re: 2000 Mules Full Version

quote:

---

They lost me at the cellphone data argument. They assigned an arbitrary distance from ballot boxes then argue any phone that went within that distance a certain number of times was a vote mile. Cellphone location tracking is only accurate to within 3-5 meters at best, so a person could pass within 15 feet of a location every day to work and be considered a mule.

---

I haven't even watched and already knew they accounted for this.

You could at least TRY To pay attention

quote:

---

lost me at the cellphone data argument.

---

So - you didn't watch it at all - or did you just rely on Snopes or some other 'disinformation' engine.

Their entire argument is based on "cell phones" that went to more than 10 different drop boxes AND more than 5 "NGO sites" <- that means the places where the fake ballots are gathered up for distribution by the mules) Many of them went to dozens of drop boxes in several different percents, counties, states. And they took photos of their 'deposits' in the drop boxes so they could be paid for their efforts.

So the data they present represents a MINIMIMUM of 700,000,000 illegal votes.
Now - sure - those could have all been Trump votes but they were still ILLEGAL. There are NO states where you can PAY someone to transport votes.

quote:

---

From the moment those fraudulent ballots dropped I knew

---

I predicted this precise scenario just as soon as the established the "mass mailing of absentee ballots" to every registered voter on the "voter rolls". It was OBVIOUS what they would do.

In fact, I think they had this same operation going for the '16 election but just didn't have the mass mail-in absentee ballot card to play. They relied on their time-worn 'dead voters' advantage - but they didnt account for the massive turnout for Trump - they just had not prepared for such a tidal wave.

Remember they tried it in '16 - remember many of these same states didn't report their final vote totals until quite late????? They just didn't have the ammo after midnight to do anything about it.

And that is why they began making noise about 'vote by mail' just as soon as the '16 election was over.

quote:

---

They lost me at the cellphone data argument. They assigned an arbitrary distance from ballot boxes then argue any phone that went within that distance a certain number of times was a vote mile. Cellphone location tracking is only accurate to within 3-5 meters at best, so a person could pass within 15 feet of a location every day to work and be considered a mule.

---

You should actually know what criteria they used. Then number of matches all but eliminates chance encounters.

quote:

---

It’s just nonsense

---

The way you described, yes! The actual use, not so much.

quote:

---

He's working backwards from a desired "truth" that this is a lie. He's trying to rationalize it. He failed in his first attempt to come up with a plausible defense. He will shift and try again.

---

Any objective person would approach this, or any other type of data driven research from the prospective that the conclusion is false until the data presented proves otherwise. To start viewing this movie with the mindset of “we know the election was stolen, now let’s see how it was done” is just letting bias make you see what you want to see.

quote:

---

dropping in multiple ballots after having visited the ngos

---

yea - I forgot that tidbit in my earlier responses on this thread.

They had to have dropped more than FIVE ballots to make the list for Mules.

2000 mules x 5 NGOs x 10 drop boxes x 5 ballots = minimum of 500,000 votes.

some of those mules went to 2 dozen drop boxes and dropped dozens of ballots

quote:

---

Any objective person would approach this, or any other type of data driven research from the prospective that the conclusion is false until the data presented proves otherwise

---

uh no - that is what you do prior to conviction.

With the information given, you start an investigation - and if enough of it proves there were crimes committed, you start putting them in PRISON.

AND - in some cases, you call for a new election = it has happened before, not just on a presidential election.

In this case, they just pooh-poohed the entire concept = WITH NO INVESTIGAtiON WHATSOEVER!!!

it would be like having a dead woman in the middle of the street with a bullet hole in the back of her head and decided that since nobody has confessed to doing it, there is no sense whatsoever to investigate all the clues that came in from hundreds of people all pointing to the same suspect.

emailed the free link to many friends! We the people must spread the word. We must talk face to face after we send the info, call or text to tell them what is is. No one knows. We have to tell them.

quote:

---

Any objective person would approach this, or any other type of data driven research from the prospective that the conclusion is false until the data presented proves otherwise.

---

No, they wouldn’t. Why would you think that’s the default? Because you’ve been told that’s appropriate? Because it’s scary? Because it’s improbable? Because you’re biased against it?

quote:

---

Exactly why the "no widespread fraud" has always been bullshart. Get a few big cities in swing states and you can turn the entire elections. Democrats have been modeling that with high precision for years.

---

All you need is a Ruby Freeman Urban Democracy Squad in a single precinct in one of the most populous counties in a "swing" state to flip the whole thing.

That Georgia "went blue" is one of the biggest bunch of horse shite to come from the 2020 election heist.