Here's the trailer to the movie "2000 Mules" - well worth forwarding to your friends. I watched the entire movie - a real eye opener that exposes the criminal use of drop boxes.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/05/the_riveting_2000_mules_proves_there_was_massive_election_fraud.html
The evidence of fraud is unquestionable. What is so striking:
1. This is not a partisan effort aimed just at the 2020 election. True the Vote began its efforts 10+ years ago. The credentials and motivation of the founder, Catherine Engelbrecht, are impeccable beyond question. While she is a conservative. it is clear that she has tried to make her fight against voting fraud bipartisan for years. She wisely has associated with Gregg Phillips who has developed lots of hard data supporting voter fraud going back for 7 years. Phillips was the mastermind behind using cell phone tracking of criminals ballot stuffing of drop boxes in the 2020 election.
2. Whether pre-planned or not, this is a perfect crime. This fraud has been appropriately labeled as such because the liberal dominated Ruling Class funded thousands of drop boxes – claiming their goodness in making voting more accessible. It is impossible to deny that they provided the ‘infrastructure” for easy voter fraud. It doesn't matter whether this was preplanned. The outcome was clearly criminal in that thousands of paid "mules" were tracked going to multiple drop boxes and filmed stuffing ballots into the boxes early morning and late at night. Unfortunately, there is no incentive for any of these criminals to come forward and identify who paid them for their criminal act. So going forward, the challenge will be in getting the message out to those who demand the truth before agreeing that there was widespread fraud in the 2020 elections. This is NOT to litigate the 2020 election fraud. Its only purpose is aimed at assuring that future elections are free from the obvious fallacy of using drop boxes and undocumented mail in voting.
6 comments:
Of course, no actual voter fraud has ever been found. Here is a what she said about her efforts:
"His colleague Engelbrecht then took over, quickly modifying Phillips’s claim.
“I want to make very clear that we’re not suggesting that the ballots that were cast were illegal ballots,” she said. “What we’re saying is that the process was abused.”
This, of course, is a massive qualifier, given the intended outcome of the Republican-led hearing and the enthusiasm from Trumpworld about its “revelations.” Here, again, the claim wasn’t that voters committed fraud. It is, instead, that Republicans don’t like how those votes got to the place to be counted. Engelbrecht offered all sorts of warnings about how this system might introduce potential fraud but offered no evidence that such fraud had occurred. In fact, one of the legislators in the hearing asked if she had seen any evidence in Wisconsin of the sorts of purported problems she claimed occurred with ballot harvesting; Engelbrecht talked around it by way of saying that she hadn’t."
At the time in wisconsin, "ballot harvesting" which simply means picking up a sealed ballot at someone's house and then dropping it into a box, was legal in that state. In other states, it is illegal.
The important thing is that even where ballot harvesting is illegal (like Arizona) the votes themselves are 100% legal and checked through a rigorous process to match the vote to an actual voter that is registered.
Laws that make ballot harvesting illegal are put in place to make it harder for legal voters to cast their votes. This is not a bombshell by any means, it is just another republican attempt to make sure that low income people that usually vote Democrat have so much difficulty in casting their vote that they just don't do it.
Demographically, creating barriers to voting and massive gerrymandering are the only way that Republicans can win elections over the next 10 years so it makes sense for them to disenfranchise as many low income voters as possible.
@Ecommerce Accelerator To begin, I am breaking my own rule here by responding to a post by someone without the fortitude to use a real name. What you suggest is that we ignore the fact that certain people were paid - by whom we don't yet know - on a per ballot basis to turn up at numerous drop boxes, often in the middle of the night, to stuff in ballots. This is dodgy behavior at best. You make staggering leaps of logic which culminate in the usual talking points of the leftists in our midst. "The republicans' only interest is to suppress the votes of minorities" , and "Laws against ballot harvesting make it harder for legal voters to cast votes" and that somehow republicans are against 'low income people'... but you offer no logical - or rational - linkages or detail to support these talking points. And mind you - it is demonstrably the democrats that conjure up bizarre, gerrymandered voting districts. Pumping money (Zuck bucs, Soros...) into democratic districts to create a conduit of cash for votes delivered is possibly the least democratic thing one can imagine.
Sorry. I don't know why it comes up as ecommerce accelerator when i post. That is a long defunct company I owned. My name is Arthur Lawida.
I have a question about your post. Why do you have any issue with anyone "stuffing" valid ballots into a box that will then be counted? As far as every investigation has found, there are virtually no fraudulent votes in any county in the entire country. In some states collecting ballots is a legal practice and in some it is not but in no case were fraudulent ballots found.
As I wrote, Englebrecht herself validates that none of the ballots counted through these boxes were fraudulent but she was focused on what she considered were "process violations".
Do you at least agree that people who are allowed to vote should be given every opportunity to have their vote counted?
I'd be happy to provide stats that show the demographics of likely voters continue to work against Republican candidates nationally and locally and in that environment, the only path to remaining in power is to either change the platform to appeal to more moderate voters or resort to gerrymandering and voter suppression. That's not a criticism but is an observation based upon the changing demographics of the country plus the insistence on both Republicans and Democrats on playing to their more radical bases.
Jim what you Chuck and all the Extremist promoters of "2000 mules" ignore is that its methodology is fatally flawed and proves nothing. Just because about 2000 cell phones passed near (but not at) a number of drop boxes and passed near but not necessarily into a number of unnamed non-profits proves nothing. Even if some of those 2000 persons did in fact place ballots into a drop box there is no evidence that any of those ballots were fraudulent. Doesn't it bother you and Chuck that there hasn't been a single prosecution of a "mule," much less one where the mule flipped to reveal this vast left-wing conspiracy. You both might want to read:
The faulty premise of the ‘2,000 mules’ trailer about voting by mail in the 2020 election or,
Fact Check: Holes in the election fraud claims of ‘2000 Mules’ movie
As far as the impeccable and bipartisan Catherine Engelbrecht you both might want to consider that in 2009 she founded the King Street Patriots, a Tea Party group in Harris County for mainly suburbanites for voting irregularities, mostly in minority precincts. [source] True the vote history suggests a similar Extremist perspective.
Finally, I do agree that suppressing minority voting is not the only interest of the Republican party; it is just one of their several interests and if one has to prove "the ski is blue to you" then you read from this search
https://www.yahoo.com/news/oan-finally-admits-no-widespread-022816382.html
But if one wants to worry about actual attempts at election fraud this blog might consider posting things like "Multiple fake electors cooperating in Georgia criminal probe of Trump's efforts to overturn 2020 election."
Post a Comment