Northcountryman

V man, you disagree? how so?

We agree here; unfortunately, the media is incredibly biased and refuse to hold Biden (and other) Dems to the same standards they do Republicans , so only Republicans are investigated/charged and held accountable most of the time

Not sure if thats true or not, but has nothing to do with the veracity of 2000 Mules evidence- correct? But Lefty, if were talking about political malfeasance, do you think, then, that Biden is beyond reproach (Burisma/ Ukraine/ Hunter Biden, etc.) ?? I think not.... Im not talking about political corruption here , I'm talking about the election fraud that occurred ( and yes, it clearly did happen) in '20, perpetrated by the Dems . (You may be right about the issue youre talking about w/ Trump however, the Grift thing; Ill read it when I get a chance)

Thanks for the link, but hardly an unbiased source (i.e. Coulter the extreme Trmup hater) , a point always made by the Left about Dsouza and his credibility/bias,btw. Here, check out a sample: https://news.yahoo.com/ann-coulter-blames-gigantic-pussy-224927277.html

Lefty, whats a Grift anyway? Youve used that term before, never heard it ( embarrasingly for me lol)

I see; and the fact that you havent seen the documentary yourself doesnt influence your opinion that it is nonsense? Quite convenient, id say.

Yup, correct.

Obviously, a very inaccurate description as thyev now released ALOT of evidence of voter/election fraud; so, whats your point here?

Care to share your thoughts about my post Virgil?

I agree that it is beyond a shadow of a doubt that the Dems cheated in '20 at the National Level and that the Dems and their Media cohorts strategy is/has been to largely ignore the evidence presented and provide weak/ lame rebutttals in response to 2000 Mules. On the other hand, because the documentary shined a national spotlight on their activities, I dont think the same efforts and tactics will be so easy to repeat next election cycle. I watched a video breaking down 2000 Mules last night; basically, guy being interviewed explains that ALL of the illicit activities documented in the film WERE FOREWARNED TO THE REBULICAN PARTY PRIOR TO THE '20 ELECTION AND THEY WERE ASLEEP AT THE WHEEL!! No way should they have allowed mass mail in bollots to be sent enamsse to every registered voter (from rolls decades old and incredibly inaccurate, mind you) that can just be sent returned to ballot boxes which cirmumvent the USPS and no Signature/ ID verification built in!! Also, these ballot boxes - by LAW- were supposed to be monitored via video surveillance in order to deter cheating- sadly, many did not. The ones that did , however, as seen in 2000 Mules, detected TONS of fraud , yet I wonder how much was missed ?

As you wish

Now we can have a real debate !! Excellent analysis !! Gimme some time to process what you said and I’ll get back - take care : D

Sweden? Wow Lucky you- I'm jealous!!!

Ok, I think we should take a break and all go fishin !! What you say Lefty? I caught 2 nice Rainbows over the weekend , hbu?

Correct- that fact, in conjunction with the cell phone data tracking these Mules from NGO to > ballot boxes(necessarily, accdg to the "Mule" delineation criteria), looks awfully suspicious and cannot be explained as merely "innocent" coincidences- no way.

You are correct about 1 thing , my friend: I do need to see the hearings in order to be better informed what the other side is saying!! However, in this case at least, 1 (me not watching the hearings) clearly has nothing to do with the other (the accuracy/validity of the conclusions drawn from the makers of 2000 Mules), so anything learned from watching the hearings still will not lessen the impact of the evidence of election fraud uncovered in the documentary- so you should watch it :).

Nor am I; it is the evidence presented in the documentary that does the convincing. My objective in this thread has -and continues to be- to convey key peices of evidence that are presented in it. Yes, you can tell theyre the same people-watch it!! Also, after you watch it, you can make an honest assessment using your own observational powers the Mule in question is stuffing into the box- is it an innocent 2 , maybe 3 , or is it 20 or more? Watch and ye shall see!!

Depends on how many members of your household you got; you doin it for 50? Nope- illegal. And 10 or more times? Pretty big immediate family , Id say.

Well, Then, sadly, I guess theres really nothing left to discuss; very easy to dismiss evidence you havent seen. And for the record, I havent dismissed ANY evidence presented in the hearings being conducted currently, just havent watched it is all.

You need to watch it , my friend- seriously.

Tell you what:lets BOTH agree to this; ill watch the hearings, you watch the documentary- deal?

The ones that were included in the movie were not at malls or libraries; they were on street corners as far as I coud tell and the trips had to be contiguous; so, got to an NGO, then the ballot box, more than 10 times, Also, theres video evidence of them stuffing bunches of ballots into the boxes. In all cases, it is illegal to drop more than 1 ballot into sadi boxes, other than your won( The law does allow you to deop for family meber or friend, however). So, your not supposed to be stuffing bunches of ballots into these boxes like the Mules were caught on film doing. Thus, all votes would be comsidered illegal and tainted.

Not even close. Watch the film yourself , please- OBJECTIVELY. If youre honest, youll admit looks pretty damn suspicious.

Yes, but to qualify as a "Mule" you have to meet the following criteria: 1) Have travelled to >10 ballot boxes during the election cycle (september thru november 2020) AND 2) Have travelled to an NGO delineated in the city as Democrat supporting/leaning Note: The ballot collection boxes are ONLY used for ballots- they are not Mail boxes!! So, if someone goes to a ballot collection box once, no problem- twice? Wellll, ok. 3 times?? Whats goi on with this guy? But they STILL didnt count as a Mule until they mmade at least 10 TRIPS. Dont know about you, but sounds pretty suspicious to me

The video evidence is more than impressive in the documentary; I think Mr. Barr is is being a bit dismissive of whats presented.