Real Evidence of Voter fraud in 2020?

[Northcountryman]

1 minute ago, Splitear said:

Actually, I’ll tell you what, because it’s you asking, I’ll pony up the $20 and watch it. I will say that there’s no way I can be objective since I’ve read about the issues in their methodology and outcomes. However, I’ll stay as open minded as possible. 
 

No need for any kind of deal, if you want to watch the committee hearings, feel free, but I’m not trying to convince anyone. 

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. 

6 minutes ago, Splitear said:

Actually, I’ll tell you what, because it’s you asking, I’ll pony up the $20 and watch it. I will say that there’s no way I can be objective since I’ve read about the issues in their methodology and outcomes. However, I’ll stay as open minded as possible. 
 

No need for any kind of deal, if you want to watch the committee hearings, feel free, but I’m not trying to convince anyone. 

 

9 minutes ago, Splitear said:

How many did people put in? Can you tell from the security cameras? Can you tell that their the same people?

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!!

[Northcountryman]

Just now, Northcountryman said:

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!!

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 :). 

 

[Grouse]

Don't forget these mules were driving around stuffing multiple mail in ballots, in multiple boxes, at 3 AM and taking cell phone pictures of themselves doing it so they could get paid, all while wearing rubber gloves after a few were caught and prosecuted because their finger prints were on the ballots.

But I'm sure the deniers would think all of that was normal.

Edited June 14, 2022 by Grouse

[Grouse]

On 6/12/2022 at 2:14 AM, Grouse said:

 

[Grouse]

[Northcountryman]

5 hours ago, Grouse said:

Don't forget these mules were driving around stuffing multiple mail in ballots, in multiple boxes, at 3 AM and taking cell phone pictures of themselves doing it so they could get paid, all while wearing rubber gloves after a few were caught and prosecuted because their finger prints were on the ballots.

But I'm sure the deniers would think all of that was normal.

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.  

[Grouse]

It takes a hit in the head with a sledgehammer to convince some people.

[BowmanMike]

25 minutes ago, Grouse said:

It takes a hit in the head with a sledgehammer to convince some people.

I hope you guys are donating to Trumps fund to fight election fraud.

[Grouse]

Well, we're sure as hell paying into Biden's fund to keep it going. 

Edited June 14, 2022 by Grouse

[left field]

1 hour ago, BowmanMike said:

I hope you guys are donating to Trumps fund to fight election fraud.

And posting memes. Nothing quite says "I'm committed to the cause" like shit posting memes at 3:00 am.

[left field]

You really have to admire the scale of the grift.

 

 

[Grouse]

41 minutes ago, left field said:

And posting memes. Nothing quite says "I'm committed to the cause" like shit posting memes at 3:00 am.

I work the midnight shift Jackoff.  Why don't you just find something better to do than rag on others on here.

[left field]

So you shitpost on someone else's time and dime? How very Trumpian of you. 

[Grouse]

From now on, don't think I'm ignoring you, you're just insignificant.

 

[diplomat019]

Typical of a leftist.  Shit posting on someone else's dime.  And boasting about it.  What else can you expect from a paid liberal agitator?   So sad. 

[left field]

21 minutes ago, Grouse said:

From now on, don't think I'm ignoring you, you're just insignificant.

I don't know, sport. You're like Trump and will swing at every pitch. 

[Northcountryman]

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?

 

 

 

[left field]

Last week. Slow day and just one brown. Sweden in Sept for salmon and sea trout. Looking forward to that.

[Northcountryman]

37 minutes ago, left field said:

Last week. Slow day and just one brown. Sweden in Sept for salmon and sea trout. Looking forward to that.

Sweden?  Wow

Lucky you- I'm jealous!!!

[Splitear]

Okay @Northcountryman, I just finished "2000 Mules". I wish I could have went into it with an open mind, but unfortunately, I read quite a bit about it and it's problems before watching it. I can totally see how it is convincing if you take it on face value and/or if it fits your beliefs (I don't want to say agenda). I did take a few notes:

So, what I found intriguing or suspicious:

1. The "Pattern of Life" map that they showed at the beginning was suspicious. It got me thinking, however, I have questions. Is this "Pattern of Life" the only place they went that day, or is it simplified to show ballot boxes and "NGO's"? The route that was shown was pretty straightforward. They said this is the pattern of life for a mule for 1 day. If this is the only data pings that phone sent that day, then the only thing that person did that day was visit boxes and NGO's, they didn't go home, they didn't deviate to get lunch or go to the bathroom. 

The alternative to this is that they simplified the "Pattern of Life" to show what they were out to prove, which is smart, because I'm guessing it would be really boring to see all of the little data points that this person laid out during the day. Obviously they are going to show someone who really fits the narrative, so what if this person was a delivery driver? What if they were an Uber driver? They may have had data pings all over that area during that day, but the only thing we saw was a route that fit the "mule" route. 

2. Some of the surveillance video was certainly suspicious. People stuffing multiple ballots in boxes, and then taking photos. Though I don't know why in the world anyone would take a photo, unless it's for an "I Voted" social media post. 

3. The one that got me was the bike guy who left and then came back to take a photo, that was weird.

4. Also, the lady who had a SC cellphone, but was in Atlanta. I wish they could ask her what is up with that. It could be nefarious or innocent, but we'll never know. However, in this account, it's all the proof we need that she was up to no good. 

Okay, so now for why I didn't buy it:

1. It was totally biased. This documentary, like most documentaries, has a strong agenda. The beauty of a documentary is, they control the whole narrative, the whole story. They can include or omit anything they want. You see what they want you to see, and if it drives their agenda, they'll include it. Hole in the data? We'll just film a "dramatization" to fill it. The fact that they never once questioned any aspect of what was going on in a way that looked to offer another explanation shows they were out to tell a story, not necessarily the whole truth.

2. Evidence: They kept saying "We have evidence" but never showed it. "We have evidence that this same guy visited 25 drop boxes that same night", then show us. You control the story, show us your evidence. You know who doesn't show evidence that they claim to have? People who don't have the evidence they claim to have. 

3. Some of the video surveillance was debunked when I read about it yesterday. The guy in the SUV putting in 5 ballots, investigators followed up, he said he put in 5 ballots for his family members, and guess what, voter records showed that there were 5 registered voters living in his house. This was the same guy they claimed visited multiple boxes, but as previously stated, they never once showed his "Pattern of Life" or video of him filling other boxes. Don't you think that would be convincing, if they could show this evidence, but they didn't. 

4. Who were the "NGO's"? They were the crux of this whole conspiracy, but they never say who they are? Why? 

5. They kept on about the "who votes at 3:00am?" thing. I would imagine that even @Grouse could answer that, people who can't vote during the day, or who do their business at night because of work schedules. If I get off of work at midnight or 1am, then guess what, I might drop off my ballot on the way home. There are a lot of people who keep those kind of hours, that's not a bit suspicious to me. 

6. The set-up of the whole film repeated tons of the debunked election lies and the popular "there's no way Biden could have won, he's senile, never came out of his basement, can't put a sentence together, etc." He also led all of the polling against an incredibly unpopular president (though Biden is beating him in that aspect now as well), including in all of the states that were contested in this film. I know, I know, Trump beat the polling in 2020....

7. Sorry, another one to add: They had evidence of 2000+ mules, all emitting geolocating data. Is it worth considering that a lot of folks have multiple geodata emitting devices on them at one time, especially in a city? Cellphone? Ping! Smartwatch? Ping! Cellular Data in your delivery truck? Ping! Just something to consider. Perhaps they "have the data" for this to, but like most everything else, they never showed it. 

So, in conclusion, D'Souza got my $20, and I got to watch a decently made documentary that told an intriguing and exciting conspiracy story, but provided very little evidence to back up the claims of "we have evidence". Does it raise interesting questions? Sure, but does it answer them? Nope, not for me. In the end, I'm glad I watched it, because now I can at least have an informed point of view about it. 

 

Edited June 14, 2022 by Splitear

[Northcountryman]

49 minutes ago, Splitear said:

Okay @Northcountryman, I just finished "2000 Mules". I wish I could have went into it with an open mind, but unfortunately, I read quite a bit about it and it's problems before watching it. I can totally see how it is convincing if you take it on face value and/or if it fits your beliefs (I don't want to say agenda). I did take a few notes:

So, what I found intriguing or suspicious:

1. The "Pattern of Life" map that they showed at the beginning was suspicious. It got me thinking, however, I have questions. Is this "Pattern of Life" the only place they went that day, or is it simplified to show ballot boxes and "NGO's"? The route that was shown was pretty straightforward. They said this is the pattern of life for a mule for 1 day. If this is the only data pings that phone sent that day, then the only thing that person did that day was visit boxes and NGO's, they didn't go home, they didn't deviate to get lunch or go to the bathroom. 

The alternative to this is that they simplified the "Pattern of Life" to show what they were out to prove, which is smart, because I'm guessing it would be really boring to see all of the little data points that this person laid out during the day. Obviously they are going to show someone who really fits the narrative, so what if this person was a delivery driver? What if they were an Uber driver? They may have had data pings all over that area during that day, but the only thing we saw was a route that fit the "mule" route. 

2. Some of the surveillance video was certainly suspicious. People stuffing multiple ballots in boxes, and then taking photos. Though I don't know why in the world anyone would take a photo, unless it's for an "I Voted" social media post. 

3. The one that got me was the bike guy who left and then came back to take a photo, that was weird.

4. Also, the lady who had a SC cellphone, but was in Atlanta. I wish they could ask her what is up with that. It could be nefarious or innocent, but we'll never know. However, in this account, it's all the proof we need that she was up to no good. 

Okay, so now for why I didn't buy it:

1. It was totally biased. This documentary, like most documentaries, has a strong agenda. The beauty of a documentary is, they control the whole narrative, the whole story. They can include or omit anything they want. You see what they want you to see, and if it drives their agenda, they'll include it. Hole in the data? We'll just film a "dramatization" to fill it. The fact that they never once questioned any aspect of what was going on in a way that looked to offer another explanation shows they were out to tell a story, not necessarily the whole truth.

2. Evidence: They kept saying "We have evidence" but never showed it. "We have evidence that this same guy visited 25 drop boxes that same night", then show us. You control the story, show us your evidence. You know who doesn't show evidence that they claim to have? People who don't have the evidence they claim to have. 

3. Some of the video surveillance was debunked when I read about it yesterday. The guy in the SUV putting in 5 ballots, investigators followed up, he said he put in 5 ballots for his family members, and guess what, voter records showed that there were 5 registered voters living in his house. This was the same guy they claimed visited multiple boxes, but as previously stated, they never once showed his "Pattern of Life" or video of him filling other boxes. Don't you think that would be convincing, if they could show this evidence, but they didn't. 

4. Who were the "NGO's"? They were the crux of this whole conspiracy, but they never say who they are? Why? 

5. They kept on about the "who votes at 3:00am?" thing. I would imagine that even @Grouse could answer that, people who can't vote during the day, or who do their business at night because of work schedules. If I get off of work at midnight or 1am, then guess what, I might drop off my ballot on the way home. There are a lot of people who keep those kind of hours, that's not a bit suspicious to me. 

6. The set-up of the whole film repeated tons of the debunked election lies and the popular "there's no way Biden could have won, he's senile, never came out of his basement, can't put a sentence together, etc." He also led all of the polling against an incredibly unpopular president (though Biden is beating him in that aspect now as well), including in all of the states that were contested in this film. I know, I know, Trump beat the polling in 2020....

7. Sorry, another one to add: They had evidence of 2000+ mules, all emitting geolocating data. Is it worth considering that a lot of folks have multiple geodata emitting devices on them at one time, especially in a city? Cellphone? Ping! Smartwatch? Ping! Cellular Data in your delivery truck? Ping! Just something to consider. Perhaps they "have the data" for this to, but like most everything else, they never showed it. 

So, in conclusion, D'Souza got my $20, and I got to watch a decently made documentary that told an intriguing and exciting conspiracy story, but provided very little evidence to back up the claims of "we have evidence". Does it raise interesting questions? Sure, but does it answer them? Nope, not for me. In the end, I'm glad I watched it, because now I can at least have an informed point of view about it. 

 

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 

[Splitear]

7 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

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 

Nope, I don't want to debate. That's my take on this, feel free to reply, but I don't want to get drug into a pages long debate on something that I don't care a whole lot about

Edited June 14, 2022 by Splitear

[Northcountryman]

9 minutes ago, Splitear said:

Nope, I don't want to debate. That's my take on this, feel free to reply, but I don't want to get drug into a pages long debate on something that I don't care a whole lot about

As you wish 

[Splitear]

10 minutes ago, Northcountryman said:

As you wish 

Thanks man, I appreciate it. 

[Grouse]

And there you have it.  It's very possible a political coup took place in 2020, the country has gone down the toilet since, there is enough evidence to support an investigation, the administration has weaponized every govt agency it has to vilify and incarcerate anyone who questions it, and people just don't care a whole lot about it.

Well that certainly proves why this country is going to crap.