Anyone seen this yet?

https://www.bitchute.com/video/oUxVva4yWsuu/

I can't sit through it all, but would be more interested in the comments of those critical of the film, compared to the overwhelmingly positive comments on the video itself. (Rumble users seem to have a political leaning)

In short, the org (True The Vote I think) has collected cell-phone and video surveillance data to show a bunch of 'mules' delivering multiple ballots to drop boxes. The contention is that the mules are not legal, somehow or other.

!	GENERAL MODNOTE This topic has been moved to a more appropriate forum. kiore.

To my mind the words "by Dinesh D'Sousa" contain everything you need to know about the film and why it's undoubtedly not worth watching.

So with none of us having seen it, I think this foreign lawyer might have some advice you can borrow...

https://twitter.com/thevivafrei/status/ ... 2920977408

VivaFrei wrote:You clearly did not watch the documentary. It might be a good idea to watch the documentary before coming to an opinion on the content of the documentary.

I'm not a twitterer, so don't know who he was advising.

It seems though, that this sort of proud ignorance is giving grandoldmemes good fodder for making fun of people.

I don't have an opinion on the content of the documentary, but as stated above, Dinesh D'Souza has exactly zero credibility. Therefore it's not worth most people's time to watch a fairy tale, including not worth your own, apparently. If the contention is that people put multiple ballots into drop boxes, then Jesus fucking Christ, there's nothing suspicious about that.

Pudendum wrote:So with none of us having seen it, I think this foreign lawyer might have some advice you can borrow...

https://twitter.com/thevivafrei/status/ ... 2920977408

VivaFrei wrote:You clearly did not watch the documentary. It might be a good idea to watch the documentary before coming to an opinion on the content of the documentary.

I'm not a twitterer, so don't know who he was advising.

It seems though, that this sort of proud ignorance is giving grandoldmemes good fodder for making fun of people.

Not really - life is too short.

I think if a convicted election fraudster, known conspiracy theorist and demonstrable liar puts out a movie, then given that his other movies, books and presentations have contained more than a few lies, untruths and conspiracy theories then I think it not unreasonable to expect that the latest offering contains more of the same.

To be more specific - based on the previous output of Mr. D'Sousa that I have encountered I have no reason to believe that any future output by him is anything other than baseless lies and conspiracy theory to advance a far right agenda. I'm certainly not going to waste my life watching his output to see if this has suddenly changed. Possibly this an unfair generalisation, but it's his own fault for producing so much shit.

(2000 Mules may be a masterpiece of investigative journalism, but even a cursory glance at Wikipedia shows " The Associated Press reported the film was based on faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper analysis of cellphone location data." )

If you want a more detailed analysis then my rate is £125 per hour because his crap isn't worth my leisure time.

I suppose among other things there's the minor matter of all those election lawsuits on behalf of mango Mussolini that failed. Dinesh is a serial liar and a convicted felon, there are other more productive uses of my time than wasting it on one of his palsied circle-jerks.

Yes, I understand. He was convicted of having donated unethical amounts to a REPUBLICAN. Can't allow that.

https://nypost.com/2021/10/13/how-mark- ... -election/

The 2020 election wasn’t stolen — but it could have been paid for. Mark Zuckerberg’s millions bought lefty activists access to local election offices, allowing them to organize massive get-out-the-vote efforts in Democrat-dominated cities from the inside.

US cities and counties shouldn’t be outsourcing election administration to partisans. But the vast Facebook-founder-funded campaign seduced many into doing just that.

Through the Center for Technology and Civic Life and the Center for Election Innovation and Research, Zuckerberg put an unprecedented amount of private funding — $419.5 million — into mail-in and get-out-the-vote efforts in 2020.

I'm not asking your analysis of course. I'll take some from anti-Trump folk, such as you have already offered so clearly. I'll also take some from pro-Trump folks. Have you got any here?

I'm more of a pro-rational skepticism type person, and as such I've requested this thread be moved to the subforum dedicated to conspiracy theories.

Cunt’s been suspended from Rationalia again until December. Clearly he’s bored. I wouldn’t engage. Wrestling with pigs and all…


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'll watch it when it gets a general release in the cinema.

Yay! Vajayjay is back!

Pudendum wrote: I'll also take some from pro-Trump folks. Have you got any here?

So only one side of the political aisle available here eh? Interesting.

I'll keep watching this 'safe-space'. It's good to hear a minority opinion from time to time.

Pudendum wrote:

Pudendum wrote: I'll also take some from pro-Trump folks. Have you got any here?

So only one side of the political aisle available here eh? Interesting.

You're having a conversation with yourself in which you answer your own question and pronounce it interesting.

Pudendum wrote:I'll keep watching this 'safe-space'.

That's sweet of you.

Pudendum wrote:It's good to hear a minority opinion from time to time.

Is it? I would say it clearly depends on what that minority opinion is.

Spearthrower wrote:
You're having a conversation with yourself in which you answer your own question and pronounce it interesting.

Whatever you do, don't address the evidence raised in the documentary.

I'm counting on your entertaining takes. Goes well with my coffee.

Pudendum wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:
You're having a conversation with yourself in which you answer your own question and pronounce it interesting.

Whatever you do, don't address the evidence raised in the documentary.

I'm counting on your entertaining takes. Goes well with my coffee.

spearcmm.png

Words actually have meanings, by the way.

For example, the term 'ad hominem' means to make a personal attack against the person you're having a discussion with as a rhetorical tactic to defeat an argument.

i) I never attacked you.

ii) You had no argument, just a thin veneer of self-aggrandizing and being condescending to others.

iii) You're not here to discuss anything.

I do of course note that you seem very interested in stirring up shit and getting a dramatic response. Presumably, in fact, that's the only reason you're here. What a clever chap.

Unfortunately for your little crusade against strangers on the internet you want to have a go at, I doubt you'll be here long if all you're capable of is such low level trolling. But at least for now you can make yourself comfortable in your natural environment of the conspiracy theory subforum.

Spearthrower wrote:...trolling...

Trolling is when someone posts off-topic to gain attention. So far, that's all you have done here. Trolling.

Here is your 'You'.

I've got time for one more coffee. Want to make me stop laughing at your stupidity, try commenting on the evidence presented in the film.

Or keep impersonating a simpleton troll, and practice vigorous ignorance of the original topic. I'm good either way.

Pudendum wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:...trolling...

Trolling is when someone posts off-topic to gain attention. So far, that's all you have done here. Trolling.

Here is your 'You'.

I've got time for one more coffee. Want to make me stop laughing at your stupidity, try commenting on the evidence presented in the film.

Or keep impersonating a simpleton troll, and practice vigorous ignorance of the original topic. I'm good either way.

Feel free to alert the moderators to my trolling rather than pretend to be one yourself. Or you could stop the spluttering blusterous charade too, if you want.

Spearthrower wrote:

Feel free to alert the moderators to my trolling rather than pretend to be one yourself. Or you could stop the spluttering blusterous charade too, if you want.

Looking...looking...
Are you trying to make some point about the film? 'Cause you missed again...

I don't see anything on-topic, just effluent from you. Maybe a moderator could help you make a rational point about the original topic.

AP watched the movie so you don’t have to

https://www.snopes.com/ap/2022/05/09/ga ... lot-mules/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Fortunately, the actual conspiracy failed - mostly because it was reliant on absolutely barking mad nonsense.

Actual Election Fraud wrote:So look, all I want to do is this - I just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state and flipping the state is a great testament to our country.