Dinesh D’Souza, Creator of ‘2000 Mules,’ Must Defend Film’s Election Denial Claims in Court

[Lastamender]

If chargedand convicted. Surely you understand if the declarations of Trumpanzees with axes to grind don't quite cut it.

The truth does not cut it anymore. If you think a post truth society will last and freedom will endure you are as stupid as you sound. We are on a path to total control and the end of individualism.

 

[Lastamender]

No, I have no use for these cult fantasies, sorry. Peddle them to someone dumber.

There is no one dumber than you.

 

[Lastamender]

You're nuts, FruitLoops. No one ever asked for names. You're so desperate after being a fool for years, that you're now making up silly excuses that don't exist. All they had to produce was proof of their claims and they couldn't.

The GBI has the power to still get the names. Why haven't they?

 

[Lastamender]

You have no proof of that either. Show Fulton County had near 100% turnout. Show Maricopa County had near 100% turnout. Show Milwaukee County had near 100% turnout.

I have posted proof, but quite a while ago. Remember the election was stolen with fake registrations and bloated voter rolls. Feel free to do your own research instead of repeating lies.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Conspiracy theorist and former Christian leader Dinesh D’Souza has failed to halt a defamation lawsuit brought against him and others behind the popular election denial film 2000 Mules and defend his widely debunked movie’s supposed evidence in a courtroom.

U.S. District Judge Steven D. Grimberg said last month he will allow the lawsuit against D’Souza and True the Vote to move forward.

The film, which aired on Christian TV networks and was shown in hundreds of churches, argues that human “mules” harvested 400,000 fake ballots to steal the 2020 election from its rightful winner, Donald Trump.

But one of the 2,000 alleged mules says he wasn’t stuffing ballot boxes all over Black areas of Atlanta, but merely depositing votes from his wife and children in a drop box, which is perfectly legal.

D’Souza and others also used video and photos of Allen in promotional appearances on Christian and conservative media outlets, including Tucker Carlson’s former show on Fox News, which earlier this year paid its own whopping defamation fine.

Andrews claims he and his family have suffered threats and many other harms. He sued D’Souza along with Salem Media Group, which helped finance the film, Regnery Publishing, and Catherine Engelbrecht and Gregg Phillips of the group True the Vote, which promotes election conspiracies, and is facing a separate lawsuit.

Dinesh D’Souza, Creator of '2000 Mules,' Must Defend Film's Election Denial Claims in Court

Conspiracy theorist and former Christian leader Dinesh D’Souza has failed to halt a defamation lawsuit brought against him and others behind the popular election denial film 2000 Mules and defend...

coloradotimesrecorder.com

---

Looks like the chickens are coming home to roost for these liars. Let's see if he pays up or like Giuliani, he claims bankruptcy.

Your thread title is completely deceptive. If your entire post is 100% true, then Denish Desousa doesn’t have to “defend his election denial.” he asked to defend using one individual as an example of the “2000 meals.“

I know those kind of deceptive, Clickbait headlines are now the mainstay of the mainstream media. But they are highly toxic to intelligent public discourse.

This guy may have a good case against the filmmakers. Don’t spoil it by lying about it, please.

 

[Magnus]

Your thread title is completely deceptive. If your entire post is 100% true, then Denish Desousa doesn’t have to “defend his election denial.” he asked to defend using one individual as an example of the “2000 meals.“

I know those kind of deceptive, Clickbait headlines are now the mainstay of the mainstream media. But they are highly toxic to intelligent public discourse.

This guy may have a good case against the filmmakers. Don’t spoil it by lying about it, please.

What the fuck are you babbling about?

Dinesh D'Souza, the creator of the film '2000 Mules,' is facing the need to defend the film's election denial claims in court. That's the title and it is completely legit.

Prove me wrong. Go.

 

[Faun]

There is no one dumber than you.

 

[Faun]

The GBI has the power to still get the names. Why haven't they?

Because there's no one to go after. No one did what 2000 Mules claimed.

 

[Faun]

I have posted proof, but quite a while ago. Remember the election was stolen with fake registrations and bloated voter rolls. Feel free to do your own research instead of repeating lies.

Post it now or you're full of shit.

 

[Lastamender]

Because there's no one to go after. No one did what 2000 Mules claimed.

Again those people can still be identified. If, and when, they are there will be Hell to pay. Trump can find them after he is elected for the third time.

 

[Seymour Flops]

What the fuck are you babbling about?

Dinesh D'Souza, the creator of the film '2000 Mules,' is facing the need to defend the film's election denial claims in court. That's the title and it is completely legit.

Prove me wrong. Go.

It’s your claim, you prove it. What I said was that if you post is 100% true, it is not about election denial. Here I’ll print it for you again:

If your entire post is 100% true, then Denish Desousa doesn’t have to “defend his election denial.” he only has to defend using one individual as an example of the “2000 mules.“

Are you claiming that that one individual who is suing not only is complaining about being falsely used as an example, but also about Desouza’s election denial? Is that in the lawsuit? You made the claim, you’re supposed to back it up.

How would that even work? “Yo, your honor, he denied the election, so he owes me money!“

I’m guessing what happened is that you simply repeated a click bait headline that you fell for. Doing that one time is not necessarily dishonest, if you just didn’t know.

But now you know, to keep pushing it is completely dishonest.

 

[Magnus]

It’s your claim, you prove it. What I said was that if you post is 100% true, it is not about election denial. Here I’ll print it for you again:

If your entire post is 100% true, then Denish Desousa doesn’t have to “defend his election denial.” he only has to defend using one individual as an example of the “2000 mules.“

Are you claiming that that one individual who is suing not only is complaining about being falsely used as an example, but also about Desouza’s election denial? Is that in the lawsuit? You made the claim, you’re supposed to back it up.

How would that even work? “Yo, your honor, he denied the election, so he owes me money!“

I’m guessing what happened is that you simply repeated a click bait headline that you fell for. Doing that one time is not necessarily dishonest, if you just didn’t know.

But now you know, to keep pushing it is completely dishonest.

Again, what the fuck are you babbling about? And, I did prove it by providing a link. In the thread title.

Are you ok, buddy? It's a bit too early in the day to be hitting the crack pipes, no? Hope you feel better. Thoughts & prayers.

 

[Faun]

Again those people can still be identified. If, and when, they are there will be Hell to pay. Trump can find them after he is elected for the third time.

FruitLoops, there's no evidence they did anything wrong.

 

[Lastamender]

FruitLoops, there's no evidence they did anything wrong.

Bullshit. The data shows those trips, they owe us an explanation for driving in circles the day of the election and the days before the election.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Your thread title is completely deceptive. If your entire post is 100% true, then Denish Desousa doesn’t have to “defend his election denial.

Well, he does, so you can stop trying to derail the thread.

 

[Faun]

Bullshit. The data shows those trips, they owe us an explanation for driving in circles the day of the election and the days before the election.

FruitLoops, True the Vote already proved there were NO "mules." Not one.

Law enforcement does not go chasing cell phone pings from people NOT suspected of committing a crime.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Again, what the fuck are you babbling about? And, I did prove it by providing a link. In the thread title.

Now you’re grasping at straws.

You know that nothing in that link proves the tread title. The thread title is about election denial, while the article is about the one guy that sued for defamation.

All the filmmakers have to defend is the use of that man’s images in their film. They don’t have to defend the fact that they Deny the results of the election are fair. Having an opinion about an election is not an actionable tort no matter how badly you may want to be.

Of course, you know that. You realize you’re wrong and you’re just grasping at straws.

Are you ok, buddy? It's a bit too early in the day to be hitting the crack pipes, no? Hope you feel better. Thoughts & prayers.

I see it has become a last word contest for you. Well, you’re welcome to have it.

 

[Lastamender]

FruitLoops, True the Vote already proved there were NO "mules." Not one.

Law enforcement does not go chasing cell phone pings from people NOT suspected of committing a crime.

Driving in circles in early AM hours repeatably? They should be suspected of something. Trump can get those names. Let's hope he does.

 

[Faun]

Driving in circles in early AM hours repeatably? They should be suspected of something. Trump can get those names. Let's hope he does.

If they stopped to drop off ballots, True the Vote would have video of them. They have no video of anyone dropping ballots more than once. Hence, no crimes were committed.

 

[Lastamender]

If they stopped to drop off ballots, True the Vote would have video of them. They have no video of anyone dropping ballots more than once. Hence, no crimes were committed.

The cameras were not pointed at many drop boxes. They were set up that way on purpose. And some states lost the videos they had. Imagine that. Like I said, maybe Trump will clear this up. Those names with those numbers will be available forever.