# Post ts_116046114905283832 - Post ID: `ts_116046114905283832` - Platform: Truth Social - Posted: 2026-02-10T11:33:08.929Z (UTC) - Deleted: no - Repost: no - Canonical URL: https://trump.fm/post/ts_116046114905283832 - Analysis page: https://trump.fm/post/ts_116046114905283832/analysis ## Post text _No text of its own. The post is its media, below._ ## What the media says **Video transcript** (5:34), transcribed automatically, so names and numbers may be wrong. Speakers aren't identified, so a voice in it may not be his: > Our team has looked at these systems, and there are a dozen ways to interdict the voting process in these issues, whether it's mail-in ballot manipulations, they can scan and allocate votes, blank votes, whether it was the 70,000 votes left in the back room, there's just lots of ways to interdict these systems. So with that, I'll answer any potential questions. Thank you. Next panel, please. Could I just ask... Yes, sir. Ask him to clarify one or two things. When we look at this Pennsylvania fixing the vote chart that they all have, could you explain at the very beginning what that line means, Biden injection? So at the very beginning of the chart, where there's a circle that says on election day, what that indicates is there is a spike in loaded votes, 337,000 plus or minus of some votes that were added in there in one big batch. So that was an anomaly in the reporting. Normally you would expect to see a smooth curve going up, not any big spikes. That's what Greg was talking about, the anomalies of loading and uploading those votes. So that big spike that occurs there is a prime indicator of fraudulent voting. And that's 604,000 votes in 90 minutes, is that right? Correct. This is 337,000 votes in that period of time. Yes. Let's look at this entire curve with all these spikes. Can you calculate how much of a vote that accounted for for Biden and how much for Trump? Close to 600,000. I think our figures were about 570,000, some odd thousand, that all those spikes represented over time. For Biden? Correct. And how much for Trump? I think it was a little over 3,200. How about that? Now just to go back to your original document, this one pager that they all have, mail in ballots counted without being observed. Those are the ballots we were talking about that were not observed in Allegheny County and in Philadelphia. Correct. Is that right? 682,770. Now, this is the part that is a mystery. World ballots sent out 1,823,148. But when you go to the count of the final count of the vote, there are 2,589,242 mail-in ballots. What happened? How do you account for the 700,000 mail-in ballots that appeared from nowhere? So our cyber team uses white hat hacking techniques. They gather a lot of publicly available information. And that information was from the Secretary of State's website. That website has been updated as late as 11/16 this morning with provisional mail-in ballots. So those numbers are still changing. They changed last night. So it's a continual target. This is 22 days after the election. That number, the 2.5 million number is no longer on the website. Just been taken off? It's not there anymore. Is there any explanation of why it's been taken off? There was no annotations. But has there been a change made in the 2,589,242 mail-in votes that have been counted in the total vote? Yeah, I'd have to check the Secretary of State's website. Could you also check and see? Is there any change in the 1,823,148 ballots that were sent out? The mail-out ballots number seems to be holding steady. And was there any other method of producing ballots other than sending them out? Not that we're aware of, unless there's previous witnesses of testimony that the potential for multiple ballot counts. So ballots could have been counted. And have you ever gotten a chance to examine any of these ballots? No. That would be part of the forensic process. One suggestion, whoever does the analysis is using paper and ink analysis of a micro-photo spectrometer. That would analyze the ink on those ballots to see if they were mass-produced. So in addition to the 682,770 ballots that were entered without a single inspection of any kind, there also appear to be something like 700,000 mail-in ballots that were never sent out, that were counted. noted discrepancies in the Secretary's report. ## Media - video: https://static-assets-1.truthsocial.com/tmtg:prime-ts-assets/media_attachments/files/116/046/113/452/839/871/original/e3d0693bd799ac3d.mp4 ## Engagement - Likes: 10,527 - Reposts: 2,776 - Replies: 277 - Views: unknown - Metrics collected: 2026-02-11T11:15:23.025Z (UTC) # Analysis _Machine-generated by trump.fm on 2026-09-09T07:10:19.291Z (UTC): a model's reading of this post, not his words. Its psychological terms describe the language, not a clinical assessment of him._ ## Summary This media-only post carries no written text; the subject posted a years-old video clip from a 2020 "election integrity" panel alleging Pennsylvania mail-in ballot fraud — claims formally examined and rejected by courts and election officials over five years ago. Since no propositional content originates from the subject, this analysis treats the act of selection and amplification as the behavior of interest, not the panelists' speech as his own. The choice to recirculate this specific material in 2026, absent any new triggering event in the surrounding post history, is consistent with persistent paranoid-toned grievance fixation and resistance to disconfirming evidence (denial/distortion defenses) rather than an acute reaction. It functions as in-group narrative maintenance — reinforcing a "stolen election" belief among followers years after judicial resolution, a pattern consistent with epistemic closure dynamics, where sustained exposure to unfalsifiable claims maintains audience distrust in institutions. No explicit fact claims are attributable to the subject (all assertions belong to unnamed panelists), no violent or dehumanizing language is present, and danger indicators are absent for this specific post. Authorship attribution rests solely on early-morning timing (~6:33 AM Eastern), a weak single-signal indicator; confidence is capped at low since no stylometric evidence exists to confirm personal versus staff posting. Clinical significance here lies less in acute severity and more in longitudinal pattern: continued amplification of debunked fraud narratives half a decade after the underlying event, suggesting a stable rather than escalating belief structure warranting continued tracking rather than urgent concern. ## Analysis: Truth Social post 2026-02-10T11:33:08.929Z (media only) **Content note:** No written text accompanies this post. The media is a clip from a 2020-era "election integrity" panel/hearing presentation (Pennsylvania mail-in ballot analysis, Allegheny/Philadelphia county discrepancies, the "337,000-vote spike" and "700,000 ballots from nowhere" claims). These are the same debunked fraud allegations from Trump's 2020 legal team, now being recirculated more than five years after the election was certified and roughly five years after courts (60+ rulings) dismissed them for lack of evidence. All factual assertions in the transcript are made by unnamed panelists, not by Trump — no propositional content should be attributed to him as speech. **Behavior under analysis:** selection and amplification. Trump is choosing, in 2026, to re-surface 2020 election-fraud material to his audience with no framing of his own. This is the analyzable act. ### Level 1 — Traits No stylometric evidence available (no written text). Behaviorally, the selection is consistent with elevated **Neuroticism** (angry hostility/vulnerability facet — persistent grievance fixation) and low **Openness** to disconfirming evidence (values rigidity — five years and dozens of court losses have not altered the narrative). Confidence: low, inferred from content choice alone, not language. ### Level 2 — Characteristic Adaptations **Agency motive** dominant: reasserting legitimacy of the 2020 outcome protects self-image as the "true" winner. **Schema**: world as populated by hidden, systemic corruption that stole what was rightfully his; elections/institutions cannot be trusted unless they produce his preferred outcome. ### Level 3 — Narrative Identity **Protagonist role**: wronged victor, victim of institutional fraud. **Contamination sequence**: implicit — legitimate win (2020) corrupted into stolen loss by fraud. **Contrasting other**: county election officials, Secretary of State's office, "the system." No explicit identity claims in his own words. ### Level 4 — Clinical indicators - **Paranoid features**: suspicion of institutions without new evidentiary basis, continued preoccupation with a five-year-old grievance, resistant to contrary rulings. - **Defenses**: Denial (rejecting the certified, court-adjudicated outcome as reality), Distortion (reshaping a settled historical record to fit inner narrative), and implicit Projection (fraud accusations mirror accusations he has separately faced). - **Narcissistic dynamics**: State reads as vulnerable/grievance-toned rather than grandiose; trigger type is best classified as "maintenance" — reinforcing group identity/epistemic closure around the stolen-election narrative rather than reacting to a new injury, though a specific proximate trigger (e.g., a news segment) cannot be confirmed from available data. - **Gaslighting/reality distortion**: Recirculating claims a court process and multiple audits found unsupported functions as denial of a well-documented event and implicitly asks the audience to treat the fraud narrative as true five years on — a marker of epistemic closure, though no explicit loyalty-test language is present since there is no caption. ### Danger assessment No eliminationist language, dehumanization, or calls to mobilization present in this post. Rated **none** for this specific post, though continued circulation of unfounded fraud claims sustains long-running institutional-distrust rhetoric documented in this subject's broader corpus. # ## Authorship Analysis **Uncertain** (score: 55%) ### Indicators - Early-morning posting time (~6:33 AM Eastern) is consistent with Trump's personal posting windows rather than staff business hours - No written caption or framing text is present, so no stylometric evidence (typos, grammar, syntax) exists to assess - Attribution here concerns who selected/queued the clip for posting, not who authored any words, since none exist ## Psychological Profile ### Traits **Big Five:** - Extraversion: 50% - Agreeableness: 30% - Conscientiousness: 40% - Neuroticism: 65% - Openness: 25% Strongest facet: angry hostility / suspiciousness (via content selection, not language) **Motives:** - Agency: 60% - Communion: 15% Primary drive: validation ### Narrative - **Role:** wronged victor / persecuted truth-teller - **Arc:** contamination - **Contrasting:** election officials, Secretary of State's office, 'the system' ### State **Vulnerable State** **Trigger:** Maintenance (No specific proximate news event is identified in the surrounding post history; the clip appears to serve ongoing narrative reinforcement of the 2020 stolen-election claim rather than a reaction to fresh news.) Sentiment: -0.30 ### Clinical **Malignant Narcissism:** - Narcissistic: 30% - Antisocial: 10% - Paranoid: 60% - Sadism: 5% **Defense Mechanisms:** - denial (pathological) - distortion (pathological) - projection (immature) **Cognitive Complexity:** - Complexity: 0% **Parasocial Techniques:** - Recirculating in-group 'proof' content to reinforce shared belief without new commentary, inviting the audience to relitigate settled history ## Danger Assessment **NONE** ### Gaslighting - Recirculation of fraud claims that were formally investigated and rejected by courts and election officials, presented without acknowledgment of that adjudication, functions as denial of a documented, settled event. ## Tags - 2020-election-fraud-claims (90%) - amplification-without-commentary (80%) - paranoid-ideation (50%) - reality-distortion (50%) ## That day _From trump.fm's machine-generated digest of the day, not his words._ **A 2:30 a.m. start, an eight-minute burst of five-year-old grievances, and total silence on the day's actual news** Trump posted 23 times, opening with a few news links just after 2:30 in the morning and closing before 7 p.m. with a rapid-fire block of seven near-identical endorsements of Florida Republicans. The middle of the day was an eight-minute burst of eleven old clips and images reposted from his own account — recycled 2020 election-fraud footage, a Hunter Biden laptop segment, and a complaint about Japan and Kuwait ripping off America that dates back decades. His one clearly personal moment came in the early afternoon, showing off renderings of the White House ballroom he's building and calling it on budget, ahead of schedule, and the finest ever built anywhere. There was no anger anywhere in the day, and no reaction at all to the two legal stories breaking around him: a grand jury refusing to indict six Democratic lawmakers, and Ghislaine Maxwell taking the Fifth while her lawyer floated a clemency deal. The mood was self-satisfied and low-key — but with under four hours of overnight quiet, and the day's grievances all pulled from the archive rather than the present. Full digest for 2026-02-10: https://trump.fm/date/2026-02-10/analysis ## Citation - APA: Trump, D. J. (2026, February 10). [Social media post]. Truth Social. trump.fm. https://trump.fm/post/ts_116046114905283832 - MLA: Trump, Donald J. "" Truth Social, 10 Feb. 2026. trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_116046114905283832. Accessed 9 Oct. 2026. - Chicago: Donald J. Trump, "," Truth Social, February 10, 2026, archived at trump.fm, https://trump.fm/post/ts_116046114905283832. ## For agents - Site overview: https://trump.fm/llms.txt - API specification: https://trump.fm/openapi.json - MCP server: https://trump.fm/mcp (search and fetch tools, no auth) - This post as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/posts/ts_116046114905283832 - Analysis as JSON: https://trump.fm/api/analysis/ts_116046114905283832 - All citation formats: https://trump.fm/api/cite/ts_116046114905283832 - Same day: https://trump.fm/date/2026-02-10 - The record alone, without the analysis: https://trump.fm/post/ts_116046114905283832.md?analysis=false _Markdown view of a trump.fm page. Post, analysis, date, feed, contradictions, search and about pages answer in markdown at their URL with `.md` appended (`/index.md` for the home page), or when sent `Accept: text/markdown`._