More Mules
-
Dire ramifications
In the movie, True the Vote reveals that it also analyzed cell phone pings from some of the 2020 riots, and found that many of the Black Lives Matter and Antifa radicals who were involved in the riots went on to become ballot traffickers.
True the Vote estimates that 20 thousand votes were illegally trafficked in Arizona, 14 thousand in Wisconsin, 275 thousand in Pennsylvania, 125 thousand in Michigan, and 30 thousand in Georgia, totaling 380 thousand votes, which is more than enough to sway the election. Minus these illegal ballots, Trump’s Electoral College votes would have been 279 to Biden’s 259, D’Souza says.
The organization notes that these numbers are based on the definition of a mule as “at least 10 visits to drop boxes.”
” If the bar is lowered to count those making at least 5 visits, the estimated affected votes increases by more than double,” the group says.
D’Souza argues that their data is “systematic, comprehensive, and well-presented enough” to convince any “reasonable person.”
“The Democratic Party has subverted the Democratic process itself,” D’Souza said Wednesday night.
In remarks before the screening of 2000 Mules in a Mar-a-Lago ballroom, former President Trump stressed that the stolen election had dire ramifications for the nation.
-
The Venn intersection of TDS sufferers and those who would have been above cheating to win in 2020, is essentially empty. My stance has always been that the opportunities to cheat did not exist in sufficient abundance to have changed the election results. But that's more of a hope than a belief. Did leftist pop culture have a righteous, win-at-any-cost mentality, where the rule of law was a nuisance at best? Of course, and that mentality continues to this day. How is pop culture accepting this supreme court opinion? The mayor of one of the largest American cities called it a call to arms. That is how our pop culture is accepting it.
Education is extremely important.
-
AP ran a hit piece on the movie which CNN and many other sites have parroted.
The response:
https://uncoverdc.com/2022/05/09/2000-mules-and-true-the-vote-debunk-ap-hit-piece/
-
@Horace said in More Mules:
The Venn intersection of TDS sufferers and those who would have been above cheating to win in 2020, is essentially empty.
Can you honestly say that you believe Donald Trump and his inner circle would have been above cheating? The fact that post election, so much of his campaign of challenging the result was managed by incompetent buffoons doesn't mean he wasn't trying. It just means he'd hired a bunch of incompetent buffoons.
Also, some here would probably consider me to have TDS, and I don't think cheating in an election is justified, even if you're running against Hitler, never mind Trump.
I was only joking
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in More Mules:
@Horace said in More Mules:
The Venn intersection of TDS sufferers and those who would have been above cheating to win in 2020, is essentially empty.
Can you honestly say that you believe Donald Trump and his inner circle would have been above cheating? The fact that post election, so much of his campaign of challenging the result was managed by incompetent buffoons doesn't mean he wasn't trying. It just means he'd hired a bunch of incompetent buffoons.
Also, some here would probably consider me to have TDS, and I don't think cheating in an election is justified, even if you're running against Hitler, never mind Trump.
Probably Trump would cheat, though I’m not sure it’s feasible that he personally had any power to do so, regarding the popular vote. Maybe his supporters would cheat. But the “existential threat” of Biden was not a drumbeat I heard. An entire culture considered Trump an existential threat, at which point it would be irrational or cowardly for them not to cheat, if they had an opportunity to do so.
-
Huckabee weighs in...
https://www.mikehuckabee.com/latest-news?id=D5100247-17C4-4E27-82BA-B19B1237FDE6
On May 5, when Catherine Engelbrecht of True the Vote went on Tucker Carlson’s FOX News show to discuss election fraud, she very strangely did not mention the name of the movie, 2,000 MULES, she had produced with Dinesh D’Souza. The movie she thought she was there to promote, the one premiering that week.
Apparently, she’d been instructed not to.
The resulting conversation was bizarre. According to D’Souza, just before the interview, Tucker and producer Justin Wells quickly got with Engelbrecht and, incredibly, told her she couldn’t say the name of her film on the air. And she was forbidden to say the election was stolen. So if her speech during this interview seemed a little halting and unsure, it’s likely because she was self-editing on the fly.
The caption appearing onscreen was just “A Look Into What Happened in the 2020 Election.”
D’Souza himself has a similar story: he’d been booked on Grant Stinchfield’s Newsmax show but was abruptly canceled. “...why isn’t this a legitimate news story?” he tweeted. “How can so-called news networks pretend it doesn’t exist?”
Unlike FOX News, Newsmax did respond, with this statement:
“Newsmax has covered ‘2000 Mules,’ including airing its trailer dozens of times, airing President Trump’s comments on it, and featuring ‘2000 Mules’ in our daily podcast. Also covered it on Newsmax.com.
We’ve allowed the for-profit ‘2000 Mules’ to run their ads on @Newsmax. We’ve extensively covered the 2020 election, its results, and President Trump’s challenges to the race. Voter integrity issues are of national importance.”
Why, yes, they are. Still, it would’ve been nice for them to explain the cancelation.
https://waynedupree.com/2022/05/znewsmax-2000-mules-dinesh/?yptr=yahoo
Needless to say, the left is loving this. I’ll spare you links to stories from Newsweek, The Daily Beast and other leftist outlets that call D’Souza a “far-right conspiracy theorist” (and worse) and his movie a “bizarre flick that baselessly claims the 2020 election was stolen,” and a “propaganda film peddling a wholly flawed and faulty premise about ballot fraud in the 2020 election.”
Really? We’ve read the so-called “fact”-checks and found them to be amusingly insufficient. Word to the not-wise: SAYING a claim is “debunked” is not the same as actually debunking. Some left-leaning news outlets are linking to the “debunk” from PolitiFact as if it were definitive. Their “fact”-check is laughable.
Yes, there are questions we’d ask about the claims in the film. We’d like to get experts on to go on record about how closely the geospatial cellphone tracking corresponds to a person’s movements. We’d also like to know if the filmmakers ever got security video of the same person at multiple drop boxes and if not, what the explanation for that would be. Of course, the same story is told when one cellphone ID shows up at different locations, but think how effective it would’ve been to see one person show up repeatedly!
If there weren’t such a media blackout on the movie, all this could be discussed in the light of day, on, say, FOX News. (Full disclosure: I’m a FOX News contributor.) That’s what the producers of this movie wanted. But as David Burge (Iowahawk) famously tweeted, “Journalism is about covering important stories. With a pillow, until they stop moving.”
My understanding is that most –- perhaps all? –- states require security cameras at drop boxes, but that many states ignore that requirement. Some states that do have cameras are withholding their video. And Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests are being ignored, as is typical.
But in other states, such as Arizona, there’s action. The sheriff of Yuma County, who was in the film, says his office is teaming with the county recorder to investigate 2020 election fraud. They announced Wednesday that as of March, they had 16 open voter fraud cases. Not only are they looking at 2020, but they’ve seen evidence of a “pattern” of fraudulent voter registration forms ahead of the 2022 primary election. Engelbrecht at True the Vote is encouraged.
“What has been happening in Yuma County is happening across the country,” she said. “The targeting of vulnerable communities and vote abuse must be stopped.”
Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich has already indicted half a dozen people for illegal ballot harvesting. And D’Souza told investigative reporter John Solomon that the alleged Yuma County “mule” interviewed in the movie is cooperating with authorities. “It seems to be a direct response to the work of both True the Vote and the movie,” D’Souza said.
Solomon goes on to report that despite the lack of media and being relegated to alternative platforms such as Locals and Rumble, 2,000 MULES has made over $10 million. D’Souza told him that in just five days, a million people have seen it, “which, for a political documentary, is like downright insane.”
Finally, for weekend reading, David Horowitz and John Perazzo have a must-read article about Mark Zuckerberg’s funding of that tax-exempt foundation, the Center for Tech and Civic Life (CTCL), largely to pay for drop boxes. For Biden to win, by the teensiest margin in history, all they needed to do was spend his strategic influx of cash on “harvesting” ballots and getting them dropped into artfully-placed boxes. $350 million went to their “Safe Elections” Project --- as in, safe for the Democrat candidate? --- and another $69.5 million went to the Center for Election Innovation and Research (CEIR), whose founder had been a director of People For The American Way. The money to both these foundations was funneled through yet another one, the Silicon Valley Community Foundation, which supports get-out-the-vote campaigns for the Democrat Party.
The article goes into much more detail about how they use these funds. They claim to be nonpartisan, but, clearly, that is a joke. In 2020, it was easy to use COVID as an excuse to do elections the “safe” way, which coincidentally made cheating safe, too, as easy as pie.
Read the whole thing and be shocked. The list of grants goes on and on, obviously targeted to help Democrats. As The Federalist has noted, “The practical effect of these massive, privately manipulated election-office funding disparities was to create a ‘shadow’ election system with a built-in structural bias that systematically favored Democratic voters over Republican voters.” It “essentially created a high-powered, concierge-like get-out-the-vote effort for Biden...”
And as the Internal Revenue Code unambiguously states, partisan political activity by non-profits is illegal.
This is the sort of conversation a movie like 2,000 MULES should be sparking in TV newsrooms. That would be real reporting, the lack of which is shameful. The political hacks at CNN, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, and CBS won’t permit it, and now we see they’re not the only ones who won’t. If this is some sort of “collusion” or “conspiracy” or “joint venture” among the powers that be, to maintain the illusion of an honest election process when we have something very different, then a REAL newsroom would distinguish itself by refusing to be a part of that.
-
He's complaining that Fox and Newsmax are covering up stories that are harmful to Democrats.
OK.
I was only joking
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in More Mules:
He's complaining that Fox and Newsmax are covering up stories that are harmful to Democrats.
OK.
I suppose Fox has calculated that its viewership is not on board, by and large, with the election theft narrative. I doubt that viewership is unconvincible. I also doubt there exists a body of evidence, presented simply and clearly, that is convincing. Granted, I haven't watched the movie, but I don't suppose something of this magnitude would be understood by so few, if it were real and persuasive.
Education is extremely important.
-
@Horace said in More Mules:
@Doctor-Phibes said in More Mules:
He's complaining that Fox and Newsmax are covering up stories that are harmful to Democrats.
OK.
I suppose Fox has calculated that its viewership is not on board, by and large, with the election theft narrative. I doubt that viewership is unconvincible. I also doubt there exists a body of evidence, presented simply and clearly, that is convincing. Granted, I haven't watched the movie, but I don't suppose something of this magnitude would be understood by so few, if it were real and persuasive.
They could also be concerned about legal action. A lot of conspiracy peddlers shut up very quickly last time when Dominion started talking about libel.
I was only joking
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in More Mules:
@Horace said in More Mules:
@Doctor-Phibes said in More Mules:
He's complaining that Fox and Newsmax are covering up stories that are harmful to Democrats.
OK.
I suppose Fox has calculated that its viewership is not on board, by and large, with the election theft narrative. I doubt that viewership is unconvincible. I also doubt there exists a body of evidence, presented simply and clearly, that is convincing. Granted, I haven't watched the movie, but I don't suppose something of this magnitude would be understood by so few, if it were real and persuasive.
They could also be concerned about legal action. A lot of conspiracy peddlers shut up very quickly last time when Dominion started talking about libel.
yeah, if the claims are not demonstrable, and they mention specific people or organizations, that would be actionable.
-
@Doctor-Phibes said in More Mules:
@Horace said in More Mules:
@Doctor-Phibes said in More Mules:
He's complaining that Fox and Newsmax are covering up stories that are harmful to Democrats.
OK.
I suppose Fox has calculated that its viewership is not on board, by and large, with the election theft narrative. I doubt that viewership is unconvincible. I also doubt there exists a body of evidence, presented simply and clearly, that is convincing. Granted, I haven't watched the movie, but I don't suppose something of this magnitude would be understood by so few, if it were real and persuasive.
They could also be concerned about legal action. A lot of conspiracy peddlers shut up very quickly last time when Dominion started talking about libel.
Could be.
But what Huckaby is saying is reasonable. Don't ignore what evidence D'Sousa has produced. Look at it objectively, check it out and dismiss it if it's wrong. Follow it more closely if it turns out to be right.
The cell phone data is interesting. We've long known of ballot harvesting being a problem. Everybody knows it, but nobody wants to really pursue it.
I don't like mail-in ballots for multiple reasons, but if we must have them, limit them and make darn sure the person voting is able to vote and his vote has been accurately recorded and submitted.
-
@Mik said in More Mules:
Agreed. Avoid all appearance of impropriety.
The main reason for the vast majority of claims 0f fraud associated with this election were not due to inconsistencies and irregularities, but to somebody being incapable of accepting that he lost.
-
Oh, sod off, fuckwit.
Everything is not always about Trump. He may have wailed that the election was rigged and in many ways, he's right.
But besides that, the primary emphasis should be election integrity. I live in a state, much like some others, where that is not a given, even unto the point here, that rival political factions carried submachine guns down public streets.
You really, really don't want to go there. You come from a country where some godawful wars have been
fought over political power, so you ought to know better.This country will not function well unless all parties agree that the vote count is as correct as humanly possible. Anything else is a slippery slope to a republic in serious trouble.
