Keeping the Mules Honest

Sharing Options

So I haven’t had an opportunity yet to view 2000 Mules, but what with the buzz about it, and clips floating around, together with other bursts of info and what not, I need to say something. There is one aspect of the whole story that simply encapsulates our fin-de-siècle cluelessness in a nutshell. This one thing, better than any other thing could, illustrates how the guardians of our republic are simply a bunch of palookas, while the children of darkness are much, much shrewder than the palookas are, as the Scripture also testifieth.

A mule is a ballot trafficker, traveling through the night to drop off twenty or so ballots at each ballot drop-off point. There were hundreds of them, their routes captured via cell phone tracking, and their activities were captured via surveillance cameras pointed at the ballot drop boxes. Okay, got the set up? The mules are doing this for money, and in order to get paid, they then had to step back and take a snapshot of the ballot drop-off box in order to prove that they had been there.

And here’s the thing that just tickles me. The mules had to take these photos to guard against cheating.

The people attempting to steal an election have a better grasp of the importance of true accountability than do scores of election officials, all of whom apparently promised their constituencies that, if elected, they would make sure to be asleep at the switch. The people running this operation, in other words, unlike our election officials, knew what kind of people they were dealing with.

Heck, why not? Comments open. Behave yourselves.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
47 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
8 days ago

If by, the people attempting to steal an election, you mean Trump and his mules, then for once I’m in agreement with you.

Andy Beno
8 days ago

…and having eyes they see not.

Gloria
Gloria
8 days ago

Most, if not all, election fraud has been carried out by Repblicans, or, rather, Trump cultists.

Cherrera
Cherrera
7 days ago
Reply to  Gloria

Absolute hogwash. I guess you have to lie to yourself constantly when your party pushes contradictions like this, though. Cognitive dissonance is a feature, not a bug, for “progressives.”

Roe.jpg
Last edited 7 days ago by C Herrera
Murk
Murk
8 days ago

The endeavour had many challenges – limited time frame – incredible number of job sites – had to be done under the cover of darkness For one night they ditched their commitment to headquarteralitous and ran the operation fully decentralized Undoubtedly this made the mulervisors more than a little nervous They know what they would do if they dropped 10 ballot boxes but could get paid for 100 ballot drops Hence the ordered system with time stamped digital photos, was utilized to verify work completed, and unwittingly incriminate themselves and most importantly to attest to the veracity of the Bible:… Read more »

Andrew Trauger
Andrew Trauger
8 days ago

This provides only one more truckload of screaming evidence piled onto the smoldering landfill. My question, and it is one unsupported by any shred of hope, is when will the hundreds of corrupt people orchestrating all this be thrown in the slammer? When will this “replay” footage overturn the blown call at first base? My guess is “never.” My guess is also that if Lady Justice doesn’t take off her blindfold and execute something–maybe even someone–then we’re just going to get this all over again (times four) in six months. So, I raise my children, tend my garden, and exercise… Read more »

The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
8 days ago
Reply to  Andrew Trauger

“This provides only one more truckload of screaming evidence piled onto the smoldering landfill.” No it doesn’t. D’Souza, a convicted felon of campaign election fraud and an adulterer, is not someone who engenders trustworthiness.

Cherrera
Cherrera
8 days ago

How rich. The party that brought us this, Pete Bootygig and countless other perversions is attempting to take the moral high ground. Ask Kamala Harris what extra-marital sex can do for your career. And of course it’s a lame, ad hominem argument anyway.

rachel-levine-coronavirus-fb-1024x538.jpg
Last edited 8 days ago by C Herrera
Justin Parris
Justin Parris
7 days ago

https://www.logicalfallacies.org/ad-hominem.html

Lets agree, for the sake of argument, that D’Souza is the devil himself. He’s just a SUPER bad guy. The worst. His real name is Dinesh D’Badman. Now that’s out of the way, can we talk about election security? Presumably its something to worry about if all these evil Republicans keep trying to use it to damage the integrity of elections.

Last edited 7 days ago by Justin Parris
The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
7 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

My reply was to Doug’s apparent endorsement of a fraudster’s election fraud documentary. One would hope that Doug could point us to a reliable report on the subject. Up until now all I’ve seen from him and a couple of far right wingers that hang around here are conspiracy theories in search of a conspiracy. Big hat, no cattle.

As far as ad hominem attacks, that’s pretty much all I see from Doug and more than a fair share of his commenters. Maybe they should get the log of their own eyes first?

Justin Parris
Justin Parris
7 days ago

“My reply was to Doug’s apparent endorsement of a fraudster’s election fraud documentary.” And my reply was to you, what’s your point? “ One would hope that Doug could point us to a reliable report on the subject.” If anyone were arguing that you should take it on faith that Dinesh’s word for it is good enough, this would be a strong argument. Since no one is taking that position, this is complete non-sequitur. “As far as ad hominem attacks, that’s pretty much all I see from Doug and more than a fair share of his commenters. Maybe they should get the log… Read more »

The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
7 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

You are misreading Doug’s post. That doesn’t lend credibility to your reply.

There’s nothing irrational about pointing our that D’Souza is a convicted, self-confessed felon, an adulterer, and a serial liar. Those are not character traits that lead to truthfulness. Did you know that about him?

Justin Parris
Justin Parris
7 days ago

“Nuh UH!”

-The Prince of Tides

I’d love to continue the conversation but you really didn’t give me anything to work with. You just contradicted me without interacting with my reasoning. Were that enough to keep me involved, I would simply pay John Cleese five pounds.

The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
7 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

The power of obfuscation is strong in you!

Last edited 7 days ago by The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
8 days ago

The irony of D’Souza, a convicted felon of, wait for it, campaign election fraud, producing an election fraud documentary is beyond the pale.

The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
8 days ago

Why didn’t Doug mention that small fact?

Last edited 8 days ago by The Prince of Tides
gene
gene
8 days ago

It takes an election fraudster to notice election fraud, right?

Last edited 8 days ago by gene
Cherrera
Cherrera
8 days ago

An illegal campaign contribution isn’t the same as a color revolution/Venezuelan style election theft that we saw in 2020. Dozens (probably hundreds) of things didn’t pass a basic smell test, including the mules, suitcases of ballots, late night count stops followed by Biden getting huge number of votes, poll challengers being kicked out, a Time Magazine article that basically admitted a rigged election “for our own good,” etc. At the very least, there should have been mass inspections of voting machines and Dominion Software code–especially after Eric Croomer turned out to the crazed sociopath many of us suspected. If we… Read more »

Jane
Jane
7 days ago

Please show me where an illegal contribution is defined as election fraud, by an outside source. Thanks.

The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
7 days ago
Reply to  Jane

Technically, he was convicted of campaign finance fraud. For me, in D’Souza’s case, it’s pretty much a difference without a distinction. But if you are comfortable with his sketchy credentials, that says more about you than it does about him.

Last edited 7 days ago by The Prince of Tides
Jane
Jane
7 days ago

I haven’t taken the opportunity to watch the documentary or otherwise investigate the claims involved, but should I do so, I will judge the content of D’Souza’s assertions based on how those assertions are justified by logic and evidence, not by means of assessing D’Souza’s character, because I believe in sound judgment, not lazy shortcuts to reasoning that confirm my bias. I don’t take anything on faith from anyone other than God. But I was simply clearing up a point of fact on which you were, as you now admit, wrong. You are concerned about facts, right?

The Prince of Tides
The Prince of Tides
6 days ago
Reply to  Jane

Good luck with all that!

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
8 days ago

Oh come now, Doug. We all know Totally Legit Joe is for realzies. There’s absolutely no reason to question how a crass, racist, plagiarizing, foul-mouthed, bumbling, pea-brained, gaffe-prone beltway swamp creature who routinely insults voters, never placed higher than fourth in the Iowa caucuses every time he’s ever ran for president, generated no enthusiasm, attracted literally dozens to his rallies the few times he left his basement, won a record low of 17% of counties, lost black and Hispanic support, lost 18/19 bellwether counties, lost Ohio, Florida, and Iowa, and lost 27/27 house “Toss-Ups” received the most votes of any… Read more »

Cherrera
Cherrera
8 days ago

This give you an idea how popular Biden is…and reveals who’s pulling his puppet strings.
Commander-In-Chief – YouTube

Thomas Bauer
Thomas Bauer
6 days ago
Reply to  Cherrera

Man that’s a short and brutal. Thanks for sharing that!

Justin Parris
Justin Parris
7 days ago

Now wait a minute, I happen to have it on good authority that questioning that it is even POSSIBLE for election fraud to take place is itself treasonous behavior, most especially when done without evidence. After all, that’s what every major Democrat I’m aware of said both directly before Hillary lost her election (when they assumed she would win, ya know, right before she claimed election fraud), and directly after Trump lost. Are these Democrat supporters on the board aware that their own party considers them functionally identical to the January 6th rioters for suggesting that Republicans steal elections? I’m… Read more »

Justin Parris
Justin Parris
7 days ago

Anyone actually in Idaho have thoughts on McGeachin? I was just sent a hit piece by the Seattle Times on her.

Dave
Dave
6 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

McGeachin is better than any of the other candidates running or the incumbent Brad Little. Little does not tell the truth about his actions and kept Idaho under his thumb for two years by extending the emergency every 30 days.

He would not allow the legislature to vote on ending the health emergency per Idaho health rules but insisted that he had the authority to keep it going by extending 30 days at a whack.

McGeachin seems solid.

arwenb
arwenb
5 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

Sounds like an excellent endorsement to me!

Ken
Ken
6 days ago

Ballot harvesting already sounds like something more nefarious than it actually is, and now apparently the election fraud theorists aren’t satisfied with it. They have to use this newfangled term ballot trafficking to really get people riled up enough to donate to True the Vote. Look, I understand that in your post here you didn’t make any specific points about the merits of the documentary’s claims. But it does seem like you take it for granted that it successfully demonstrates at least some of the claims that it purports to. And so I think it’s appropriate to respond by making… Read more »

Last edited 6 days ago by Ken
Cherrera
Cherrera
6 days ago
Reply to  Ken

It would only take swinging the vote in a few very corrupt locations (the ones we saw with mysterious suitcases, unexplained shutdowns in the wee hours, hundreds of cases of fishy/fraudulent activities backed by affidavits, Republican poll watchers being kept away, voting machine and software tampering, etc.). In the intel world, you look for a large number of clues like this, because cheaters aren’t going to leave a single obvious clue. Mules are one of many things that point to a stolen election on a night of unbelievable anomalies. Here’s another likely piece of the puzzle, one that’s been known… Read more »

Justin Parris
Justin Parris
6 days ago
Reply to  Ken

Your stated understanding of the concerns of ballot harvesting bear no resemblance whatsoever to the concerns I have. I don’t think people are altering or falsifying ballots at all. I think they’re collecting ballots from people who don’t care, and filling them out on their behalf. You go to renew your drivers’ license. Should we register you to vote? Yeah, sure, whatever. Hey, Phil, your ballot came in the mail. Can I have it? Yeah, sure, whatever. With ballot harvesting, one person can in function gain dozens of votes, simply by being proactive about pursuing them. Now to what degree… Read more »

Mike Freeman
Mike Freeman
6 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

One huge step toward suppressing fraud would be to abolish the electoral college. If you were planning to steal an election, which would be easier: Stealing 150,000 votes in three close states, or stealing 7 million votes nationwide? Not only does the electoral college make fraud easier, it also makes it easier for losers to be suspicious about the results, thus generating questions about the legitimacy of the process. I personally think Joe Biden won fair and square and that all this talk of a stolen election is merely bile from the losing side. But suppose I’m wrong about that.… Read more »

The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
The Commenter Formerly Known As fp
6 days ago
Reply to  Mike Freeman

Mike F: “One huge step toward suppressing fraud would be to abolish the electoral college.”

Yes, because the only place vote fraud ever happens is in presidential elections.

Meanwhile, be sure to keep your eyes glued to your media stenographers. Next week, the Democrat-Media complex may change its mind yet again about the electoral college and you don’t want to be left in the dust.

Justin Parris
Justin Parris
6 days ago
Reply to  Mike Freeman

In a world where fraud is the *only* consideration, I would agree with you. Since it isn’t, I don’t. The states are not arbitrary subdivisions of a Federal Empire. They agreed to the terms of the union predicated on certain compromises of divisions of power. To change those terms after they’re locked into the union is tantamount to treason and invasion. That is, unless you want to get a constitutional amendment first, which would require the approval of the states whose power you wish to grab. If so, you then need to convince low population states why they should submit… Read more »

Cherrera
Cherrera
6 days ago
Reply to  Mike Freeman

“One huge step toward suppressing fraud would be to abolish the Constitution.”

That’s exactly what Mike is saying–unless he’s so ignorant that he doesn’t know the origins of the electoral college. He wants to abolish something he swore to support and defend during his alleged time in the Navy. Like most leftist traitors, he clearly made an empty promise and would be happy to have a totalitarian state disguised as a “democracy.”

Last edited 6 days ago by C Herrera
Mike Freeman
Mike Freeman
6 days ago
Reply to  Cherrera

Cherrera, and Justin, you are seriously suggesting that advocating for a change in policy is treasonous? That’s fairly extremist, even for you. We have political dysfunction unknown anywhere else in the Western world; Congress can’t even pass a budget. January 6 happened because of the electoral college. Our debt is in the trillions precisely because under our polity, neither side can get anything done. That bargain you’re talking about was struck 250 years ago, and it outlived its usefulness a long time ago. Now, you’re right, changing it would require a constitutional amendment, which won’t happen because why would the… Read more »

Justin Parris
Justin Parris
6 days ago
Reply to  Mike Freeman

“Cherrera, and Justin, you are seriously suggesting that advocating for a change in policy is treasonous? That’s fairly extremist, even for you.” No. That’s not what I said. I said if you try and do it without a Constitutional amendment it would be treasonous. I was careful with my words. Try to be so with yours. “That bargain you’re talking about was struck 250 years ago, and it outlived its usefulness a long time ago.” The bargain to which you’re referring *is* the country. What you’re saying is there should be no United States. That’s perhaps a *slightly* more extremist… Read more »

Mike Freeman
Mike Freeman
5 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

Justin, I have actual work that I need to do today so this will be short and I’ll only respond to what I think are the most important points. Choice of words has nothing to do with it. I didn’t say a word about change other than by amendment, nevertheless the first word out of your mouth was treason. It’s telling that you don’t consider people who disagree with you to be honest people who disagree with you; no, they’re traitors. Maybe you should see someone about that. Please stop making the thoroughly disingenuous argument that you don’t think the… Read more »

Cherrera
Cherrera
6 days ago
Reply to  Mike Freeman

“Polling data indicates majority support for abortion rights, gay rights, and single payer health care.,,,that allows the minority to run roughshod over democracy.” We’re not a “democracy,” we’re a constitutional republic, under the rule of law. It doesn’t matter if 51% of our current idiocracy thinks it’s okay to murder 2-week old children and there’s no such thing is male and female. Such things may happen when you have a government/corporate fascist partnership that censors dissenting views, appoints Ministry of Truth czars and programs kids from pre-K to college. But lies and propaganda are still lies and propaganda. That’s why… Read more »

Mike Freeman
Mike Freeman
5 days ago
Reply to  Cherrera

Cherrera, if someone argues that something is a bad idea, it’s no answer to say, “But it’s in the Constitution,” because that tells us nothing about whether something is a good idea or a bad idea. The Constitution has a lot of good stuff in it, but it also has a lot of junk, and this is not the country it was in 1789. I suspect you may even agree with me that not everything in the Constitution is a good idea; we just disagree about which parts. Nobody is arguing for pure democracy (which I don’t think would even… Read more »

Cherrera
Cherrera
5 days ago
Reply to  Mike Freeman

The Constitution is MUCH better than any document the current, morbidly evil administration…or you…could come up with. And you have no alternatives, other than “pure democracy” which you don’t really support either. Again, you took an oath to support and defend the Constitution. So it’s not even debatable that you’re a liar and a traitor. I’d say you should stop responding at this point as you’re just adding extra rope for your figurative noose with every comment.

Dave
Dave
6 days ago
Reply to  Mike Freeman

“Him having win by 7 million popular votes is a far tougher thing to attack than him having won by 150,000 votes in three close states.”

Mike, John Walker sold US secrets for years before he was investigated and tried. How many sailors and others worked with him and thought something was crooked but didn’t take action. 18 years of selling classified information.

It’s easy to fool folks who aren’t looking or who trust the system to be honest. Real easy.

Ken
Ken
6 days ago
Reply to  Justin Parris

I agree with a lot of what you’re saying. If you don’t think the election was stolen, then we are mostly on the same page. And I agree that the left’s response to the fraud claims have consistently been cringe and have made things worse. As far as the traceability of fraud perpetrated via harvesting, some post-election canvassing (such as was done in AZ) could very well turn up evidence of that, especially if it was egregious enough to affect the outcome of a major election. But you make a good point. I would modify my argument to say that… Read more »

Dave
Dave
6 days ago
Reply to  Ken

Ken, officials changing election rules instead of state legislators voting and making those changes law is in the vernacular — crooked as the back leg of an old yeller dog.

It is fraud that does not need an audit.

Ken B
Ken B
6 days ago

A couple of observation from across the Pond. With your permission of course! America is not a fledgling democracy like some ex-Soviet republic where the idea of being able to vote a government out of office goes against everything they have ever experienced. Surely there must be measures in place to ensure as much as possible that fraud cannot afffect the result of an election? America knows how to do elections. Is there no-one who couldn’t objectively investigate what went on in the 2020 election to ascertain how much, if any, significant fraud there was? The police – who ought… Read more »

Rabid Bunny
Rabid Bunny
5 days ago

We all agree that election fraud is wrong, regardless which side does it. But even when people try to usurp democracy, ultimately God will judge them all. There will never be a world free of fraud, and though we should try to stop it, we should still recognize that our hope is not in America but in God, and that only he will bring about true peace when Christ returns.