TheCount
Member

I would love to hear how someone thinks a naval blockade can block fentanyl

Even if you actually thought that opening more grocery stores would solve the problem, this seems like the worst possible strategy. If they all feel so strongly about it, surely they could open a co-op grocery store or the like?

Policy #1: eliminate the age of consent

Her ex might be getting the better deal in that he doesn't have to deal with her drama. Wasn't she cheating on her husband before?

People never seem to get upset when I have sex at my house, why are they so upset when I have sex in a theater?

If that's all you have, it's all you have. That one or the other one?

Maybe read the thing that follows the colon

You're really slicing this thinly to find something to be outraged about, aren't you? Is this all you're left with? I didn't point to a background graphic and say that it invalidated every other graphic because I then went on to talk about how their other graphics were also shit. My comments on the background graphics were about how they were part of the deception of the film, where they're trying to dazzle their audience with Hollywood graphics while using weasel language to say a bunch of things which are technically true but do not actually prove their claims. They very carefully talk around nearly everything in the entire film. Can you point out to me where it is on True the Vote's map?

That's what happens when you plead guilty. Also, notice that he didn't go to jail for this, which is equivalent to what you're posting in this thread: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/infowars-host-owen-shroyer-gets-2-months-in-prison-in-capitol-insurrection-case

The public areas were outside. And yes.

For standing outside the gate?

Because even a child will know that graphic is fake. 8100 Holcomb Bridge Road, Alpharetta, GA 30022 I do. In all the 4 million minutes of surveillance video that they have, they never saw a person go to two boxes.

It's a public space. You can go there. What you can see in the tweets is the entry area for his office where the public can go to talk to his staff and/or meet with him. It's in the Rayburn building. The protestors were arrested for being disruptive and refusing to leave. They conducted a sit in. 1701255012930707898

People's examples are stupid. These two actions are not the same: 1) Entering a place that you are permitted to be on a day that place is open to the public 2) Entering a place that you are not permitted to be on a day that place is closed to the public You can legally go in the lobby of your bank when it is open. You cannot legally go into the vault of your bank when it is closed.

The graphic with the ballot drop box that I showed is the only foreground scenery graphic of a "mule" route in the entire film. What other graphic should I look at instead? How am I taking them at face value? I have the box addresses. I can confirm their statements. There's no way to do the same for the film. They present no data, only statements of supposed fact that you're supposed to take on faith.

Whether Paint, Gimp, or Photoshop, it has no bearing on my point of view. Either the ballot boxes are there or they aren't. How they came to be superimposed on the map is irrelevant. Unless, that is, you think that the True the Vote crew actually created some Minority Report supercomputer in order to display cell phone data. And then that supercomputer accidentally used a map for the wrong city.

Unless you're using a computer from 1995 you can just highlight an address in your browser, right click, and search and you'll get a map pin. Do you think those pins will be where True the Vote says they are? Why would I care?

The whole argument is low hanging fruit. All the J6 threads are basically the same: "Why is this completely different situation treated differently?!?"

You don't have to trust anyone. With the data (addresses) provided, you can actually check the drop box locations themselves. That's why I included them in my post. But that's the difference between you and I, isn't it? The first result for "2000 mules murder" is this story which names the girl.

This is what happens when you don't watch it and just believe bullshit propaganda on the internet.

Oh well if everyone else is saying the same thing then I must definitely be wrong...

Waiting on those time stamps.

If two people say the same thing, should I reply twice?

Masks and gloves at 3 am to shove 5-15 ballots in the box? Wow, that sounds serious. Where in the movie are those clips? Since you said "ones" I'm going to assume there's multiple fitting that description... should be easy. Side note: The ballot drop conversation is just as hilarious as the arrest conversation. This exchange happens at 40:25.

They made a bunch of CSI / Minority Report-looking graphics to sucker the ignorant and gullible. Do you believe that this is an actual screenshot or live view of a program that they created to analyze that "spreadsheet of numbers?" Here's a zoom of the animated map that they used:

Your argument is self-defeating. If it's not possible to know if it's based on real data, if it could be called fake or true, how do you know which it is? Here's some examples as to how it can be shown that it's not based on real data: - The locations of the ballot boxes are public. You can find them yourself. They weren't in the locations shown on the maps in 2000 Mules. - Moscow, Russia is not in the United States. No mules delivered fake ballots for the US election to ballot boxes in Moscow. Despite this, maps of Moscow are used in 2000 Mules. What ballot stuffing videos?

1701642993864716317

The maps, animations, etc. It's all just their opinion. They present no evidence, found no mules, and recalled their book from publication in order to remove all sections where they made specific claims as to which non-profit groups were allegedly involved in the scheme. Why do you believe them, besides the fact that you desperately want to believe them?

:aok:

Yeah. They said things and I said those things were untrue. For example, their graphics, which were made for dramatic effect and do not reflect reality, and their claim that they solved murders when in fact they did no such thing. If I got some people to sit around in a room and roleplay through the world's longest CSI episode, the way they did, would you find it more convincing?