- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 2000 Mules Fact Checking
Posted on 5/12/22 at 8:59 am to McChowder
Posted on 5/12/22 at 8:59 am to McChowder
quote:
I haven't seen the movie yet but what would be the explanation for a person's cell phone being within close proximity of 20+ drop boxes in one night?
The problem is they don’t really prove this in movie. They say it but don’t follow through with real proof.
That one article gives multiple examples of how it’s easily written off.
In Pennsylvania for example they had no video. A State politician says he has four devices and went around to all kinds of polling places. Just as example.
The same problem ON VIDEO going to multiple boxes and their path matched (hopefully with a name) And showing stops at democrat non profits.
They said they have all this but don’t show it. You had to know you couldn’t leave doors open.
5
Posted on 5/12/22 at 9:03 am to RealDawg
quote:
They said they have all this but don’t show it. You had to know you couldn’t leave doors open.
I think they may be using the Project Veritas approach where they present the evidence in a way that invites debunking. Like a trap.
That may also be wishful thinking.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 9:07 am to RealDawg
What people are missing here is they were able to buy the cell phone data and develop a methodology around that data to detect a mule. They set an incredibly high bar to ensure the highest level of integrity.
That's essentially the evidence. Video was secured where available and in places where transparency laws allowed them to access it. Not every drop box in question had video, and some that did were not accessible by TTV. In other words, they dont have video of everything - rather they used the video they were able to get to test their geodata hypothesis - and were able to do so successfully. They also tested it on a murder cold case, and it lead to 2 arrests.
That's essentially the evidence. Video was secured where available and in places where transparency laws allowed them to access it. Not every drop box in question had video, and some that did were not accessible by TTV. In other words, they dont have video of everything - rather they used the video they were able to get to test their geodata hypothesis - and were able to do so successfully. They also tested it on a murder cold case, and it lead to 2 arrests.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 11:05 am to RealDawg
I don’t think they can just drop names if there is a criminal investigation going on
Posted on 5/12/22 at 1:00 pm to RealDawg
quote:
In Pennsylvania for example they had no video.
How exactly would they have video after the fact? Do you think someone had a camera on the drop box that will willingly give it up? You think the US government right now will give that security footage up?
This is the first evidence - the cell phone tracking. It raises suspicion. I doubt that D'Souza as a private citizen can obtain the name of the cell phone owner from the company. This would take law enforcement to subpoena it.
This is not TV detective stories. We have laws that hinder anyone from just pulling private information and there is a slow process to work around this.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:41 pm to RealDawg
quote:
The problem is they don’t really prove this in movie. They say it but don’t follow through with real proof. That one article gives multiple examples of how it’s easily written off. In Pennsylvania for example they had no video. A State politician says he has four devices and went around to all kinds of polling places. Just as example. The same problem ON VIDEO going to multiple boxes and their path matched (hopefully with a name) And showing stops at democrat non profits. They said they have all this but don’t show it. You had to know you couldn’t leave doors open.
Why do think they have no video in PA? The criteria was 10 DB visits & 5 "stash houses" so the State politician would have been ignored. They also established patterns before the time frame of the actual report. How many State politicians roll around in the middle of the night, unless they're up to no good as well?
The reluctance to divulge names of any parties involved was to avoid lawfare, IMHO. This movie was intended to compel investigations as much as anything else.
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News