The right-wing One America News Network admitted in a Monday legal statement that there was no widespread voter fraud by Georgia election officials in the 2020 presidential election after having extensively pushed the groundless claim. In a 30-second statement that aired Monday night, a voiceover stated: "Georgia officials have concluded that there was no widespread voter fraud by election workers who counted ballots at the State Farm Arena in November 2020." "The results of this investigation indicate that Ruby Freeman and Wandrea 'Shaye' Moss did not engage in ballot fraud or criminal misconduct," the statement said, referring to two election workers for Fulton County, Georgia. "A legal matter with this network and the two election workers has been resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the parties through a fair and reasonable settlement."
The statement was a response to a defamation lawsuit filed against the network by Freeman and Moss, who are mother and daughter. Citing legal documents, Reuters reported in April that Freeman and Moss had reached a settlement with OAN in the case. Freeman and Moss have also filed a defamation lawsuit against Rudy Giuliani, the former personal lawyer of former President Donald Trump, the report said. The pair, who helped to administer the 2020 election in the state, said they were subjected to harassment and abuse after baseless rumors pushed by Trump allies that they had interfered with votes as part of a plot to deprive Trump of victory. The former president and his allies, including Giuliani, launched a campaign to overturn Trump's defeat in Georgia, a red-leaning state that voted to elect Joe Biden in 2020. OAN also broadcast reports baselessly alleging that Freeman and Moss had produced fake ballots and registered them in voting machines to steal the election from Trump.
An investigation by Georgia officials last October found no evidence of wrongdoing in how the election had been conducted in Fulton County, which had been pivotal to Biden's win and where Trump allies had focused their efforts to overturn the result.
It's amazing what happens when all these election fraud hucksters have to substantiate their claims in court.
The right-wing One America News Network admitted in a Monday legal statement that there was no widespread voter fraud by Georgia election officials in the 2020 presidential election after having extensively pushed the groundless claim. In a 30-second statement that aired Monday night, a voiceover stated: "Georgia officials have concluded that there was no widespread voter fraud by election workers who counted ballots at the State Farm Arena in November 2020." "The results of this investigation indicate that Ruby Freeman and Wandrea 'Shaye' Moss did not engage in ballot fraud or criminal misconduct," the statement said, referring to two election workers for Fulton County, Georgia. "A legal matter with this network and the two election workers has been resolved to the mutual satisfaction of the parties through a fair and reasonable settlement."
The statement was a response to a defamation lawsuit filed against the network by Freeman and Moss, who are mother and daughter. Citing legal documents, Reuters reported in April that Freeman and Moss had reached a settlement with OAN in the case. Freeman and Moss have also filed a defamation lawsuit against Rudy Giuliani, the former personal lawyer of former President Donald Trump, the report said. The pair, who helped to administer the 2020 election in the state, said they were subjected to harassment and abuse after baseless rumors pushed by Trump allies that they had interfered with votes as part of a plot to deprive Trump of victory. The former president and his allies, including Giuliani, launched a campaign to overturn Trump's defeat in Georgia, a red-leaning state that voted to elect Joe Biden in 2020. OAN also broadcast reports baselessly alleging that Freeman and Moss had produced fake ballots and registered them in voting machines to steal the election from Trump.
An investigation by Georgia officials last October found no evidence of wrongdoing in how the election had been conducted in Fulton County, which had been pivotal to Biden's win and where Trump allies had focused their efforts to overturn the result.
It's amazing what happens when all these election fraud hucksters have to substantiate their claims in court.
Still scattershooting around the issue, as always. This, again, has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Just more crap.
You won't watch it, you coward.
Re: 2000 Mules
Posted: Tue May 10, 2022 12:06 pm
by flockofseagulls104
OK, Here are some of your answers.
If you are not totally in the tank, you can see by this article how you have been misled by those who are threatened by this evidence. So you need to see it for yourself. Your choice. You can rely on those that want to mislead you and misdirect you, or you can make up your own mind.
The AP published a “hit piece” on May 3, attempting to expose TTV’s “flawed analysis of cellphone location data and ballot drop box surveillance footage” presented in 2000 Mules. We will examine those claims, weaving in information from the movie and conversations with Engelbrecht over the weekend.
Notably, the AP story states neither D’Souza nor Engelbrecht responded to “a request for comment.” At least in Engelbrecht’s case, she was given little to no time to respond. She “received the request for comment at 11 p.m., and this story was published the next day.”
“Cellphone data is like digital DNA,” Engelbrecht explained. A court case on the precision of this technology makes that claim difficult to dispute. In response to the 2016 Supreme Court case, Carpenter v. United States, Justice Roberts wrote a 2018 opinion in which he describes the level of precision tracing afforded by pinging a cellphone using geofencing technology. “Accordingly, when the Government tracks the location of a cell phone,” writes Roberts, “It achieves near perfect surveillance as if it had attached an ankle monitor to the phone’s user.”
The AP story [AND MY LOYAL STALKER, WHO REFUSES TO WATCH THIS DOCUMENTARY] contends Georgia Secretary of State Raffensperger’s office investigated one of the surveillance videos circulated by True the Vote saying it found the man was dropping off ballots for himself and his family. Engelbrecht told UncoverDC while TTV has offered the video surveillance copies to the SOS, Raffensperger does not have TTV footage:
“They only have geospatial data. The GBI already has access to all the video because it’s a state video. We went through everything and offered to provide video, but until the subpoenas, they’ve never indicated what or how they wanted to receive info, and we didn’t want to do anything incorrectly. That’s how I am certain the comment about the Raffensperger having our video is inaccurate.”
UncoverDC reached out to Raffensperger’s office on Thursday about the video footage claim but has received no response as of this publication.
In the pattern of life below, the blue tracks are the pattern of travel by the individual in the course of one day. The orange dots are the dropboxes, and the house icons are the NGOs.
Re: 2000 Mules
Posted: Tue May 10, 2022 3:55 pm
by silverscreenselect
Since we don't have the geolocation data that True the Vote supposedly obtained (which was probably purchased from a company that markets such data), we can't know how they determined the exact path these individuals took. Cellphone mapping is not an exact science, especially when you don't know the phone number of the device you're tracking. The usual claims on accuracy are about 100 feet, more or less, depending on the terrain. And that's assuming the cell phone user isn't using a private VPN or similar technology or any number of other situations that can cause the data to be inaccurate.
The services that sell this data sell different versions of the data with more accurate data costing more money. Again, it will be interesting to see what sort of accuracy this service supplies.
We'll see what happens when True the Vote actually produces the data for public scrutiny, if that ever happens. And that still doesn't answer the question of where these ballots came from. Either hundreds of voters would have had to given their ballots to these mules to send in, or they would have had to find some way to send applications to hundreds of non-existent voters, all of whom would have had to supply ID to match their registrations.
Since we don't have the geolocation data that True the Vote supposedly obtained (which was probably purchased from a company that markets such data), we can't know how they determined the exact path these individuals took. Cellphone mapping is not an exact science, especially when you don't know the phone number of the device you're tracking. The usual claims on accuracy are about 100 feet, more or less, depending on the terrain. And that's assuming the cell phone user isn't using a private VPN or similar technology or any number of other situations that can cause the data to be inaccurate.
The services that sell this data sell different versions of the data with more accurate data costing more money. Again, it will be interesting to see what sort of accuracy this service supplies.
We'll see what happens when True the Vote actually produces the data for public scrutiny, if that ever happens. And that still doesn't answer the question of where these ballots came from. Either hundreds of voters would have had to given their ballots to these mules to send in, or they would have had to find some way to send applications to hundreds of non-existent voters, all of whom would have had to supply ID to match their registrations.
Stalker, you have no fucking clue. You are just performing your normal, self-appointed role. What the fuck do you know about cell phone data? Who the hell are you trying to fool?
You have not and will not even look at the documentary, yet you are never at a loss in trying to blindly discredit it, most times in ways that have nothing to do with it. Just throwing shit. And many times adding personal shit directed at me, for no other reason than because you have some hateful vendetta against me.
That's all you ever do, in every thing and every subject that conflicts with your narrative and worldview. You're really a sad, irrelevant annoyance.
And I'm sure you'll come back with some more crap for me. Cause that's what you do. But get it through your head, I DON'T CARE what you say to me or about me. And I don't really think anyone else does either.
What the fuck do you know about cell phone data? Who the hell are you trying to fool?
What I know about cell phone data comes from the sources I consulted, including the companies who sell this data who repeatedly try to caution people against trying to read too much into information that has an inherent level of inaccuracy.
What you know apparently came from what Dinesh D'Souza and Catherine Engelbrecht told you.
And I will be glad to accept the evidence produced by True the Vote, if and when they actually produce any evidence as opposed to making a movie claiming they have the evidence. And it means having this evidence reviewed, verified, and analyzed by someone competent to do so. But what I expect are more excuses and double talk.
Still scattershooting around the issue, as always. This, again, has nothing to do with the subject at hand. Just more crap.
You won't watch it, you coward.
I posted this article because this is just the latest (and one of the more embarrassing) instances of right wing Big Lie advocates making accusations and not being able to back them up.
I fully expect the same thing to happen with this sham documentary.
Re: 2000 Mules
Posted: Tue May 10, 2022 5:44 pm
by flockofseagulls104
the sources I consulted
Yes, of course. And the sources you consult always seem to be unimpeachable, and anyone who says anything else is a complete idiot or are just flat out lying. I wish I had your kind of sources.
Yes, of course. And the sources you consult always seem to be unimpeachable, and anyone who says anything else is a complete idiot or are just flat out lying. I wish I had your kind of sources.
You could easily get my kind of sources if you ever bothered to do any fact checking with anyone other than the people who made the documentary themselves.
Yes, of course. And the sources you consult always seem to be unimpeachable, and anyone who says anything else is a complete idiot or are just flat out lying. I wish I had your kind of sources.
You could easily get my kind of sources if you ever bothered to do any fact checking with anyone other than the people who made the documentary themselves.
How the fuck would you know? You haven't even watched it. Just blindly trying to discredit and defame. And quoting 'sources' that have the same purpose. At least some of them get paid to do the same shit you do for free.
And quoting 'sources' that have the same purpose. At least some of them get paid to do the same shit you do for free.
The sources I consulted about the accuracy of geolocation technology had nothing to do with this documentary. These articles appeared before this documentary and True the Vote were around. They are industry sources. All I know about what True the Vote introduced so far is that the GBI wasn't persuaded enough to launch an investigation without further documentation which True the Vote refused to provide.
And quoting 'sources' that have the same purpose. At least some of them get paid to do the same shit you do for free.
The sources I consulted about the accuracy of geolocation technology had nothing to do with this documentary. These articles appeared before this documentary and True the Vote were around. They are industry sources. All I know about what True the Vote introduced so far is that the GBI wasn't persuaded enough to launch an investigation without further documentation which True the Vote refused to provide.
You didn't even bother to read the article I linked to. Sad, irrelevant annoyance.
You didn't even bother to read the article I linked to. Sad, irrelevant annoyance.
The only real corroboration in that article was a statement about how the DOJ was able to show that one of the rioters was in the Capitol. The FBI identified the rioters by their social media posts, then subpoenaed their cell phone records from AT&T. Based on that information, there were able to get 14 separate hits that placed these rioters (I can't tell from the article whether they're talking about one or both individuals) inside the Capitol. Of those 14, only three were accurate enough within 100 feet that confirmed they had to have been in the Capitol.
So the FBI had the names and phone numbers of the rioters, subpoenaed their specific records, and only 3 of the 14 hits they got confirmed the rioters actually within the Capitol based on the accuracy of the identification. And this was for rioters who probably spent an hour or two in the Capitol, not someone whose name and phone number are unknown and who allegedly drove up to a dropbox and dropped in ballots.
Re: 2000 Mules
Posted: Wed May 11, 2022 8:28 am
by flockofseagulls104
I'm done looking at the stalker's posts. We all know where his head is at.
I am hoping one of you 'on the fence' people will venture to watch 2000 Mules for yourself and not rely on what others, including me, tell you to think about it, and share what you think after watching it. Did it open your eyes to anything or give you something to think about that you hadn't considered before?
I'm done looking at the stalker's posts. We all know where his head is at.
I am hoping one of you 'on the fence' people will venture to watch 2000 Mules for yourself and not rely on what others, including me, tell you to think about it, and share what you think after watching it. Did it open your eyes to anything or give you something to think about that you hadn't considered before?
Out of curiosity, I looked up the movie on YouTube. The page that supposedly contains the movie is actually a two-hour title card asking people to click on the bit.ly description below to watch the film. When I did so, I was redirected to another viewscreen on a site called justplayfilm.com and was again told to click on the link to watch the film. This time, I was directed to a site called flixzone.store, where I was asked to register for a free account that would allow me free unlimited access to the movie with no ads. I entered a fake email address and tried to set up the account. This time, however, Malwarebytes blocked me from going to the next site, which it said contained malware. I took them at their word.
I then looked up flixzone.store and found that it was a scam site, with people being asked to give credit card info and then being billed exorbitant amounts. Here are some of the comments:
Absolutely fraudulent website. They steal your money as soon as you get duped into their $1 free trial!!! After they get your $1, they start charging $157 every week, and there is no stopping!!
I got scammed as well. It said $1 for a month. I used Paypal. Then I couldn't see a film or contact them to complain. I then did a search and found out it was a scam with 10 minutes of signing up. I went to paypal and found that they had setup auto pay. I would have to pay $160 a month!! I cancelled it immediately. I did a sweep on my computer and changed my email password, just in case. If they contact me, I'll spam them.
I've been looking on Reddit and from what I've seen is this person made a post saying that they went to flixzone where you can supposedly watch anything for a dollar a month so you have to pay a dollar to watch their content. So this person decided to buy it since it's $1 and so you know they did it and then it turns out that it's a scam because then they started charging more money on their account and they freaked out and posted it to Reddit.
So, in order to "watch" this documentary on YouTube, you are directed to a scam site that charges exorbitant amounts to your credit card. I think that should tell you all you need to know about this particular operation.
Just create an account and you can rent or buy it. $20 rental. $30 to buy it.
Just like anything else you buy on the internet.
This could and should be available like a regular documentary, but It is being censored by the usual suspects, so they have to host it themselves.
Did you really think YOUTUBE would allow you to see this? They censor anything remotely conservative.
Just create an account and you can rent or buy it. $20 rental. $30 to buy it.
Just like anything else you buy on the internet.
This could and should be available like a regular documentary, but It is being censored by the usual suspects, so they have to host it themselves.
Did you really think YOUTUBE would allow you to see this? They censor anything remotely conservative.
You're right that you can't watch this on YouTube because it directs you to a scam site, just like everything else associated with d'Souza:
I'm done looking at the stalker's posts. We all know where his head is at.
I am hoping one of you 'on the fence' people will venture to watch 2000 Mules for yourself and not rely on what others, including me, tell you to think about it, and share what you think after watching it. Did it open your eyes to anything or give you something to think about that you hadn't considered before?
I'm betting that we will not see a lot of sharing here along those lines by someone inspired by you to do so.
Hope somebody will take the other side of that.
Re: 2000 Mules
Posted: Wed May 11, 2022 1:46 pm
by silverscreenselect
Catherine Engelbrecht's deposition before the State Election Board is scheduled for May 26. She is required to produce her documents on or before that date. Let's see what happens.
I'm done looking at the stalker's posts. We all know where his head is at.
I am hoping one of you 'on the fence' people will venture to watch 2000 Mules for yourself and not rely on what others, including me, tell you to think about it, and share what you think after watching it. Did it open your eyes to anything or give you something to think about that you hadn't considered before?
I'm betting that we will not see a lot of sharing here along those lines by someone inspired by you to do so.
Hope somebody will take the other side of that.
I am not betting either way. If someone is truly just 'liberal' and not leftist, they might wonder why the main stream media outlets are doing all they can NOT to let you see or even hear of this movie. What is it they won't let you see? Do they think your mind will be completely corrupted if you expose yourself to this? I used to be a liberal, and I would certainly be curious. What's the worst that could happen? You're down $20? Wait a week and that will be 2 gallons of gas. You don't think the evidence is convincing? You have been told that, so nothing will change for you. An evil far-right website will have your email address? Go to gmail, make a new one and use that.
It's everybody's free choice to be informed or to be led.
I'm done looking at the stalker's posts. We all know where his head is at.
I am hoping one of you 'on the fence' people will venture to watch 2000 Mules for yourself and not rely on what others, including me, tell you to think about it, and share what you think after watching it. Did it open your eyes to anything or give you something to think about that you hadn't considered before?
I'm betting that we will not see a lot of sharing here along those lines by someone inspired by you to do so.
Hope somebody will take the other side of that.
I am not betting either way. If someone is truly just 'liberal' and not leftist, they might wonder why the main stream media outlets are doing all they can NOT to let you see or even hear of this movie. What is it they won't let you see? Do they think your mind will be completely corrupted if you expose yourself to this? I used to be a liberal, and I would certainly be curious. What's the worst that could happen? You're down $20? Wait a week and that will be 2 gallons of gas. You don't think the evidence is convincing? You have been told that, so nothing will change for you. An evil far-right website will have your email address? Go to gmail, make a new one and use that.
It's everybody's free choice to be informed or to be led.
I am pretty sure what your choice will be, travis.
I'm done looking at the stalker's posts. We all know where his head is at.
I am hoping one of you 'on the fence' people will venture to watch 2000 Mules for yourself and not rely on what others, including me, tell you to think about it, and share what you think after watching it. Did it open your eyes to anything or give you something to think about that you hadn't considered before?
I'm betting that we will not see a lot of sharing here along those lines by someone inspired by you to do so.
Hope somebody will take the other side of that.
I am not betting either way. If someone is truly just 'liberal' and not leftist, they might wonder why the main stream media outlets are doing all they can NOT to let you see or even hear of this movie. What is it they won't let you see? Do they think your mind will be completely corrupted if you expose yourself to this? I used to be a liberal, and I would certainly be curious. What's the worst that could happen? You're down $20? Wait a week and that will be 2 gallons of gas. You don't think the evidence is convincing? You have been told that, so nothing will change for you. An evil far-right website will have your email address? Go to gmail, make a new one and use that.
It's everybody's free choice to be informed or to be led.
I am pretty sure what your choice will be, travis.
Like a lot of people, I'm going to go by Bill Barr's summary.
And, of course, I'll probably end up taking into account Fox News' take as well.
Re: 2000 Mules
Posted: Wed May 11, 2022 4:12 pm
by Beebs52
I think one must let some of this just...go.
There are probably many "stolen" elections, look at history, Flock.
All one can do is go on and watch it happen again, on both sides. And if there is blowback by lefties, fuckem.
I'm betting that we will not see a lot of sharing here along those lines by someone inspired by you to do so.
Hope somebody will take the other side of that.
I am not betting either way. If someone is truly just 'liberal' and not leftist, they might wonder why the main stream media outlets are doing all they can NOT to let you see or even hear of this movie. What is it they won't let you see? Do they think your mind will be completely corrupted if you expose yourself to this? I used to be a liberal, and I would certainly be curious. What's the worst that could happen? You're down $20? Wait a week and that will be 2 gallons of gas. You don't think the evidence is convincing? You have been told that, so nothing will change for you. An evil far-right website will have your email address? Go to gmail, make a new one and use that.
It's everybody's free choice to be informed or to be led.
I am pretty sure what your choice will be, travis.
Like a lot of people, I'm going to go by Bill Barr's summary.
And, of course, I'll probably end up taking into account Fox News' take as well.
I think one must let some of this just...go.
There are probably many "stolen" elections, look at history, Flock.
All one can do is go on and watch it happen again, on both sides. And if there is blowback by lefties, fuckem.
I am not sure what you're saying here, beebs.
Again, it was not the purpose of this film to contest the election or overturn it. No one suggested that. It's about election integrity. The election wasn't stolen from Trump. It was, quite possibly, stolen from US. And if we don't learn from the vulnerabilities that are in our election system, it WILL happen again.
And what was the response from our Federal Government? They wanted to federalize our election system so they could ensure the methods used, documented by TTTV, would be made permanent. Thank God that bill was defeated.
I don't want it to ever happen again. And if we just ignore it, like the stalkers of the world and the censoring media want us to do, it will.
