I watched it last night and found the geotracking component of this to be very compelling evidence. The folks at True the Vote and D’Souza all need to be congratulated and supported.
I do have one comment on a change/addition that I wish they would have made which I think would have made this more powerful.... As I understand the methodology they used, they used specific criteria to hone in on the Mules; I don’t remember it exactly but to meet the criteria, the targets related to a) mules visiting multiple drop points, b) mules making multiple trips to the drop points and c) multiple visits to the centers where ballots were picked up..... and the bar of ‘multiple’ could be set anywhere but the idea of why it would be necessary for anyone to visit a drop point more than once should raise eyebrows immediately.
What always makes something more powerful is when there is a head to head comparison to something else... or for this case, other locations. During the documentary, cities like Milwaukee and Atlanta were focused on....There is always going to be leftists who come up with some stupid reason why the criteria for the Mules could be met in some ‘innocent way’. What I think would have made the documentary more powerful is if it had of shown how it would have looked if an identical criteria had of been applied to some city that was in a deep red area.... or perhaps even a ‘blue city’ that is in a ‘red state’. Take for example, cities in Texas like Dallas, Houston, Austin and San Antonio.... all which show up as ‘blue cities’ on the 2020 election map ( https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/upshot/2020-election-map.html ) If that same criteria of Mules had of been applied for those cities, would any have been identified?
When I watched it again...I thought I heard the one of the two people who were involved with True The Vote say that the criteria was "visited at least one non-profit" which makes more sense to me.
I will try to verify that.
That said, I fail to find any rational explanation for the path followed by a mule in the animated GIF I posted at #62 other than...the person was visiting every dropbox in the region.
Because that is what their path shows.
At 2:30 AM.
And coupled with the video they were able to glean out of that 4 million minutes that was time synchronized with the path driven...well. It does, as Sebastian Gorka said indignantly, beggar belief.
Let's say there were robberies of five houses in a neighborhood. Think of a a parent whose known problematic son was accused of such a thing, were they presented by the authorities with this cell phone tracking path, showing the track, and it showed their son taking a circuitous route that took him out of the way but passed all five burglarized houses in the time frame the robberies took place.
Then they played footage from a security camera on a house that showed their son's car stop nearby and their mask-wearing son wearing rubber gloves comes into view and disappears, then reappears some minutes later.
At that point, a well meaning uncle who happened to be visiting says "There is probably an innocent explanation for this..."
At that point, the mother, father, and detective all pause to look at the uncle in disbelief and irritation.
(LOL, in telling this, it is not YOU who are the uncle, hecticskeptic, it is the Leftists who offer that explanation who should be met with stares of irritated disbelief!)
Just t be clear-they were only focused on the battleground states that Biden won in the wee hours of the morning. They had two million dollars to spend from a grant, and could only afford to buy the "geofenced" tracking data in those states, so they were working within the confines of that, not to mention the "Citizen's Requests" (Like the FOIA requests for federal data but at the state level) they had to put I and hammer through.
Using that data, they WERE able to see that pattern shown in the animated GIF at post #62 in other battleground states, that same criteria identified more than a thousand such "mules" in Pennsylvania, and so on.
Heh, you can tell I was pretty convinced by it, but...I admit that I already concluded there was massive election fraud. (Which is a point made by the infamous Politi"Fact" "Fact Check" done on...wait for it...the PREVIEW of the documentary!!!! In it (again, on the PREVIEW of the documentary) they said:
"...It is conspiracist thinking," he said. "They are interpreting data that confirms their pre-existing conclusions. It’s a zombie claim; no matter how many times you kill it, it keeps coming back..."
So, yes! You are spot on, and they used that even before the documentary was seen.
Well. I guess that will be the Leftist mantra, as it always seems to be. " Deny, Deny, Deny".
And there is no denying that they are banking on a sufficient number of people to simply say "Oh. I heard the documentary was debunked."
What we are banking on is that there are a sufficient number of Americans who, after seeing this compelling documentary, will look with irritated disbelief at the Leftists who say "Oh, there are innocent explanations for this activity..."