Amazing that you'd continue to pretend there is anything proven by D'Souza's fictional account of the election. I already posted a link that destroyed the entire premise of the movie.
The FBI and GBI investigated any identifiable individual from his video. Each one was dropping off ballots for members of their families who reside at the same address. Perfectly legal.
The GPS data for cell phones varies wildly...as much as 15 meters depending on the type of phone. Add to that there is certainly no way his data shows who the ballots are votes for. Could be fraudulent Trump ballots...right?
Evidence Gaps in ‘2000 Mules’
At one point in the film, Phillips shares a visual purporting to show the movements of a single cellphone.
“What you see here on this screen is a single person on a single day in Atlanta, Georgia,” Phillips explains. “They went to 28 drop boxes and five organizations in one day.”
But as Philip Bump of the
Washington Post learned, the dots purporting to be drop box locations did not match up with actual drop box locations. And he called Phillips on it.
Phillips responded via email that “the movie graphics are not literal interpretations of our data.”
A conservative film now playing in select theaters around the country isn't "determinative, definitive" proof of widespread voter fraud, as former President Donald Trump has claimed.
www.factcheck.org
An interesting aspect to the movie is that D'Souza did his best to blur out anything that might identify someone he says is participating in election fraud. The FBI and GBI had to use license plates that D'Souza hadn't blurred to find people. So why would he hide their identities? Could it be fear of a lawsuit for defamation?
To my eye, the dog is blurred for one reason only.
www.alreporter.com
odysee.com
