2000 Mules Creators Are Ready To Defend President Trump Against Indictment With Research

You know, you can actually purchase exactly the same geolocation data from the same place True The Vote purchased it from, who also happen to be the same entities the government purchases it from, the Police purchase it from, and even intelligence agencies purchase it from.

Of course I can. However they supposedly ran this geotracking data through algorithms to narrow it down to those who repeated visited drop boxes. They also promised to release this data in their Pull the Ripcord" video. They never did. Instead they proceeded to create a website where only approved visitors could view the data. The website contains zero data. Nothing. Nada. Here's an article about it: WATCH: The Moment When The ‘2,000 Mules’ Folks Admit Their Supposed Evidence Is Nonsense

People create images out of data all the time to portray something that people can grasp. Literal portrayals of data are done all the time, although your “So the creator of that graphic, Greg Phillips, says the graphic is not REAL DATA. It’s made up.” is not the quote from Greg Philips. Your representation is not a literal interpretation of what he said. So people do this all the time to varying degrees.

You claimed in your earlier post:
What you see in the graphic just above is geotracking data from ONE person on ONE night. (Ballot Dropboxes are the overlaid red dots, and the red circles are the NGO Get Out The Vote sites.)

Here are the actual locations of ballot boxes in the Atlanta area superimposed over their supposed "mule" graphic.

Greg Phillips created an animated image (likely using Photoshop) with fake ballot box locations, a fake "mule" route, and fake "stash houses". Nobody does this unless the are frauds.

You said “there is no GPS data”. What do you mean by that? As I said above, you could get the exact same data yourself if you were inclined to do so.

I meant exactly that. They have never present a shred of GPS data. The faked animated image above is not data. This is one format of GPS data:

$GPGGA,180154.10,3725.5666392,N,12205.6524680,W,1,13,0.9,3.43,M,-32.64,M,,*50
$GPRMC,180154.10,A,3725.567,N,12205.652,W,0.0,320.6,210520,,,A*19
$GPGGA,180154.20,3725.5666445,N,12205.6524662,W,1,13,0.9,3.43,M,-32.64,M,,*52
$GPRMC,180154.20,A,3725.567,N,12205.652,W,0.0,320.5,210520,,,A*19
$GPGGA,180154.30,3725.5666489,N,12205.6524646,W,1,13,0.9,3.43,M,-32.64,M,,*55
$GPRMC,180154.30,A,3725.567,N,12205.652,W,0.0,320.5,210520,,,A*18
$GPGGA,180154.40,3725.5666506,N,12205.6524640,W,1,13,0.9,3.43,M,-32.64,M,,*52
$GPRMC,180154.40,A,3725.567,N,12205.652,W,0.0,320.5,210520,,,A*1F
$GPGGA,180154.50,3725.5666508,N,12205.6524640,W,1,13,0.9,3.43,M,-32.64,M,,*5D
$GPRMC,180154.50,A,3725.567,N,12205.652,W,0.0,320.5,210520,,,A*67
$GPGGA,180154.60,3725.5666507,N,12205.6524639,W,1,13,0.9,3.43,M,-32.64,M,,*5F
$GPRMC,180154.60,A,3725.567,N,12205.652,W,0.0,320.5,210520,,,A*64
$GPGGA,180154.70,3725.5666507,N,12205.6524639,W,1,13,0.9,3.43,M,-32.64,M,,*5E
$GPRMC,180154.70,A,3725.567,N,12205.652,W,0.0,320.5,210520,,,A*67

They couldn't even release the data of just one such walk of a "mule". Why not? Answer. They don't have any. They faked all of it.

That said, how do you explain the video footage they have of people actually stuffing ballots, footage which was located and examined directly using the GPS data for location, date and time, and showing them doing exactly what the GPS data showed those people doing?<.i>

There is zero footage of the same "mule" going to multiple ballot boxes nor of any "mule" maiking a repeat vist to the same ballot box. That is they show no video footage that supports their "mule" premise. There is also nothing illegal shown.

Yep, and I think Dinesh D’Souza is a pretty serious guy. It’s hard for me to believe he’d be associated with something that wasn’t solid.

Who knows, maybe the True The Vote people will get a chance to present their evidence before a court in the discovery process of one of these crazy prosecutions against Trump.

Btw, I did the google search you mentioned and it is indeed a solid wall of mainstream media debunkers and critics.

Yeah. Some people read stuff from the likes of Philip Bump at the Washington Post or anything from the NYT and take that as the gospel truth.

Those are the same people who look at all those fact check articles that pop up in the first two or three (or twenty) pages of a Google Search, and not only believe those “fact check” articles they see, but simultaneously, if you ask them, won’t believe Google doctors its returns to support an agenda.

Yes. You see the truth with your eyes when you actually look.

There are always people who will never accept some things, even if it leaped out, bit them and yelled “I DID IT!”

I must say, if you watch the linked video the thread references, for a couple of grifters and liars, it is astonishing they would concoct this stuff out of thin air in order to make money (and only to make money) actually SUBMITTING that to the FBI, and then...eagerly awaiting the chance to bypass the putrid media filter and address the issue as they present it in a court of law under cross examination.

Very puzzing a couple of con artists would be so willing, but hey...I don’t read the Washington Post, so what do I know???

They seem legit to me. The problem is they’re up against a media establishment that’s powerful and a public that’s pretty complacent. Plus the waters have been muddied by some high profile people who made claims about election interference that didn’t pan out. Just lots of headwinds working against them.

That’s true. In the documentary, they talk about the people who conflate those endeavors and the problems it causes.

I understand that, but if those people hadn’t been raising hell, even if they were going down the wrong path, nobody would have even said boo about it.

Then, when an entity such as True The Vote has real and valid information, they would do nothing about it, saying “You didn’t say anything in November-December of 2020, this is old news, and a conspiracy theory.

I don’t see the Media as complacent. I see them as active participants in the steal.

I agree the media is an active participant, and they are helped by a public that doesn’t have its eye on the ball the way it used to.

Sorry for the slow reply.

My distrust of 2000 Mules started when I noticed that nowhere in the film was it clearly specified how close a possible mule had to come to a ballot dropbox to count as a visit. That statement would have been something like this: "When a potential mule's phone came within two feet of a ballot dropbox, we counted that as a visit. We ignored any distance over two feet. " There is no such "distance" statement anywhere in the film, yet True the Vote must have used such a specific distance if they wanted to distinguish mules from non-mules.

The film clearly implies that there was no doubt after examining True the Vote's geospatial cell phone data, that specific mules visited specific ballot boxes, and were close enough to insert fraudulent ballots. How close would that have to be? Perhaps under three feet?

Dinesh D'Souza never gave a specific number in the film or in interviews I saw. He just kept repeating that geospatial tracking was very accurate. He never specified how accurate Trut the Vote's SPECIFIC data was. Why not? The number is critical to proving the mule hypothesis.

After looking on the internet to find a specific "distance" number, I encountered the 9/30/2021 letter sent by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation to True the Vote, rejecting TTV's request that the GBI investigate TTV's findings as evidence of vote fraud. That letter is shown in its entirety here:

https://twitter.com/stphnfwlr/status/1451309892824936452/photo/1

Please read the letter.

Note this entry: "Devices within 100 feet of org or dropbox by day." Also, note this: "... the spreadsheets identify 229 cellphones which had made multiple trips to within 100 feet of a voter drop box."

Finally, I had found a "distance" number! The problem was, it wasn't two feet, it was 100 feet. That's enough distance to have included tracked phones in cars traveling on roads near the ballot dropboxes. 100 foot accuracy obviously cannot be used to place anyone within a couple of feet of a ballot dropbox.

Geospatial data can be much more accurate than 100 feet, so at first the number specified by the GBI puzzled me. However, when TTV purchased its geospatial data, they had so specify the diameter of the geofences being examined. TTV must have specified geofences that extended 100 feet around each dropbox and near each nonprofit organization. I expected that D'Souza would explain how TTV had narrowed that 100 feet down to a foot or two. It never came. However, he did permit himself to be interviewed by the Washington Post's Philip Bump. Bump repeatedly brought up the "100 foot" figure, and D'Souza did not object to it. Here's that interview:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/05/17/discussing-gaps-2000-mules-with-dinesh-dsouza/

Please read the interview. Search for "100". This is the Washington Post, and nothing that Philip Bump says can be trusted, but I assume the Dinesh D'Souza quotes are accurate. If D'Souza's quotes were fabricated or altered, he had plenty of places to complain online or in interviews, and AFAIK he did not. D'Souza pretends in the interview that TTV tracked the paths of mules within the hundred foot radius, but that critical information was not mentioned or shown in the film. He also says that the data showed that mules were shown to have gone many times between particular dropboxes and particular nonprofit organizations, but that only meant that supposed mules came within 100 feet of both. So what?

No wonder the Georgia Bureau of Investigation said at the end of its letter, "As it exists, the data, while curious, does not rise to the level of probable cause that a crime has been committed."

The GBI was being polite to call the data "curious." "Meaningless" would have been a better word.

I bet that the GBI letter came as a shock to True the Vote. They almost certainly submtted their data in good faith, believing they had discovered significant voter fraud. They had wasted a lot of money to purchase the worthless geospatal cell phone data. How were they going to recoup that loss? Enter Dinesh D'Souza.

There are plenty of other problems with 2000 Mules. Obviously this says nothing about real Democrat vote fraud.

TChad, if you are really interested in knowing the truth, you cannot look at anything put out by the media. All of them are deliberately dishonest on this.

I have not only seen the “2000 Mules” documentary, I have purchased the companion book that not only discusses many things they did not put into the documentary (often to keep the movie down to a manageable length of an hour and a half) but also discusses many of the “fact check” pieces by the likes of Philip Bump and others, and speaks directly to those things. Often, the “fact checkers” had not even seen the movie.

It is absolutely 100% false that Geotracking is only good to 100 feet. This is probably THE most common lie that is deliberately stated, and propagated from “fact check” to “fact check” all across the country and those that show up in Google and the likes of the Washington Post.

Geotracking, using an application on the cell phone to capture and convey GPS data is far more accurate than 100 feet. Using this common method, built into modern smart phones, has a distance of 16 feet. There are a myriad of applications that capture and store this data, ranging from the phone vendor’s included software (such as Apple Maps) to an application created by Walmart or Target.

These applications capture and store GPS data, and transmit that data to centralized collection points at Apple, Walmart, or Target, where it is married up with other information they have collected from you.

I believe there are only three data elements captured: The MAC address of your phone (a unique identifier, no other phone built has the same identifier) the GPS coordinates, and the date/time.

Note that the “fact check” articles and people like Philip Bump go out of their way to deliberately conflate (deliberately, because I don’t believe they are all that stupid) GPS data and Triangulation data in order to confuse people. Triangulation localization is far less accurate, and is 100 feet at best, and can be up to a mile off at worst. But all that is deliberately done to confuse people or muddy the water, create doubt, which they have successfully done.

To prove the truth of this to yourself, ask yourself this question: If your iPhone or Samsung phone was only able to get your location to within a hundred feet, how could you possibly use the turn-by-turn navigation on a smartphone to go somewhere if it were that inaccurate? You would be far beyond a turn before it would tell you to turn, right? Also, keep in mind the software used to find your phone if you have misplaced it. Apple has “Find My iPhone” software as standard, and I used it today to find my iPad. I brought it up, and it literally showed the location of my misplaced iPad as being in my car in the driveway. On the map, it showed the location being right outside the boundary of my home between my house and the street. As I look at it right now, in my living room with my iPad beside me, I can tell which quadrant of the house the iPad is currently positioned in.

But all of that is a red herring.

The methodology True The Vote used works to track mules down is what is the most important thing. Whether they say the geofence around each box is 16 feet or 50 feet, it isn’t enough that someone went inside that limit (whatever it was) on a given Ballot Dropbox to designate that person carrying the cell phone as a “Ballot Mule”.

Makes little difference if the “geofence” around each ballot box is 16 or 50 feet. Or maybe even 100 feet. But I am going to use 50 feet because I don’t know what their criteria was for drawing the geofences.

The point is: that distance, whatever is used, is not the key factor in classifying a cell phone owner as a Ballot Mule for obvious reasons. If someone is inside that geofence around a dropbox, they might be simply passing it buy on the way to a convenience store or going to or from work.

That is common sense.

But if someone penetrates the geofence drawn around ten dropboxes, that is a different thing

That was one factor in their criteria, which they “dumbed down” to get rid of what are called “false positives”, that is, people getting defined as Ballot Mules when they were not involved in that kind of thing. So they set a high standard of ten geofence penetrations in a single day. (In the film, as you recall, they describe how they set this criteria and why. (NOTE: There were many people who went to far more of them. Over a two week period leading up to the election, 242 individual people (Identified by their cell phone MAC address) went to an average of 24 dropboxes and eight NGO locations in a single day.

Think of that. 242 INDIVIDUAL people going to an AVERAGE of 24 dropboxes and eight NGO’s in one day. Never mind it is often taking place between midnight and 6 AM.

The other main criteria in addition to penetrating the geofence around ten or more dropboxes, is that they had to visit five or more NGO (Non-Governmental Organizations that are deceptively referred to as “Get Out The Vote” organizations) in that time frame. (The NGO’s are staging areas where the illegally trafficked ballots are stored for distribution to the mules.)

The COMBINATION of those two parameters in defining someone’s activity as illegal ballot mule activity is quite strict.

After all who is going to penetrate the geofence of ten ballot dropboxes and five NGO’s in one night?

To make this even more compelling, True The Vote got 4 million minutes of video footage-more than a petabyte’s worth-of dropbox surveillance video (using the state or local equivalent of a FOIA request). They were able to use the geolocation data of a dropbox geofence penetration, get the date and time from that data point, and go directly to that date and time in the video footage, and there they saw people stuffing ballot boxes.

And one more thing-Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips of True The Vote were not only sent to jail for refusing to reveal their sources (as is their right) they are ready and willing to go into a court of law, on a national stage, and subject their data, their methods, and their conclusions to an adversarial legal process and cross examination by experts.

That they are not only willing, but eager to do so should tell you that they are not only serious about their findings and willing to put themselves into this legal process, but will do so in the face of massive lies told by people who have shown themselves repeatedly to be totally non-trustworthy.

I will put my money on them.

Bkmk. Amazing. Thank you for the concise explanation. Well done.

“These applications capture and store GPS data, and transmit that data to centralized collection points at Apple, Walmart, or Target, where it is married up with other information they have collected from you.”

Apple has been consistent that data that it may collect is 1) anonymized and 2) is not sold.

Correct me if wrong, but you seem to be suggesting that data collected by Apple is somehow sold, and was done if the basis for tracking phone movements.

It is absolutely kept and sold by Apple and Samsung. And other vendors too, like Walmart and Target, just to name a few.

It is a BIG business. Data. Used for marketing.

However, without the information about who owns that phone with a specific MAC address (GPS Coordinates, Date/Time, and MAC Address are the bare minimum of useful data) the data is anonymized.

And to guard privacy, Apple, Samsung know who that smartphone with the specific Mac Address is, because they know who owns they phone...it is in a sales record somewhere.

I make the assumption that entities that get it from an application such as Walmart or Target know full well who you are, because most people have to fill out some kind of user profile for the application, which they can easily marry up to the MAC Address. How private our data is with industry is wholly debateable. They don’t have any stricture that prevents them from selling that except their good word, crossed fingers, and a smile.

They don’t have a legal impediment such as HIPAA (for the Healthcare industry) so if they want to sell it...

However, for government to obtain your identity legally and be able to use it in a court of law, the government or law enforcement agency must submit a supoena issued by a judge to unmask a MAC Address. They would generally submit that to Apple or Samsung, who have happily complied in the past.

So yes, the anonymized GPS data is sold for gazillions of reason for millions of dollars. It is a serious privacy hole, IMO.

It is possible that while Walmart and Target DO know who you are if they could marry your profile information to the MAC Address, I readily admit I cannot say with certainty that they can do that. It could be that Apple or Samsung only know that information, and they guard it (who the MAC Address belongs to) and Walmart and Target know who you are as a person, but not your MAC address. This nuance is something I don’t know about.

But Apple and Samsung DEFINITELY know who you are, even if the phone was not sold by Apple directly but by a third party like Amazon or Verizon.

Let me be more specific.

Apple does not sell data generated by apps that -they- make such as any Apple IOS app like Maps, Find My, Home, etc.

Apple DOES warehouse and sell your data. This is a significant revenue stream for them.

IMPORTANT NOTE: They likely get around this by using the phrase in their SLA of “personally identifiable” data. If you download an application from The App Store (Apple) such as the Target or Walmart application, and when you launch it, it asks if you wish to allow geolocation services. This gives them the legal right to do that.

In America, Big Tech owns your digital data. By contrast, in Communist China, the CCP owns your digital data.

Asking you for that permission to use Location Data Services is one of the very first things that happens when you launch that application.

Most people click “Allow” and you do it for those companies and their application. Once you do that, the can, and have done, pretty much what they want with your data within the confines of those 10 page long SLA (Service Level Agreements that EVERYONE reads. (that was indeed a capital letter emphasis for sarcasm)

Apple sells your data that it collects on you from Maps, Find My, etc.

It just sells your data without any personally identifiable data, thus fulfilling its promise to customers to be an advocate for their digital privacy.

People buy that data. If you run ABC Business, you can buy geodata from one of the many data warehouses by working with them to say “ABC business is at this location. I want to get geolocation data from everyone who comes to ABC Business from this one mile radius.” So, a geofence is drawn around your business, and every identifiable (yet anonymous) phone that penetrates the small geofence drawn around the ABC Business location is harvested, and the sum of all the movements of THOSE phones that entered the ABC Business Geofence are provided for whatever distance around the ABC Business locations is extracted and sent to the ABC Business.

With that data, they can confirm what routes people take to get to their physical store. Did they come up Route 95 from the south or from State Highway 786 from the west? Oh...it is from State Highway 786 from the west. Let’s put up more signage out that way.

Or they can have a second geofence drawn around the locations of their competitors, and they can see if people are driving straight to their physical ABC Business site, or are they stopping at XYZ Shop first to look for their product so they can either buy it there and go home, check availability, or simply get prices for comparative purposes. They may determine to buy a physical property to the west of XYZ Shop on State Highway 786 so that people stop at THEIR store first, and hopefully, buy THEIR product first.

And this is all divorced from knowing who the individual person is. For these purposes, they may not care in the least who the individual is, just what their “pattern of life” is.

For other purposes, it may vitally important to know who that person is, so they sell an application that tells them who that user is, what their shopping history is, where exactly they are coming from to shop, how often they shop (they can target them with sales to keep them coming if their competitor up the road is taking more business, etc)

This is big, BIG business. That True The Vote spent $2 million to get this data, and it was freely given with the exchange of cash should tell you just how big that is.

I’m sorry, but we will just disagree.

If you can find something more specific that Apple is selling anonymized data, I will gladly stand corrected.

Fury, I don’t have a problem at all with your disagreement with me on a specific point like this one. We have had our differences on many things over time, so I am gratified to see that we can have an amicable disagreement.

I suggest putting this phrase into Google or DuckDuckGo, and reviewing some of those articles in there that come up: “does apple sell geolocation data?”

A lot of those articles point statements by Apple that use Clinton-risqué phrasing to dance around the issue, but if you look at those, you can see that the answer is pretty clearly “yes they do”.

You can draw your own conclusions from those, and I promise to respect them, even if I disagree.