We paid for and watched 2000 Mules. It’s a documentary by Dinesh DiSouza. You might remember him. He was falsely imprisoned by the Obama Administration and blamed for their total failure at Benghazi.
One of the best things I learned in my Cinema class at Willowbrook High School was documentaries are not objective. Even if they appear to be objective, they aren’t. In that class, we watched Harlan County USA. Thank you, Ralph Amelio and John Mostacci for teaching that class.
I am quite sure my two teachers were unabashedly liberal but at the same time, they were objective enough to teach us, not indoctrinate us.
DiSouza has a point of view. 2000 Mules has a point of view.
I would ignore all the fact-checkers and view it yourself. Draw your own opinion.
There are some opinions I had prior to going into the movie,
America’s voter rolls need to be cleaned up. Coming from Chicago I knew the voter rolls were a source for voter fraud. VoteRef.com is attempting to do that. I blogged about it here.
I knew nursing homes were gardens for the farmers of fraud. Chicago is a case and point.
There were abnormalities, if not outright fraud in the 2020 Presidential election. However, there are in most elections. One question I didn’t know the answer to is this: “Did the fraud put Biden over the top?”
No one had successfully filed suit in court and heard anything in an objective court of law. There certainly were peer-reviewed statistical studies that led one to believe that fraud took place.
Fraud is mostly a Democratic Party creation. Machines are like that. However, Republicans sometimes engage in it. DiSouza points out instances in North Carolina.
Mail-in ballots and the changing of rules because of Covid invite fraud.
It has always been my suspicion that early voting and all kinds of alternative voting other than day of, or regulated absentee ballot were invitations for fraud.
Ballot harvesting takes place, and it is illegal and fraudulent.
I think before you watch a documentary, it’s important to know where you stand so you don’t either find yourself nodding at every sentence, or not hearing the other side because you get so angry. Again, that’s because documentaries are usually pretty biased, even when the content they are exposing needs to be exposed.
My goal was to poke holes in DiSouza’s documentary going into it. I wanted to check my own confirmation biases.
The one compelling argument DiSouza makes that fraud occurred is when you follow the money and what was done with it.
Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg spent over $400M of his own dough and the Democratic operation used it to hire people to ballot harvest. I think that was the difference in the election.
It reminded me of when former Illini star Chris Gandy and I looked to start a business. We delved into the way basketball prospects are brought to colleges and delivered to the pros. The dark money that goes to street agents permeates the entire process. The 2000 mules were like street agents.
The other thing that DiSouza has is data from True the Vote. They used cell phone data to track the mules. Someone is going to have to explain to me how it is wrong since law enforcement uses it. By the way, tax collectors use the same data to see if you are inside a state when you say you are not.
DiSouza is not a guy I’d want to sit down and have a beer with. But, the argument put forth in the movie is compelling that there was fraud. Additionally, if you are a Democrat or someone that doesn’t think fraud at scale happened, or if you thought, “democracy dies in darkness” his documentary is required viewing.
Why?
Because if you believe in a democratic process, the tactic of ballot harvesting undermines everything you believe in. It will challenge your confirmation biases if you are open to it.
I would love to see an objective court of law take up the case of fraud. Let’s hear the evidence. We don’t do ourselves or the Republic any favors by sweeping it under the rug. Those dust balls grow into big monsters that no one can control.
Cellphone location data, as I understand it, derives from GPS data if the phone has GPS enabled, otherwise, based on triangulation of distances from multiple cell towers. The first should usually be accurate to around 20-30 feet, for the second, more like 500-1000 feet.
I don't know whether the purchased data includes a 'how derived' flag, indicating what records are GPS-derived versus which are not. Would seem important to know.
I haven't done the statistical analysis (and neither, I suspect, have the various professors who claim in 'fact checks' that you can't draw any conclusions from the cellphone data), but adjacency to TEN drop boxes as well as FIVE political nonprofits seems like a pretty tight screen for GPS-derived locations.
Yuma County (AZ) sheriffs office beginning an investigation:
https://www.truethevote.org/yuma-county-sheriffs-office-opens-massive-voter-fraud-investigation/