Wow, this is a steaming pile of unconvincing flailing. “Who do you believe, us, objective fact checkers for the Associated Press, or your lying eyes?”
The mules recorded dumping piles of ballots in the drop boxes could’ve just been doing it for (large) families, or the disabled! And many were wearing gloves (in Atlanta) because of the cold, and COVID. And then they threw their rubber gloves in the trash because it, I dunno, warmed up quickly. 🙄🙄🙄
Pages and pages of fatuous and false deboonking like this only makes this movie seem even more credible than it already did.
The cell phone data is the same that prosecutors use in court against We The People, but when we use it against [them] they say its not accurate enough. Kek
Just like Facebook knows who I am if I'm using a VPN on a fresh phone that never had it installed. Has me pinned down to the area, and somehow understands my age range and also apparently where I went to school because it suggests people to me that I knew in fucking elementary school and haven't interacted with in two decades when I fake my name / birth date / etc.
I appreciate your comment. That's pretty much what happened to me on fascistbook. I took myself off there at least a year and a half ago. The only thing I want to be on there for is one or 2 pages that put up information about this corrupt town that I can't find elsewhere. Recently, I tried twice to get back on, both times with a VPN, fake name, age....didn't give any more information than was absolutely necessary. From the beginning, I could never access anything and within a couple of days, the account was disabled. Second time, I used a new proton mail account, fake name, etc. AND used Tor. Didn't make any difference. They disabled that account within just a few minutes. My conclusion is that a VPN is way overrated. I am running Ubuntu Linux and despite the greater security that it has, it made NO difference with fascistbook.
Well, the cell phone data is good for proving where someone was, not what they were doing there.
Proving that somebody was within a few feet of where they were standing is pretty good proof they were at Trump’s rally for a precise amount of time, and where they traveled in that rally.
Being in certain areas (like the Capitol) during the rally was a crime, so a location is good enough to prove a crime occurred.
Proving that someone walked near a drop box a few times, when those drop boxes are deliberately placed on highly-trafficked areas, doesn’t prove a crime, because it wasn’t illegal to walk through public areas more than once. The location isn’t illegal.
So location data in this case doesn’t really prove a crime, because cell phone data can’t prove someone was dropping off fake votes. That would have to be corroborated by additional evidence for that specific individual.
The OFFICIAL GOVT VIDEO of the folks dropping in multiple ballots - at multiple drop box locations - on the same night - taken at the same time as the cell phone location data track shows the phone was there - IS the corroboration as to what happened.
Either that - or you were one of those Mules trying to shift blame.....
The threshold that True the Vote used for trips to these boxes by one person was TWENTY FIVE. They wanted it to be patently obvious that something shady was going on. So twenty five trips by one cell phone to same drop box.
I'm glad you're here to debate this. It'd be best to watch the movie, which won't be a waste of time. It'll address many questions and arguments. It will also prove AP's phony fact check is absurd. If AP were honest, they would be asking if these same mules normally traveled to these dropbox locations before or after the election week window.
Well, the AP isn’t the one making the claim, so I’d say the burden of providing that proof would be on the documentary. If they want their numbers to be credible, then they need to be the ones closing in these gaps in the data. It’s not up to me or the AP to validate their claims for them.
I too am interested in the range that this data was collected. I’ll see if I can track down a written report on which this documentary was based.
Not saying it's AP's responsibility to prove the case, but their own assertions should pass reasonable doubt as well. It's an absurd assertion that these mules just happened to be within meters of multiple dropboxes only during the week of an election -- but not on any other dates -- yet they had no involvement with the election.
'You could use cellular evidence to say this person was in that area, but to say they were at the ballot box, you’re stretching it a lot,' said Aaron Striegel, a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Notre Dame. 'There’s always a pretty healthy amount of uncertainty that comes with this.'
Makes perfect sense!
After watching the movie, ask yourself: Is stealing an election impossible? If not, what evidence would be necessary to prove it? How granular in detail should we demand the data be? If many liberals continue to refuse evidence at any level of detail -- including video of the crime -- then one must conclude that many liberals believe stealing elections is impossible... Except when Republicans win like in 2016 when many liberals asserted cheating based on zero evidence.
After watching the movie, ask yourself: Is stealing an election impossible? If not, what evidence would be necessary to prove it? How granular in detail should we demand the data be?
Excellent question.
Considering the outcome that is demanded by Trump's supporters... very high.
Look, what standard of proof would you require to believe that Q was a LARP and you were tricked by a nobody?
No one was a bigger critic of Q than I was. I used to walk away from people who brought it up. Then I made some discoveries and admitted I was wrong. So yes, my standard of proof about Q is high.
I don't mean this personally, but I don't think you understand Trump supporters enough to know what their demands were. Most, like me, would have graciously accepted a loss like all previous election losses. The difference is the leftists and RINO's who ran the counting centers in swing states flagrantly and arrogantly violated election laws out in the open, some Constitutional, then laughed off the evidence of the fraud.
What you may not understand is those crimes and irregularities would still matter to us even if Trump won. The integrity of the election process is more important than Trump. The election theft took the decision-making power over our government away from you as much as it did from us. This crime is much bigger than who won, and I hope you keep that in mind when you watch the movie.
Shouldn’t he be found and arrested for terrorism (as the apparently leader of so called violent Charles Manson-esque murder suicide cult should be) or at least identified for the world to see?
I haven’t seen the film yet and can’t respond to its evidence.
Only the question as to why the cell phone location data was considered powerful evidence of criminal trespass and significantly less powerful (on its own) of proving that people were in the area to drop off fraudulent votes as part of a major criminal conspiracy.
Proving 2000 people were in areas he considered suspicious is fine. But if none of those areas are illegal, then he still has to match those 2000 data points with an actual crime.
I would hope the film presents compelling evidence proving each of those people actually committed a crime.I look forward to seeing it later.
IIRC they had CCTV data that showed them putting in multiple ballots along with the cellphone data.
one such mule who made 53 trips to 20 drop boxes for example so using the excuse they were just helping they granny post her ballot does not really fly, also they will have been paid by someone for this and probably been texted their instructions similar to the paid rioters.
If someone in law enforcement actually bothered to investigate it i don't think it would be long before the some of the 2000 mules would start to crack and roll on the others rather than go to jail.
So even circumstantial evidence would be quite powerful in that case.
Also with the phone tracking even if you use a burner phone whilst your doing something illegal if you have it with you when you buy a coffee or bring it home with it they will be able to find out who you are due to seeing the phone at various locations, so think about the amount of CCTV your seen on throughout the day and if your burner phone is seen at 10 locations where they can see you on CCTV they know its you.
Also Accurate to within a couple of feet from what i have read.
So to establish a crime, they'd need to tie an individual's phone number to the location. Then they'd need to have evidence of that individual dropping off multiple ballots. Then they'd need evidence that the individual was not allowed to drop off multiple ballots and/or that those specific ballots the individual dropped off were fake.
Then, if they can prove at least that level of crime, they have to connect that individual to a larger conspiracy, and that the individual was answering to someone specific (and not just a movement or philosophy). And then we have to connect that someone specific to an organization, and prove that handler was operating on behalf of that organization.
Then we have to show that the organization directed that individual to commit that crime, and connect it to an election fraud conspiracy.
We have to do all of this with hard evidence. And then we have to do it for another individual. And another individual. And another individual.
To date, the evidence I've seen of election fraud (AZ audit, Lindell, etc) has operated like this:
"Imagine if a Democratic operative was caught on camera going from Democratic offices to the drop boxes multiple times to drop off fake votes for Biden as part of a national conspiracy to steal the election. That would be pretty damning if we had evidence of that, right?
Well, we do have evidence that a bunch of people were near the Democratic offices and the dropboxes multiple times. And we have a video of some of those people dropping off multiple ballots. Some of them were doing suspicious stuff like wearing gloves.
We're going to assume they're fake ballots for Biden. We're going to assume they're Democratic operatives. We're going to assume they're doing this as part of a conspiracy. And based on those assumptions, this is REALLY damning evidence that the election was stolen."
If you take any random sample of thousands of people, start pulling targeted behaviors from individuals in this group, and then assume all these behaviors MUST be related to a single malicious motivation just because you drew lines between the behaviors, then yes, you can find evidence of whatever you want, I promise.
This is a basic correlation/causation error.
Like I said, I can't speak to the specifics of a video I haven't watched yet. But all of the big evidence releases so far have shown lot of data points I'm supposed to assume have a connection based on a correlation.
IF there is a connection between these data points, then yes, that would be concerning. But that's the evidence I'm looking for, and the evidence a court would be looking for. I won't assume a narrative just because a bunch of uncontextualized data points correlate in an interesting way.
Yes they did, but they didn't need pinpoint accuracy to say that they were in an area they were not allowed to be in. In their case the location was the crime, with 2000 mules being within ten feet of a drop box at some given frequency isn't necessarily a crime.
But the cell phone data isn't 10 foot, it's actually accurate to 18in - 12in, and many of the drop boxes had CCTV watching them so it is extremely easy to see who comes back multiple times and drops of multiple ballots.
Along with the cell phone data and CCTV images the way these mules got paid was to take a photo as they delivered them to the drop box? The mules had to do this as evidence to their handlers and then to get paid. Around 10 dollars per ballot! That metadata is also recorded. As are the daily visits to the buildings where they pickled up the ballot's from.
The CCTV images show them placing the ballot's into the box, and often then discarding the latex gloves they had on so as not to leave fingerprints. I suppose some would argue they had gloves on to keep warm, but you don't discard your gloves every time do you?
Quick scan through, looks like it's pretty bad deboonking. They don't even bring up the videos except for "yeah, some people wore gloves because it was cold or something!", couldn't give a shit if they wore gloves because it was cold, more concerned about why they're putting more than one ballot in. If they used timestamping on the video footage and cellphones then it negates a bunch of their bullshit.
I still don't think the corrupt institution will do anything though. I'm just hoping accountability comes before things get out of hand.
I listened to a few podcasts covering the subject, but will be watching the virtual premiere this Saturday, I have a few questions I hope get answered before I'm 100% on board, the video will be the most damning evidence for me though.
If you do more than a "quick scan" your other question might be answered, for example people are allowed to drop multiple ballots off for family members legally.
Think about 2000 Mules as if you were a juror in a court case.
This GPS cell phone tracking was presented as evidence and where available had surveillance video camera footage to verify the cell phone owner at the drop boxes stuffing the ballots in, at several locations; night after night.
You have whistle-blower mules testify that this is how the system played out.
Then you have the non-profit facilities where the mules picked up the ballots.
You also have the money trail of the mules getting paid by the non-profits.
You also have names of major donors to those non-profits and that money trail.
You also have evidence of which political party those non-profits donated to.
You also have the knowledge that States' election laws were illegally changed to allow the illegal ballot drop boxes.
What would you do? What does your common sense tell you about all this evidence? Is this clear and convincing evidence of a crime?
Plus, experts say cellphone location data, even at its most advanced, can only reliably track a smartphone within a few meters — not close enough to know whether someone actually dropped off a ballot or just walked or drove nearby.
I know this is bullshit, just from watching murder mysteries on ID - they are always tracking people by cell location
This is about as good a debunking as the Detroit news that said the van dropping off ballots at 3 A.M. was actually their crew dropping off camera supplies. Only to turn out it was the Vote Mobile.
First, this is the AP who collude at the highest level within the MSM sphere. Second, I think there were pictures/videos of mules posing with their handfuls of ballots as they were dropping them, as this is how they were paid. Third, why can the CDC use the same type of data (purchasing it with our Tex dollars) to essentially do the same thing? Oh right, that’s okay because it fits their narrative to control We the People! I call bullshit!!!
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10779833/CDC-used-location-data-millions-cell-phones-track-lockdown-compliance.html
When do they prove the collected ballots were for Biden? Why hasn't ONE PERSON come forward who got paid for this? All these people couldn't have been paid in cash! Where is the paper-trail?
I love how they make all those allegations about the movie then don't go into detail in a single one of them. Who could possibly read that and think they have an informed opinion?
You can't have the most secure election ever and hundreds of incidents of 'well they were probably just dropping all those ballots off for their friends' at the same time.
Alley Swenson is clearly a Shilltastic Hack! She does a bad job of trying, trying to skew the obvious facts of the cheat, and fails to even admit, regardless if she thinks the data is wrong, these people Broke The Law which makes all of these ballets null and void, since they have no clear chain of custody! Doesn’t matter is she disagrees with the data, these are dead/void ballots period! Which, which gives Trump the WIN! Just stupid people.
Hard truth here. Except in GA ballots harvesting was legalized. Would have to prove the ballots themselves were forged or fake. Which is conveniently impossible.
they should do the webstreaming of it with the QA afterwards if they really want to get anywhere. come on lefties, own his face right in front of his fans.
In short people used covid to put unsecured drop boxes to put in unverified mail in ballots to push a candidate who supports the Globalist plan to kill America
oooooh nice. Stupid people would call this "conspiracy theory or fantasy movie". Hopefully lots of people attended so it can spread faster. I actually wouldn't know about this if this website wouldn't be active. Thank you!
Wow, this is a steaming pile of unconvincing flailing. “Who do you believe, us, objective fact checkers for the Associated Press, or your lying eyes?”
The mules recorded dumping piles of ballots in the drop boxes could’ve just been doing it for (large) families, or the disabled! And many were wearing gloves (in Atlanta) because of the cold, and COVID. And then they threw their rubber gloves in the trash because it, I dunno, warmed up quickly. 🙄🙄🙄
Pages and pages of fatuous and false deboonking like this only makes this movie seem even more credible than it already did.
The cell phone data is the same that prosecutors use in court against We The People, but when we use it against [them] they say its not accurate enough. Kek
Hahaha - their debunk is saying the tracking could be meters off.
More headlines trying to influence lazy people who won’t read or critically scrutinize the ‘facts’ in the article.
This article is a steaming heap of propaganda
Just like Facebook knows who I am if I'm using a VPN on a fresh phone that never had it installed. Has me pinned down to the area, and somehow understands my age range and also apparently where I went to school because it suggests people to me that I knew in fucking elementary school and haven't interacted with in two decades when I fake my name / birth date / etc.
I wish we'd stop letting him roam around.
I appreciate your comment. That's pretty much what happened to me on fascistbook. I took myself off there at least a year and a half ago. The only thing I want to be on there for is one or 2 pages that put up information about this corrupt town that I can't find elsewhere. Recently, I tried twice to get back on, both times with a VPN, fake name, age....didn't give any more information than was absolutely necessary. From the beginning, I could never access anything and within a couple of days, the account was disabled. Second time, I used a new proton mail account, fake name, etc. AND used Tor. Didn't make any difference. They disabled that account within just a few minutes. My conclusion is that a VPN is way overrated. I am running Ubuntu Linux and despite the greater security that it has, it made NO difference with fascistbook.
A VPN is definitely overrated.
Any commercial VPN can be traced back to you by either the exchange of money or the governmental pressure.
There are use cases, but internet privacy isn't strictly one of them.
It's been disappointing but I am always looking for solutions; perhaps I'll find one. :-)
Well, the cell phone data is good for proving where someone was, not what they were doing there.
Proving that somebody was within a few feet of where they were standing is pretty good proof they were at Trump’s rally for a precise amount of time, and where they traveled in that rally.
Being in certain areas (like the Capitol) during the rally was a crime, so a location is good enough to prove a crime occurred.
Proving that someone walked near a drop box a few times, when those drop boxes are deliberately placed on highly-trafficked areas, doesn’t prove a crime, because it wasn’t illegal to walk through public areas more than once. The location isn’t illegal.
So location data in this case doesn’t really prove a crime, because cell phone data can’t prove someone was dropping off fake votes. That would have to be corroborated by additional evidence for that specific individual.
Watch the movie, THEN comment.
The OFFICIAL GOVT VIDEO of the folks dropping in multiple ballots - at multiple drop box locations - on the same night - taken at the same time as the cell phone location data track shows the phone was there - IS the corroboration as to what happened.
Either that - or you were one of those Mules trying to shift blame.....
The threshold that True the Vote used for trips to these boxes by one person was TWENTY FIVE. They wanted it to be patently obvious that something shady was going on. So twenty five trips by one cell phone to same drop box.
Surveillance camera mean anything to you?
I'm glad you're here to debate this. It'd be best to watch the movie, which won't be a waste of time. It'll address many questions and arguments. It will also prove AP's phony fact check is absurd. If AP were honest, they would be asking if these same mules normally traveled to these dropbox locations before or after the election week window.
Well, the AP isn’t the one making the claim, so I’d say the burden of providing that proof would be on the documentary. If they want their numbers to be credible, then they need to be the ones closing in these gaps in the data. It’s not up to me or the AP to validate their claims for them.
I too am interested in the range that this data was collected. I’ll see if I can track down a written report on which this documentary was based.
Not saying it's AP's responsibility to prove the case, but their own assertions should pass reasonable doubt as well. It's an absurd assertion that these mules just happened to be within meters of multiple dropboxes only during the week of an election -- but not on any other dates -- yet they had no involvement with the election.
Makes perfect sense!
After watching the movie, ask yourself: Is stealing an election impossible? If not, what evidence would be necessary to prove it? How granular in detail should we demand the data be? If many liberals continue to refuse evidence at any level of detail -- including video of the crime -- then one must conclude that many liberals believe stealing elections is impossible... Except when Republicans win like in 2016 when many liberals asserted cheating based on zero evidence.
Excellent question.
Considering the outcome that is demanded by Trump's supporters... very high.
Look, what standard of proof would you require to believe that Q was a LARP and you were tricked by a nobody?
Also... very high. Right?
Considering the outcome?
No one was a bigger critic of Q than I was. I used to walk away from people who brought it up. Then I made some discoveries and admitted I was wrong. So yes, my standard of proof about Q is high.
I don't mean this personally, but I don't think you understand Trump supporters enough to know what their demands were. Most, like me, would have graciously accepted a loss like all previous election losses. The difference is the leftists and RINO's who ran the counting centers in swing states flagrantly and arrogantly violated election laws out in the open, some Constitutional, then laughed off the evidence of the fraud.
What you may not understand is those crimes and irregularities would still matter to us even if Trump won. The integrity of the election process is more important than Trump. The election theft took the decision-making power over our government away from you as much as it did from us. This crime is much bigger than who won, and I hope you keep that in mind when you watch the movie.
Where is the guy who made the Q LARP then?
Shouldn’t he be found and arrested for terrorism (as the apparently leader of so called violent Charles Manson-esque murder suicide cult should be) or at least identified for the world to see?
I haven’t seen the film yet and can’t respond to its evidence.
Only the question as to why the cell phone location data was considered powerful evidence of criminal trespass and significantly less powerful (on its own) of proving that people were in the area to drop off fraudulent votes as part of a major criminal conspiracy.
Proving 2000 people were in areas he considered suspicious is fine. But if none of those areas are illegal, then he still has to match those 2000 data points with an actual crime.
I would hope the film presents compelling evidence proving each of those people actually committed a crime.I look forward to seeing it later.
IIRC they had CCTV data that showed them putting in multiple ballots along with the cellphone data.
one such mule who made 53 trips to 20 drop boxes for example so using the excuse they were just helping they granny post her ballot does not really fly, also they will have been paid by someone for this and probably been texted their instructions similar to the paid rioters. If someone in law enforcement actually bothered to investigate it i don't think it would be long before the some of the 2000 mules would start to crack and roll on the others rather than go to jail. So even circumstantial evidence would be quite powerful in that case.
Also with the phone tracking even if you use a burner phone whilst your doing something illegal if you have it with you when you buy a coffee or bring it home with it they will be able to find out who you are due to seeing the phone at various locations, so think about the amount of CCTV your seen on throughout the day and if your burner phone is seen at 10 locations where they can see you on CCTV they know its you. Also Accurate to within a couple of feet from what i have read.
So to establish a crime, they'd need to tie an individual's phone number to the location. Then they'd need to have evidence of that individual dropping off multiple ballots. Then they'd need evidence that the individual was not allowed to drop off multiple ballots and/or that those specific ballots the individual dropped off were fake.
Then, if they can prove at least that level of crime, they have to connect that individual to a larger conspiracy, and that the individual was answering to someone specific (and not just a movement or philosophy). And then we have to connect that someone specific to an organization, and prove that handler was operating on behalf of that organization.
Then we have to show that the organization directed that individual to commit that crime, and connect it to an election fraud conspiracy.
We have to do all of this with hard evidence. And then we have to do it for another individual. And another individual. And another individual.
To date, the evidence I've seen of election fraud (AZ audit, Lindell, etc) has operated like this:
"Imagine if a Democratic operative was caught on camera going from Democratic offices to the drop boxes multiple times to drop off fake votes for Biden as part of a national conspiracy to steal the election. That would be pretty damning if we had evidence of that, right?
Well, we do have evidence that a bunch of people were near the Democratic offices and the dropboxes multiple times. And we have a video of some of those people dropping off multiple ballots. Some of them were doing suspicious stuff like wearing gloves.
We're going to assume they're fake ballots for Biden. We're going to assume they're Democratic operatives. We're going to assume they're doing this as part of a conspiracy. And based on those assumptions, this is REALLY damning evidence that the election was stolen."
If you take any random sample of thousands of people, start pulling targeted behaviors from individuals in this group, and then assume all these behaviors MUST be related to a single malicious motivation just because you drew lines between the behaviors, then yes, you can find evidence of whatever you want, I promise.
This is a basic correlation/causation error.
Like I said, I can't speak to the specifics of a video I haven't watched yet. But all of the big evidence releases so far have shown lot of data points I'm supposed to assume have a connection based on a correlation.
IF there is a connection between these data points, then yes, that would be concerning. But that's the evidence I'm looking for, and the evidence a court would be looking for. I won't assume a narrative just because a bunch of uncontextualized data points correlate in an interesting way.
Why are you here?
Mule.
That's what the CCTV is for!
Not forgetting the way these mules got paid was by taking a photo at the drop boxes, and then getting paid per ballot.
Do you think that metadata is not available as well lol.
It is in the film.
4,000,000 minutes of video showing them putting multiple ballots into multiple drop boxes -- and only in areas that turned from DJT to FJB.
Must suck to be fag like you.
I see what you did there.
I’ll look forward to seeing this RICO case, then.
Lmao bro you are obsessed with this guy. I like you both but I find your relationship hilarious.
Who owns AP? Reuters. Who owns Reuters? Rothschild family.
I thought it was pre-bunked already? You know, by WaPo. But, I guess a post-bunk is also a good thing. Clown world.
The Streisand Effect
But hang on, didn't the F B eye use cell phone data pings for locating those in and around the Jan 6th "event" at the Capitol?
Which way round is it AP?
Yes they did, but they didn't need pinpoint accuracy to say that they were in an area they were not allowed to be in. In their case the location was the crime, with 2000 mules being within ten feet of a drop box at some given frequency isn't necessarily a crime.
They also have them on CCTV posting multiple ballots along with the phone data which is accurate to a couple of feet not 10 feet
one such mule who made 53 trips to 20 drop boxes for example.
But the cell phone data isn't 10 foot, it's actually accurate to 18in - 12in, and many of the drop boxes had CCTV watching them so it is extremely easy to see who comes back multiple times and drops of multiple ballots.
Along with the cell phone data and CCTV images the way these mules got paid was to take a photo as they delivered them to the drop box? The mules had to do this as evidence to their handlers and then to get paid. Around 10 dollars per ballot! That metadata is also recorded. As are the daily visits to the buildings where they pickled up the ballot's from.
The CCTV images show them placing the ballot's into the box, and often then discarding the latex gloves they had on so as not to leave fingerprints. I suppose some would argue they had gloves on to keep warm, but you don't discard your gloves every time do you?
I'm going by what was in the article,
This matches up with my findings when searching for more information.
Where do you get "18in - 12in" from?
I do plan to watch the movie, so maybe it will answer that and other questions for me, like where there's evidence of
Here, watch.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=64dafWEFzRU&t=1755s
"Experts say"..............kek.
So.. what do your experts say? Where'd that 1 to 1.5 foot margin come from?
How dare you try to logic this win away from us!!
Correct.
u/#afraid
Quick scan through, looks like it's pretty bad deboonking. They don't even bring up the videos except for "yeah, some people wore gloves because it was cold or something!", couldn't give a shit if they wore gloves because it was cold, more concerned about why they're putting more than one ballot in. If they used timestamping on the video footage and cellphones then it negates a bunch of their bullshit.
I still don't think the corrupt institution will do anything though. I'm just hoping accountability comes before things get out of hand.
I listened to a few podcasts covering the subject, but will be watching the virtual premiere this Saturday, I have a few questions I hope get answered before I'm 100% on board, the video will be the most damning evidence for me though.
Love your user name!!
If you do more than a "quick scan" your other question might be answered, for example people are allowed to drop multiple ballots off for family members legally.
A few ballots. Not handfuls. And no need to do it multiple times. No ones family is that large
Think about 2000 Mules as if you were a juror in a court case.
This GPS cell phone tracking was presented as evidence and where available had surveillance video camera footage to verify the cell phone owner at the drop boxes stuffing the ballots in, at several locations; night after night.
You have whistle-blower mules testify that this is how the system played out.
Then you have the non-profit facilities where the mules picked up the ballots.
You also have the money trail of the mules getting paid by the non-profits.
You also have names of major donors to those non-profits and that money trail.
You also have evidence of which political party those non-profits donated to.
You also have the knowledge that States' election laws were illegally changed to allow the illegal ballot drop boxes.
What would you do? What does your common sense tell you about all this evidence? Is this clear and convincing evidence of a crime?
I know this is bullshit, just from watching murder mysteries on ID - they are always tracking people by cell location
No kidding. "Hurr they may not've been dropping those ballots off in the drop boxes, maybe they were dropping them off on the floor nearby durr"
They caught the hacker Kevin Mitnick in 1995 using cell phone triangulation, long before today's modern smartphones were a thing.
https://www.cybersecurityeducationguides.org/tsutomu-shimomura-vs-kevin-mitnick/
That fact that they are speaking in terms of the metric system should be a dead give away. This is the USA. It's inches, feet, yards, miles...
AP.... Anti-American Phaggots.
When tracking those people on ID murder mysteries, does a 10 foot margin matter?
And there are the magic words: “according to experts”
🤢 Wait until all the affidavits from these mules are released. The back pedaling will be audible
"Cough" - AP what's this about the CDC?
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/human-events-daily-with-jack-posobiec/id1585243541?i=1000559637408
u/#fact
This is about as good a debunking as the Detroit news that said the van dropping off ballots at 3 A.M. was actually their crew dropping off camera supplies. Only to turn out it was the Vote Mobile.
Sounds like AP didn't like the movie. It must be good.
First, this is the AP who collude at the highest level within the MSM sphere. Second, I think there were pictures/videos of mules posing with their handfuls of ballots as they were dropping them, as this is how they were paid. Third, why can the CDC use the same type of data (purchasing it with our Tex dollars) to essentially do the same thing? Oh right, that’s okay because it fits their narrative to control We the People! I call bullshit!!! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10779833/CDC-used-location-data-millions-cell-phones-track-lockdown-compliance.html
When do they prove the collected ballots were for Biden? Why hasn't ONE PERSON come forward who got paid for this? All these people couldn't have been paid in cash! Where is the paper-trail?
We've got two ladies in Utah who have practically turned over their lives to exposing election fraud in the state.
Their biggest obstacle is the Republican party.
Stop with your logic, we only want gut feeling and hearsay here.
They were paid in fentanyl
I love how they make all those allegations about the movie then don't go into detail in a single one of them. Who could possibly read that and think they have an informed opinion?
You can't have the most secure election ever and hundreds of incidents of 'well they were probably just dropping all those ballots off for their friends' at the same time.
PANIC
Blah blah blah blah REEeeeeEEE!
Alley Swenson is clearly a Shilltastic Hack! She does a bad job of trying, trying to skew the obvious facts of the cheat, and fails to even admit, regardless if she thinks the data is wrong, these people Broke The Law which makes all of these ballets null and void, since they have no clear chain of custody! Doesn’t matter is she disagrees with the data, these are dead/void ballots period! Which, which gives Trump the WIN! Just stupid people.
PANIC PROPAGANDA!
I look forward to Dinesh’s rebuttal!
Hard truth here. Except in GA ballots harvesting was legalized. Would have to prove the ballots themselves were forged or fake. Which is conveniently impossible.
To shill and protect his co-conspirators.
they should do the webstreaming of it with the QA afterwards if they really want to get anywhere. come on lefties, own his face right in front of his fans.
I was not going to see it because I assumed it was true, but now that there's controversy I will have to see it and find out for myself.
Experts say again
I'm not American but I've seen lots of posts about 2000mules, can anyone explain to me on short, what's going on?
In short people used covid to put unsecured drop boxes to put in unverified mail in ballots to push a candidate who supports the Globalist plan to kill America
oooooh nice. Stupid people would call this "conspiracy theory or fantasy movie". Hopefully lots of people attended so it can spread faster. I actually wouldn't know about this if this website wouldn't be active. Thank you!
No worries mate, you're welcome
LoL, well AP is at least consistent in their bullshit🤪
Some have complained the movie is understated in that it didn't name specific NGOs. It only fingered Markie Suckerbux.
c i A P?