2,000 Mules

[Sidewinder2k2]

His work was banned on social media. Why would that be? Maybe the companies don't want to be associated with a proven fraud.

So put the DVDs out for a dollar, plus shipping. This is a clear and obvious money grab.

You're going to be ok. No one is going to make you watch it.

I actually find it hilarious that people are actually paying money for it. Dinesh is smart and he is getting over on idiots.

[Night Train]

Dammit, why can't we see Spiderman for free? If they really wanted everyone to see it, they'd make it free derp derp. Feel sorry for all those saps that paid to see Spiderman.

Oh jeez.

Spiderman is not pretending to be informational. It's entertainment. The fact that you made that reach comparison shows just how far gone you really are.

Okay. Maybe Michael Moore or Al Gore would've been a more appropriate example. I remember paying to see an Inconvenient Truth, and that fuckface Al Gore won an oscar for it. It's okay for him to charge, but not anyone else.

[Sidewinder2k2]

Dammit, why can't we see Spiderman for free? If they really wanted everyone to see it, they'd make it free derp derp. Feel sorry for all those saps that paid to see Spiderman.

Oh jeez.

Spiderman is not pretending to be informational. It's entertainment. The fact that you made that reach comparison shows just how far gone you really are.

Okay. Maybe Michael Moore or Al Gore would've been a more appropriate example. I remember paying to see an Inconvenient Truth, and that fuckface Al Gore won an oscar for it. It's okay for him to charge, but not anyone else.

I don't like either of those assholes either. But at least some of their stuff has some kind of legitimacy.

You actually paid to be lectured by Al Gore?

[ForCaleb]

Dammit, why can't we see Spiderman for free? If they really wanted everyone to see it, they'd make it free derp derp. Feel sorry for all those saps that paid to see Spiderman.

Oh jeez.

Spiderman is not pretending to be informational. It's entertainment. The fact that you made that reach comparison shows just how far gone you really are.

Okay. Maybe Michael Moore or Al Gore would've been a more appropriate example. I remember paying to see an Inconvenient Truth, and that fuckface Al Gore won an oscar for it. It's okay for him to charge, but not anyone else.

Welp

[Bull]

Dammit, why can't we see Spiderman for free? If they really wanted everyone to see it, they'd make it free derp derp. Feel sorry for all those saps that paid to see Spiderman.

Oh jeez.

Spiderman is not pretending to be informational. It's entertainment. The fact that you made that reach comparison shows just how far gone you really are.

Okay. Maybe Michael Moore or Al Gore would've been a more appropriate example. I remember paying to see an Inconvenient Truth, and that fuckface Al Gore won an oscar for it. It's okay for him to charge, but not anyone else.

Did you believe what you saw in An Inconvenient Truth? Or did you think it was all bullshit?

[Ask Not]

Dammit, why can't we see Spiderman for free? If they really wanted everyone to see it, they'd make it free derp derp. Feel sorry for all those saps that paid to see Spiderman.

Oh jeez.

Spiderman is not pretending to be informational. It's entertainment. The fact that you made that reach comparison shows just how far gone you really are.

Okay. Maybe Michael Moore or Al Gore would've been a more appropriate example. I remember paying to see an Inconvenient Truth, and that fuckface Al Gore won an oscar for it. It's okay for him to charge, but not anyone else.

No one is saying it's not okay for him to charge money. It was you who said it says a lot that this is a huge story that congress should be having hearings on yet he needs to sell the DVD for $25 a pop.

Everyone else is simply letting you know selling a DVD for $25 has no correlation with its importance. (just like Spiderman or An Inconvenient Truth)

[Hornets]

Let's get back to the fact that this is damning evidence that proves the election was not fair....

[Ask Not]

Let's get back to the fact that this is damning evidence that proves the election was not fair....

Will you please walk us through it?
Thank you, Hornets. Appreciate you.

[Hornets]

Let's get back to the fact that this is damning evidence that proves the election was not fair....

Will you please walk us through it?
Thank you, Hornets. Appreciate you.

No need to. Watch it yourself. The evidence is clear. You're welcome.....

[Mizuno Man]

Dammit, why can't we see Spiderman for free? If they really wanted everyone to see it, they'd make it free derp derp. Feel sorry for all those saps that paid to see Spiderman.

https://www2.solarmovie.to/movie/spider ... ching.html

you're welcome

[mlhouse]

I just finished watching the documentary.

The claims are pretty compelling if they actually have the evidence they claim they have: namely, video of these individual "mules" that are linked by geo tracking data and video data at the drop boxes placing multiple ballots into multiple drop boxes. Even some of the anecdotal video is pretty suggestive- there is a woman who breezes up to the drop box wearing gloves, turns around and walks to a trash can she did not even look at on her approach and throws the gloves into the trash or the people dropping off ballots in these drop boxes and then taking a pic of the box (to prove they dropped off the ballots so they can be paid). Who wears gloves just to make a drop at a ballot box? Who takes pictures of a ballot drop box?

But the weakness of the presentation is they do not show this. They show the clips, but they never showed video of a person going to more than one drop box. They claim in the 400 million minutes of video they have this but it is never shown in the released documentary.

Because of this, there is not sufficient evidence presented in the released documentary to make a real case. I believe there was a huge amount of ballot harvesting in the 2020 election with the millions of unsolicited ballots mailed out to voters, many of whom no longer existed at the address they had on the voter rolls (who fights keeping accurate voting rolls?). But, if I had to make a jury vote of "guilty or not guilty", unless they presented information not presented in the released documentary I would vote "not guilty" because they did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt their case.

[Slap Shot]

Let's get back to the fact that this is damning evidence that proves the election was not fair....

Will you please walk us through it?
Thank you, Hornets. Appreciate you.

He hasn't watched it either.

Has there been a single credible media source on the planet that has deemed it credible?

[Gork]

They tracked the " mules " with the microchips from the vaccine.It makes sense now!!!

[Bull]

I just finished watching the documentary.

The claims are pretty compelling if they actually have the evidence they claim they have: namely, video of these individual "mules" that are linked by geo tracking data and video data at the drop boxes placing multiple ballots into multiple drop boxes. Even some of the anecdotal video is pretty suggestive- there is a woman who breezes up to the drop box wearing gloves, turns around and walks to a trash can she did not even look at on her approach and throws the gloves into the trash or the people dropping off ballots in these drop boxes and then taking a pic of the box (to prove they dropped off the ballots so they can be paid). Who wears gloves just to make a drop at a ballot box? Who takes pictures of a ballot drop box?

But the weakness of the presentation is they do not show this. They show the clips, but they never showed video of a person going to more than one drop box. They claim in the 400 million minutes of video they have this but it is never shown in the released documentary.

Because of this, there is not sufficient evidence presented in the released documentary to make a real case. I believe there was a huge amount of ballot harvesting in the 2020 election with the millions of unsolicited ballots mailed out to voters, many of whom no longer existed at the address they had on the voter rolls (who fights keeping accurate voting rolls?). But, if I had to make a jury vote of "guilty or not guilty", unless they presented information not presented in the released documentary I would vote "not guilty" because they did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt their case.

So they don’t even show the most compelling evidence they say they have?



A fool and his money….

[Hornets]

Let's get back to the fact that this is damning evidence that proves the election was not fair....

Will you please walk us through it?
Thank you, Hornets. Appreciate you.

He hasn't watched it either.

Has there been a single credible media source on the planet that has deemed it credible?

Watched it start to finish and it was absolutely damning for liberals. You won't watch it, your attention span is about 10 seconds.

[Beef Supreme]

I just finished watching the documentary.

The claims are pretty compelling if they actually have the evidence they claim they have: namely, video of these individual "mules" that are linked by geo tracking data and video data at the drop boxes placing multiple ballots into multiple drop boxes. Even some of the anecdotal video is pretty suggestive- there is a woman who breezes up to the drop box wearing gloves, turns around and walks to a trash can she did not even look at on her approach and throws the gloves into the trash or the people dropping off ballots in these drop boxes and then taking a pic of the box (to prove they dropped off the ballots so they can be paid). Who wears gloves just to make a drop at a ballot box? Who takes pictures of a ballot drop box?

But the weakness of the presentation is they do not show this. They show the clips, but they never showed video of a person going to more than one drop box. They claim in the 400 million minutes of video they have this but it is never shown in the released documentary.

Because of this, there is not sufficient evidence presented in the released documentary to make a real case. I believe there was a huge amount of ballot harvesting in the 2020 election with the millions of unsolicited ballots mailed out to voters, many of whom no longer existed at the address they had on the voter rolls (who fights keeping accurate voting rolls?). But, if I had to make a jury vote of "guilty or not guilty", unless they presented information not presented in the released documentary I would vote "not guilty" because they did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt their case.

So they don’t even show the most compelling evidence they say they have?



A fool and his money….

Gotta save something for the sequel: “2,001 Mules!”



What’s a better grift than charging idiots $24.99 to watch bullshit?


Charging them $49.98 to watch it twice!

[Coach Guy]

I just finished watching the documentary.

The claims are pretty compelling if they actually have the evidence they claim they have: namely, video of these individual "mules" that are linked by geo tracking data and video data at the drop boxes placing multiple ballots into multiple drop boxes. Even some of the anecdotal video is pretty suggestive- there is a woman who breezes up to the drop box wearing gloves, turns around and walks to a trash can she did not even look at on her approach and throws the gloves into the trash or the people dropping off ballots in these drop boxes and then taking a pic of the box (to prove they dropped off the ballots so they can be paid). Who wears gloves just to make a drop at a ballot box? Who takes pictures of a ballot drop box?

But the weakness of the presentation is they do not show this. They show the clips, but they never showed video of a person going to more than one drop box. They claim in the 400 million minutes of video they have this but it is never shown in the released documentary.

Because of this, there is not sufficient evidence presented in the released documentary to make a real case. I believe there was a huge amount of ballot harvesting in the 2020 election with the millions of unsolicited ballots mailed out to voters, many of whom no longer existed at the address they had on the voter rolls (who fights keeping accurate voting rolls?). But, if I had to make a jury vote of "guilty or not guilty", unless they presented information not presented in the released documentary I would vote "not guilty" because they did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt their case.

So they don’t even show the most compelling evidence they say they have?



A fool and his money….

Gotta save something for the sequel: “2,001 Mules!”



What’s a better grift than charging idiots $24.99 to watch bullshit?


Charging them $49.98 to watch it twice!

You mean they took a page out of the BLM playbook?

Nice!

[thinktank]

Yeah, whatabout BLM?!

[Slap Shot]

Will you please walk us through it?
Thank you, Hornets. Appreciate you.

He hasn't watched it either.

Has there been a single credible media source on the planet that has deemed it credible?

Watched it start to finish and it was absolutely damning for liberals. You won't watch it, your attention span is about 10 seconds.

No one believes you.

[Coach Guy]

Yeah, whatabout BLM?!

Sorry for your loss. Maybe they will send you a picture of one of their mansions you sponsored.

[Rusty Kuntz]

Yeah, whatabout BLM?!

Sorry for your loss. Maybe they will send you a picture of one of their mansions you sponsored.

[ForCaleb]

Yeah, whatabout BLM?!

Sorry for your loss. Maybe they will send you a picture of one of their mansions you sponsored.

[thinktank]

Yeah, whatabout BLM?!

Sorry for your loss. Maybe they will send you a picture of one of their mansions you sponsored.

Never gave to BLM but you sure are pissy about froobaloos getting called out for financing Dinesh’s fictional narrative.

A fool and his money, indeed.

Trump lost fair and square. Deal with it.

[Gork]

And the moon is a lie!

[Night Train]

And the moon is a lie!

What a projecting red ass. Stay mad all day loser.

[BlackDog]

Further proof that it’s over for this country. Enjoy believing the reason a person who isn’t in your party lost because of cheating.

[Gork]

NT with the bathroom mirror shot!

[Hornets]

He hasn't watched it either.

Has there been a single credible media source on the planet that has deemed it credible?

Watched it start to finish and it was absolutely damning for liberals. You won't watch it, your attention span is about 10 seconds.

No one believes you.

LOL...figured you and other sheep here won't watch it, as you would not like what you saw!

#liberalnarrativedestroyed!

[weimy froob]

I just finished watching the documentary.

The claims are pretty compelling if they actually have the evidence they claim they have: namely, video of these individual "mules" that are linked by geo tracking data and video data at the drop boxes placing multiple ballots into multiple drop boxes. Even some of the anecdotal video is pretty suggestive- there is a woman who breezes up to the drop box wearing gloves, turns around and walks to a trash can she did not even look at on her approach and throws the gloves into the trash or the people dropping off ballots in these drop boxes and then taking a pic of the box (to prove they dropped off the ballots so they can be paid). Who wears gloves just to make a drop at a ballot box? Who takes pictures of a ballot drop box?

But the weakness of the presentation is they do not show this. They show the clips, but they never showed video of a person going to more than one drop box. They claim in the 400 million minutes of video they have this but it is never shown in the released documentary.

Because of this, there is not sufficient evidence presented in the released documentary to make a real case. I believe there was a huge amount of ballot harvesting in the 2020 election with the millions of unsolicited ballots mailed out to voters, many of whom no longer existed at the address they had on the voter rolls (who fights keeping accurate voting rolls?). But, if I had to make a jury vote of "guilty or not guilty", unless they presented information not presented in the released documentary I would vote "not guilty" because they did not prove beyond a reasonable doubt their case.

[BlackDog]

All these recounts, audits, and election officials (regardless of party) providing evidence of no systematic fraud.

“The party told you to reject the evidence with your eyes and ears. It was their final, essential command.”