Dinesh D'souza New Political Film 2000 Mules

Author: Reece101 ,

Posts

Total: 20
Reece101
Reece101's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,350
3
2
2
Reece101's avatar
Reece101
3
2
2
The film alleges Democratic-aligned individuals, or "mules," were paid to illegally collect and deposit ballots into drop boxes in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin during the 2020 presidential election.

Conservatives, why do you think Fox or OAN aren’t promoting it? Do you think they’ve lost their credibility?
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,873
3
2
7
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
2
7
--> @Reece101
D'souza's film uses a common tactic of fraudsters. Use an arcane methodology to amass data points and conclude, without any real evidence, that the data points to your thesis. Use the technical nature of the data to get the gullible to believe that you have proven with scientific certainty that your thesis is correct.
In short, it's "dazzle them with bull***t" to sell your argument.


Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 13,428
3
4
8
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
8
--> @FLRW
Agreed.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 101
Posts: 7,220
7
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
7
10
11
AP NEWS: GAPING HOLES in the CLAIM of 2K BALLOT 'MULES'
By ALI SWENSON
May 3, 2022

A film debuting in over 270 theaters across the United States this week uses a flawed analysis of cellphone location data and ballot drop box surveillance footage to cast doubt on the results of the 2020 presidential election nearly 18 months after it ended.

Praised by former President Donald Trump as exposing “great election fraud,” the movie, called “2000 Mules,” paints an ominous picture suggesting Democrat-aligned ballot “mules” were supposedly paid to illegally collect and drop off ballots in Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

But that’s based on faulty assumptions, anonymous accounts and improper analysis of cellphone location data, which is not precise enough to confirm that somebody deposited a ballot into a drop box, according to experts.

The movie was produced by conservative filmmaker Dinesh D’Souza and uses research from the Texas-based nonprofit True the Vote, which has spent months lobbying states to use its findings to change voting laws. Neither responded to a request for comment.

Here’s a closer look at the facts.

CLAIM: At least 2,000 “mules” were paid to illegally collect ballots and deliver them to drop boxes in key swing states ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

THE FACTS: True the Vote didn’t prove this. The finding is based on false assumptions about the precision of cellphone tracking data and the reasons that someone might drop off multiple ballots, according to experts.

“Ballot harvesting” is a pejorative term for dropping off completed ballots for people besides yourself. The practice is legal in several states but largely illegal in the states True the Vote focused on, with some exceptions for family, household members and people with disabilities.

True the Vote has said it found some 2,000 ballot harvesters by purchasing $2 million worth of anonymized cellphone geolocation data — the “pings” that track a person’s location based on app activity — in various swing counties across five states. Then, by drawing a virtual boundary around a county’s ballot drop boxes and various unnamed nonprofits, it identified cellphones that repeatedly went near both ahead of the 2020 election.

If a cellphone went near a drop box more than 10 times and a nonprofit more than five times from Oct. 1 to Election Day, True the Vote assumed its owner was a “mule” — its name for someone engaged in an illegal ballot collection scheme in cahoots with a nonprofit.

The group’s claims of a paid ballot harvesting scheme are supported in the film only by one unidentified whistleblower said to be from San Luis, Arizona, who said she saw people picking up what she “assumed” to be payments for ballot collection. The film contains no evidence of such payments in other states in 2020.

Plus, experts say cellphone location data, even at its most advanced, can only reliably track a smartphone within a few meters — not close enough to know whether someone actually dropped off a ballot or just walked or drove nearby.

“You could use cellular evidence to say this person was in that area, but to say they were at the ballot box, you’re stretching it a lot,” said Aaron Striegel, a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Notre Dame. “There’s always a pretty healthy amount of uncertainty that comes with this.”

What’s more, ballot drop boxes are often intentionally placed in busy areas, such as college campuses, libraries, government buildings and apartment complexes — increasing the likelihood that innocent citizens got caught in the group’s dragnet, Striegel said.

Similarly, there are plenty of legitimate reasons why someone might be visiting both a nonprofit’s office and one of those busy areas. Delivery drivers, postal workers, cab drivers, poll workers and elected officials all have legitimate reasons to cross paths with numerous drop boxes or nonprofits in a given day.

True the Vote has said it filtered out people whose “pattern of life” before the election season included frequenting nonprofit and drop box locations. But that strategy wouldn’t filter out election workers who spend more time at drop boxes during the election season, cab drivers whose daily paths don’t follow a pattern, or people whose routines recently changed.

In some states, in an attempt to bolster its claims, True the Vote also highlighted drop box surveillance footage that showed voters depositing multiple ballots into the boxes. However, there was no way to tell whether those voters were the same people as the ones whose cellphones were anonymously tracked.

A video of a voter dropping off a stack of ballots at a drop box is not itself proof of any wrongdoing, since most states have legal exceptions that let people drop off ballots on behalf of family members and household members.

For example, Larry Campbell, a voter in Michigan who was not featured in the film, told The Associated Press he legally dropped off six ballots in a local drop box in 2020 — one for himself, his wife, and his four adult children. And in Georgia, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger’s office investigated one of the surveillance videos circulated by True the Vote and said it found the man was dropping off ballots for himself and his family.
___
CLAIM: In Philadelphia alone, True the Vote identified 1,155 “mules” who illegally collected and dropped off ballots for money.

THE FACTS: No, it didn’t. The group hasn’t offered any evidence of any sort of paid ballot harvesting scheme in Philadelphia. And True the Vote did not get surveillance footage of drop boxes in Philadelphia, so the group based this claim solely on cellphone location data, its researcher Gregg Phillips said in March in testimony to Pennsylvania state senators.

Pennsylvania state Sen. Sharif Street, who was there for the group’s testimony in March, told the AP he was confident he was counted as several of the group’s 1,155 anonymous “mules,” even though he didn’t deposit anything into a drop box in that time period.

Street said he based his assessment on the fact that he carries a cellphone, a watch with a cellular connection, a tablet with a cellular connection and a mobile hotspot — four devices whose locations can be tracked by private companies. He also said he typically travels with a staffer who carries two devices, bringing the total on his person to six.

During the 2020 election season, Street said, he brought those devices on trips to nonprofit offices and drop box rallies. He also drove by one drop box up to seven or eight times a day when traveling between his two political offices.

“I did no ballot stuffing, but over the course of time, I literally probably account for hundreds and hundreds of their unique visits, even though I’m a single actor in a single vehicle moving back and forth in my ordinary course of business,” Street said.

City election commission spokesman Nick Custodio said the allegations matched others that had been debunked or disproven after the 2020 election.

“The Trump campaign and others filed an unprecedented litany of cases challenging Philadelphia’s election with dubious and unsubstantiated allegations of fraud, all of which were quickly and resoundingly rejected by both state and federal courts,” Custodio said.
___
CLAIM: Some of the “mules” True the Vote identified in Georgia were also geolocated at violent antifa riots in Atlanta in the summer of 2020, showing they were violent far left actors.

THE FACTS: Setting aside the fact that the film doesn’t prove these individuals were collecting ballots at all, it also can’t prove their political affiliations.

The anonymized data True the Vote tracked doesn’t explain why someone might have been present at a protest demanding justice for Black deaths at the hands of police officers. The individuals who were tracked there could have been violent rioters, but they also could have been peaceful protesters, police or firefighters responding to the protests, or business owners in the area.
___
CLAIM: Alleged ballot harvesters were captured on surveillance video wearing gloves because they didn’t want to leave their fingerprints on the ballots.
THE FACTS: This is pure speculation. It ignores far more likely reasons for glove-wearing in the fall and winter of 2020 — cold weather or COVID-19.

True the Vote’s researcher claimed in the movie that voters in Georgia started wearing gloves to prevent their fingerprints from touching ballot envelopes after two women in Yuma, Arizona, were indicted on Dec. 23, 2020 for alleged ballot harvesting in that state’s primary election. But the Arizona indictment didn’t mention anything about fingerprints.

Voting in Georgia’s Jan. 5, 2021, Senate runoff election occurred during some of the coldest weeks of the year in the state, and when COVID-19 was surging.
In fact, the AP in 2020 documented multiple examples of COVID-cautious voters wearing latex gloves and other personal protective equipment to vote.

In a similarly speculative allegation, the film claims its supposed “mules” took photographs of ballots before they dropped them into drop boxes in order to get paid. But across the U.S., voters frequently take photos of their ballot envelopes before submitting them.
___
CLAIM: If it weren’t for this ballot collection scheme, former President Donald Trump would have had enough votes to win the 2020 election.

THE FACTS: This alleged scheme has not been proven, nor do these researchers have any way of knowing whether any ballots that were collected contained votes for Trump or for Biden.

There’s no evidence a massive ballot harvesting scheme dumped a large amount of votes for one candidate into drop boxes, and if there were, it would likely be caught quickly, according to Derek Muller, a law professor at the University of Iowa.

“Once you get just a few people involved, people start to reveal the scheme because it unravels pretty quickly,” he said.

Absentee ballots are also verified by signature and tracked closely, often with an option for voters themselves to see where their ballot is at any given time. That process safeguards against anyone who tries to illegally cast extra ballots, according to Barry Burden, a University of Wisconsin-Madison political science professor and the director of the Elections Research Project.

“It seems impossible in that system for a nefarious actor to dump lots of ballots that were never requested by voters and were never issued by election officials,” Burden said.
___
This is part of AP’s effort to address widely shared misinformation, including work with outside companies and organizations to add factual context to misleading content that is circulating online. Learn more about fact-checking at AP.


oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 101
Posts: 7,220
7
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
7
10
11
Let's recall that Dinesh D' Souza pled guilty to felony election fraud and served  8 months.  Trump pardoned D' Souza in 2018.
ILikePie5
ILikePie5's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 10,246
3
7
10
ILikePie5's avatar
ILikePie5
3
7
10
We love people dropping off ballots at 3am.
thett3
thett3's avatar
Debates: 2
Posts: 1,576
3
2
7
thett3's avatar
thett3
3
2
7
Back in 2012 my friends boomer dad dragged us to a Dinesh film and it was incredibly funny, I remember he went into a CGI secret back room in the Democratic Party headquarters that was full of old slave chains and whips and stuff. I also remember he did one on Hillary Clinton where he portrayed that in his time in prison (Which iirc didn’t actually happen) all the prisoners gave Hillary Clinton a standing ovation when she came on the tiny prison TV in the rec room lol. Intentionally or not the dude is an artist 
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
2
2
2
--> @oromagi
I saw the film. It all depends on if the data is real. We'll see https://www.freepressers.com/articles/true-the-vote-going-public-with-all-2020-election-data


Plus, experts say cellphone location data, even at its most advanced, can only reliably track a smartphone within a few meters — not close enough to know whether someone actually dropped off a ballot or just walked or drove nearby.
This is the only relevant statement in that entire post, and it is facially self-defeating. A few meters in the context of temporal data is more than enough to render the intersection of ten boxes in a short period of time (such as a voting period) statistically impossible without intent.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 101
Posts: 7,220
7
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
7
10
11
--> @ADreamOfLiberty
-->@oromagi
I saw the film.  It all depends on if the data is real.
No.  We've already established that the methodology is pure dumbshit, so the data is irrelevant.

My dropbox, for example, is located at the  entrance to a local museum.  It stands next to a bank of mailboxes, fed ex & UPS dropoff boxes, and a bank of Amazon pick up boxes.  The museum is the main attraction but that museum sits on a hill that offers one of the famous views of the city.  I go there most weekends to walk my dog.  It is a popular place for tourists to take pictures or meet, etc.  I would estimate that on a average day, between one and two thousand people pass within 10 feet of that dropbox location, and far more when the dropbox is there.  Now, I live in a high density hospital district.  A quick google search show some 120 non-profits have offices on my daily routes through that neighborhood.  If Dinesh D'Souza had been digitally creeping on me and my neighbors, he would easily have found evidence of 200-300 mules working my ballot box alone, in spite of the neighborhood being so overwhelmingly Democrat that nobody would ever bother.

Using D'Souza's methodology, I could easily draw a line between visits to ballot boxes and various  evangelical Christian churches, dog tracks and slaughterhouses to attest that Trump voters were likewise stuffing the ballot box.

freepresser.com is website can post literally anything without fact checking or gatekeeping.  The top story in the culture section is "Who is Jesus?"  Let's be sure to dismiss your source as worse than mere gossip.  So, on April 12th, Catherine Engelbrecht said she would release the data after the movie was released.  That was two weeks ago.  Let's note that Engelbrecht has also refused to share her "data" with Republican Legislators in Wisconsin and Georgia.  

ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
2
2
2
--> @oromagi
I saw the film.  It all depends on if the data is real.
No.  We've already established that the methodology is pure dumbshit, so the data is irrelevant.
You have not.

My dropbox, for example, is located at the  entrance to a local museum.  It stands next to a bank of mailboxes, fed ex & UPS dropoff boxes, and a bank of Amazon pick up boxes.  The museum is the main attraction but that museum sits on a hill that offers one of the famous views of the city.  I go there most weekends to walk my dog.  It is a popular place for tourists to take pictures or meet, etc.  I would estimate that on a average day, between one and two thousand people pass within 10 feet of that dropbox location, and far more when the dropbox is there.
and how many would then loiter within 10 feet of that drop box at 3am and then continue to do the same thing at nine other drop boxes in the same trip?

probabilities are multiplicative

Now, I live in a high density hospital district.  A quick google search show some 120 non-profits have offices on my daily routes through that neighborhood.
You're assuming the data doesn't have the temporal resolution to distinguish between driving past a location and stopping there.

If Dinesh D'Souza had been digitally creeping on me and my neighbors, he would easily have found evidence of 200-300 mules working my ballot box alone, in spite of the neighborhood being so overwhelmingly Democrat that nobody would ever bother.
That is begging the question. The claim that the district is so overwhelmingly democrat that no one would even bother is substantiated by the ballot count. If there were 200-300 mules however that ballot count would not reflect reality.

There is indeed no point trying to cheat in an election that is a forgone conclusion, but the relevant elections were state or nation wide. Which means cheating in a district that is heavily democrat has just as much effect on the outcome as cheating in a district that is heavily republican. For instance cheating in Philadelphia cancels the votes of people in PA outside Philadelphia even if there wasn't a single red voter in Philadelphia.

Using D'Souza's methodology, I could easily draw a line between visits to ballot boxes and various  evangelical Christian churches, dog tracks and slaughterhouses to attest that Trump voters were likewise stuffing the ballot box.
It would be interesting analysis. If the data is published you should try and post it here so it may be reproduced. Now that I think about it though if it was purchased data there may be contractual obligations preventing redistribution.

freepresser.com is website can post literally anything without fact checking or gatekeeping. 
So that makes it no worse than self described fact checkers....

Let's be sure to dismiss your source as worse than mere gossip.
As I pointed out previously, dismissing sources/authorities is the inevitable outcome of a true disagreement because relating assertions is not an argument. Dismiss at will, but remember what you do and do not hold others to a different standard.

So, on April 12th, Catherine Engelbrecht said she would release the data after the movie was released.  That was two weeks ago.  Let's note that Engelbrecht has also refused to share her "data" with Republican Legislators in Wisconsin and Georgia.  
Did you independently fact check that or are you just going off free presser after dismissing it? If she said that then freepresser was reliable in this instance wasn't it?

Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 1,695
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
There was definitely massive fraud in the 2020 election, but not in my race, I won fair and square
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 101
Posts: 7,220
7
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
7
10
11
--> @ADreamOfLiberty
and how many would then loiter within 10 feet of that drop box at 3am and then continue to do the same thing at nine other drop boxes in the same trip?

I don't know, my example is hypothetical while yours claims to be real.   In my hypothetical, I suppose any Amazon driver loading up  the Amazon lockers might qualify and, of course, election officials collecting ballots might easukt qualify.

How many of convicted election fraudster D'Souza's  "mules" loitered in front of 10 dropboxes at 3am? 

So that makes it no worse than self described fact checkers....  As I pointed out previously, dismissing sources/authorities is the inevitable outcome of a true disagreement because relating assertions is not an argument. Dismiss at will, but remember what you do and do not hold others to a different standard.
Yes, I accept AP fact checks because they hold themselves accountable and have a long history of being proved correct.  They aren't perfect but I will match their track record for getting the truth right against all of your true believer bullshit any time.

Did you independently fact check that or are you just going off free presser after dismissing it? If she said that then freepresser was reliable in this instance wasn't it?
It's like the Arizona recount- they keep postponing any specific accusation hoping that evidence of some specific accusation might eventually turn up.

ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
2
2
2
--> @oromagi
and how many would then loiter within 10 feet of that drop box at 3am and then continue to do the same thing at nine other drop boxes in the same trip?
I don't know, my example is hypothetical while yours claims to be real.
Your hypothetical was missing conditions.

In my hypothetical, I suppose any Amazon driver loading up  the Amazon lockers might qualify and, of course, election officials collecting ballots might easukt qualify.
Amazon drivers would go to amazon warehouses, it is beyond reasonable belief that every relevant box is next to an amazon drop-off, and that any significant proportion of the identified mules were accounted for by innocent functions. Furthermore if the election laws were not broken quite so thoroughly there would be cameras on every drop-off box so that interactions with the box could be confirmed which as I have stated before is the main issue.

Putting forward election officials hardly discredits the method, they are acting as ballot mules; simply authorized ones. It should be a simple matter to check records to see which phones could match the logs of election officials. I say "should" because that is exactly the kind of data that no one is allowed to ask for without being charged with insurrection these days.
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 101
Posts: 7,220
7
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
7
10
11
--> @ADreamOfLiberty
it is beyond reasonable belief that....any significant proportion of the identified mules were accounted for by innocent functions.
Based on what?  You're still waiting on the data 18 months later. Have any mules been identified?  Are any mules expected to be indentified?

Furthermore if the election laws were not broken quite so thoroughly there would be cameras on every drop-off box so that interactions with the box could be confirmed which as I have stated before is the main issue.
First I'm hearing of it, of course.  So the MAIN problem with 2020 election that there were not cameras on drop off box in spite of legal requirements?  How have you documented this claim?

Putting forward election officials hardly discredits the method, they are acting as ballot mules; simply authorized ones.
I see.  So the election officials were all in on it?  Aren't we  talking about mostly Republican districts here, so you are alleging a vast interstate Republican conspiracy to keep a Republican candidate out of office?  Is that right?  Why?

It should be a simple matter to check records to see which phones could match the logs of election officials. I say "should" because that is exactly the kind of data that no one is allowed to ask for without being charged with insurrection these days.
It's allowed.  You and election fraudster D'Souza's only problem is that you must first demonstrate probable cause for such a search and 18 months after the election nobody claiming fraud has managed to meet that low standard, even in front of judges sporting tattoos of Trump on their forehead.   When even Tucker Carlson won't let you tell your lies on his show, you know for sure you ain't got shit.
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
2
2
2
--> @oromagi
it is beyond reasonable belief that....any significant proportion of the identified mules were accounted for by innocent functions.
Based on what?  You're still waiting on the data 18 months later. Have any mules been identified?  Are any mules expected to be indentified?
Based on the presented scenario and my general knowledge of probability math. The point of the documentary was the claim of identifying 2000 mules under the constraints of visiting 10 drop boxes and non-profits, the graphics in the film imply this scenario occurred in a short period of time.


So the MAIN problem with 2020 election that there were not cameras on drop off box in spite of legal requirements? 
The main problem is people saying "prove it was fraudulent" with a smug grin when that is not where the burden of proof should be in this scenario. This is a matter of delegated trust at the root of our civilization and the responsibility for transparency and auditability is on the people who are given trust not the people who are suspicious of them.

"Woopies there weren't any cameras" is a microcosm of the general offense. It's not good enough to hope there wasn't cheating, it needs to be ruled out. If it is not ruled out any claims of democracy and thus the social contract binding anyone are especially absurd.


Putting forward election officials hardly discredits the method, they are acting as ballot mules; simply authorized ones.
I see.  So the election officials were all in on it?
Once again you say something that I believe demonstrates your disingenuity on this subject.


Aren't we  talking about mostly Republican districts here
No, and the more you keep confusing that the more your ignorance of how elections work grows apparent.




It should be a simple matter to check records to see which phones could match the logs of election officials. I say "should" because that is exactly the kind of data that no one is allowed to ask for without being charged with insurrection these days.
It's allowed.  You and election fraudster D'Souza's only problem is that you must first demonstrate probable cause for such a search and 18 months after the election nobody claiming fraud has managed to meet that low standard
Unacceptable standard, if a broker takes your money to invest you don't need probable cause of fraud to demand a ledger of what he did with your money, not keeping a ledger is itself probable cause. The transparency/security/auditability is owed, elections are not a person whose breach of privacy requires due process under the 4th amendment.

oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 101
Posts: 7,220
7
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
7
10
11
--> @ADreamOfLiberty
Based on the presented scenario and my general knowledge of probability math. The point of the documentary was the claim of identifying 2000 mules under the constraints of visiting 10 drop boxes and non-profits, the graphics in the film imply this scenario occurred in a short period of time.
So, I get to choose between your "general knowledge of probability math" and the AP's Professor of Computer Science and Engineering  to evaluate whether it is beyond a reasonable belief that D'Souza is misinterpreting ordinary traffic.  
CLAIM: At least 2,000 “mules” were paid to illegally collect ballots and deliver them to drop boxes in key swing states ahead of the 2020 presidential election.

THE FACTS: True the Vote didn’t prove this. The finding is based on false assumptions about the precision of cellphone tracking data and the reasons that someone might drop off multiple ballots, according to experts.

“Ballot harvesting” is a pejorative term for dropping off completed ballots for people besides yourself. The practice is legal in several states but largely illegal in the states True the Vote focused on, with some exceptions for family, household members and people with disabilities.

True the Vote has said it found some 2,000 ballot harvesters by purchasing $2 million worth of anonymized cellphone geolocation data — the “pings” that track a person’s location based on app activity — in various swing counties across five states. Then, by drawing a virtual boundary around a county’s ballot drop boxes and various unnamed nonprofits, it identified cellphones that repeatedly went near both ahead of the 2020 election.

If a cellphone went near a drop box more than 10 times and a nonprofit more than five times from Oct. 1 to Election Day, True the Vote assumed its owner was a “mule” — its name for someone engaged in an illegal ballot collection scheme in cahoots with a nonprofit.

The group’s claims of a paid ballot harvesting scheme are supported in the film only by one unidentified whistleblower said to be from San Luis, Arizona, who said she saw people picking up what she “assumed” to be payments for ballot collection. The film contains no evidence of such payments in other states in 2020.

Plus, experts say cellphone location data, even at its most advanced, can only reliably track a smartphone within a few meters — not close enough to know whether someone actually dropped off a ballot or just walked or drove nearby.

“You could use cellular evidence to say this person was in that area, but to say they were at the ballot box, you’re stretching it a lot,” said Aaron Striegel, a professor of computer science and engineering at the University of Notre Dame. “There’s always a pretty healthy amount of uncertainty that comes with this.”

What’s more, ballot drop boxes are often intentionally placed in busy areas, such as college campuses, libraries, government buildings and apartment complexes — increasing the likelihood that innocent citizens got caught in the group’s dragnet, Striegel said.

Similarly, there are plenty of legitimate reasons why someone might be visiting both a nonprofit’s office and one of those busy areas. Delivery drivers, postal workers, cab drivers, poll workers and elected officials all have legitimate reasons to cross paths with numerous drop boxes or nonprofits in a given day.

The main problem is people saying "prove it was fraudulent" with a smug grin when that is not where the burden of proof should be in this scenario. This is a matter of delegated trust at the root of our civilization and the responsibility for transparency and auditability is on the people who are given trust not the people who are suspicious of them.
If your main problem is the emotion you perceive in the faces of others than I suggest that your problem is  primarily psychological.  By all accounts the 2020 election was the most transparent and thoroughly audited election in human history.  If you are going to disagree with history and international consensus, then yes, the burden of proof is yours. 

"Woopies there weren't any cameras" is a microcosm of the general offense. It's not good enough to hope there wasn't cheating, it needs to be ruled out. If it is not ruled out any claims of democracy and thus the social contract binding anyone are especially absurd.
What is your evidence that there weren't any cameras?  I will not take your word for it.  I will assume that every or nearly every ballot box had at least camera on it most of the time until you are willing to make the effort to document otherwise.
Putting forward election officials hardly discredits the method, they are acting as ballot mules; simply authorized ones.
I see.  So the election officials were all in on it?
Once again you say something that I believe demonstrates your disingenuity on this subject.
I am asking you a direct question which you are dodging.
Aren't we  talking about mostly Republican districts here?
No, and the more you keep confusing that the more your ignorance of how elections work grows apparent.
I am asking you a direct question which you are deflecting.  Why are so unable to identify a specific case that can be fact checked?



It should be a simple matter to check records to see which phones could match the logs of election officials. I say "should" because that is exactly the kind of data that no one is allowed to ask for without being charged with insurrection these days.
It's allowed.  You and election fraudster D'Souza's only problem is that you must first demonstrate probable cause for such a search and 18 months after the election nobody claiming fraud has managed to meet that low standard
Unacceptable standard, if a broker takes your money to invest you don't need probable cause of fraud to demand a ledger of what he did with your money, not keeping a ledger is itself probable cause. The transparency/security/auditability is owed, elections are not a person whose breach of privacy requires due process under the 4th amendment.
US citizens are not "elections."  If you are going to Big Brother their phone data you are goddamned right you are going to need to show probable cause and get a fucking warrant.  Just I as I can ask my broker for a ledger, I am able to go online and audit the progress of my ballot and request a copy of my vote for weeks after the election.  If 7% of the election was fraudulent, then you should have little problem coming up with voters who's vote was misrepresented and yet there are none- just wild speculations based on the fuzziest of datasets.




ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 327
2
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
2
2
2
--> @oromagi
Based on the presented scenario and my general knowledge of probability math. The point of the documentary was the claim of identifying 2000 mules under the constraints of visiting 10 drop boxes and non-profits, the graphics in the film imply this scenario occurred in a short period of time.
So, I get to choose between your "general knowledge of probability math" and the AP's Professor of Computer Science and Engineering  to evaluate whether it is beyond a reasonable belief that D'Souza is misinterpreting ordinary traffic.  
You get to choose whatever you want, but if you choose to claim something was disproved when it wasn't I may choose to call it out.


By all accounts the 2020 election was the most transparent and thoroughly audited election in human history.
If that was the case and you still said this:

You and election fraudster D'Souza's only problem is that you must first demonstrate probable cause for such a search
Then we have never had a trustworthy election in human history.


What is your evidence that there weren't any cameras?
Dinesh said there wasn't.


I will not take your word for it.
Nor presumably anyone else's, nothing I can (practically) do about that. If you want to believe there were cameras and Dinesh is lying because the footage disproved the mule theory you go right ahead because I certainly don't have the time to prove you wrong... but you haven't proven there were cameras either and don't pretend otherwise.

Aren't we  talking about mostly Republican districts here?
No, and the more you keep confusing that the more your ignorance of how elections work grows apparent.
I am asking you a direct question which you are deflecting.
"No" is an answer to your question, full context reproduced above.

Why are so unable to identify a specific case that can be fact checked?
So when I said: "For instance cheating in Philadelphia"

The "instance" was an indicator of a specific example, Philadelphia is not an abstraction Philadelphia  is a city set upon the Delaware river in the state of Pennsylvania.

US citizens are not "elections."
They are when they are running elections. I seem to remember this clamor about tax returns and an orange man?

Just I as I can ask my broker for a ledger, I am able to go online and audit the progress of my ballot and request a copy of my vote for weeks after the election. 
You are clueless as to the actual system. Are you even an American? Federal and almost all state votes are secret ballots. It would be a direct violation of hundreds of election laws if they could provide you a record of your voting choices.

If 7% of the election was fraudulent, then you should have little problem coming up with voters who's vote was misrepresented and yet there are none
Some such people were found, but there is no reason for the people whose names were used to acquire fraudulent ballots would be at all aware of the need to audit their ballot. If you're a cheater and you're looking for a ballot, you don't go after people who are likely to vote. Such people would discover the double ballot (presuming the election system was working, there are indications it wasn't).

Ballots are harvested from people not in their right mind, dead people, people who are entirely apolitical and would never even check, people who had sold their ballot (they definitely wouldn't report), people who had moved out of state, etc...

You didn't understand that republican districts can be disenfranchised by fraudulent votes in a democrat district, you didn't understand the ballot is secret, and now you don't understand the most plausible theory of fraud.

Three strikes and you're out.

Bones
Bones's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 587
3
5
7
Bones's avatar
Bones
3
5
7
--> @oromagi
Do you think there is credibility to the claim that geolocation has shown that "mules" have been paying visits to 30 drop boxes in a single day? 
oromagi
oromagi's avatar
Debates: 101
Posts: 7,220
7
10
11
oromagi's avatar
oromagi
7
10
11
--> @Bones
Do you think there is credibility to the claim that geolocation has shown that "mules" have been paying visits to 30 drop boxes in a single day? 
Only a fool would.

"In the film, Phillips shows a diagram on a tablet computer purporting to show a mule traveling to 28 drop boxes in Atlanta. When that diagram is superimposed over a diagram of actual drop box locations, only some of the purported locations are near actual drop boxes, but many do not correspond to actual drop box locations. Phillips told The Washington Post that "the movie graphics are not literal interpretations of our data." Another diagram in the film purported to show geolocations superimposed over a map of Atlanta, but the map was actually of Moscow, Russia."
Bones
Bones's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 587
3
5
7
Bones's avatar
Bones
3
5
7
--> @oromagi
I think that the stipulation that there existed people travelling to numerous drop boxes is different to the veracity of the diagram depicted - I was thinking more along the lines of the assertion that geolocation as a tool found many "mules" travelling in irregular patterns.