Jump to content

2000 Mules


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

I'm assuming you know who Andrew Breitbart is

Yessir

9 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Lauren was big on YouTube in the Breitbart days. Then she disappeared to do documentaries

Never heard of her.

9 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

One of her points in consideration of 2000 Mules from a documentarian's perspective was if she was making the film she would have followed a specific mule showing his trail of drop boxes then identified him or her as the ballot box stuffer we saw on film.

My country is in perilous danger. I am angry at anyone who detracts from the few brave people trying to expose the biggest crime in our history. Perhaps in normal times I would be okay with the critique. These are not normal times. If she feels that way then she should make a documentary following one mule instead of criticizing Dinesh. Then we would have 2 films, more exposure, and more awareness.

Edited by Great American
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just watch the last couple of minutes of her 2000 Mules review on the previous page. You'll be surprised to discover she's actually a fan.

What about Jordan Petersen? Have you heard of him? Here he is telling you a story about Lauren:

And here she is herself - in action in the old days.

Edited by Infidel Dog
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one might interest you GA:

Sheriff of Arizona county featured in '2000 Mules' announces 2020 voting fraud investigations

Quote

The sheriff's office of an Arizona county highlighted in Dinesh D'Souza's "2000 Mules" documentary on alleged ballot harvesting and trafficking in the 2020 presidential election announced Wednesday it has teamed up with the county recorder to investigate 2020 election fraud. 

The Yuma County Sheriff's Office announced Wednesday that as of March, it has 16 open voter fraud cases.

The Sheriff's Office and the Recorder's Office "are working together to actively examine cases of voting fraud from the 2020 General Election and now a recent pattern of fraudulent voter registration forms leading up to the 2022 Primary Election," according to the YCSO.

"Some examples of voter fraud Yuma County is currently seeing," the sheriff reports, "are the following:

  • Impersonation fraud: Voting in the name of other legitimate voters and voters who have died or moved away.

  • False registrations: Falsifying voter registrations by either using a real or fake name, birth date, or address. This is being done by outreach groups who are paid for each registration form they submit, therefore, are out soliciting voters into unnecessarily re-registering or falsifying forms with Yuma County [residents'] identities.

  • Duplicate voting: Submitting multiple votes or registering in multiple locations and voting in the same election in more than one jurisdiction or state.

  • Fraudulent use of absentee ballots: Requesting absentee ballots and voting without the knowledge of the actual voter; or obtaining the absentee ballot from a voter and either filling it in directly and forging the voter's signature or illegally telling the voter who to vote for."

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Just watch the last couple of minutes of her 2000 Mules review on the previous page. You'll be surprised to discover she's actually a fan.

What about Jordan Petersen? Have you heard of him? Here he is telling you a story about Lauren:

And here she is herself - in action in the old days.

Dude, you got his pronouns wrong! He's a man. (unless he changed back. Or she changed back. Either way, I'm pretty sure that you're being a sexist lol)

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Just watch the last couple of minutes of her 2000 Mules review on the previous page. You'll be surprised to discover she's actually a fan.

What about Jordan Petersen? Have you heard of him? Here he is telling you a story about Lauren:

One small thing about that video, it's kinda funny that the little protester woman initially started off ranting about the "manosphere", but then at the end when Lauren informed her that he was legally a man, the woman got all sympathetic and strange about it.

Shouldn't her respect for Lauren actually have gone down a bit once she realize that Lauren had become part of the dreaded manosphere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have questions about the movie 2000 Mules? Here is your chance to get your questions answered! Be sure to sign up at truethevote.locals.com so you don't miss out on this incredible event! Can't wait to see you there!

VIDEO: https://rumble.com/v14mv8j-ask-us-anything-about-2000-mules..html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

Just watch the last couple of minutes of her 2000 Mules review on the previous page. You'll be surprised to discover she's actually a fan.

I watched. She is a luke warm fan. She wants the data independently verified. By who? The film proves that, from government to media to judges, the deep state cannot be trusted, so who are you going to trust to verify the data? By her own admission, there is enough evidence that all organs of government should be devoted to finding the truth. The fact that they are not, and the fact that the subject is actually suppressed in the media, proves that there IS a conspiracy as far as I am concerned.

19 hours ago, Infidel Dog said:

What about Jordan Petersen? Have you heard of him?

I think so, maybe. I don't know anything about him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Great American said:

Wait? What? And @Infidel Dogis calling him a conservative? I have been duped.

She just went and get new ID issued in a day to show how much of a farce the process is. 

She legally became a man without ever dressing like a man or doing her hair like a man. She just tucked it into a baseball hat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Great American said:

I watched. She is a luke warm fan. She wants the data independently verified. By who? The film proves that, from government to media to judges, the deep state cannot be trusted, so who are you going to trust to verify the data? 

The way I remember it she was waiting until all the data was made public. She thought that was going to happen. True the vote suggests it will make the data public.

I expect it. It's the old Breitbart trick. O'keefe who studied at Breitbart's heels still does it. You release the main video. The Progs attack with hysterical criticisms concerning weaknesses or flaws they see in the argument. You release the rest of the data you've been holding. Bam. The legs are kicked out from under the critics and they're flat on their asses.

If True the Vote releases the names of the NGOs behind the scam, for example, this story will get even bigger. TtV claims they do have the names.

There is some data they don't have. For example they don't have video on all the mules from all the locations. Dinesh replies to a critique from Ben Shapiro on that one:

 

Edited by Infidel Dog
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me revealing the names of the NGOs they say were issuing the ballots to the mules is vital. 

When they do this whole can of worms opens up in a way it hasn't yet.

If they don't you have to wonder why not.

The claim is they have the names.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are military whistle blowers, bio lab whistle blowers and now these ones to do with the election.

Durham has people from Hillary’s 2016 campaign now cooperating to save their sorry skins.  And then there is the Chinese politician, high up in the security apparatus of their nation who apparently brought reams of data.

The courts have turned on the Biden administration, who is in deep trouble due to the evidence on his son’s laptop.

What a difference a year makes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/9/2022 at 10:27 PM, WestCanMan said:

Why are you afraid to look at what they have to say? 

Why are you writing it off as propaganda without even looking at it?

Why should people follow your advice, and not look at it? You're a self-proclaimed conservative without any conservative viewpoints who unfalteringly supports Trudeau and the Dems. 

It's a non starter, because off the top it repeats childish conspiracy theories that are a waste of time, such as Republican governors conspiring against Trump.

Don't fret though, you can always use the internet to find people who will buy this merchandise.

It's suppressed right? And yet #1 on Amazon, which is owned by Jeff Bezos who owns the Washington Post? 😂

Conspiracy theories... Sheesh... They don't stand up...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2022 at 4:10 AM, Michael Hardner said:

It's a non starter, because off the top it repeats childish conspiracy theories that are a waste of time,

In other words, you want to keep your head up your ass. Shocker.

Quote

 such as Republican governors conspiring against Trump.

Glad to see that you didn't let your overwhelming ignorance stop you from acting like an expert on the subject. 

Quote

Don't fret though, you can always use the internet to find people who will buy this merchandise.

You need to stop posting here, you're tanking the level of discourse on this forum. 

Quote

It's suppressed right? And yet #1 on Amazon, which is owned by Jeff Bezos who owns the Washington Post? 😂

How is that a reply to anything that I said?

I said that you are here trying to convince people that they should keep their heads in the sand with you. I didn't say anything about "tha man tryin'a keep D'Souzan dowwwnnn", bruh.

Quote

Conspiracy theories... Sheesh... They don't stand up...

You say that, yet you haven't even uttered a single word about the content of the movie.....

The only thing that's not standing up is your ignorance and drivel. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. In other words, you want to keep your head up your ass. Shocker.

2. Glad to see that you didn't let your overwhelming ignorance stop you from acting like an expert on the subject. 

3. How is that a reply to anything that I said. I didn't say anything about "tha man tryin'a keep D'Souzan dowwwnnn", bruh.

4. You say that, yet you haven't even uttered a single word about the content of the movie.....

 

1. ha ha ... I read the points of view on here that are reflected,so no I don't want to hide from other opinions.  Going on here, on the other hand, takes less time and gives me a chance to question and respond to posters.
2. I can't be an expert on conspiracy theories that I did not construct
3. Must have been another poster.
4. "Dinesh D'Souza exposes the powerful evidence of voting fraud" We went through all that in 2020 and now we can move on.  There's no way you can accuse us of not spending enough time on this bogus topic.

-------_

Find me a serious and objective 3rd party who isn't mining profits from this ridiculousness who has made a claim on it.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. ha ha ... I read the points of view on here that are reflected,so no I don't want to hide from other opinions.  Going on here, on the other hand, takes less time and gives me a chance to question and respond to posters.

So it's like I said, you still haven't watched it because you'd rather keep your head up your ass like a good little leftist.

"We, the sheeple, will not gaze upon that which is forbidden to us."

Quote

2. I can't be an expert on conspiracy theories that I did not construct

You're an expert on living within conspiracy theories, you just don't know it. 

"When you're dead, you don't know you're dead, it's only difficult and painful for others. It's the same thing for stupid people (eg, conspiracy theorists)." 

Quote

4. "Dinesh D'Souza exposes the powerful evidence of voting fraud" We went through all that in 2020 and now we can move on.  There's no way you can accuse us of not spending enough time on this bogus topic.

Huh? How much time, exactly, was spent on considering whether or not this was a bogus topic?

CNN declared right on election night that the 2020 election was "completely legitimate" after spending 4 years saying that the 2016 was completely fraudulent, and they never managed to come up with any evidence that either claim was true. They've never wavered from that position. 

At what point was any time spent on this topic?

Coming up with proof of widespread voter fraud wasn't easy, but it's important to look at. 

When someone has indisputable evidence of voter fraud in the world's foremost democracy, shouldn't you at least look at it? What do you have to do with your time that's more important than that, aside from posting your lies on an internet forum? 

Quote

-------_

Find me a serious and objective 3rd party who isn't mining profits from this ridiculousness who has made a claim on it.  

Name a single objective 3rd party from anywhere in the world, MH. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Name a single objective 3rd party from anywhere in the world, MH. 

All of Western democracy is predicated that objectivity exists, so that says something about you. And no I spent about 3 seconds deciding I wouldn't pay attention to this. I already told you why, but you just keep repeating same things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

All of Western democracy is predicated that objectivity exists, so that says something about you. And no I spent about 3 seconds deciding I wouldn't pay attention to this. I already told you why, but you just keep repeating same things.

So name your objective party who has commented on the movie then...

You can't, so instead you randomly pontificate on the underpinnings of democracy, as if there's some straw in there to keep your idiotic debate points afloat while they're spinning into the toilet-vortex of your mind.

There are 3 kinds of people:

1) people who have watched 2000 Mules, who understand it, and are willing to discuss the content

2) people who have watched it and desperately want to challenge the content but can't, so they pretend that they haven't seen it because they are above watching it

3) people who refuse to watch it because they know that it will upset their apple cart, and who also pretend that they are above watching it.

It's not my first rodeo. I know for a fact that you'd be regurgitating the leftist propaganda, claiming to refute the evidence laid out in the movie, if it was worth regurgitating, but it only works in an echo chamber, so the good little leftist's only defence in an actual debate is "WE DON'T NEED TO SEE IT! THE ELECTION WAS DECLARED TO BE THE MOST SECURE ELECTION IN AMERICAN HISTORY RIGHT ON CNN! TALKING ABOUT 2020 ELECTION FRAUD IS TREASON! JAN 6th WAS AKIN TO PEARL HARBOUR AND 9/11!", i.e.  - "WE REFUSE TO HAVE OUR NOSES RUBBED IN THE TRUTH!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

1. So name your objective party who has commented on the movie then...

 

2. people who refuse to watch it because they know that it will upset their apple cart, and who also pretend that they  

1. You are confused. I challenged you to produce an objective commenter who supports these theories.

2. I refuse to watch it because I don't have the time or money in my life. Replying to this post took one minute and that's about as much time as I have..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You are confused. I challenged you to produce an objective commenter who supports these theories.

Not confused at all. 

You're trying to send me on a wild goose chase, and find people who confirm what Dinesh says, just so that you can say "He wasn't objective!".

I turned it back on you. Find someone objective who doesn't believe the evidence. 

You're the one who's trying to debunk all of the evidence without even glimpsing at it. You're the one who needs to provide a good reason for doing such a childish thing.

Quote

2. I refuse to watch it because I don't have the time or money in my life. Replying to this post took one minute and that's about as much time as I have..

🤣

That's lame, weak and stupid all at the same time.

You spend hours and hours opining about politics. You're on here every day. Of course you have time. You just have to support a narrative, and you can't do that if you allow yourself to be exposed to the facts. As usual, facts are your enemy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

1. You're trying to send me on a wild goose chase,

2. Find someone objective who doesn't believe the evidence. 

3. You're the one who's trying to debunk all of the evidence without even glimpsing at it. 

1. Hahaha... Meaning that no such objective person exists that would back up these claims.

2. 3. https://gov.georgia.gov/press-releases/2020-11-23/governor-kemp-formalizes-election-certification-calls-signature-audit

That's two minutes... Enough said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Hahaha... Meaning that no such objective person exists that would back up these claims.

No, it means that you don't have any reasonable arguments, so you want me to run and fetch opinions which you can then then refute based entirely on your own assessment of their objectivity. 

Quote

That's from Nov 2020. What's your point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...