*bump*
That graphic really gets the point across. I hadn’t seen it before.
I wonder what the current state of the debate over the 2000 Mules methodology is. I’m guessing its creators have fired back at the debunkers. I wonder whose arguments have stood up better.
I still need to see the movie. I recommended it to a friend at work who saw it and found it convincing but I’ve managed to miss seeing it myself.
I would take it as a positive that True The Vote (as this article states) is ready and willing to go into a court of law, presenting their data and methodologies to the thrust and parry of an adversarial legal process.
I am usually more inclined to feel confidence and affinity towards entities who are ready to place all the cards on the table and subject it to scrutiny as True the Votes appears to be, and less confidence in the entities who are going to engage in the subterfuge we see engaged against Trump.
It isn’t my confidence and affinity that will tell the story, and both Gregg Phillips and Catherine Englebrecht seem pretty confident going into this that if given their chance in a high profile case, they can make their case.
There are some who brand them as mercenaries who are in it to make a buck off it. I view those kinds of things as ad hominem attacks and don’t see that as constructive in any way to a civil or useful discussion.
I am fully comfortable viewing those in charge at True The Vote as Patriots. Even though there are many people who would rather just see Trump locked up and put away, both literally and figuratively (and we have those type of people right here on Free Republic) I look forward to this legal process.