Full Breakdown: 2000 Mules Documentary by Dinesh D’Souza

In this week's episode we do a full breakdown of the controversial 2000 Mules Documentary by Dinesh D'Souza. We cut through the fluff, focusing only on the cold. hard. facts. Who True the Vote is, What data do they claim to have found that (according to them) irrefutably proves that the election was stolen from Donald Trump. We discuss how they pulled off the biggest election heist in history (allegedly), who was involved, who funded them, and even the things that may be said to refute this evidence. Do not miss this episode regardless of where you land on the political spectrum as it may wake you up to the true inner workings of our election system.

For all the articles, videos, and documents discussed on this week's podcast join our substack! 

Podcast Companion Substack: https://redpillrevolution.substack.com ----more----

Please consider leaving a donation for all of the hard work that goes into this ad-free podcast. I love doing what I do and can only continue through your generosity and support! 

Donate https://givesendgo.com/redpillrevolution 
----more----

 

Full Transcription:

 

welcome to red hill revolution. My name is Austin Adams. Red pill revolution started out with me realizing every thing that I knew, everything that I believed, everything I interpret about my life is through the lens of the information I was spoonfed as a child, religion, politics, history, conspiracies, Hollywood medicine, money, food, all of it, everything we know was tactfully written to influence your decisions and your view on reality by those in power.

Now I'm on a mission, a mission to retrain and reeducate myself to find the true reality of what is behind that curtain. And I'm taking your ass with me. Welcome to the revolution.

Hello and welcome to red pill revolution. My name is Austin Adams, and this is episode number 27 of the red pill revolution podcast. And thank you so much for joining me. It's going to be a very interesting discussion today. This is going to be a little bit different than what we normally do. A lot of times we'll pull up current events.

We'll talk about things that are going on. We'll have a specific topic, but we'll generally have multiple things that we're discussing, but I think this is a pressing enough topic to where we should give it its full due its full attention. And that's what I'm going to do here for you today. And so without further ado, this episode is going to be all about the 2000 mules documentary that was just released by the Nash.

Now, if you don't know who Dinesh D'Souza is, he's a author podcaster, a overall conservative personality. He was actually, which we'll find out a little bit more about later, he was pardoned by Trump due to some type of like campaign  finance issues or something. I don't know, maybe something we should look a little bit more into, but he released a documentary recently and it's actually a decent cost for the documentary.

It costs about $30 to purchase it $20 to rent it for 72 hours, which I thought was a little steep for a lot of people. So, I did want to do a full, deep dive. I've pulled some, you know what I think to be the most important little short clips, I don't want to take away from the fact and I don't want to emphasize in, or I don't want to diminish the fact that you should buy this documentary.

You should watch the entire thing beginning to end. All I'm going to give you today is about eight full well not full minutes, but eight short clips. Well, eight minutes of clips that are cut and pieced up into about one to two minute segments of, of really topics, generators that I think we should discuss together.

And I hope you enjoy the conversation. So if you haven't heard what, this is, what this documentary is about, and you haven't heard a little bit more about in the 2020 election, there's a little bit of controversy surrounding it. Some people seem to think that the 2020 election had a little bit of shadow surrounding it, including our former president Donald Trump.

So this documentary sheds light on some of the facts. Some of the reasons that people may question the integrity of our election system, If you're, you know, I know that generally you're not every single person that listens to this is going to be on the very right side of things. And I, and I don't think that this conversation should be only for people who are pro-Trump or hyper conservative or whatever it is that you want to call it, which I don't generally wouldn't generally label myself hyper conservative.

I have social aspects of my political beliefs that lean more centrist and more libertarian than in some fiscal side of things. So I am not a die hard, , evangelical, conservative, or even a die hard,  right wing individual. I have belief systems that fall somewhere in the middle of both. So I did just kind of want to talk about that and let you know that this is coming from a little bit more of a, a little bit more of a centrist libertarian, somewhat conservative opinion.

But I do have some social issues that I fall more towards the left side of things. So, so this, this is not a complete, , diehard.  Pro , episode. So if you're not that individual stick around, cause I think it's important to still discuss these things, right. Because why should you care? Right. If, if you don't feel like the election was stolen,  why should you care?

Well, if, if a certain section of our country does believe that it really diminishes the entire point of our democracy, right? If, if if a large portion of our country believe that our democracy is built on a house of cards in, in, in lies and deception and deceit and cheating, that really, really is the systemic issue that.

Affect our country for a very, very long time to come. So I do think it's very important to have this discussion. I do think that it's very important to look at these facts. And I do think that it's an important conversation to have, because there are some very, very compelling arguments within this documentary.

And even if you're not going to shell out the $30 yourself, I think it's important for you to understand the arguments. Right. And even if you don't believe it, it's, it's important to still get the idea that this conversation's being had by a good portion of our country right now. Okay. So there's kind of the framework for you.

All right now it's a dive a little bit more into what the actual beliefs are and what the facts are and what, what this conversation is surrounding. These 2000 mules in this documentary is the idea that one party, the left specifically was a, and they go into more detail about who was a part of it and why they did it and how they did it.

We even look into, and I'll kind of take you through some of the topics from top to bottom. So some of the things that we're going to go over today is who are the people that came up with this data? How did they get that data? And how were they tracking and coming up with these, these opinions, or even more importantly, these facts.

Right. So that's the first thing we're going to talk about. The second thing we're going to talk about is the math involved, right? So what, how do we know that these 2000 mules actually affected the total outcome of the election? And then the next thing we're going to talk about how they did it. We're going to look at a interview with somebody who is actually a part of this cheating scheme, allegedly.

And then we're also going to see who they did it to who funded it, what they're going to say about this documentary. And we'll look at that side of things of like, you know, maybe, you know, to kind of the conversation around who did that sh dissociate is, and whether he's a trustworthy source here, although he's not generally the one who's coming up with the data for this.

But also, and then we'll look at kind of the outro from the episode itself.

All right. So there's the episode. That's what we're going to discuss, that the conversation that we're going to have today, so stick around for that. Now, if you're new to this podcast, I do have a newer platform that is kind of growing and kind of interesting that it's right along the lines of this documentary coming out.

But on the backs of Twitter, getting On or bought by Elon Musk, which we talked about last episode, if you haven't listened to that as a great one, go back and listen to that. But I have built a somewhat decent audience over on truth, social. True social is Trump's Twitter replicate, replicate, or duplicate.

It's, it's a lot like Twitter, which I didn't think I would primarily like the short form text content, but I found a good groove in what I'm doing and the content I'm putting out and the videos that I'm able to put out on there. So I am excited about having this new audience, if you are on their audience and you are listening to this as a result.

Thank you so much. I really appreciate you following along. I'm so glad that I'm starting to build an audience outside. If you don't know if you're only from true. I had a very large audience, about 50,000 people that came and were watching my videos from Instagram until I got shadow banned into oblivion for posting a Senate hearing about the bio labs.

And so that platform is, is still in a, kind of a holding pattern while I wait for that shadow band to kind of drop I'm hoping it does it in the next 10 to 15 days or so. And then I'll be putting out a ton more content there. You may also be listening to tick-tock. I put a ton of videos out on Tik TOK.

Anyways, besides the point, if you do have a true social, go ahead and follow me at red pill, revolt. Same with Tik TOK, same with Instagram. So you get that whole ecosystem of the stuff that I'm putting. Anyways. Thank you. And then the last thing would be go ahead and subscribe, hit that subscribe button right now.

If you're listening to this on apple podcast, Spotify, Instagram, well, probably not Instagram, YouTube, whatever. This is, go ahead and hit that subscribe button, leave a five star review. It would mean the world. To me. There's very few things that you could do today, where you could really affect somebody's life positively.

And that is one of them. It's really super easy. It's right there on your phone. All you have to do is tap that button that says subscribe. And if you're really feeling frisky, leave a five-star review, write something nice. Talk about a topic that you enjoyed, whatever it is. Thank you so much for considering doing that.

All right. Without further ado, let's go ahead and jump into it. The first topic that we're going to discuss surrounding this documentary today is going to be the who, who is the actual organization that they got this data from. Okay. So the first, the first video they're going to watch is going to be who the hell are these people?

So Dinesh D'Souza was working alongside a nonprofit called called true the vote. So let's watch their little intro from this documentary right here and get a little bit more of a background, and then we'll discuss it right here after. So here we go. Sure. Background that prepares you for this kind of work I've been in and around election intelligence and integrity for about 40 years.

We've done investigations, literally all over the world. It's a combination of data acquisition data analysis occasionally some in-depth data mining, our ability to draw meaningful conclusions, that link the who to the wind, to the, where is significant in the space. Catherine, you started the group called true the vote in the year, 2010.

What was your mission or objective? We just didn't have enough volunteers working at the polls in our local elections. So we began by training people to work in the polls. And then as we got further into it, we recognize, wow. Some of the problems you see at the polls can be attributed to problems in the voter rolls.

Well, what can we do about the voter rolls? And so it turned into something much bigger than we had anticipated. True. The vote has the largest story. Of election intelligence for the 2020 elections in the world. No one has more data than we do. So I started true the vote to ensure that every American voter has an opportunity to participate in elections.

I think I became familiar with your work when you gave congressional testimony. Now that was in the year 2014, the hypothesis was, if you were going to cheat, how might one go about this? That would be provable trackable. Do you said there might be some, let's just call them bad actors who are delivering ballots systematically and illicitly to these mail and drop boxes.

And there might be a way to track them and to bust them. We didn't know. We decided we're going to let the data, tell the tale. And we collected together a team of highly skilled contractors and put together a plan to see where the data would take us. What Greg is geo tracking. So the idea is to collect the signals that are emitted from your phone.

Your cell phone is delivering information to apps that are collecting that ping. So there are four key coordinates, the lat-long, the elevation and the time. And with that data, we can then build a pattern of life around. So there we have it. That's exactly who true the vote. Is there an organization that basically collects data surrounding voter fraud.

Okay. And they've been doing this, this isn't their first rodeo. Okay. That's, that's a, that's an important distinction. And then an important thing to understand that this is not the first time that they've done this, this, they were not designed as an organization just to go after this election specifically, they've actually had some success in the past, including an indictment in 2020.

And to show even further that they're not a partisan organization. Excuse me. They're not a partisan organization. They're not Republicans, they're not Democrats that the entire point of this is to take an approach that is non bias to making sure that there's fair elections. Okay. So in 2020, they actually were a part of the indictment and the overturning of a Republican who was caught cheating in an election, caught Harvey harvesting ballots and that person's position and role of winning that election was overturned.

And he was, is now not a sitting politician than the role that he had won that election on from cheating. So they're not a bunch of Republicans who created this organization specifically to go after this election. I think that's an important distinction, right? You have to know that it's not bias. That data is not starting from a point of bias.

That's a great way to realize that they actually have gone after successfully overturning election results for Republicans. We were caught doing this or a specific Republican. Okay. So now, now that we've kind of set that framework. That is who true. The vote is that is who Dinesh D'Souza teamed up with to come up with the data for this.

And that is who is coming up with this election fraud answer as a result of these 2000 and mules. So if you listened to close enough there, what you have heard is the way that they went about this data mining, right? The way that they are looking at this election and the way that they are believing that this election was fraudulent is based on cell phone data.

Geotracking okay. Now, if you don't know what that is, cause that's a long word and cell phones have only been around for 20 years in geo tracking specifically has only been around for a short amount of time. The, the data mining. And geotracking basically what that is is, is your phone everywhere you go.

If you don't know this you're ignorant or, or maybe you just climbed out of a whole. Your phone's always tracking you right through apps, through your location services, whatever that is, but primarily through 300,000 apps that all work together and sell your data to people like the CIA law enforcement officials.

There's, there's a, basically a big gathering of all this data in one specific place. Okay. So that's how they did it. They tracked these 2000 individuals in specific states, swing states, specifically in specific counties. The counties that mattered in those swing states because the amount of time it would have taken them to do the entire country would have been ridiculous, but they wanted to look at where the concentrated attention should have been, right.

That the concentrated focus by these parties to try to steal this election would have been in these swing states in these counties at this time at these specific ballot boxes. Now we have that framework, right? So basically what they were doing is they were tracking these 2000 individuals and finding and mapping out people who were going between a ballot box to ballot box, to ballot box, to ballot box, too, to see how many people would have been involved in the fraud in these specific counties.

And so they found 2000 people that were dropping off ballots and going from ballot box to ballot box to ballot box 25, 27, 50 in a row, in some cases. And often it was at two and three o'clock in the morning that they were doing this stuff. Okay. And what they would do is they would take basically they would go and we'll find out a little bit later with how they did it.

But what they would do is they would essentially. Track this geo data find finds these patterns of people who are going from ballot box to ballot box to ballot box, and then they would kind of try to, to follow those people. And what they found was even more interesting. The people that came through that most important question of all was the magnitude of trafficking.

Yeah. Okay, let's wait on that. That's going to be the mule math conversation, which is important to see, and that's going to be the next topic that we listened to and follow is, is, did this actually affect the outcome, right? Because great. There could have been mules. There's always mules, right? This always happens.

As we saw in that 20, 20 election, this might have had an effect. Right. But did it affect the outcome of the election specifically? So that's that video, but what I was just discussing is the fact that they followed these patterns and what they found in these patterns specifically is the same cell phone IDs that they were tracking from ballot box to ballot box were actually in teeth, a riots prior to this.

So I think that brings up an interesting conversation is, is, were these people recruited specifically because they were a part of Antifa or are these implanted people into Antifa who are designed to cause a stir are designed to get paid to do things like this election fraud, whatever it is. It's an interesting conversation that they found that out that not only were these people essentially being mules for these ballots and in trying to, or attempting to steal this election, but they're also a part of Antifa members who were violently rioting prior to this.

Okay. So I think that's an important note is that the people that they were geotracking like all of the ideas that they found in these cell phones, also had some sort of correlation, not all of them, but a portion of them had some correlation with these Antifa riots as well. So I think it's an interesting conversation.

Are they just a part of Antifa? And did they recruit people through NTFS specifically? Because. They know that those people are somewhat extremists and maybe more liable to keep their mouth shut, or maybe they had some dirt on them and said, we're going to arrest you. Or we're going to give this data over.

If you do not do these things on our behalf, I don't know. But it's an interesting thing that they found out there that there is that correlation. So let's go ahead and watch this mule math conversation and see what, you know, w what is the actual effect of this, right? What is the math cause? 2000 people that doesn't seem like a lot right in election is 81 million people voted for, for Joe BARDA.

And, that 2000 people does that seem like a lot. But when you look at the math, you see how many ballots they were harvesting and how many boxes that they went to in these specific states, it starts to add up. And so here is the mule math conversation, and let's see if this actually affected. The most important question of all was the magnitude of vote trafficking.

And these key swing states enough to tip the balance in the 2020 presidential election. Let's first narrow in on just our 2000 mules, their average number of Dropbox visits, 38. There were average number of illegal ballots deposited per visit five that's 380,000 illegal votes, but was this sufficient to put Biden in the white house?

To answer that question, we must look at each key state. In Michigan, 500 meals, averaging 50 Dropbox visits and five illegal ballots per drop. That's 125,000 illegally trafficked votes, not quite the 154,000 vote difference between Trump and Biden. So Michigan with its 16 electoral votes stays in the Biden column in Wisconsin.

100 mules averaging 28 Dropbox visits and five illegal ballot. Now real quick. I do like how they did that. I do like how they are pointing out the fact that, okay, this did not affect every state as at least if we're only taking into consideration these small counties and these small areas that we tracked, right?

They're not just saying here's every single person had a tremendous effect on this election. No, it's not every single time they're pointing out the fact that like, they just showed a Michigan. If we only go by the mules from the data that we're pulling up here, it did not affect Michigan. Right. It did not overturn the electoral votes for that swing state specifically.

So they're taken losses, they're taken Ellis first and they led with that. Right. This, in this specific state, in this specific county, this did not affect the electoral votes. Okay. And I think when we're talking about the bias conversation, that's important to note, right? Because in, in a situation you, you, we kind of expect it to a, and something like this, that's.

Large accusation that it would in every state, in every situation in every county and in every electoral vote, that they'd overturned. Right. But it wasn't the case in the way that they just broke this down. So I liked that they did that. Let's continue for a drop that's 14,000 illegally traffic votes, 6,000 votes short to give Trump the wind.

So using only our mules Wisconsin's 10 electoral votes stays in the Biden camp, but now we come to Georgia, 250 meals averaging 24 Dropbox visits and five illegal ballots per drop that's 30,000 illegally trafficked votes, far more than the 12,000 vote difference between Trump and Biden. Soar Georgia with 16 electoral votes moves over into the Trump.

In Arizona, the numbers are roughly the same 200 meals averaging 20 Dropbox visits and five illegal ballots per drop. That's 20,000 illegal votes. Again, these illegal votes are substantially more than the 10,000 vote margin that gave the states 11 electoral votes. The Biden in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania alone, 1,100 meals averaging 50 Dropbox visits and five ballots per visit that's 275,000 illegal votes.

Again, comfortably exceeding the 80,000 vote margin between Trump and Biden. So Pennsylvania's 20 electoral votes goes for Trump. Shockingly, even this narrow way of looking at just our 2000 mules in these swing states gives Trump the wind with 279 electoral votes. The Biden's 259. But no one thinks that our 2000 mules were the only mules trafficking, illegal votes to widen the search, Greg and his team lowered the criterion from 10 or more to five or more.

Dropboxes. So while he's explaining here is the fact that they were very conservative, according to him surrounding how they went about, is this a stolen election? Right? So they only looked at specific counties. And in those specific counties, did these geo location T ID tags show these individuals going from more than 10 or more Dropboxes in a single trip.

Okay. So that was their initial criteria. And under the math that we just looked at, even that even the small margin that they just gave themselves there of 10 or more boxes, a single drop still gave him the election with 200. And I think it was 2 79 electoral votes. Okay. So even that small margin gave him the win, even 10 boxes or more.

So what they're saying now is let's go back and let's be less conservative. Let's look at who went from, you know, because why in the hell would anybody be going. Ballot box to ballot box to ballot box to ballot box and let alone at three in the morning. Right. Which is what we're going to see, you know, in a lot of cases here.

And in one thing I didn't mention is this is also where the, what they're doing is they've also ID. The same individuals with these geolocation tags, all of these ballot boxes, almost all of them had video evidence, like video systems, right there showing that these people were doing this right. So they would follow the geo tags.

They would follow that individual to the Dropbox. They would see them and then pull up the video footage, which they got directly from the state. From a freedom of information act, they would actually get the video evidence and then they would match that with the geotags that there were. So it's not like they were just looking at these blips on a map.

They were taking those blips, those geotags, watching these people go from ballot box to ballot box, and then they were polling the video feeds and seeing them literally stuffing stuffing ballots into the box to the point where some idiot had them dropping on the ground. In other cases, people were taking pictures of these people doing it because it looks so ridiculous.

There's there was a lot of evidence here, but it was all substantiated with video. It was all substantiated with these ID tags from these geo locations on their cell phones. And then as far as this goes with the math that we're looking at now, they kind of take it back, right? They're like, okay, let's stop being so conservative because even if we are conservative, we can go with 10 ballots or more.

And only these specific counties, which are swing counties in swing states. Let's take it back. Let's take it to five Dropbox's. Okay. Not 10, five. And again, why the hell would you go to Dropbox, to Dropbox, to Dropbox, to Dropbox, to Dropbox, right? It's not like they were all stuffed to the brim and it's not like the people that we're following here were a part of the election committee designed to pick these ballots up.

No, the videos that they pulled show in every case, they were dropping multiple ballots off into into these ballot boxes. And that's how they got that generic number of like five. Right? In a lot of cases, you said that, you know, if you take a conservative number that they were only putting five and at the time of each Dropbox and there was 2000 in these specific counties, that's where we got this data from.

Okay. So let's look at it, what it is when they're a little bit less conservative when they look at five Dropboxes instead of 10. the huge upsurge in the number of meals from 2000 to 54,054,000 mules next, they used a very conservative estimate of just three ballots for Dropbox visit. Now, when we multiply this increased number of mules times to five Dropbox visits per mule times just three illegal votes per drop.

We find election fraud on an astonishing scale in Wisconsin, 83,565. Illegal votes were trafficked in Georgia, 92,670 in Pennsylvania, 209,505 and Michigan 226,590. And in Arizona. 207,435. Using this calculus. Trump would have won all the key states and the final electoral vote. 3 0 5 to 2 33.

Now that is scary. That's terrifying. Every single one, every single one of these swing states. Trump won according to their data. Right? And that's that 2000 jumping to 54,000 is a crazy number. 54,000 people participated in this that's crazy. 54,000 people are out there right now who committed a felony and overturned the election.

How many of those have to come out and speak? If the proper people get in front of them? How many of them are willing to give up the organization that did this? How many paper trails and financial trails are behind these 54,000 people when they brought it back down to five Dropbox's 2000 is the name of the, the is the name of the documentary only because that's all it took.

And he's still one according to this data. But if you draw it back and you become less conservative, take that from five or 10 Dropboxes to five Dropboxes the number increases substantially. And in every single case, according to this data, Trump would have won. And that's terrifying. So there's potentially 54,000 people out there right now who participated in this alleged, alleged election fraud.

That, that have information about what happened here. That know what the outcome was going to be, that, that participated in this felonious act. Felonious is kind of a silly word. I think there should probably be a better word for that, but felonious sounds like BOLO in the ass felonious at 54,000 people.

That's a lot of loose ends. That is a lot of loose ends. And, and here's my point with all of this, right. I, I think it's important to note that if we actually went after these people, if we took this evidence and if the, the machine of what our country's capabilities are when it comes to what we can actually accomplish with the FBI, with the CIA, with the police, with the sheriffs, with w all of these organizations that we have set up, if we went at this full force and we have forced these people, we shoved this data down their throat.

We sent every Sheriff's office, every CIA office, every FBI agent, a copy of this. For free, what would be the outcome of that? Right. And so I think there's definitely some ways that this can cause a triggering effectors, 54,000 loose ends out there right now that participated in this. And let's say 1% of those 54,000 people were able to speak up and were willing to give up the organization to avoid going to jail and having a felony on their record.

That's 540 people that you would have that would, would have to testify that would have to say that they participated in this. And that's one fourth of the overall that it took with this 2000 to overturn the outcome of this. It's it's terrifying. Right? And then as I spoke about originally, you know, you have to, you eat whatever side you're on, you have to care about this.

You, you, you cannot close your eyes to the fact that this election, the potential of this election being stolen is there, right? Th th th th the outcome of this may have not been completely legitimate, unless everything that they're saying is a lie and that they need to show this. I think they need to release this data.

I think that that's something that I put out is that great job to nationals the data's there. You've shown that there a legitimate case for these mules having done this now release the data because there's millions of people in a position who are frustrated with the way that our election system is being run right now, who will see this and be so ready to be outspoken and a lot more people who are a lot more intelligent than me could use this data and, and, and put together a.

A N breakable argument, right? And infallible arguments surrounding this, this election fraud. So we need to, we need the data we need. We need the license plates. We need the the corners of the city. We need the ballot boxes. We need all of that. We need to know who did this. We need the, every single person that was involved in that, that 54,000 that you tracked, let's put together a spreadsheet of what city, what state, what the timeframe was that timestamp of them dropping it off was what their license plate was.

Cause I know you can see or what type of car they drive. Right? All of that is important. Okay. So now the next thing we're going to look at is the fact that Trump actually called this a little bit ahead of time. Right? If you, if you recall, the there was a big controversy surrounding all of the ballots that were being sent out to everybody as a result of COVID right?

Cause COVID was there big sham surrounding this COVID was the reason that they had the capability to even accomplish this, right? Because the only way that they were able to get that many ballots to harvest, to drop in these drop boxes, allegedly was because under the guise that COVID would, shouldn't make it so that everybody should receive a ballot.

Right. That, that was the reasoning. So here is Trump talking about this months before this even happened. And I believe it's Charlie Kirk that brings this up. Up to his credit tweeted out in July, mail-in ballots are a disaster and he was attacked so hard by camp. And Doocy in so many, but that was, he didn't have this information.

Obviously instinct ended up being right. This is the tip of the iceberg.

So that was a lot shorter than I thought. I thought they'd actually show where Trump talked about this. Yeah, Trump was very vehemently against the ballots being sent out. He said, it's going to be the biggest, I can't do a good Trump impression. The biggest fraud. That's terrible. Sorry. But, but he came out and said that, that this was going to happen, right.

That the only reason they were pushing for all these ballots to be pushed out there, like literally everywhere was mailing ballots to almost everybody. And the reason that they pushed so hard to do that was because they knew that this type of organization could accomplish this. Right. So let's watch that next.

I think that's important is how they did it. Okay. We'll watch that first. We'll listen to that portion. And then we will discuss it and then we'll look at the confession of the mule who actually brought it up themselves. All right, here it is. Okay. Everything from filling out absentee ballot request forms for voters, but having the ballot sent to them, to actually going to the voters and obtaining the ballots from them to stealing them out of mailboxes, to actually using high quality photocopying machines, to make their own balance.

Look, these cases, unfortunately go on all the time. Trump to his credit tweeted out in July mail-in ballots are a disaster and he was attacked so hard by Kemp. And Doocy in so many. Well, he didn't have this information, obviously this is the tip of the iceberg.

All right. So I thought I'd show you that twice because you know, it was such a quick clip. So what they said is there's, there's tons of ways to accomplish this, right? Anything from harvesting these ballots from people, from mailboxes of individuals who no longer live in that state to pushing people who are in senior homes, who are, who are mentally incapable of making these decisions themselves, to paying people in low-income areas to harvest their ballots and to be able to fill them out on their behalf and then go drop them off.

So if there's $54,000 there 200,000, I think he said 200,000 total ballots. That were accomplished through this, then there's gotta be a trail. There has to be people who know this, like if there's 200,000 ballots that were a potential, there's 200,000 people out there that, that show this happened. Right.

So now it's it's how do we prove that? How do we, how do we prove that these individuals allowed this to happen? There's a huge paper trail. I mean, that's literally like, what is that? There's 300 million people in the United States. That's like 1% of the total population and was involved in this fraud in some way, shape or form.

So not, not the fact that they were actually a part of it or did it themselves, but the fact that their ballots were a part of that. So even, even if a lot of times might be against them even knowing. But I think that's important to know. All right. So here is the mule who actually confesses that this happened, right.

Actually talks about the fact that they were a part of this scheme, what they were told to do, who told them to do it and why they did it. So here is that clip right now. So, what, what was your, what was your job like? What were you doing? A receptionist. So at some point you were asked or, or sort of instructed, I guess, to start receiving people's balance.

I was just instructed to go ahead and receive balance from various Females mostly. And and on Friday they would come and pick up a payment. I assumed it was payments for what they were doing. So they would, during the week they would bring them in at various times. And then you would pay them. I call on a Friday.

Is that kind of how it went? Yes. And then I would get a call to find out how many ballots were brought in. And if they were already prefilled out first and she would come to the office, look at them. And then before she left, she would either take them herself. But other times she would ask me if I could drop them off at the library.

So what was the instruction? Just, oh, just to drop them off in the drop, the drop box, the early ballots. Can you give me an idea of how many you personally put into box hundreds could open? Yes. And was there a reason they wanted you, she wanted you to go to that Dropbox as opposed to maybe a city hall or especially on Congress?

There's no commerce there and she wouldn't want me to take it in the evening when it was dark. Also, can you think this is widespread in Yuma county or elsewhere? I would say that. So do you think that people, you know, in San Luis, they believe that their vote matters? I don't think they know the meaning of one 40.

Yes. Do you personally think that the elections in San Luis or free and fair? No. Terrifics, they've been fixed there already. No. Seriously. Who is gonna win the next election before it even happens?

No. I think that last statement was an interesting one because I've heard this before now, the source of who I heard this from was a very high level, special forces individual. And I know that sounds like cheesy and silly. But it was, it was somebody who's done like security detail for, for the president.

It is somebody that I knew through a business that I was in if like four or five years ago. And he spoke up about this and said something about how they, their elections are already known ahead of time. These corporations that are involved. And then when you specifically talk about why she was sent to those ballot boxes was because there was not cameras.

Right? And that's when we're going to get into who did this, like who funded this? Where did the money come from? Right. And so the money, what we're going to find out, came from corporations who were funding these ballot boxes that were giving the avenue, giving the, the, the capability for people to be able to do this in the first place.

Because now you don't have to walk into city hall and hand it to the nice lady behind the counter. You can go do this in the middle of the night without any cameras present. And in the middle of the night, this election can be stolen. Right. As we saw, like, if you recall back, like you think about the election, I remember like going to bed dis pretty darn confident that Trump was going to be our president.

And then there was like this crazy swing and I'm in the Midwestern area. And there was an area specifically in Detroit where they boarded up the walls, like boarded up the glass windows of the place, where they were counting the ballots because they didn't want people to look inside. And then they pulled video footage of the of this van that pulled up and have boxes of ballots, boxes of ballots.

And so there is a lot of shady things going on and that was at specifically like pretty sure where they were counting them, even, not just these shady little ballot boxes. But the shady little ballot boxes have a lot to do with that. And that's what we're gonna get into the conversation of who actually funded that.

But I think it's important to kind of take a step back and talk a little bit more about true the vote. Okay. So true. The vote Catherine is the woman that was speaking about true the vote in, in the I don't recall the man's name, but Catherine was a woman. She was recently on Fox from true the vote to discuss, I don't know exactly what she was discussing, but Fox news and, and may even have been Tucker Carlson.

Then she went on to, to discuss this. I'm not discussing this documentary, but discussing other election related matters. But she was told specifically by Fox news. And this came from Dinesh D'Souza that the director of this documentary specifically, that she was told not to discuss 2000 mules, she was told not to mention this documentary.

She was told not to mention the data that they pulled that proved this all and not to talk about this documentary specifically, which is terrifying, right? How many, there's literally very, very few mainstream mainstream medias, that you can discuss that are not extremely liberal Fox news, obviously being the biggest one.

And so if Fox news is stifling, this conversation, why, if their, if their team's player Trump who's a Republican was the, was the victim of this. Why would they not want people to know about this documentary that just tells you how powerful it is? And that tells you where Fox news loyalty law. Right. If they're not even allowing this woman to discuss a documentary where only facts are given, right.

There's very little color commentary. The only color commentary that really comes from this comes from a little panel of, of conservative talking heads, like, who was in Dennis Prager from Prager U Charlie Kirk from the Charlie Kirk show and turning point. And then a couple other individuals that I'm not as familiar.

But they had this little panel of people who you'll see in a little bit, I think where they were discussing some of these things and, and giving their opinions on them. None of the rest of this was really opinion based. It was all fact based. So the fact that Fox news did not even want this woman mentioning the name, mentioning the name of this documentary on live television is terrifying, is censorship.

Right? So, so it just tells you a lot about what you should be looking into and where you're getting your news from. Right. And that's kind of a hard thing to like, where should you be getting your news? There's a few sources that I kind of pay attention to. One of them is a, is a great Instagram account called real news.

No bullshit. So if you don't follow them, you should, they have some great content. It's very, very non-biased. They, they barely ever give any opinions. And when they do, they give, they have somebody who is on the conservative side of things. Somebody who's on a more liberal left side of things and they both give opinion.

So they say, Hey, this person thinks this, this person thinks this, but here's the facts that we can display form your own opinion.

And so that's important, right? Journalism used to always be that journalism was never really this opinion based manipulation of language to try and push their ideas and opinions onto you. News was always like, here's what happened? You form your own decision about it, right? You come up with the ideas.

We are not here to give you the idea of truth, right. And just like, you know, it kind of interesting too, with the formation of the, the ministry of, of truth over with disinformation governance board. With Joe Biden. I'm not sure where that's at right now. I'm going to have to do some diving into that.

And I'm going to do an episode a little bit later on this stuff where we're, you know, you have the Roe V Wade stuff that just came out and all the justices who are having these huge these huge protests in front of their houses and all of this stuff. So I, I will do it an episode coming up soon, hopefully in the next few days, it does talk on those points in some current events, but this is an important enough conversation I wanted to give it.

Okay. So if you're enjoying this conversation right now, go ahead and hit that subscribe button. Go ahead and leave a five star review. If you didn't already do it, I forgive you. I will forgive you this one time hit that subscribe button hit the five star reviews. If you can write something nice about what, what you like about this podcast so far what you think about it, what you think about me, whatever it is, think of something to write in there.

It helps push our, my content in front of more people and I would appreciate it so, so much. All right, now, the next thing you can do is go head over to red pill revolution that sub stack.com and sign up for our sub stack, where we have in the past been doing podcast companions. It takes two seconds to sign up.

I'm finding a better workflow for these things. I know I've said that a couple of times, but I'm really looking forward to bringing it all together. This is only my 27th episode, 27th week, few months into this podcasting thing, but I've built it fairly quickly and fairly. I had a lot of success. So I'm, I'm still trying to work through all the moving parts of this.

So, bear with me on a couple of these things. Now, the other thing that you can do is go ahead and follow us on YouTube. I'm going to revamp the rumble page now, so I can actually post this full episode on there. Cause I will not be able to post this on YouTube because the one thing that will really get you polled and banned forever is talking about any sort of election fraud, which absolutely does not exist.

So, make sure you follow on all channels, including the. Eventually we'll get unshadowed band. You got to type in the full name at red pill, revolt the at symbol red pill, revolt. Same thing for truth, social, same thing for Twitter just has two T's at the back of it. I haven't posted on there yet, but you can follow there.

Eventually. I may That's what I got for you. So let's go ahead and look at a little bit more about this, who they did it to. Okay. And that is a former Supreme court justice in Wisconsin named Gabriel man has done it for a preliminary report. He talks about the fact that there are approximately 90,000 people in Wisconsin who are in resident care facilities or nursing homes.

Sure. She's basically not capable any longer. Even remaining awake for more than a few minutes. And so were you surprised that you voted in February, 2021? Absolutely. But I was surprised to hear that she voted in the last president. Now, if you're listening to this and not watching, there's a woman, who's in a hospital facility, in a bed who is literally incapacitated with air running into her nose with her mouth and jaw just dropped open, looking like she's on her death bed.

And that's who they're talking about, who who's completely incapacitated, could not sign the ballot at all. And this person voted in, in to their own families surprise. Right. So just to give you that visual. Much to my surprise. She had voted for the last off and on for the last 10 years, I guess in my mind, I thought if you put your parent into a facility because they were incapacitated, they would not even be offered.

The volt, they make you, they make you vote here and, and so how do they make you vote? I didn't want to vote. And they told me I had, that is a real problem. Clearly it was a problem in Wisconsin, 2020, but unfortunately that's a perennial problem in other states, too. What happens is you have staff in those Ersing and what he's talking about with Wisconsin in 2020, he's specifically talking about that candidate that had the election overturned as a result of this data coming out.

So just to give you some context, Oh, sometimes they are activists politically. They get these individuals registered to vote, or it's already registered to vote. They will request absentee ballots in their names, sometimes forging their signatures and then filling out the ballots for them just prior to the 20, 20 election, the state of Texas and died at a social worker in a home for young people who were basically mentally incompetent.

She had sent in over a hundred voter registrations for these individuals who were not legally competent to vote. What about homeless shelters? You need to look. If a homeless individual is mentally capable, they ought to be able to vote 40th. The only place they can list as registered address the homeless shelter.

That's fine. But the problem there is that it's very easy. I think for them to be intimidated and coerced in Chicago, the largest election fraud case, the U S justice department ever prosecutor. They were paying homeless individuals to cast ballots the way they wanted them to cast ballot, which is even worse, right?

Like they are literally taking advantage. They are taking advantage of the elderly of the homeless of the mentally incapable to fraudulently win electi