2,000 mules

That is absolutely feasible. Researchers do it all the time.

This isn't an analysis. Anybody looking to actually analyze patterns and with the background to actually do this sort of research can easily poke a ton of holes in this analysis that makes it useless as an actual study to find the truth of the situation (many of which have been pointed out on this thread). This is just an attempt to make people feel better about losing an election, thinking they didn't really lose and most people actually agree with them.

 

I pretty much agree with everything you said.
That is why I said a few times if they are that confident in their data, hand it over to the officials so they can determine if there is enough there to start questioning people.
With the limited evidence they showed in the video, it warrants at least that.

What I can’t stand is many here don’t even want to view the information or data. Nothing happened and move on.
If we have that type of mindset, people who truly do have bad tendencies will continue to get away with it. Its the same thing as the “the science is settled” crowd. Absolutely ridiculous statements.

 

Wait so are you saying if I have proof of massive voter fraud I should give it to authorities for free instead of charging a $30 admission fee? That's insane!

 

Geolocation uses the same thing to find missing phones or tablets. I used it once for my phone. Got me within three feet.

You continue to not grasp that the geolocation data was used in conjunction with video evidence at multiple locations at various times of the day. You don’t need geolocation to be within 5 feet when your tracking the same ID that happens to go to multiple drop box locations in the same day while also catching that same person on camera at each location that matches up the time of the geolocation…

 

How do we know whether some or all of the relevant local municipalities didn't have its workers or representatives or security firms doing regular checks of the ballot boxes throughout the day and night? That would account for multiple visits.

Or some of them could have been either located near a bar or restaurant that has the same Uber driver pick up and drop off patrons and/or food multiple times throughout the day and night.

Or the drop box was located next to a commercial business, like a Domino's Pizza, with delivery person making 20-30 trips an evening.

Or next to a police station with squad cars rolling in and out on patrol all night long.

It took me 90 seconds to envision those scenarios. D'Sousa made a whole film about it with about as much basis for a conclusion as I have.

And I've used geofencing repeatedly in commercial real estate. It's pretty accurate but hardly an exact science, and without actual video of someone harvesting ballots (in which case the geofencing is irrelevant to prove voter fraud) or knowing who owned the pinged cell phones and why they were there, his guesses are no better than mine are.

 

I have no doubt you didn’t watch the movie.
He himself doesn’t have the data. It was a group that paid all the money and time spent to compile the data. They happened to agree with him to be on the movie. The group themselves said they would offer all the data to authorities.

 

So the group didn't actually provide the data for the movie and show it?

BTW, the last sentence appears to be false, again.

What ‘2000 Mules’ leaves out of ballot harvesting claims

And the GBI already investigated their claims, despite their lack of cooperation, not finding the evidence to even merit a law enforcement investigation, for many of the same reasons that both I and others on this thread have pointed out to you.

So let's see, a group wants to accuse people of crimes, but doesn't seem to want specific investigations of their claim. Why do you think that is?

 

How would they have names? Geotracking data doesn’t provide names.
Either way if that’s true, than 100% agree they need to put up or shut up.
It appeared to me they only had the geotracking data connected with the surveillance footage. It would be up to the authorities to connect that data to individual names.
It does appears subpoenas out there so this is not done yet in Georgia.
I can’t find anything from True to Vote confirming if they actually had names or not.

Subpoenas seek evidence of Georgia ballot collection

 

They have video of them engaged in the actions and their unique cell phone IDs? But they don’t know who they are? And the so called perps documented whatever they do by taking pictures? None of That sets off your BS detector?

 

They don’t claim in the movie to have names. Geotracking only provides the unique ID to the device.

 

They have the device IDs and video of supposed peeps wearing gloves dropping off ballots and they won’t turn the info over to law enforcement? I don’t believe they have valid evidence because they refuse to subject it to a test for reliability or veracity— the elements of acceptance of witness claims for probable cause. They want to sell a movie. Which is fine. Except there is no value in BS. Easy to find out names of subscribers to phones and match that up to video of the subscriber. By not subjecting their data to verification, there will always be believers

 

Nope. Major flaws and the refusal to allow their data to be tested and verified. Better to have the gullible buy their garbage.

 

How do you suppose law enforcement would get their names?

They will do neither (put up or shut up).

 

Riddle me this. If D'Souza really had this incredible smoking gun why would he be charging $30 to view it? Wouldn't he want the whole world to see all his evidence themselvesc to blow this thing wide open? The only audience he is reaching are the rubes. And that's all he is interested in reaching.

 

So they were documenting their alleged criminality to preserve the evidence?

mmkay

By the way, another problem with this whole conspiracy is that DD can't even demonstrate if the alleged criminal behavior was dissimilar in any other locations that they didn't focus on where Trump won.

Weird.