- 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 9:28 am to RealDawg
Posted on 5/12/22 at 9:28 am to RealDawg
quote:
I’m hopeful they just pulled the trigger too soon. Sometimes you can’t make up that ground when you do that.
All the while, the "water under the bridge/we'll get 'em next time!" RINO surrender monkeys are desperate to close the books on 2020 and double pinky swear that the 2022 midterms are going to be the difference maker.
0
Posted on 5/12/22 at 9:32 am to RealDawg
You are nit picking because you have a preconceived bias that no fraud was committed.
You say they dont express their geotracking, except they do and your response is "its not enough and my map looks different".
They showed video of clear ballot stuffing. Your response is "I need to see more video".
They find someone willing to come forward. Your response is "I'd like to see more whistleblowers".
They insulate themselves from legal accusations by not naming individuals in the film specifically. Your response is "If they had real evidence, they'd name names".
You wont acknowledge anything they did as legitimate. Yet men hang for less evidence than this. Presidents go down over less than this.
You say they dont express their geotracking, except they do and your response is "its not enough and my map looks different".
They showed video of clear ballot stuffing. Your response is "I need to see more video".
They find someone willing to come forward. Your response is "I'd like to see more whistleblowers".
They insulate themselves from legal accusations by not naming individuals in the film specifically. Your response is "If they had real evidence, they'd name names".
You wont acknowledge anything they did as legitimate. Yet men hang for less evidence than this. Presidents go down over less than this.
This post was edited on 5/12/22 at 11:04 am
Posted on 5/12/22 at 9:33 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Presidents go down over less than this.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 9:39 am to RealDawg
quote:
Most of their primary evidence is still just in believe me status.
Sounds like you wanted a 100hr documentary explaining the 1k terabytes of raw data they collected.
It's a movie, not a court deposition.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 9:52 am to SidewalkDawg
quote:
The problem is there is no meat behind it. They showed a path on a screen, they claim it was from a single mule. That's all well and good, very compelling. Give me a name. Lets hold these people accountable, get them on video, ask some questions. Hell anything.
You give that name to law enforcement but I'm not sure publicly doxing that person is a good idea. This is serious stuff and I do think it would result in that person getting threats or even vigilante justice. All that would lead to a lawsuit against those that created the movie.
In today's world, you just cant be the person that reveals that name publicly.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:00 am to McChowder
quote:
Sounds like you wanted a 100hr documentary explaining the 1k terabytes of raw data they collected. It's a movie, not a court deposition.
I wanted One example of tracking a person cells path and showing at least one drop on video with (potential) non profit stops. They didn’t give us this…not once.
They showed one path as example the entire movie. One. It wasn’t tied to video or a shown person.
If that have what that say they have. This would be a no brainer.
Do this 3 or 4 times is stronger than all the verbal back and forth they did saying what they have.
The video is compelling. Why never show the same person drop multiple locations or their path?
They kept saying they have things but don’t show it.
This post was edited on 5/12/22 at 10:30 am
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:34 am to RealDawg
Lest we forget, they caught one Dem operative sending out more than 400 pre-filled ballots in Indiana in 2020.
https://www.courierpress.com/story/news/crime/2021/07/01/janet-reed-election-2020-voter-fraud-indiana-democrat-probation-felony/7799375002/
quote:
The illegal mailings were absentee ballot applications Reed sent with the Democratic Party pre-selected in the section where voters were supposed to choose whether to receive a ballot for the Democratic or Republican primary election.
The marked applications also included instructions that the section "needs no input," according to a four-page letter sent last year by the Vanderburgh County Election Board to Vanderburgh County Prosecutor Nicholas Hermann.
https://www.courierpress.com/story/news/crime/2021/07/01/janet-reed-election-2020-voter-fraud-indiana-democrat-probation-felony/7799375002/
This post was edited on 5/12/22 at 10:35 am
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:36 am to mmcgrath
quote:
mmcgrath
I went to a Ronald Reagan campaign rally at the LSU Assembly Center in 1980 with a guy named Mike McGrath. He was from Slidell.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:43 am to McChowder
You have to watch the movie. They claim too have that exact info. The question would be, why not show it? I could think of several reasons to not show that to the public. Of course even with 28 trips to the drop boxes and the same number of trips to the same non-profit would be explained away by some as being normal.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:55 am to elit4ce05
quote:
Of course even with 28 trips to the drop boxes and the same number of trips to the same non-profit would be explained away by some as being normal.
There's a very targeted audience for this information. The most hardcore MSNBC junkie isn't going to be swayed by the data presented. Those of us square in the trenches of the information war are already convinced.
The sweet spot for the first wave of conversions should be the MAGA folks who have been resistant to the fraud claims. Maybe it's due to cognitive dissonance. After all, this is America. We couldn't be witnessing in real time the theft of a Presidential election, right? Right? Those who are able to be swayed first will be the ones who see with their own eyes what the rest of us have been screaming about for 18 months.
This will be what some of us refer to as "drip-drip-FLOOD".
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:57 am to VoxDawg
I follow the GA State election board pretty close. They stay waaaayy behind but they are constantly prosecuting these cases. The definition of “wide spread” is subjective.
As for the movie, I’m glad they did it and hope more is to come. If they have what they say they have..it could have been presenting in a much more compelling way (or at all) without naming names. They didn’t pull it together which even for me opens speculation they didn’t have all they said.
One cell path shown in an 1.5 hour documentary despite being their big wow. One whistle blower. Zero times a person shown going to multiple boxes.
As for the movie, I’m glad they did it and hope more is to come. If they have what they say they have..it could have been presenting in a much more compelling way (or at all) without naming names. They didn’t pull it together which even for me opens speculation they didn’t have all they said.
One cell path shown in an 1.5 hour documentary despite being their big wow. One whistle blower. Zero times a person shown going to multiple boxes.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:58 am to mmcgrath
quote:
At this point we have to assume that this doesn't exist. Pretty clear they looked for it and it would be in the movie if they could find it.
Criticism and questioning if this is good. A back and forth on methods and conclusions is a way to get to the truth.
But as you can see in your post, the left doesn’t want to really do that. They want to simply dismiss, often with misinformation themselves.
Englebricht was on Bannon this morning and committed to responding to a Wash Post criticism in the near future on the show. She was very confident in their evidence.
More importantly she pointed out that the people writing these pieces aren’t even reaching out to ask any questions. They don’t want the truth.
She also said that their work now is on publishing ALL of the data so that everyone that wants to can review. That’s pure transparency.
Only one side is doing that. The other side isn’t even asking questions. They want/need to make false assumptions to come to plausible conclusions.
It’s clear as day.
This post was edited on 5/12/22 at 1:39 pm
Posted on 5/12/22 at 10:59 am to RealDawg
the fact that its up to an Indian-American commentator to put in a little leg work to expose election fraud tells you everything you need to know. nobody is interested in exposing fraud. most of our leaders are cowards.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 11:01 am to RealDawg
quote:
They didn’t pull it together which even for me opens speculation they didn’t have all they said.
There's nothing wrong with being skeptical. It's a good thing. I'm sure that I've said this in the past, and likely to you directly, but it may very well be that you're gonna have to find out when the rest of the country does.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 11:01 am to VoxDawg
quote:
Lest we forget, they caught one Dem operative sending out more than 400 pre-filled ballots in Indiana in 2020.
She sent out prefilled ballot APPLICATIONS. I take it you know the difference but lied anyway. In any case she was caught and the applications were rejected.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 11:02 am to Shamoan
quote:
nobody is interested in exposing fraud. most of our leaders are cowards.
Remember, the GOP leadership had this information ages ago, and they sat on it.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 11:02 am to VoxDawg
The cheating doesn't stop in the swing states but across the nation. No telling how long the Dems have been ballot harvesting with mules. But mail in ballots were the key to the steal. Unless that gets fixed and that isn't the only problem then it will be used again for stolen elections.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 11:02 am to Tchefuncte Tiger
quote:10 years before I was there.
I went to a Ronald Reagan campaign rally at the LSU Assembly Center in 1980 with a guy named Mike McGrath. He was from Slidell.
Posted on 5/12/22 at 11:03 am to SidewalkDawg
quote:
I tend to agree. The claims they made were very compelling. But this was the opportunity to share your most damning evidence. Why not show the same person at multiple drops? Why not show these non-profits. I eagerly await the data drops to see if they are in there.
It's not to late to revise the editing.
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
Page 3 of 14
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News