Sadly it appears that you didnt watch 2000 Mules. It wasnt the fact that the "mules" simply put ballots in the boxes. It was that the pattern is one person putting a small number of ballots in over a hundred boxes in the early hours of the morning and the "mules" all began their routes by starting at non-profits who are involved in democratic politics. Your point that every ballot must have a valid name and address wasnt covered in the film but I'll bet that somehow each ballot appeared to be legit. Please watch it with the attitude that it could be valid evidence of corruption. I have a lot of respect for "True the Vote".
So basically you are saying that their whole thesis is based on fake evidence? They make it clear that based on the pings they know which "mules" went to which drop boxes when. You are saying that their entire thesis is based on lies? They do not claim that any "mule went to the same drop box more than once but each one went to multiple droop boxes with a few ballots. A normal person might return to the same box but not make the rounds of up to or more than 100 boxes! You arent persuading me.
Likewise! I do believe that Dinesh is not above deception. The video clip alone of Biden at the start of the film is a pretty upfront example of deceptive editing and false insinuation. The raw data must be interpreted, and I do not believe that True The Vote or Dinesh use sound principles in evaluating it. Anyway, the film doesn't *show* anybody showing up at multiple drop boxes. And the "pings" do not demonstrate that anybody went to a dropbox. It's all inference, and unreliable, and patently presented by somebody deeply invested in it being true--or convincing others that it's true. And, of course, there is the teensy problem that the ballots would have to be verifiable and legitimate to get counted. ;) Cheers, and again, really: thanks for reading even when I irritate you! Hopefully that isn't all the time.
Sadly it appears that you didnt watch 2000 Mules. It wasnt the fact that the "mules" simply put ballots in the boxes. It was that the pattern is one person putting a small number of ballots in over a hundred boxes in the early hours of the morning and the "mules" all began their routes by starting at non-profits who are involved in democratic politics. Your point that every ballot must have a valid name and address wasnt covered in the film but I'll bet that somehow each ballot appeared to be legit. Please watch it with the attitude that it could be valid evidence of corruption. I have a lot of respect for "True the Vote".
Thank you! But, actually, the film doesn't show any one person going to a drop box more than once. Here's a helpful analysis. https://factcheck.thedispatch.com/p/fact-checking-dinesh-dsouzas-2000?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjo0MjkwMTgwLCJwb3N0X2lkIjo1NTk1MjczOSwiXyI6InRXSVZpIiwiaWF0IjoxNjUzMTUyODA5LCJleHAiOjE2NTMxNTY0MDksImlzcyI6InB1Yi0yMjA2MyIsInN1YiI6InBvc3QtcmVhY3Rpb24ifQ.USPA5FzytNWvrBLKpRd1bjGzbdRXIusxdVbw6HjyJqk&s=r
So basically you are saying that their whole thesis is based on fake evidence? They make it clear that based on the pings they know which "mules" went to which drop boxes when. You are saying that their entire thesis is based on lies? They do not claim that any "mule went to the same drop box more than once but each one went to multiple droop boxes with a few ballots. A normal person might return to the same box but not make the rounds of up to or more than 100 boxes! You arent persuading me.
I appreciate your response as well as your posts in general. ( I'm a fan!) But hurts me when you appear to be blind on this subject.
Likewise! I do believe that Dinesh is not above deception. The video clip alone of Biden at the start of the film is a pretty upfront example of deceptive editing and false insinuation. The raw data must be interpreted, and I do not believe that True The Vote or Dinesh use sound principles in evaluating it. Anyway, the film doesn't *show* anybody showing up at multiple drop boxes. And the "pings" do not demonstrate that anybody went to a dropbox. It's all inference, and unreliable, and patently presented by somebody deeply invested in it being true--or convincing others that it's true. And, of course, there is the teensy problem that the ballots would have to be verifiable and legitimate to get counted. ;) Cheers, and again, really: thanks for reading even when I irritate you! Hopefully that isn't all the time.
Oh, almost forgot: why, exactly, was this necessary when the Dominion machines were rigged? ;) Have some skepticism of the source!