 8 million so again

take Google out of the

equation that would have been pretty

much a tie in the popular vote and Trump

would have won 11 out of 13 swing States

instead of

five so going forward from roughly

2012 I think the the free and fair

election has been an illusion an

illusion and this is something it's very

weird and kind of ironic but this is

something that Dwight D Eisenhower

warned about in that last speech of his

his farewell speech he warned about the

rise of military-industrial complex

everyone's heard about that but he also

warned about the rise of a technological

Elite that could someday control public

policy without anyone

knowing and the technological Elite are

now in control that's what we have

that's where I get back to my my ranting

and my my pain because I

realize no one is paying attention

Eisenhower said we have to be alert or

this will happen we have not been alert

and the fact is people right this second

who I give speeches to sometimes they

get all riled up and then they walk out

of the auditorium with their

surveillance phones mine is not this is

a secure

phone but they walk out with their

surveillance phones in their pocket and

they use all the surveillance tools that

Google has set up for them and other

companies too

now and they think isn't this nice this

company is doing all this nice stuff for

me and giving me all this free stuff

that's not the business model all those

free things are just apps that trick you

into giving up personal data and then

they monetize the data and they use it

to control you that's what's really

happening that's the business model and

people can't see it and I'm telling you

I've been working on this for 12 years

and it's gotten to the point where I am

wiped out I am fed up I am exhausted I

am

disillusioned

and

um and I'm lonely because since Misty

was killed 5 years ago I sometimes feel

like I'm literally dying of loneliness

and the fact that other people around me

have been hurt one quite one quite

seriously uh makes me a little nervous

too and that's where I am at this point

and it's a it's a terrible place to be

terrible

now it took $7 million to build what

we've built but it's been really tough

okay we're talking about like raising a

dollar at a time it's been really really

difficult and for us to set this up so

that it's actually permanent and self-

sustaining and so we have court

admissible data in all 50 states which

will make these

companies think it'll make them think

think twice

maybe that is going to require at least

another $50

million that gets us a secure facility

and our own servers and a security team

we have virtually no security hear that

Google and they know this because a

couple months ago they attacked us in an

extremely sophisticated way I've never

seen this before when you say they who I

don't know someone I don't know Google

has what did they

do it was very very unusual it was

not it was it was not the usual thing

what they did was they uh they got our

uh our accounts they got our they got

our apps to to run uh kind of at

Ludicrous Speed I guess you could say

and what they did was they pulled in in

more and more and more servers until we

were running so many servers

simultaneously that we actually got shut

down in the

cloud uh and we lost access to our own

data for almost two

weeks now we've never seen an attack

like that even the our security people

had never seen an attack like that it

was really pretty what was the mechanism

of this attack how' they do it we're not

sure how they got in once they got in

all they did was they just C created a

tremendous amount of activity so that

that that pulled in more and more

resources and this is definitely created

this is not organic oh no no it's AB

absolutely created but and and now now

we're now that we know about this

particular kind of attack uh if it

happens again we'll be up within two

days max but uh the point is there's a

lot of pressure on us so we need a lot

of money to set up a secure Facility

have security teams not just protecting

our data for protecting our people we

have to protect our

people uh have you ever talked to Elon

about this stuff I I've never had a way

to reach him well hopefully someone will

take this clip and put it on X and he's

a junkie He he'll be on it all day so so

hopefully someone will put it to his

attention and put it up there because

I'm sure this is very concerning to him

I mean he has a a vested interest in

this clearly what happened when he

purchased Twitter and he found out the

extent of government interference in

free speech and uh how many uh people

were being pressured to uh not talk

about certain things that were

inconvenient or how many accounts they

were trying to get taken down because

these accounts were uh purveyors of

misinformation that turned out to be

absolutely accurate there's uh he has a

a deep distrust for sure well he he has

a few times lately he has retweeted

content about my work so aware he might

be he might be

aware uh and there's another way also by

the way to take down Google uh which I

the I published this in Bloomberg

businessweek if you if you go to Epstein

and businessweek.com you'll actually see

the article

and

it's we've reached the point where data

become an essential part of our lives

and the way to take down Google is to do

what governments have been doing for

hundreds of years to declare their index

the database they use to generate search

results to be a public

Commons this is exactly what governments

do when water uh electricity telephone

Communications any commodity any service

becomes essential governments at some

point have to step in the electric

companies they were all privately owned

I didn't know that I didn't realize that

they were all privately owned until the

government had to step in and this is

where we are now with data and the

biggest baddest database in the world is

Google's because it's the gateway to all

knowledge it needs to be declared a

public Commons as I say ample precedent

for that in law it's very light touch

regulation and what it'll do is it'll

allow other people to draw from the

database to create their

own Niche search engines so you know

you'll create a search engine for people

interested in U DMT and UFOs some it

will create one for women for

lithuanians for you know we'll end up

with thousands of these search engines

all of which V are vying for attention

it will be exactly like the news exactly

like the news the the news media that

domain and that's the way it should be

search should be competitive Google

Google was not the first search engine

it was the

21st so that's how you do it and also

then search would become Innovative

again there have been there have been no

Innovations in search for the 20 years

that Google has dominated surge so uh uh

General Paxton Ken Paxton of of this

this great state of Texas he's

interested in this uh uh Senator Cruz is

interested other people are interested

this would be tough to implement in the

US but the EU could do it because five

of Google's data centers are in the EU

the EU could do it in a

Flash and they're very frustrated with

Google because they've been trying to

keep them under control for a long time

now and they've

failed so there are some things that

could be done permanent large scale

monitoring system that is a necessity

that must be there cuz if you don't have

that you don't know what these companies

are doing you don't know how they're

messing with our minds with our kids

minds and with our elections you have to

monitor and you have to have court

admissible data in every state and

probably in every country and then they

will pull back a little bit because they

have to they're violating campaign

Finance laws when they when they very

blatantly support one candidate or one

party the they're making huge in-kind

donations without declaring them so

another thing they're doing right now

perfect example of something our system

is capturing right the second right this

second Google is sending register to

vote reminders to Democrats at about two

and a half times the rate they're

sending them to

Republicans how do I know because that's

that's what the monitoring system shows

that's what they're doing at some point

that's going to turn into partisan mail

in your ballot reminders and then that

turns into partisan go vote

reminders these are just displayed on

Google's homepage we're capturing the

homepages by the millions if you don't

capture them then the content is

ephemeral and it disappears and it's

gone forever and you can't go back in

time and figure out what they were doing

so monitoring is no longer optional it's

it and it by the way monitoring is fast

unlike uh you know regulations and laws

monitoring can keep up with whatever the

tech company is dishing out the next

company the next Google after that

monitoring can keep up you if you're

going to have an

internet and it can mess with people's

lives and it can mess with governments

and elections and so on then you've got

to have monitoring systems in place