Interesting and Topical Documentary

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Ohmin, Dec 24, 2020.

  1. JazzMan1221

    JazzMan1221 Better-Known Member

    BurnPyro likes this.
  2. chickenpox2

    chickenpox2 I need me some PIE!

    Ignore him he been sucking on trump 'teeth" for too long
  3. Braxzee

    Braxzee I need me some PIE!

    Those things are not a Ponzi scheme. You vote for leaders who can make the changes for you. Notice LEADERS not just one. If you do not actively vote and push on many platforms and levels of government and just vote for the president you will be unhappy and loose. It is like saying I want to loose weight but my only choice of food is a Hamburger (republican) or a chicken sandwich (democrat). Our government is way to complex to break it down to just that.
  4. EtherLiam

    EtherLiam Well-Known Member

  5. profhulk

    profhulk Forum Royalty

    Just stop. Omg. Here. Check it out. It is only 8:24 seconds.

  6. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    Still waiting on actual proof of voter fraud that isn't in favor of Donald Trump...

    BurnPyro likes this.
  7. EtherLiam

    EtherLiam Well-Known Member
    :p That's just the ambience you get from sleeping in the wilderness with only the thin walls of a trailer to seperate you...
    Last edited: Jul 16, 2022
  8. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    Ah, thanks for actually providing something to discuss!


    So, the 2000 Mules is basically conspiracy theory nonsense.

    The claim is that based on cell phone tracking data, they show that many people visited many ballot boxes.

    "Some cell phones may have appeared near more than one ballot box based on data we claim to be valid!"

    First, there is no way for anyone to independently verify that the data isn't simply made up.

    Second, even if it were true, it doesn't prove any voter fraud, but is exactly the kind of stuff that conspiracy theorists love pushing as proof in place of... well... anything specific.

    For example, if a person attended several rallies at various locations, they may have been carrying multiple devices with a cell signal (I know I have 3 different ones personally). So that, right there, changes everything about the narrative as one person could be responsible for dozens of so-called "mules," (with no evidence they dropped of any ballots), but of course, the conclusion the movie wants you to draw is that each count is a unique person who have no other reason to be in those places.

    Third, the tracking data doesn't actually show anyone visiting a ballot box at all, as it's not that accurate. They could have been 40 feet away from it. So they start showing surveillance video of people (not necessarily the same people as the phone records) dropping off more than a single ballot, but...

    Fourth, people are allowed to drop off multiple ballots for many reasons. The movie pretends it's illegal. Georgia investigated these cases and found no evidence of any wrongdoing, one man in a White SUV, he dropped off.. a few ballots, for his family, as is his legal right - the investigation found the man's registered home had 5 legal voters - all family members. The movie says, "What you are seeing is a crime." Which is false.

    In another case, the man dropped off a ballot for himself and his mother.

    In general, it is not illegal to drop off ballots for others in many cases, from family members, to a person in your care (if you are a hospice worker, for example), etc. By pretending that scenes must show a crime, the movie attempts to mislead people with no actual evidence.

    What's extra funny is the man who made the movie says, "All they did was ask who they dropped ballots off for and accepted it!" which is hilarious because all he did was show that some people may have been near more than one ballot box which is even more tenous. Of course, it's not true that's all the investigators did - they verified with election records that those ballots were, indeed, dropped off that day as claimed - which is vastly more evidence that this movie has.

    Fourth, there is one scene where they claim to show the drop box locations... but they don't actually match up with the actual drop box locations, LOL. The response, "the movie graphics are not literal interpretations of our data" - oh, so what you show in the movie... may not be true to the data? I see, I see... LOL

    Fifth, note that ballots dropped in boxes get checked just like any other ballot with matching signatures. It's not like they get fast tracked and counted with no verification. In other words, if they were counted, they were shown not be fraudulent ballots themselves. So even if it were true that some ballots were illegally dropped off... that's a different matter than if the ballots themselves were illegal. Still, troubling if true, but a much lower class of problem. There is no evidence of any "fake" ballots.

    Sixth, the movie claims numerous times there was a "paid" operation, but provides no actual evidence of this.

    Finally, if you were to actually use the data scientifically, you'd also want to use the same data to check some null hypothesis. What about a coffee shop? How many of those tracked visited multiple coffee shops in the same period? My guess is a lot - it may even overlap significantly with the "ballot box" locations.

    Or bus stops? Or parking lots? The fact is, with data of this type and size, you could pick virtually any commonly visited locations and the data will show that people "visited" many of these same places too. It doesn't mean a crime occurred at those places any more than at the ballot boxes.


    Note that Georgia's investigation is still under way, but the strongest evidence (the videos showing people dropping off ballots with license plates visible) have already been looked into and found not to be illegal. Funny what happens when you actually look into something instead of implying it with no evidence.

    Note too that ballot harvesting DOES happen - and it does get investigated, so it's not like the issue being shown here never happens and is ignored by investigators. They investigate this stuff frequently.

    Here's an example where an election was overturned due to actual evidence of ballot harvesting and tampering (in favor of a Republican candidate):
    (By the way, the person responsible has died while awaiting trial, how convienient.)

    Republicans claim this case proves it can happen, for me, it proves that the process already catches it and pretending it's happening without evidence is un-American.


    As is always the case with these kind of "evidence" it's never about the actual ballots themselves, and investigations into the ballots have virtually never found anything actually fraudulent about them.

    Fundamentally, this movie is basically making unsubstantiated claims to back another unsubstantial claim. It's basically like when you lie to cover up your previous lies - if there was real evidence, you could just SHOW it, instead of relying on implications and speculation.

    Imagine if the police arrested you and you were convicted on murder based solely on someone who hates you claim's that your cell phone being near... somewhere that thousands of people could have been every day (say, a Starbucks) - no witnesses, no body, no murder weapon, no physical evidence, just that your cell phone pinged near the Starbucks (which is also near a lot of other stuff). Would you really be like, "Ok, you got me, I went to the book store next door, so I must have committed murder at the Starbucks even though you have no body and no evidence anyone was killed?" It's so insane.

    This isn't evidence. It isn't evidence there was a crime. It isn't evidence you were at the Starbucks. It isn't evidence something happened at the Starbucks.

    With no other evidence, it means literally nothing, and any reasonable person should come to the same conclusion.

    The only people who could possibly think this is evidence are people who have already made up their mind or don't have the ability to think critically about such claims.

    It's not surprising every time someone claims "evidence" it's stuff like this. If there was actual evidence, we'd have all seen it by now.

    Ping me when something interesting shows up.
    Last edited: Jul 8, 2022
    BurnPyro likes this.
  9. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    By the way, the guy who made the film and claims that the information in his film came from a whistleblower?

    He has publicly admitted that he has never spoken to the whistleblower and doesn't know the terms of the arrangement the whistleblower allegedly had and claims that the whistleblower doesn't want to be contacted by the authorities.

    How convenient that the ENTIRE BASIS for the movie is based on his totally real Canadian girlfriend that no one has met, not even himself.
    BurnPyro likes this.
  10. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    Here's what the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said after looking at the data:


    It's much less precise than what the people behind this have been suggesting. 100 feet? Good christ - the average street in the US is 71 feet - you could literally be across the street but they claim you were at a dropbox with no other evidence.

    It'd take USAIN BOLT 3 seconds to cross 100 feet. Think about that how far that actually is in terms of trying to tie someone to a freaking drop box.


    The fact that they only obtained for the period they were interested in shows how unscientific this process is.

    In order to actually come to the conclusion that these datapoints are anomalous, you'd need to establish a baseline.

    For example, it'd extremely compelling if they could show that during the period from Jan 1st to Dec 31st of 2019 to 2020 that there were no similar patterns for any set of locations - because that would mean that the concentration of these "multi-trippers" were higher than what would be expected from a normal day or period. You want at least a year, probably 2, in order to isolate against seasonal differences, etc.

    You may also want to get data from states that you don't believe had this problem, and see if the same "multi-trippers" pattern emerges there.

    The point is that this whole thing is a fishing expedition intended, not to provide evidence, but to keep the narrative going, to keep people outraged - to keep the $$$ flowing. True the Vote and others doesn't want the gravy train to stop.


    The fact that despite all this information, footage, they cannot demonstrate with any physical proof, names or details of ANYONE specific having dropped off multiple ballots illegal tells you how tenuous it really is.

    The bike guy is a particular funny one, because they keep saying he went to multiple drop boxes and took pictures - but they have literally no evidence of this being the case - they can't even provide evidence that ties him to one of their cell IDs. He could literally be ANYONE who voted, legally.
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2022
  11. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    But but... what about that lady in Arizona who pled guilty?


    Look, I already said ballot harvesting is a real thing and provided an example.

    So let's look at this ONE case and see if it proves WIDESPREAD, ORGANIZED VOTER FRAUD in the 2020 General Election of the 46th POTUS, as alleged by the 2000 Mules movie.


    Ok, so she is one of the 2000 mules right? We can tie her to a cellphone ID that shows she was at multiple dropboxes?

    No? What do you mean no?

    She did this in... August 2020? So what were the ballots for? It was still for the President right?

    No? It wasn't ballots for the Presidential election? Oh... it was for a primary?

    Well, still, that proves that a widespread scheme was going on WELL BEFORE the actual election right? She and her cronies must have harvested thousands of ballots.

    No? There were just 2 people involved? And they harvested... four ballots? And she dropped them off... at a SINGLE ballot box?

    Well, there must be hundreds of these cases in AZ since the law against this practice was passed in 2016 right? With many of them coming after the 2020 General Election, proving once and for all that there was widespread voter fraud in favor of Biden?

    This is the ONLY case???


    Your proof, ladies and gentlemen!

    Four ballots.
    One box.
    Wrong election.

    Yes, "as seen in 2000 Mules." Mmhmmm... yes, indeedy, no differences whatsoever.
    Last edited: Jul 9, 2022
  12. EtherLiam

    EtherLiam Well-Known Member

    Did you actually watch the entire movie?
  13. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    Not every minute, but enough to know it's devoid of value. I believe I addressed the major pieces of the film sufficiently.

    If you think I missed something, let me know what it was and I'll answer that.

    Not going to play the guessing game as to what you think is important or not.

    Ohmin tried to do that before with Lindell's stuff and it was bullshit then and is bullshit now. I gave you plenty of criticism of the theory to work with.

    The fact that you engaged with none of it is telling, but not surprising.
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2022
  14. EtherLiam

    EtherLiam Well-Known Member

    As opposed to say the Pfizer study results.

    I didn't discuss anything, other than crickets!

    Just posted a link which was enough bait to trigger another launch into more of the same on election results.

    None of it was important.

    The fact that Dinesh is a convicted criminal who violated federal campaign finance laws and that this was just a blatant cash grab was enough to disuade me from watching more than the trailer.

    The fact that you engaged with ALL of it is telling, but not surprising.
  15. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    I think this is a very problematic stance. If he has credible evidence, I wouldn't want to dismiss it out of hand. Also, the fact that I am interested in the subject and many believe the claims is enough for me to want to know about the claims and whether they are valid.

    That said, kudos for not believing in this nonsense, though I feel it's better if we judged this sort of stuff on its merits instead of simply shooting the messenger.
    Last edited: Jul 17, 2022
  16. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    Still waiting for that evidence from Lindell...

    "Zeidman successfully decoded the eleven data sets provided. Some contained lists of IP addresses in China, some contained spreadsheets which appeared to have been doctored, and some contained gibberish. None contained the promised packet captures which would effectively time stamp them as being related to the 2020 election, and so the arbitrators awarded him the $5 million."

  17. BurnPyro

    BurnPyro Forum Royalty

    Incredible to come to online forums and see someone ask "did you watch Dinesh D'Souza's documentary in FULL though?" like anything the guy puts out is supposed to be credible, and not the most obvious partisan conspiracy hackery like he's been doing for decades.

    There's no hope for political change in this country. The most obvious glaring flaws in the system can't be diagnosed by the average Joe without making it some weird conspiracy and not simply rich, powerful people vacuuming up your money.
  18. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

  19. Sokolov

    Sokolov The One True Cactuar Octopi

    "The movie “2000 Mules” was supposed to be the definitive proof that Democrats stole the 2020 election from President Trump. Last week it was quietly retracted. Salem Media Group, which co-produced this Trumpian fantasy mockumentary, ceased distribution of the film and issued an apology to Mark Andrews, one of the Georgia voters depicted as an illegal ballot “mule.”

    Mr. Andrews is suing for defamation, and Salem aims to shift blame to the film’s purported vote-fraud-fighting heroes. “We relied on representations made to us by Dinesh D’Souza and True the Vote, Inc. (‘TTV’) that the individuals depicted in the videos provided to us by TTV, including Mr. Andrews, illegally deposited ballots,” the company said. “We have learned that the Georgia Bureau of Investigation has cleared Mr. Andrews of illegal voting activity in connection with the event depicted.”"

    Well, yea... the entire film was a fabrication.

Share This Page