So did 2000 mules actually have anything?

From what I can find out about it, without actually watching it, it seems like it turned out to be kind of a nothing burger.

Individual "mules" don't appear to have deposited more than 5 or 6 ballots per drop. Meaning they would need to do quite a lot of drops, over a long time, in order to insert enough votes to flip the outcome.

Even if each one was visiting 10 boxes, and did so 10 times, that's only about 500 or 600 ballots each. I guess it could add up, with enough "mules" doing it.

But then we're left with the other question: how reliable is the cell phone data? If enough people were identified visiting, each one, enough boxes, then the odds of it happening by accident would become vanishingly small. One or two people might exist who have a life that just so happens to take them to all 10 locations on a daily basis. Also some people actually have the job of visiting the boxes (such as whoever it is that empties them out.) And as some debunk sites point out: one person could be carrying several devices. (Which also is easy to filter for, by checking the time stamps, and assuming mules don't travel in a group.)

I'm trying to decide whether to waste the time, and money, to see it.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

I didn’t watch it either, but here’s what I want to know: did they ever do a control experiment? As I understand it, they tracked phones in and around drop boxes on and around Election Day and observed patterns where some phone numbers showed up around the drop boxes more often than others. They then inferred without direct evidence, that those individuals were cheating. Did they do the same experiment at the same locations 3 months before or 3 months after Election Day and compare the two patterns? Unless you know what a normal pattern looks like, you don’t know what an abnormal pattern looks like.

Also, a person delivering 5 or 6 ballots seems entirely consistent with one person depositing all the ballots for a household or a family—which is usually legal.

They have video footage of these people. The film was worth the watch. The entire process is explained.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

I think the movie was initially downloadable. I definitely didn't pay for it.

What I noted is that some of the 'footage' seemed to show moving camera angles (like cameras that move down the street to show the alleged malefactors around parked cars, at a better angle) and other things that felt to me that were not capturable by fixed mount security cameras (even ones that could zoom and scan). This means that some of the footage must, at least, have been staged.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Only 500-600? per mule? Only???! Thats 1 million votes for 2000 mules and only in 3 key swing states... Lol a nothing burger you say? Thats many times over enough to decide those states... Also 10 dropboxes was the minimum any of those mules did, most did more, so they couldve even dropped less per dropbox to get to a massive decisive amount of fraudulent votes.

Ive seen the movie and I will summarize it for you, so you finally have an idea what youre talking about: Voter fraud organisation Truethevote bought geolocation data of around 10 million phones of only 3 swing states of the 2020 election. They claim they played a roll in the past with investigating election fraud by both parties but also crime.

With that data they looked for patterns of people that visited dropboxes using a filter so they would only identify highly suspected patterns. The filter was at least 1 building of so far not disclosed leftist or Democrat organisations and at least 10 ballot dropboxes that same day. This way they found 2000 phones that followed that pattern.

This also means there could be a lot more mules since they used a very high amount of minimum dropboxes and only organisations with locations they know of. They also found many that did more than exactly 10 dropboxes, which was the lowest amount of any mule.

Next they did a Foia request of the camera footage of all those dropboxes. They found out many dropboxes didnt have the by law required cameras installed.

Still with the footage of those dropboxes they got they matched the time at which a phone of a suspected mule was at a dropbox and checked the footage. That way they still found hours of evidence of voter fraud.

For the sake of the movie they just show the most suspicious: often in the middle of the night people getting out of their car, putting a few ballots in and then some take a picture of the ballot box and drive off. They show a few at different drop boxes. There is around 3 videos shown of people that vote with one glove on even, taking it off and disposing it next to the drop box.
They say this might have to do with the fact around that time the FBI convicted someome by identifying fingerprints on the envelope.

Anyway if 1 million fraudulent votes is a nothing burger for you guys that explains so much about your partisan way of discussing the corner stone of any democracy, which elections are ofcourse. Astonishing statement really.
Also its not just the footage on itself that is hard evidence, its the geolocation of phones connected to it, proving the rest of the steal that did indeed happen in 2020. Unless proven the footage is fake, the foia is fake, the geolocation data is fake, the evidence and proof imo, is real. But im pretty sure they dont like to do prison time, so the odds are very small that that documentary is fake or acted.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Then you should probably watch it and educate yourself about it instead of posting this really half-assed attempt at debunking it.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

I think the movie was initially downloadable. I definitely didn't pay for it.

What I noted is that some of the 'footage' seemed to show moving camera angles (like cameras that move down the street to show the alleged malefactors around parked cars, at a better angle) and other things that felt to me that were not capturable by fixed mount security cameras (even ones that could zoom and scan). This means that some of the footage must, at least, have been staged.

If you take a still from video footage, zoom in and focus on a small portion of it, then take another portion out of range and/or slightly overlapping from the first portion and do the same thing, it will appear the camera has moved.

The reality is you only saw a portion of the full image both times.

Apparently there is a plan to thwart fraudulent voting:

www.aol.com...

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
Apparently there is a plan to thwart fraudulent voting:

www.aol.com...

Gee, another fact-checker site. Has one ever taken an opposing stance to the official government sanctioned narrative? Ever? I haven't been able to find any examples....

It was just an article of interest, seems we are not the only ones who know the voting process is faulty and illegal. Now they have to do something about it, President Trump or someone of his caliber has to get back in!

a reply to: nugget1

Gee, another fact-checker site. Has one ever taken an opposing stance to the official government sanctioned narrative? Ever? I haven't been able to find any examples....

that's the trendy thing that a@@ kissing controlled MSM/s and left biased lib dem sites do. it cool to them to be a a@@ kisser.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

Yeah,

It had a bunch of people (mules) tracked by cell phone gps data going to and from "activist organizational" offices to 20-30 vote dropboxes multiple times, multiple days, multiple cities and strangely this pattern of behavior for these people only happened during the voting time period. Not before, not after.

There is also video of some of these people stuffing 20-30 ballots in at a time multiple times.

It is pretty obvious to anyone not lying to themselves.

This example shows a single person visiting 28 drop boxes and 5 leftist "organizations" in a single day. (Ballot stash houses).

originally posted by: bloodymarvelous

From what I can find out about it, without actually watching it, it seems like it turned out to be kind of a nothing burger.

That's about the level of investigation I have come to expect . Good job

People wonder where the label 'Drones' & 'NPCs' come from?

The second post is the same...

originally posted by: 1947boomer
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

I didn’t watch it either, but here’s what I want to know:

At least you guys are open now, like msm, you don't even pretend to hide your bias.

a reply to: bloodymarvelous

If you want the abridged version, skip to 25 minutes.

www.bitchute.com...


See Also Thread:

Watch The Voter Fraud

www.abovetopsecret.com...

They purchased phone geolocation data from data brokers from October to January in some metro areas.

They then created a geofence around 309 ballot droboxes in the Metro Atlanta area, then they cross referenced people who had been to TEN or more drop boxes and 5 or more visits to one of these "Organizations".. cough cough.

This of course is starting with the worst offenders who met that criteria.

What were the results? 242 people (ballot mules) who averaged visiting 24 drop boxes and coincidently visited on average 8 of these "organizations".

This example shows a single person visiting 28 drop boxes and 5 leftist "organizations" in a single day. (Ballot stash houses).

Then they did the same thing in Phoenix Arizona, identifying about 200 ballot mules. Then Milwaukee Wisconsin and they had about 100 ballot mules who averaged visiting 28 ballot drop boxes each. Then in Michigan, over 500 ballot mules. There are some people in Detroit that visited over 100 different ballot drop boxes.

Philadelphia, over 1100 ballot mules who averaged visiting 50 ballot drop boxes each.

They then got some video of one of these drop boxes, they chose one in Gwinnett county Georgia which showed 1,962 ballots deposited in a 24 hour period Both video and geolocation data showed that only 271 people approached that drop box in that time period.

Then there is video of some of these mules dropping off ballots with gloves and taking pictures of the ballots being dropped in so that they can get paid. More video of a mules walking up to a drop box with little bag full of ballots they are putting in.

These are just the worst offenders.

Undeniable voter fraud.

They used cell phone data in conjunction with video evidence.

The exact same thing they used to track all the JAN 6th defendants.

Exactly the same. But to retarded lib progessives its only real evidence for Jan 6th

Idiots .

originally posted by: pureblood69
They used cell phone data in conjunction with video evidence.

The exact same thing they used to track all the JAN 6th defendants.

Exactly the same. But to retarded lib progessives its only real evidence for Jan 6th

Idiots .

So true, good enough to prove insurrection but not vote fraud.
Double standard democracy.

Start a thread saying a movie is stupid that you didn't even watch.

Go vote for Brandon and pedocrats.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

I think the movie was initially downloadable. I definitely didn't pay for it.

What I noted is that some of the 'footage' seemed to show moving camera angles (like cameras that move down the street to show the alleged malefactors around parked cars, at a better angle) and other things that felt to me that were not capturable by fixed mount security cameras (even ones that could zoom and scan). This means that some of the footage must, at least, have been staged.

Well the IMDB lists Jacob Hyman in the roll as Mule. So, it would lead you to believe that not all the footage is accurate.

It's my understanding that the cell data was not filtered or anything. So was any of the phones within 100 feet in the area multiple times a delivery van or worker in the area? Someone who walked their dog daily or nightly? The police use certain techniques to narrow down cell information to verify accuracy. If you notice the map of Atlanta, there is a river running through it. There is no river running through Atlanta. If you rotate and flip the map, it's actually stock photo of a map of Moscow.

Also, the claims that the geolocation data supposedly proves something about violent rioters. A phone location cannot prove anyone was violent. Can prove they were in the area. Were they an emergency worker? A cop? Did they work at Wendy's? Were they there but not violent?

True The Vote did approach the GBI with their claims. GBI determined the vague geolocation was not enough to go on, and they needed to speak with this "witness" True The Vote claimed they had. True The Vote then ghosted both the GBI and the requests from the FBI when they reached out to get a statement from the witness. At that point instead of providing first hand witness information so it could be investigated, the documentary was made instead, which did gross over 10 million for Dinesh.

a reply to: frogs453

Are you daft? They have video footage of these people with multiple ballots and some using gloves. Some late at night. Some even did it in front of witnesses.

No US election is legit anymore.

a reply to: frogs453

If you think about it rather than parrot what you are told to say, it brings up a fascinating bit or common sense. True the Vote got all their data from organic sources. They bought the data for cell phone tracking, and used FOIA to get the video footage.

What they showed is what looks a lot like voter fraud. It can't be said for sure, since it's not been investigated. But the investigators are the same one's who would have benefitted from the fraud, so you have to ask, how hard they might look for the truth here.

But hey, it was a bonus for the left, so ignore it, and just be happy you got the end result you wanted. BAMN. It would never be used on your side. Ever.