Dinesh D’Souza’s Vile Big Lie Documentary 2000 Mules Is Too Stupid Even for Fox

Jarod said:
Simply the fact that someone walked past both a voting drop box AND a liberal organization HQ does not mean they were stuffing ballot boxes.
A video of separate individuals dropping multiple ballots into single boxes does not mean there was ballot harvesting.

They will not release their data.
They have no video of any single person visiting voting boxes multiple times or the same person visiting more than one ballot box.

There are reasonable alternative explanations for all of these pieces of of evidence.
Click to expand...

Thank you for shining some clarity unto this bullshit conspiracy theory.

MAGA wets panties.

6234108.gif
giphy.gif
giphy.gif
giphy.gif
LazyOldAegeancat-small.gif
funny-gif-baby-concerned-girl-crying1.gif
 
Joe Capitalist said:
I can when it's not evidence.
Next month, when nobody's talking about 2000 Mules, I'm going to show you these fucking moronic posts of yours and we'll all have a good laugh at your expense.
Click to expand...

You already said this. Argument by repetition fallacy. You cannot wish the evidence away by repeating yourself, dude. Argument of the Stone fallacy.
 
Into the Night said:
He didn't. The Democrat Party is a conspiracy. You can't make the evidence disappear by calling it bullshit or a theory, dude. Argument of the Stone fallacy. Word stuffing.
Click to expand...


You already said this. Argument by repetition fallacy. You cannot make the evidence appear by repeating yourself, dude. Argument of the Stoned fallacy.

raw
Kamala-Harris-GIF.gif
 
Jarod said:
Simply the fact that someone walked past both a voting drop box AND a liberal organization HQ does not mean they were stuffing ballot boxes.
A video of separate individuals dropping multiple ballots into single boxes does not mean there was ballot harvesting.

They will not release their data.
They have no video of any single person visiting voting boxes multiple times or the same person visiting more than one ballot box.

There are reasonable alternative explanations for all of these pieces of of evidence.
Click to expand...
Jarod it is painfully obvious that you have not watched 2000 Mules. They addressed your just walked past a ballot box theory. The mules had to just walk past at least 10 ballot boxes. They have video taxing pictures of the ballots and the boxes. Who does that. One mules live in the next state and one mule went to 28 drop boxes in 6 counties in one night. Here is a novel suggestion try watching the movie before talking because you are making yourself look very stupid
 
Last edited:
ExpressLane said:
Jarod it is painfully obvious that you have not watched 2000 Mules. They addressed your just walked past a ballot box theory. The mules had to just walk past at least 10 ballot boxes. They have video taxing pictures of the ballots and the boxes. Who does that. One mules live in the next state and one mule went to 28 drop boxes in 6 counties in one night. Here is a novel suggestion try watching the Ovid before talking because you are making yourself look very stupid
Click to expand...

None of that equates to ballot harvesting. Plus, It might not be true because they refuse to release the back up data.
 
Jarod said:
None of that equates to ballot harvesting. Plus, It might not be true because they refuse to release the back up data.
Click to expand...

Breakdown Lane, the fake doc watched the entire Mike Lindell dog and pony show with a raging hard-on he was so excited. Dude must have the bluest ballls on record. Nothing he EVER predicts actually happens.
 
Jarod said:
None of that equates to ballot harvesting. Plus, It might not be true because they refuse to release the back up data.
Click to expand...
No they are glad to release the data to law enforcement. They don't want to release the names of the whistleblowers that they have been talking with. They gave the whistleblowers a promise of anonymity. They are trying to honor that promise. However it should be easy for law enforcement to uncover who the mules are. They only need to track the phone pings back to their home and then see who lives there. Then they need to threaten indictment if they don't give evidence of who masterminded the trafficking scheme. I never said Ballot harvesting. I said ballot trafficking. The ballots have an illegal chain of custody. At no point is ballot trafficking legal in any state. And someone ballot harvested to gather the ballots and take them to the NGOs.
 
Joe Capitalist said:
You already said this. Argument by repetition fallacy. You cannot make the evidence appear by repeating yourself, dude. Argument of the Stoned fallacy.
Click to expand...
Argument of the Stone fallacy. Argument by repetition fallacy. Inversion fallacy. Mockery. No argument presented.
 
ExpressLane said:
No the are glad to release the data to law enforcement. They don't want to release the names of the whistleblowers that they have been talking with. They gave the whistleblowers a promise of anonymity. They are trying to honor that promise. However it should be easy for law enforcement to uncover who the mules are. They only need to track the phone pings back to their home and then see who lives there. Then they need to threaten indictment if they don't give evidence of who masterminded the trafficking scheme.
Click to expand...

:rofl2:
 
Concart said:
Breakdown Lane, the fake doc watched the entire Mike Lindell dog and pony show with a raging hard-on he was so excited. Dude must have the bluest ballls on record. Nothing he EVER predicts actually happens.
Click to expand...
No I just let you suck me off then you sallow. Its neater that way.
 
Jarod said:
None of that equates to ballot harvesting. Plus, It might not be true because they refuse to release the back up data.
Click to expand...
No the are glad to release the data to law enforcement. They don't want to release the names of the whistleblowers that they have been talking with. They gave the whistleblowers a promise of anonymity. They are trying to honor that promise. However it should be easy for law enforcement to uncover who the mules are. They only need to track the phone pings back to their home and then see who lives there. Then they need to threaten indictment if they don't give evidence of who masterminded the trafficking scheme. But law enforcement can find out more about how the ballots were gathered if they lean on the NGOs that participated in the trafficking scheme.
 
ExpressLane said:
No I am laughing at your inability to refute my comments so you just leave a trolling meme instead. Typical troll behavior of yours. :laugh:
Click to expand...

Your bullshit has already been refuted 1000 times and you are just too dense to realize that. Besides, people have to give Uber app permission to know your location. It's clear that you have zero knowledge how it works.
 
AProudLefty said:
Your bullshit has already been refuted 1000 times and you are just too dense to realize that. Besides, people have to give Uber app permission to know your location. It's clear that you have zero knowledge how it works.
Click to expand...
The CDC used the same data to see if people were social distancing. The cops use the same data to solve crimes. Law enforcement uses the same technology for ankle bracelets. Are you seriously a geo tracking denier??? :rofl2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top