Thanks for responding, but I guess I have to repeat myself.
The question is not "Is Geospatial Data with Cellphones Precise?"
The question is "How precise was the specific geospatial data purchased by True The Vote."
Contrary to what some Freepers seem to believe, I did not come up with the the 100 foot figure myself. I first saw it in the Georgia Bureau of Investigation letter, and I was surprised to see Dinesh D'Souza effectively confirm it in his interview with Philip Bump.
Where did the 100 foot number originate? Perhaps from phone companies or other geospatial data vendors that sold their data to TTV. The accuracy/precision numbers should have been specified in the sale documents, e.g. "We are selling 1.2 terabytes of geospatial data to True the Vote that we guarantee to be accurate to within a radius of 100 feet." If those sales documents say "accurate to with one meter" then TTV should long ago have released them to the public, and the information should have been highlighted in 2000 Mules. Instead the number was kept hidden, which was one of the red flags for me that the film was not what it pretended to be -- and what I wanted it to be.
The number becomes critically important when considering the criminal prosecution of mules based on the geospatial data. No prosecutor will bring a case based on 100 foot data. "Let me get this straight. You are accusing my client of voter fraud because he drove within 100 feet of a few ballot boxes?"
So, why would the TTV accuracy only be 100 feet, when it can be much better? Perhaps the data vendors were using old equipment, perhaps there were environmental factors affecting reception, there could me many reasons. I'm sure the data vendors would have liked to be able to say that they guaranteed the data to be more accurate, but for some reason, that did not happen. D'Souza has had a long time to clear this up, and he just keeps repeating "Geospatial data can be very accurate!" He never says, "The companies that sold us our data guaranteed that it would be highly accurate, and I'll provide the documentation." Why hasn't he done that?
My other main point in this thread is that if the mule hypothesis in 2000 Mules is correct, by now there should have been many confirmations of that, with plenty of mules and stash houses identified. The bigger the conspiracy, the greater the chances of leaks, and this conspiracy supposedly involved many thousands of people. It was gigantic. Yet the expected confirmation has not appeared. Why not?
Trump does not need D'Souza and TTV on his team, and Freepers should not trust them.
This point was addressed in today's video.
Stacey Abrams and Marc Elias have initiated lawfare against True The Vote.
That means that all the Democrat scum have to do is drag TTV into a friendly stooge-judge's venue for an easy beat-down - right during the run-up to the next rigged "election".
Again, you seem to be fixated on the distance factor. First, Dinesh is not the expert. He was the filmmaker. TTV has the experts.
Let’s assume for the sake of argument that 100 feet is the number. The other variables that went into identifying the mules are dispositive for me. The distance is just one factor.
Did you watch TTV today? Do you grasp the legal issues associated with revealing the identities of the NGOs and mules? One mule has come forward and TTV is working with the police in various counties like Yuma and Racine. Englebrecht said that since 2010 there has not been one day that she has not been in court. At one point five government agencies were investigating her re her personal and business activities. I first met Catherine at CPAC in 2010 where we both had booths. I have the highest respect for her integrity and patriotism. She is not a liar or a fool. I trust her judgment and competence.
I have no knowledge of who you are, but I can say unequivocally and without reservation that Trump and the American people are very lucky to have TTV on their side.