"2000 Mules" Grosses More Than One Million Dollars on Locals and Rumble

Million bucks. Nice.

Dinesh appreciates your contribution.

This could be first time ever when people actually PAY to watch political propaganda.

 

2000 Mules is not political propaganda, it is the exact opposite. It is an analysis of certain human behavior during the election of 2020.

As long as you attempt to judge a book by its cover, as long as you refuse to watch the movie, you will be happy as a clam but grossly misinformed. When everything the American people believe is false, we will know the success of our misinformation efforts.

 

Dinesh.....Not only you you lap up everything he says, you actually PAY for it.

"Dinesh Joseph D'Souza is an Indian-American right-wing political commentator, provocateur, author, filmmaker, and conspiracy theorist"

 

You haven't seen the video, I take it.

 

^^^
Thinks that putting cardboard over windows and doors in the ballot counting room blocking the view of the vote tabulations, along with the removal of republican polling observers, while suitcases of ballots are delivered between 1:00 to 3:00 am after the voting tallying was suspended for the night is "Conspiracy Theories"

 

The only time with the cardboard was when people were illegally capturing sensitive voter information. Republican polling observers were allowed in; Trump's own lawyers had to admit in court that they were lying about that. etc. etc. yes, the conspiracy theories are dumber than a box of hair.

 

Yes, those people who were watching all the ballots being FAKED and the election being stolen from President Trump and shifted to Pedo-Joe Biden. They all had X-ray Vision and were "illegally stealing and capturing sensitive voter information" off the ballots were being tallied illegally from 75 to 500 feet away.

 

My belief is that a high percentage of Americans wanted more evidence than was offered by Mr. Mike Lindell in his film "Absolute Proof" so now that they have it the ARRESTS WILL SOON BEGIN!!!!!!!

https://www.bitchute.com/video/5VLkg2Sn65Mp/

 

No they won't - but keep hoping

 

It's paywall if there is something in the article that supports your contention post it.

 

That is strange - not a paywall when I click on it

 

So, I watched this movie today and even though I doubted election fraud to the point it affected the election beforehand, now I have my doubts. They got video footage of many people pushing tons of ballots into drop boxes. Now, if that did happen enough times to affect 10k people in certain states, then that would swing an election. Who knows for sure though, but I would not put it past the realm of probability.

 

I do believe that this is being choreographed brilliantly.....
One of the first things that had to happen was that they needed to wait until Biden made himself very unpopular.......

That mission has certainly been accomplished......

 

Nonsense. It's a load of conspiracy theory twaddle, and you're right, I couldn't stomach all of it, but what I did see was not the evidence he claimed. I know bulls**** when I smell it, as I've been debunking conspiracy theories for two decades. It is clear your confirmation bias is clouding your reason because of your unquestioning loyalty to the ousted demagogue.

https://www.detroitnews.com/story/n...-presidential-election-fact-focus/9762206002/

https://www.politifact.com/article/2022/may/04/faulty-premise-2000-mules-trailer-about-voting-mai/

'"The purported evidence in the film is merely circumstantial and the filmmakers have leaped to outrageous conclusions without sufficient justification," said Barry Burden, director of the Elections Research Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.'

"Cell phone tracking data is insufficient to establish anything other than a person was within 100 feet of a particular location," said Charles Stewart, a political science professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. "It can't establish precisely where they were nor, importantly, what they were doing."

'In September 2021, the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said in a letter that cell phone geolocation data provided by True the Vote was not evidence of illegal ballot harvesting in the state.'

'"As it exists, the data, while curious, does not rise to the level of probable cause that a crime has been committed," GBI Director Vic Reynolds said in the letter, as reported by Georgia Public Broadcasting.'

'For example, someone who purportedly visited several drop boxes could be a delivery person, cab driver or postal worker who works in the area. Burden said elections officials would also have legitimate reasons to visit drop boxes, which have several security mechanisms in place. And drop boxes are intentionally placed in high-traffic areas such as libraries and college campuses, meaning average citizens could potentially come into contact with them in their daily routines.'

https://factcheck.afp.com/doc.afp.com.329T2LX

Oh, who to believe, the AFP factcheckers or the known frauds at 'True the Vote'?

If this so-called 'evidence' is as compelling as you believe, then the courts will re-open the case and we will see how that proceeds. Or in true conspiracy theorist tradition, are the courts biased against Trump and all his lickspittles as well? D'Souza is just another biased crank:

​

​

 

I can see why you thought that, no.

"2000 mules" is about as believable as moon landing conspiracy theories on YouTube.

 

The flaw with the science isn't the pings. It's the conclusion they drew from those pings. Without knowing who those pings were (they were anonymous), it's impossible to determine what they were doing. With that large amount of video time, one would think they would have at least one person visiting more than one drop box, or at least multiple trips to one of them. They didn't have that. The secret "witness" is anonymous. The only one, by the way, in Arizona.
Is there a poll worker who checks to drop boxes occasionally, and what is their cell phone number? We conveniently don't know.
Also, the location of the pings only has an accuracy of 2-3 meters (6-9 feet), so you can't tell if they walked by, drove by, etc. In Philadelphia, they claim some 1500 mules, but assumed them to be as much because they were near a drop box multiple times, which were located in high traffic areas. So, if you walked by one going to work every day, you were counted as a mule. Not really exact science.
There would need to be much more information to draw the conclusion that there was a massive scam going on.
Then there's the obvious. Let's say they did uncover a massive plan to cheat the election. If there is truly evidence of it, why did they make a movie (that people have to pay for to see) instead of turning over their finding to authorities? Because it's a scam to get the money out of your pocket, and by all indications, it worked on some of the more gullible.
I read of two of them getting checked out (they dropped off multiple envelopes), and both of them were dropping off for their families.
In short, there is zero evidence of a large plan in place to defraud the election.
You didn't think about my previous post, about the show Ancient Aliens. Lot's of interesting stuff in that show, but watch it and observe the method by which they lead you to the "obvious" conclusion that aliens were here long ago. There is a quantum leap buried in there. You just haven't recognized it, yet.

 

Ah, Gottcha. lol

 

Yes.. One needs other data like photos from voting drop box locations which 2000 Mules has. The pings gave the clue. The photos give the proof.

 

The "documentary" doesn't have video or photo evidence of people using multiple drop boxes. And "pings" aren't as accurate as the documentary pretends they are. All they can show you is that someone was within a few dozen feet of a drop box . . . which happen to primarily be around government buildings. If you commute to work in a downtown area, you probably passed more than one. If your favorite election felon actually had video evidence in his "millions of minutes" of video that backed up his claims, he would have provided it. He didn't. He just wants your money. He's failed at his "evidence" just like the hundreds of others before him.

 

Have you seen it? So if I have a cell phone, and pass by a drop box (one expert said the location data has a error factor of 100 feet, while others say 6-9 feet) and one day I drop my votes in the box, I'm a mule?
You don't see the error? How can you verify who the person is and what they are doing without identifying them and finding out what they are doing?
I call it a quantum leap, because it goes from fact to conclusion without a viable logical path between. Surely you see this.
How much did you pay to see it?

 

Pings give a clue to a sense of direction of an investigation. The photos give the facts.

I don't know how many photos 2000 Mules has of mules dropping off ballots at drop boxes. I think the video 2000 Mules shows, maybe, 10, or so, different videos at drop boxes. I have no clue how many videos 2000 mules actually has. Wouldn't that be a good start into the investigation into the 2020 election? Comparing all the videos at drop boxes with cell phone pings? You do want free and fair elections to ensure democracy, don't you?

 

I paid 30 dollars which is a whole lot cheaper than the federal paid for the sham investigation into the Trump campaign.

Like I posted to another on this thread, you do want democracy in your elections don't you? You realize the election is the only vestige of democracy in American government?

 

"Mule's" would be dropping off ballots at multiple boxes. That's the "clue" the pings were supposed to provide. The video didn't back that up. Again: the fake "documentary" provided no video evidence of the same person using more than one box. Let that sink in. They had "millions of minutes" and couldn't find ONE video example that backed up the documentary's central claim. Yes, I care about free and fair elections. People who blindly swallow this bull ****, however, don't. If you actually cared about "free and fair elections," then you would care about EVIDENCE, which you clearly ****ing don't.

 

Then why didn't they, the people who made "2000 Mules", do that? Why don't they have videos/photos of any one person visiting more than one box, or the same box multiple times? Seems that would be something necessary to determine before some conclusion is drawn. Does that make sense to you? Or maybe they are saving that big evidence for the sequel: "2001 Mules"
Should change the name to "2000 Rubes".

 

If your beloved election felon cared about free and fair elections, why does he hide the "evidence" (which, as discussed, he doesn't actually have) behind a paywall?