Skip to comments.ABSOLUTE PROOF: A BRIEF REVIEW
Posted on 02/06/2021 7:40:41 PM PST by JewishRighter
I have three points on Mike Lindell's film "Absolute Proof":
1. Mike should have used a professional presenter. I love his passion for truth and his courage for sticking his neck out, but it was hard listening to his rather loud "pitchman" voice for 2 hours and his sort of ham-handed leading questions ("so this is absolute proof, right?").
2. The money part, which showed the listed foreign hacks into the election and the video animation showing the pathway of the hacks on the map, was, in general excellent and powerful. I believe it would have been better if some background was given on how this information was collected and prepared for presentation. As it was shown, it could easily be attacked as something anyone could have just typed up and the video animation could have simply been created by capable computer video specialists.
3. It was too long. I think he should have kept it to a half hour at most, perhaps leading with a few of the key experts in shorter, sharper segments and then getting more quickly to the "money part" showing the actual hacking data and video.
What say ye, FReinds?
I just want to express my gratitude for what Mike did. I didn’t post this just to knock him down, but I think this could be significantly improved and made more effective.
Saw two hours and said, I’d rather read a summary or a written paper.
Agreed. Too long and his reactions seemed rehearsed. Still, a lot of truth behind these weaknesses.
It just needs to go to court. That’s all. They can’t run away anymore
The tables he presented at the first part were the worst part, since they were subjective “estimates,” without any citation of sources. We can and must do much better than that.
I respect his efforts. It could have been edited better. Two of the interviewees seemed to be just cut off. The final interview was good, could have given deeper information on the sources and technical methods used to track the incursions
Mike did a great job. He is Patriot. His presentation was Excellent. I am grateful for Mike - I wish those that are critical would go out and do something supporting the cause of Truth or just go out.
MAGA LIVES !!!!!
I think the entire presentation was too broad. He could have drilled down into any number of specific fraud schemes and made a strong case.
Discussing strategies for making a stronger case for election fraud is going out and doing something.
.... I Appretiate his dedication ... But in the world of the Media and information purveance .... Presentation is everything .... This won’t sway anybody ... But it is a good source for information ....
I skipped every 20 minutes because I am already up to speed but the end, last 25 minutes,
“We’ve Got It All”
took on new meaning.
Why does anything have to be tightly scripted to be believed. Are we that superficial that we can only believe truths spoken by a “professional” presenter? Why did Dominion threaten OAN if they allowed Mike’s video to run? (OAN ran the video as a paid for advertisement). Mike is risking everything to tell the truth. We should ALL support him.
As I watched and listened, there were a couple of things I could have jumped on, but I feel Mike’s down-to-earth, man-on-the-street style may reach more people than we think.
God bless him for doing this. He’s the only one standing up to Dominion, along with OANN who are airing it non-stop over the weekend.
I don’t disagree with your points at all, but maybe it’s best to have an ordinary, passionate patriot bringing this to the American people. Mike is passionate about this election being stolen, and it shows. A few follow-up releases that go into each specific crime, perhaps with more details, from the experts, would serve a purpose.
I must say that having The Times story released at the same time may prove very helpful. It certainly takes the wind out of the sails of those ready to scoff and write this off as conspiracy theory.
100%. If he had used a real presenter, this would carry a lot more weight. The experts were compelling.
As others have pointed out, presentation is extremely important to get information and ideas across effectively. If the audience tunes out because its too long or unfocused or not persuasive, it doesn’t serve its key purpose.
I posted a “FactCheck” ( Note the quotes ) from Lead Stories ) in this FR thread:
Here are the critiques of skeptical Freepers who watched the video:
1) Mike Lindell shows charts and information without citing a source.
2) The tables Mike presented at the very first were a little dubious, What is the source of these number? Do Sec. of States really record the number of illegal aliens who voted, or the number of dead people who voted? Doubtful.
3) The China Angle: Ockam’s razor - Don’t multiply entities needlessly.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.