Dr. Teeth said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

From what I gather about this threads critics of the movie is that we should ignore everything we do know because of what we don't know. In other words, if we can't know everything about a subject, it is discredited. Let's apply that same line of thinking to climate change then.

Seriously, I would like to see everyone here who is taking a negative critical view of this movie state that law enforcement should not investigate the subject and information covered in the movie if you do not believe it is legit. Go on record. If not, and you believe that law enforcement SHOULD seriously investigate, then your criticisms have more to do with your personal desires for more information and not about discrediting the movie.

---

They should.

But i also know that the very first question their defense attorney will ask is: "Do you have any proof this person actually dropped off ballots at all of these locations?"

---

Just one drop box dump is a crime!..but I'm sure now you will say "Can you prove this person didn't drop off his entire extended family's ballots?"

These were municipal and county election agencies. They can be FOIA'd for the grants from CTCL and the follow-up reports they submitted on how they spent the money, if law enforcement won't do it.

Yeah, was probably Uber eats orders

Dr. Teeth said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

From what I gather about this threads critics of the movie is that we should ignore everything we do know because of what we don't know. In other words, if we can't know everything about a subject, it is discredited. Let's apply that same line of thinking to climate change then.

Seriously, I would like to see everyone here who is taking a negative critical view of this movie state that law enforcement should not investigate the subject and information covered in the movie if you do not believe it is legit. Go on record. If not, and you believe that law enforcement SHOULD seriously investigate, then your criticisms have more to do with your personal desires for more information and not about discrediting the movie.

---

They should.

But i also know that the very first question their defense attorney will ask is: "Do you have any proof this person actually dropped off ballots at all of these locations?"

---

Your premise is that all there is is this movie. This movie is not a presentation of evidence in a trial. The movie is intended to make people aware that highly suspicious activity occurred. It is the basis for starting a legal investigation, not the conclusion of one.

some people have a strong desire to keep their heads in the sand and find a way to DEBOOONK True the Vote's work here. "I don't see video of the same guy at every drop box the cell data says he visited. Therefore, no one should investigate and we must keep mass mailing the ballots and keep hundreds of unsecure dropboxes all over the city. Most secure election EVVAAARRR!!".

Enviroag02 said:

---

Dr. Teeth said:

---

American Hardwood said:

---

From what I gather about this threads critics of the movie is that we should ignore everything we do know because of what we don't know. In other words, if we can't know everything about a subject, it is discredited. Let's apply that same line of thinking to climate change then.

Seriously, I would like to see everyone here who is taking a negative critical view of this movie state that law enforcement should not investigate the subject and information covered in the movie if you do not believe it is legit. Go on record. If not, and you believe that law enforcement SHOULD seriously investigate, then your criticisms have more to do with your personal desires for more information and not about discrediting the movie.

---

They should.

But i also know that the very first question their defense attorney will ask is: "Do you have any proof this person actually dropped off ballots at all of these locations?"

---

Just one drop box dump is a crime!..but I'm sure now you will say "Can you prove this person didn't drop off his entire extended family's ballots?"

---

Now you are getting it. If there is a legal case for dropping off multiple ballots, then, of course, they will claim that's what they were doing, and there's no way, at all, to prove them wrong.

Again, I agree with you. 100%.

But, this movie simply isn't the slam dunk D'Souza claims it is, and the criticisms of it are valid.

If there's more coming, great. If there is, I simply don't understand why TTV is slow-playing this, particularly in the wake of Sidney Powell and Lin Wood grifting on this same issue.

Quote:

---

But, this movie simply isn't the slam dunk D'Souza claims it is, and the criticisms of it are valid.

---

It's not meant to serve as proof..it's designed to inform the public to get them to pressure lawmakers to investigate it further. You know, the people that can do something about this.

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

If he did satisfy your requirement for proof, what would you want/expect to happen next?

of course people who expected Dinesh to go knock on doors at the NGOs and demand to see their bank statements, ID the mules, track them down at their homes, and try to get admission seeking interviews out of them, or expected video surveillance footage at places where there were no cameras are going to be disappointed with the movie and not appreciate the work TTV did here. These guys can't do the police work. What they can do is present undeniably strong evidence that this wasn't the most secure election ever, and hope some police work gets started or at least legislatures can start working on some proactive preventative measures for future elections.

It's an incredibly frustrating film, and you can't be mad at people for being frustrated with it.

TheHulkster said:

---

It's an incredibly frustrating film, and you can't be mad at people for being frustrated with it.

---

So you subscribe to the, 'shoot the messenger' theory?

Of all the places ire should be directed, the film is hardly one of them.

Quote:

---

The film 2000 Mules, which documents allegations of fraud during the 2020 elections, is returning to theaters Friday.

Around 400 theaters across the nation will perform a normal release with typical ticket sales and multiple showings each day beginning May 20.

"With the success of the movie, everyone talking about the movie, a lot of independent theaters began to call us, 'Hey, why didn't we have this movie in the theater?'" Dinesh D'Souza, conservative political commentator and 2000 Mules creator, said. "And we were like, 'You know what? This is fantastic.' A lot of our people love to see the movie in groups, love to see it in the theater. In fact, we've been bombarded with people trying to organize groups."

---

Link

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

---

Because I want it to be one. I want people to go to prison. I want the case to be so irrefutable, so rock ****ing solid, that it can't be ignored and there can be no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

This movie doesn't rise to that level and I really wanted it to.

Dr. Teeth said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

---

Because I want it to be one. I want people to go to prison. I want the case to be so irrefutable, so rock ****ing solid, that it can't be ignored and there can be no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

This movie doesn't rise to that level and I really wanted it to.

---

The case is irrefutable and rock ****ing solid. It can't be ignored. There is no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

You just refuse to accept it.

Y'all still going off about this movie? It's been debooooooonked.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1098787088/a-pro-trump-film-suggests-its-data-are-so-accurate-it-solved-a-murder-thats-fals

We have uncovered the mystery of bigfoot, however.

GeorgiAg said:

---

Y'all still going off about this movie? It's been debooooooonked.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1098787088/a-pro-trump-film-suggests-its-data-are-so-accurate-it-solved-a-murder-thats-fals

We have uncovered the mystery of bigfoot, however.

---

Says the Biden voter.

Rockdoc said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Y'all still going off about this movie? It's been debooooooonked.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1098787088/a-pro-trump-film-suggests-its-data-are-so-accurate-it-solved-a-murder-thats-fals

We have uncovered the mystery of bigfoot, however.

---

Says the Biden voter.

---

...and NPR. Two very reliable sources.

GeorgiAg said:

---

Y'all still going off about this movie? It's been debooooooonked.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1098787088/a-pro-trump-film-suggests-its-data-are-so-accurate-it-solved-a-murder-thats-fals

We have uncovered the mystery of bigfoot, however.

---

You obviously did not check out the link to the video about the murder case posted earlier.

He's obviously just trolling at this point. Not sure why people keep falling for it.

GeorgiAg said:

---

Y'all still going off about this movie? It's been debooooooonked.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/17/1098787088/a-pro-trump-film-suggests-its-data-are-so-accurate-it-solved-a-murder-thats-fals

We have uncovered the mystery of bigfoot, however.

---

No it hasn't..you've been brainwashed.

Dr. Teeth said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

---

Because I want it to be one. I want people to go to prison. I want the case to be so irrefutable, so rock ****ing solid, that it can't be ignored and there can be no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

This movie doesn't rise to that level and I really wanted it to.

---

ITS NOT TRYING TO DO THAT..

You realize that even if they presented an air tight case, they can't do anything?

Only law enforcement can do anything, and law enforcement is controlled by what? Politicians.

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Dr. Teeth said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

---

Because I want it to be one. I want people to go to prison. I want the case to be so irrefutable, so rock ****ing solid, that it can't be ignored and there can be no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

This movie doesn't rise to that level and I really wanted it to.

---

ITS NOT TRYING TO DO THAT..

You realize that even if they presented an air tight case, they can't do anything?

Only law enforcement can do anything, and law enforcement is controlled by what? Politicians.

---

Then what is it supposed to do? Convince the already convinced?

Its starting to feel a lot like a money grab, tbh.

CSTXAg92 said:

---

Dr. Teeth said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

---

Because I want it to be one. I want people to go to prison. I want the case to be so irrefutable, so rock ****ing solid, that it can't be ignored and there can be no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

This movie doesn't rise to that level and I really wanted it to.

---

The case is irrefutable and rock ****ing solid. It can't be ignored. There is no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

You just refuse to accept it.

---

It's being ignored an awful lot for something that can't be ignored.

Quote:

---

Then what is it supposed to do? Convince the already convinced?

Its starting to feel a lot like a money grab, tbh.

---

I have never really liked Dinesh but he has the investors and others needed for film production.

Phillips and Englebrecht use their collected money to buy info and hire the people needed to do the massive amount of work involved in this project. And they have no editorial control over how Dinesh edits this film if I understand their arrangement correctly.

BUT and it is a huge BUT, the night of the Las Vegas "premiere" Phillips immediately said he and Englebrecht are already working on a user friendly website for ALL of the underlying info. I took that to mean they were not completely happy with the final edit either.

I want someone to do Hunters laptop.

Quote:

---

It's not meant to serve as proof..it's designed to inform the public to get them to pressure lawmakers to investigate it further

---

Lol false.

That is not what the movies purpose was.

Dinesh knew good and well that the soil around the seed of election conspiracy was starting to dry.

He used this to water that seed and stuff his pockets. Plain and simple. He's done a fine job at both. All while continuing to foster to the ridiculous and obtuse on the fringe of society.

Dr. Teeth said:

---

CSTXAg92 said:

---

Dr. Teeth said:

---

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

---

Because I want it to be one. I want people to go to prison. I want the case to be so irrefutable, so rock ****ing solid, that it can't be ignored and there can be no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

This movie doesn't rise to that level and I really wanted it to.

---

The case is irrefutable and rock ****ing solid. It can't be ignored. There is no defense or "explanations" of any kind, whatsoever.

You just refuse to accept it.

---

It's being ignored an awful lot for something that can't be ignored.

---

The wheels of justice turn slowly. This isn't a tik-tok video.

TikkaShooter said:

---

Quote:

---

It's not meant to serve as proof..it's designed to inform the public to get them to pressure lawmakers to investigate it further

---

Lol false.

That is not what the movies purpose was.

Dinesh knew good and well that the soil around the seed of election conspiracy was starting to dry.

He used this to water that seed and stuff his pockets. Plain and simple. He's done a fine job at both. All while continuing to foster to the ridiculous and obtuse on the fringe of society.

---

You could not be more wrong.

TikkaShooter said:

---

Quote:

---

It's not meant to serve as proof..it's designed to inform the public to get them to pressure lawmakers to investigate it further

---

Lol false.

That is not what the movies purpose was.

Dinesh knew good and well that the soil around the seed of election conspiracy was starting to dry.

He used this to water that seed and stuff his pockets. Plain and simple. He's done a fine job at both. All while continuing to foster to the ridiculous and obtuse on the fringe of society.

---

So in a nutshell, you can't dispute the actual topic of the video so you resort to attacking why it was made.

Your opinion has no weight in the discussion since you can't stay on topic.

TikkaShooter said:

---

Quote:

---

It's not meant to serve as proof..it's designed to inform the public to get them to pressure lawmakers to investigate it further

---

Lol false.

That is not what the movies purpose was.

Dinesh knew good and well that the soil around the seed of election conspiracy was starting to dry.

He used this to water that seed and stuff his pockets. Plain and simple. He's done a fine job at both. All while continuing to foster to the ridiculous and obtuse on the fringe of society.

---

Dinesh D'Souza has spent time in jail for daring to tell the truth. He is clearly more interested in exposing truth than you are.

Stop it.

It would make sense if 2000 Mules and Gen. Flynn's huge new lawsuit against the feds (and a bunch of fantastic memes and mocking vids) led to Nina Jankowitz's little Mis/Disinformation Board position being put on-hold.

From Revolver: https://archive.ph/tlhQj

Bravo, team! Whoop!

Funky Winkerbean said:

---

Quote:

---

But, this movie simply isn't the slam dunk D'Souza claims it is, and the criticisms of it are valid.

---

It's not meant to serve as proof..it's designed to inform the public to get them to pressure lawmakers to investigate it further. You know, the people that can do something about this.

Why do you continue to think this is a court proceeding?

If he did satisfy your requirement for proof, what would you want/expect to happen next?

---

Why not make the strongest possible case, thereby making it easier to pressure lawmakers?

This "they could have made a stronger case, but they chose not to do so because [waves hands] reasons" is silly.


You know what would make it really easy to pressure lawmakers?

A five minute video showing a "day in the life of a mule", with a credentialed presenter at a digital white board showing a map, the cell phone tracking, the NGOs, and video of the same individual making multiple drops. All time-synced. "Here is ironclad, irrefutable proof of what happened. And we have evidence this occurred at scale."

A 90-minute meandering preach-to-the-choir film that costs $30 to watch and has some glaring evidentiary gaps is far less effective. It's also a great way to look like a grift and not be taken seriously.


Again, I think the theory is true. I do think large-scale ballot-trafficking occurred in urban areas of swing states. But this presentation is absolute sheet and guarantees that it will remain on the fringe.

aggiehawg said:

---

And that's conservative numbers.

Quote:

---

To prove this theory, True the Vote obtained geo-tracking information for major urban areas in Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, Georgia, and Arizona, allowing them to follow cell phone signals. They marked all the drop boxes and all the facilities for left-wing non-profits. They then looked for cell phones that traveled between the non-profits and drop boxes at least ten times (to be sure to winnow out statistical noise). Through FOIA requests, they also obtained as many videos as they could showing people stuffing multiple ballots into the drop boxes, a completely illegal act.

Their data revealed 2,200 mules in just five cities, visiting between 20 and 45 drop boxes each, at which they dropped off an average of five ballots. When you do the math, the numbers are staggering:

---

Quote:

---

They only get worse when you contemplate the fact that 10 trips per mule is an exceptionally high bar and that these were just mules in five cities. When one considers the small margin by which Biden "won" in the disputed states, had these mules not been active, Trump would have won the election by a medium to huge margin.

---

Link

Of course little of this is news to those of us who followed the big Election Day thread.

---

Do the asterisks represent an election being flipped by these illegal votes?

You people are too much. A man clearly presents video information showing a very high probability of voter fraud, and you attack him.

But, that's what liberals do when things get uncomfortable for them.

When you take the field, you play your best game.

You don't give a half-ass effort.

IANAL

• There is irrefutable video proof mules stuff multiple ballets in at least one ballot drop box.
• There is also irrefutable evidence these mules visited multiple drop boxes on the same day they were caught on video stuffing ballots in a ballot box.
• There is also irrefutable evidence that between visiting drop boxes these mules visited partisan political organizations.

Is it not reasonable to believe these mules were ballot stuffing at other drop boxes that had no camera surveillance in a court of law?
Not sure of the law, but isn't reasonable evidence enough to convict in these cases? It doesn't have to meet the criteria of beyond a reason doubt does it?

There is no doubt in my mind these were mules performing illegal acts for money or zealotry. Hopefully, state, county and city law enforcement opens multiple investigations.