2000 Mules

[Moonbox]

4 minutes ago, Deluge said:

Moonbat believes that only left-wing diapered psychopaths are allowed to throw insults at others. lol

Pee-pee-poo-poo, the deluge down your leg.  

[Deluge]

11 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

Pee-pee-poo-poo, the deluge down your leg.  

 

[Moonbox]

3 minutes ago, Deluge said:

 

[Deluge]

19 minutes ago, Moonbox said:

I was raised on the muppets until my moms pulled me away from it because it didn't have transgender representation. *CRY!!!*'

-- Moonbat

Edited June 3, 2024 by Deluge

[Hodad]

1 hour ago, Nationalist said:

All true. You can lie...and you are...but its all true.

Here you go.

[Moonbox]

11 minutes ago, Deluge said:

I was raised on the muppets until my moms pulled me away from it because it didn't have transgender representation. *CRY!!!*'

-- Moonbat

LOL! 

What any of this has to do with transgender representation is a mystery, but Poopy Deluge's tribal programming was triggered, so this is the random boilerplate squawking that we're getting. 

[Deluge]

Just now, Moonbox said:

LOL! 

What any of this has to do with transgender representation is a mystery. 

Stop crying and admit that both your moms couldn't stand you.  

[Nationalist]

1 hour ago, Deluge said:

Moonbat believes that only left-wing diapered psychopaths are allowed to throw insults at others. lol

Moonbat is a loser. It has no moral compass and no intellect. Which is why its wrong consistently. 

 

[Deluge]

Just now, Nationalist said:

Moonbat is a loser. It has no moral compass and no intellect. Which is why its wrong consistently. 

 

It was sent here to shill the masses, just like robowoke does. 

[Nationalist]

49 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Here you go.

Thanks. I use them crushed in meatballs.

Have a warm and fuzzy day.

Edited June 3, 2024 by Nationalist

[Goddess]

11 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Moonbat is a loser. It has no moral compass and no intellect. Which is why its wrong consistently. 

 

Most of its' posts are poo-poo, pee-pee, farts and butt sex, etc.

I'm convinced it's a 12 year old boy.

 

[Moonbox]

13 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Most of its' posts are poo-poo, pee-pee, farts and butt sex, etc.

I'm convinced it's a 12 year old boy.

Hey Karen.   I think the vaccine quackery thread is getting lonely without you.  

[BeaverFever]

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

But it didnt.  it just ranted a little

No I spelled out in detail the flaws/ errors in his argument. But like all conservatives in this forum when you hear something that’s inconvenient to your ideology you just make a blanket statement that it’s somehow not relevant. 
 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

Sorry, but all of that is wrong. Some of it is plausible. He is not arguing what you say he's arguing. And rather than make a sense of argument all you've got in there is constant unending insults in an attempt to dismiss something that you cannot argue against.

That is entirely false and none of it is wrong D’Souza is a convicted felon having previously convicted of election fraud, which is completely relevant to a “documentary” he’s made to discredit the 2020 election and demanding that we take him at his word. 
 

He is absolutely and in no uncertain terms arguing what I said he’s arguing the flaws in his claims and logic are so wide you can drive a truck between them and I described in detail what those flaws are. Ironically you’re not even able to describe how any of MY arguments are inadequate. Again typical for a conservative on this forum: you complain that detailed and specific criticism was detailed and sepecif enough, while refusing to provide ANY details or specifics yourself. But of course shameless hypocrisy has become the Republican brand. 
 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

And your entire argument, after paragraph after paragraph of ad hominem attacks,  is a statement that you can't prove or even demonstrate

It’s not ad-hominem to state the fact that this man RECENTLY went to jail for trying  to undermine free and fair elections considering this conversation is about his attempt to under the 2020 election. 
 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

is a statement that you can't prove or even demonstrate. 

which statement is that?

 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

He hasn't provided any evidence yet because he can't!! DERP!!!!  Frankly i don't know that he hasn't, and more importantly if he hasn't there's a dozen legit reasons why that might be true, so how do you know?

LMAO clearly you don’t understand how evidence works   You are the only DERP here if you think anyone is supposed to believe his grandiose and outrageous claims and overturn the election based on secret evidence he has but won’t show anyone, even 2 years later And you admit you don’t even know if he’s provided any evidence or not but you don’t seem to even care. What would a legitimate reason be?  
 

Again more of your hypocrisy that when the accusations come from a Republican, even a convicted felon who pleaded guilty to election fraud NO EVIDENCE IS REQUIRED to believe his claims, you tak him at his word. But yet when the accusations are against any Republican suddenly your criteria for evidence is an impossibly high standard that nobody could ever realistically meet. 
 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

Your post was the kind of incoherent, unsupported, illogical hate filled nonsense

That’s a lie it was a factual critique that you don’t want to accept so you pretend it was as you wish it was. 
 

RECAP OF FACTS:  he hasn’t shown how he can locate a phone that close despite industry experts disputing his claim, he hasn’t shown how he ruled out the device of people who routinely pass by boxes located near where they live and work particularly since drop boxes are deliberately located in high traffic areas like malls and libraries,  he hasn’t provided the addresses of supposed Democrat “safe houses” or even described how he knows the locations to be such, he hasn’t shown footage of anyone stuffing a box or visiting a box lore than once despite claiming 2 years ago that he has it

 

And fact: claiming to have secret evidence that you refuse to show anyone means that for all intents and purposes you have NO evidence. Otherwise that kind of defeats the whole point of evidence in the first place. If I call the cops and say I have secret evidence that you’re a criminal but I refuse to show them or anyone, should they or anyone else believe me and come arrest you?
 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

Btw  fun fact, every  time i use my 'find my friend' on my phon

I don’t think the technology has been invented that could help find you a friend 😝

 

On 6/2/2024 at 9:50 PM, CdnFox said:

it shows it within about 18 ft of where it is, often less. I literally used to be able to see specifically i left it in my office rather than the boardroom etc. Or conversely at home that i'd left it in the living room rather than the back bedroom area. And this was back in teh day when i worked at the office a lot more, so if anything it'll likely have gotten better not worse.  Just thought i'd mention.

We all have mobile phones. We’ve all experienced where it shows the device is in the backyard or the neighbours yard when in fact it is in the house and I’m not certain find my phone is even the same tech as the geolocation data anyway. 

And D’Souza absurdly claimed his cell phone location is accurate to 18 INCHES not 18 feet. In fact he said “12 to 18 inches” which is hilariously false.   Experts said accuracy is 2-10 METRES at best under ideal lab conditions never mind real world environments  Also geolocation can’t tell the difference between a moving object and a stationary object, it’s just the approximate location of the phone in the split second it was pinged. So there’s  no way to tell if someone who was pinged was standing still directly at a box or speeding past the box at 100 mph on a nearby road  

 

Debunking links here:

Does ‘2000 Mules’ provide evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. presidential election?

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL2N2XJ0OQ/

FACT FOCUS: Gaping holes in the claim of 2K ballot ‘mules’

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-covid-technology-health-arizona-e1b49d2311bf900f44fa5c6dac406762
 

Conservative group tells judge it has no evidence to back its claims of Georgia ballot stuffing

https://apnews.com/article/georgia-elections-true-vote-ballot-stuffing-199113b47bc2df79c63fdf007cd23115
 

Group featured in debunked ‘2000 Mules’ election doc admits it has no evidence
 

https://www.nydailynews.com/2024/02/15/true-the-vote-2000-mules-no-evidence-debunked/
 

Former AG Bill Barr discredited the ‘2,000 Mules’ voter fraud film in a Jan. 6 hearing
 

https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/attorney-general-bill-barr-trump-2000-mules-voter-fraud/
 

 

Edited June 4, 2024 by BeaverFever

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, Deluge said:

It was sent here to shill the masses, just like robowoke does. 

That is you cause I post EVIDENCE.

[Deluge]

16 minutes ago, robosmith said:

That is you cause I post EVIDENCE.

You post woke propaganda. You're the biggest shill on this forum. 

[BeaverFever]

9 hours ago, Deluge said:

Sure he is, dumbass. 

You think fat ass "Twinkie" wasn't paid off to derail Trump's presidential campaign? lol

https://nypost.com/2023/01/26/george-soros-is-the-most-dangerous-man-in-america-heres-why/

 

 

Pfft Republicans have a truckload of activist billionaire mega donors who are richer, than boogie man George Soros and at least as powerful and politically active . Donald Trump himself is now reportedly richer than Soros, thanks to fleecing gullible suckers like you

 

Donald Trump is now richer than George Soros — and on track to overtake Mark Cuban
 

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-wealth-tmtg-dwac-billionaires-stock-court-judgment-rich-list-2024-3?amp

 

American billionaires’ political spending overwhelmingly leans Republican

https://qz.com/american-billionaires-political-spending-overwhelmingl-1849751449

 

Beyond George Soros, Republican mega-donors represent 7 of top 10 individuals pouring into $17B midterms

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/beyond-george-soros-republican-mega-donors-represent-7-top-10-individuals-pouring-17b-midterms.amp

 

The Ultra-Rich Are Ultra-Conservative

https://jacobin.com/2019/07/billionaires-and-stealth-politics
 

The billionaires rallying behind Trump after his conviction

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ckvvlv3lewxo.amp

 

6 GOP megadonors quietly propelling Republicans through Trump-era turbulence 

https://www.salon.com/2023/05/04/peter-thiel-top-megadonors-2024/

Edited June 4, 2024 by BeaverFever

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

No I spelled out in detail the flaws/ errors in his argument. 

No you didn't. You just simply said 'he wrong' with no evidence as i pointed out, 

And i see you've done the same thing again. All your arguments again amount to 'nuh uh' and ad hominems.  Your sources disagree with you and admit there's some plausibility to his claims, although they say it's not enough to be considered convincing proof. Which is fair. 

And sorry kid but when you try and claim that his argument is invalid because you think he's a bad person, that is literally by definition an ad hominem attack. That was everything you put forward , every second word was about how he was a criminal when it's clear that has no bearing on this. 

And you clearly didn't read your own cites. They support his claim more than yours.  At best they say the evidence isn't definitive. 

So what you clearly did is a quick google search and you posted links that at a glance seemed to support the idea of no evidence.  In fact they did provide evidence, that is clear.  You can argue it's not definitive proof or the like but your statement that there was no evidence is absolutely debunked by your own sources. 

I haven't watched the show but based on the sources you provided it is at least plausible. There appears to be gaps in the proof and there's questions as to the analysis but it's very interesting that none of the credible sources actually say it's 'false', just that there's significant problems with it. 

And when you get called on your bullshit, once again it's the fault of the conservatives that you're wrong.  Sigh. 

 

 

[BeaverFever]

32 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

No you didn't. You just simply said 'he wrong' with no evidence as i pointed out, 

And i see you've done the same thing again. All your arguments again amount to 'nuh uh' and ad hominems.

That is absolutely false. I clearly demonstrated the HE has no evidence for uis claims. Are you seriously claiming that I need to present evidence that he didn’t present evidence for his accusation ?  You don’t understand how burden of proof works  

I clearly articulated how his arguments and claims are false and provided links.    For example he claims he has footage of “mules” stuffing ballot boxes and dropping votes in boxes more than once but for 2 years hasn’t shown it, so you absurdly claim that I am the one who needs to present evidence he doesn’t actually have this footage otherwise we must assume his no-evidence claim is true???  Same for the addresses of the so-called Democrat “stash houses”, the names of the Democrat groups supposedly linked to them or any proof of their existence. I could go on and repeat myself for the third time but there’s no point  No I think you’re just being a troll because you’re not this dense  

 

I think you don’t even know what ad hominem means

 

44 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Your sources disagree with you and admit there's some plausibility to his claims, although they say it's not enough to be considered convincing proof.

Another absolute lie on your part.

 

46 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

And sorry kid but when you try and claim that his argument is invalid because you think he's a bad person, that is literally by definition an ad hominem attack. That was everything you put forward , every second word was about how he was a criminal when it's clear that has no bearing on this. 

LOL no it is not the definition!  Being convicted of felony election fraud for Republican candidates is directly relevant to his attempt to discredit the 2020 election for a Republican candidate….the one who pardoned him no less. What are you suddenly soft on convicted criminals now too?   How do you not understand that being exposed as a fraud destroys your ability to credibly speak on the same subject where you committed your fraud?

 

55 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

And you clearly didn't read your own cites. They support his claim more than yours.  At best they say the evidence isn't definitive. 

That’s absolutely false!  One of them even says it has “gaping holes” right in the title!  You didn’t read's cites. Trump’s AG Bill Barr’s criticism was then only one that pulled punches because he’s also a Republican and he was testifying before Congress, but I included it just to show you that even HE doesn’t buy it.  He has also called Trump’s stolen election claims “bullshit” 

 

59 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

So what you clearly did is a quick google search and you posted links that at a glance seemed to support the idea of no evidence.  In fact they did provide evidence, that is clear.  You can argue it's not definitive proof or the like but your statement that there was no evidence is absolutely debunked by your own sources. 

Absolutely false!  The sources say the things he claims to be evidence aren’t really evidence at all.  One headline has the words “debunked” and two have the words “no evidence” right there in the title.  Another uses the words “gaping holes” and they don’t mean it in the way you’re hoping. 😝

Again CLAIMING you have video footage of someone visiting a drop box multiple times but only showing them visiting one time is NO evidence, it’s not half the evidence. Claiming cellphones can be geolocated within 18 inches when NO expert agrees that is possible is NO evidence.  And that is exactly what the links I posted say. 

NOWHERE DO ANY OF THE ARTICLES SAY IT IS PLAUSIBLE 

You clearly skimmed the articles with your MAGA dementia lenses on and saw what you wanted to see

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

There appears to be gaps in the proof and there's questions as to the analysis but it's very interesting that none of the credible sources actually say it's 'false', just that there's significant problems with it. 

False. The sources I posted systematically dismantle his claims and clearly state that what D’Souza claimed to be “evidence” was nothing of the sort. As I said, the sources say the things he claims to be evidence aren’t actually evidence at all.  One headline has the words “debunked” and two have the words “no evidence” right there in the title.  Another uses the words “gaping holes”. 
 

Seriously you can’t possibly be this deranged.  You admit that you don’t even know anything about what is claimed in 2000 mules and you shamelessly completely misrepresent the criticism of him that totally dismantled his claims, in an effort to suggest the jury is still out or that he has most but not all of the evidence   
 

You know sometimes you come off as one of the more reasonable conservatives on here but sometimes you are in an alternate reality. 

[robosmith]

5 hours ago, Deluge said:

You post woke propaganda. You're the biggest shill on this forum. 

That is you. Posting ONLY your BULLSHIT OPINIONS.

This is me:

Edited June 4, 2024 by robosmith

[CdnFox]

23 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

That is absolutely false. I clearly demonstrated the HE has no evidence for uis claims.

But he does.  All the cites you gave state very clearly he does. 

Which means it is up to you to challenge the validity or quality of that evidence. A number of the sources you cited attempted to do that. But what you have done is insisted that there isn't any. Every single thing you posted said there was.

You keep saying the words clearly articulated as if they are true or accurate. As I have pointed out you have not clearly articulated any of your points so far. You claim he has no evidence, he clearly has evidence. You harp on the fact that he's a convict, that's clearly not relevant and therefore a ad hominem attack.

And as I have demonstrated using your own evidence every time you say something is absolutely false it is in fact true. You just don't want it to be true. Unfortunately the facts don't care about your feelings.

So here's what an honest person sees reading your cites: They're clearly is a fair bit of evidence that is presented by the authors to prove their case. Much of it is questionable or not thoroughly documented enough to be able to say with any certainty that it's An accurate analysis of the data. None of them out and out show evidence disproving the data or make the claim that there is no valid data. They question the data and its interpretation and fair enough.

And an honest person sees you Falsely stating otherwise. You claim there is no evidence when in fact there is evidence. You say things are false when they are very clearly demonstrably true.

So I have to ask, if it is so obviously true that his claims are not accurate, why do you feel the need to be dishonest or lie or exaggerate or use ad hominem attacks to try and present your case? Wouldn't the truth be enough under those circumstances?

I've said it a million times but it is such an important life lesson to learn: If you have to lie to make your point you don't have a good enough point. And if you don't have to lie to make your point then don't! You call your opinion into question when you can't make your point honestly.

[Nationalist]

9 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

No I spelled out in detail the flaws/ errors in his argument. But like all conservatives in this forum when you hear something that’s inconvenient to your ideology you just make a blanket statement that it’s somehow not relevant. 
 

That is entirely false and none of it is wrong D’Souza is a convicted felon having previously convicted of election fraud, which is completely relevant to a “documentary” he’s made to discredit the 2020 election and demanding that we take him at his word. 
 

He is absolutely and in no uncertain terms arguing what I said he’s arguing the flaws in his claims and logic are so wide you can drive a truck between them and I described in detail what those flaws are. Ironically you’re not even able to describe how any of MY arguments are inadequate. Again typical for a conservative on this forum: you complain that detailed and specific criticism was detailed and sepecif enough, while refusing to provide ANY details or specifics yourself. But of course shameless hypocrisy has become the Republican brand. 
 

It’s not ad-hominem to state the fact that this man RECENTLY went to jail for trying  to undermine free and fair elections considering this conversation is about his attempt to under the 2020 election. 
 

which statement is that?

 

LMAO clearly you don’t understand how evidence works   You are the only DERP here if you think anyone is supposed to believe his grandiose and outrageous claims and overturn the election based on secret evidence he has but won’t show anyone, even 2 years later And you admit you don’t even know if he’s provided any evidence or not but you don’t seem to even care. What would a legitimate reason be?  
 

Again more of your hypocrisy that when the accusations come from a Republican, even a convicted felon who pleaded guilty to election fraud NO EVIDENCE IS REQUIRED to believe his claims, you tak him at his word. But yet when the accusations are against any Republican suddenly your criteria for evidence is an impossibly high standard that nobody could ever realistically meet. 
 

That’s a lie it was a factual critique that you don’t want to accept so you pretend it was as you wish it was. 
 

RECAP OF FACTS:  he hasn’t shown how he can locate a phone that close despite industry experts disputing his claim, he hasn’t shown how he ruled out the device of people who routinely pass by boxes located near where they live and work particularly since drop boxes are deliberately located in high traffic areas like malls and libraries,  he hasn’t provided the addresses of supposed Democrat “safe houses” or even described how he knows the locations to be such, he hasn’t shown footage of anyone stuffing a box or visiting a box lore than once despite claiming 2 years ago that he has it

 

And fact: claiming to have secret evidence that you refuse to show anyone means that for all intents and purposes you have NO evidence. Otherwise that kind of defeats the whole point of evidence in the first place. If I call the cops and say I have secret evidence that you’re a criminal but I refuse to show them or anyone, should they or anyone else believe me and come arrest you?
 

I don’t think the technology has been invented that could help find you a friend 😝

 

We all have mobile phones. We’ve all experienced where it shows the device is in the backyard or the neighbours yard when in fact it is in the house and I’m not certain find my phone is even the same tech as the geolocation data anyway. 

And D’Souza absurdly claimed his cell phone location is accurate to 18 INCHES not 18 feet. In fact he said “12 to 18 inches” which is hilariously false.   Experts said accuracy is 2-10 METRES at best under ideal lab conditions never mind real world environments  Also geolocation can’t tell the difference between a moving object and a stationary object, it’s just the approximate location of the phone in the split second it was pinged. So there’s  no way to tell if someone who was pinged was standing still directly at a box or speeding past the box at 100 mph on a nearby road  

 

Debunking links here:

Does ‘2000 Mules’ provide evidence of voter fraud in the 2020 U.S. presidential election?

https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSL2N2XJ0OQ/

FACT FOCUS: Gaping holes in the claim of 2K ballot ‘mules’

https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-covid-technology-health-arizona-e1b49d2311bf900f44fa5c6dac406762
 

Conservative group tells judge it has no evidence to back its claims of Georgia ballot stuffing

https://apnews.com/article/georgia-elections-true-vote-ballot-stuffing-199113b47bc2df79c63fdf007cd23115
 

Group featured in debunked ‘2000 Mules’ election doc admits it has no evidence
 

https://www.nydailynews.com/2024/02/15/true-the-vote-2000-mules-no-evidence-debunked/
 

Former AG Bill Barr discredited the ‘2,000 Mules’ voter fraud film in a Jan. 6 hearing
 

https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/attorney-general-bill-barr-trump-2000-mules-voter-fraud/
 

 

You seem to be pretty interested in this stuff. Tell me...what sort of conviction did Rosie O'Donnell get for her donation fraud?

[Deluge]

9 hours ago, robosmith said:

That is you. Posting ONLY your BULLSHIT OPINIONS.

This is me:

That's nowhere near you. 

THIS is you:

 

[CdnFox]

11 hours ago, robosmith said:

That is you. Posting ONLY your BULLSHIT OPINIONS.

This is me:

Every fanatic thinks they're an intellectual. It comes with the ability to delude one's self. 

[Hodad]

On 6/4/2024 at 6:01 AM, Nationalist said:

You seem to be pretty interested in this stuff. Tell me...what sort of conviction did Rosie O'Donnell get for her donation fraud?

lol. None. 
 

This is exactly like the false equivalency you guys try to draw between Trump documents and Biden documents.

O'Donnell's donations were not fraud. Just excessive contributions which are only prosecuted if they can establish intent. 

[robosmith]

On 6/4/2024 at 7:26 AM, Deluge said:

That's nowhere near you. 

THIS is you:

 

Like I said, ^DELUSIONAL LIES 24/7