Not only that but here’s how a mind already predisposed to believe something combined with slanted commentary can actually impact what one believes they are seeing.
Look at the picture I just posted,
That person only put one ballot in the drop box.
He had one.
I just realized the guy who supposedly started out as “agnostic” about the 2000 Election being stolen was Dennis Prager!
Here is Prager showing he doesn’t know what the word “agnostic” means.
50% (+1) of 330 Million = 115 Million??
I don’t agree to that at all.
Wow, did I mess that up.
Think I dropped about 50 million. 
Thanks. Fixed.
WW
I hated to be THAT guy, but yeah, that’s quite an error.
I figured you meant to hit 165 and somehow just hit the 1 twice.
And that’s why we always check our math. 
Actually I appreciate the heads up.
Thank you.
WW
A circle with a 100 ft radius is an area slightly larger than half a football field.
Good video tells the truth about leftist/globalist liars.
2 Likes
I agree with that video that voting is useless and anyone who believes the conspiracy shouldn’t do it.
2 Likes
Why should D’Souza put any effort into it? He knows they’ll believe him literally no matter what he says because they want it to be true.
I don’t think that the video they have shown, even combined with everything else they have shown is irrefutable proof of an organized 2000 mule or 54,000 mule 800,000 vote fraud operation.
There claims go well beyond questioning why persons are at ballot boxes at strange hours or with multiple ballots or while acting strangely. They claim these persons, and thousands more that are not captured on video are connected to and paid by D organizations and that they visited multiple drop boxes. And they say that they have proof this. And that it is irrefutable.
So the excuse that they haven’t processed the data enough to release proof does not make sense. If they see the evidence as irrefutable then they must at some point have had a set of data sufficient to convince a skeptical but open minded person like me.
What is the likelihood of keeping a conspiracy involving thousands of people under wraps? Or even a dozen people for that matter LOL.
It’s not under wraps anymore.
Only the most weak minded morons, or the most evil and corrupt, would insist on electing a person with full blown dementia.
1 Like
Then where are the prosecutions!
1 Like
The most thorough debunking of 2000 Mules I have seen yet.
Adds some new details I hadn’t seen elsewhere, like one of the first “mules” Dinesh shows had already been investigated by the Georgia Bureau of Elections before TTV ever approached them with their data, and it was found the five ballots he was seen putting in the drop box were all family members’ ballots.
The best description I have seen yet as to why geolocation will not by itself show a person stopped at a drop box.
A reminder of both Phillips’ (he of the “there were 3-5 million illegal votes cast in 2016” hypothesis that was based on a very dubious nalysis on sparse data) and Englebrecht’s pasts (a Tea Party militant) and finally a good description of how tough it is for such a huge ballot harvesting scheme to work, and how fraud that has been stopped in the past never has just one anonymous witness…always has lots of witnesses, including people who turn against the fraud perpetrator.
He’s fair and points out that TTV has actually spotted and reported real voter fraud in the past, but also has a history of making outlandish claims.
Finally he points out how GBI has already dismissed TTV’s claims. Now the Georgia Secretary of State hasn’t dropped his investigation yet, but his office has had to stoop to issuing subpoenas to try and get TTV’s data and also their witness/witnesses to testify.
Why subpeonas? Because although TTV brought the original complaint, they are now not being cooperative in the investigation. That seems odd for an organization that wants to make sure all our elections have integrity.
Anyhow…the link…it’s a decently long read, so be prepared for that.
2 Likes
That piece reminded me of one of the arguments used as evidence of fraud for Biden is that other Republicans on the ballot did better than Trump did. The logical question would be why didn’t the ballot harvesters get the Dems some more senators and congresspeople while they were at it?
Says the Qanon supporter without a hint of irony or self reflection
1 Like
