2020Election.Add 2000 Mules information

[CookingWithCale]

To prove election fraud, you must use an evidence standard, and in this situation, the standard is a Preponderance of Evidence Standard (PoES). PoES means that more than likely the Petition claims are true and thus Petitioner is entitled to relief. This is opposed to the Clear and Convincing Evidence Standard (CaCES), which means almost certainly the Petition claims are true and the State must use minimal intervention in the relief granted. Sadly most people aren’t trained enough in law so this has been completely overlooked. I had to deal with this in Court for a decade and I’m a software-computer engineer who makes compilers so I know it intimately. Compiler design and software engineering is almost identical to law. Certainly, 2000 Mules does not prove Beyond a Reasonable Doubt Evidence Standard (BaRDES), we must unmask the Mules in Court and convict enough of them BaRDES to assert that claim.
We must break down the evidence claims to rank them as Preponderance or Clear and Convincing. There is the smartphone ping data. Is the data more than likely true? Yes. Did the Mules more than likely go to the other ballot harvesting boxes? More than likely. Almost certainly? I think almost certainly, but that’s my opinion, and also why Higher Courts have multiple Judges. You might have a different opinion.
To me as a software engineer, I know that when you see ping data from a suspected ballot mule going to 21 ballot harvesting boxes on average, many paid for by Mark Zuckerberg’s illegal $419.5 MILLION donations described below, that that person almost certainly was there to deposit ballots. Certainly, it meets the PoES. Does it meet BaRDES? No, because the Court would use this along with corroborating evidence to prove BaRDES.
https://nypost.com/2021/10/14/zuckerberg-election-spending-was-orchestrated-to-influence-2020-vote/George Soros also contributed $70 MILLION to the 2020 election.
https://freebeacon.com/elections/soros-triples-election-spending-pouring-70-million-into-2020-efforts/https://www.statista.com/chart/22962/highest-spending-pacs-us-election/503(c)(4) non-profits who are banned from engaging in electioneering (election engineering), which includes paying ballot mules. A Federal election official in 2000 Mules testified that the Feds know about the illegal ballot mules and mules testified. They’re operating in a legal grey zone that the Court has not ruled on the legality of.
The real question: did the mules MORE THAN LIKELY affect the outcome of the 2020 election? Who’s burden is that to prove? It certainly isn’t my burden, and certainly isn’t anyone’s job who doesn’t work for the Government, and thus the State has the burden of proof because it would take away our constitutional right to our State Legislature picking the Electors who vote for the President. All we know is that Mark Zuckerberg donated $419.5 MILLION to fund an illegal takeover of County election offices in Swing States, and this change was not cleared through the State Clearinghouses established in the Help America Vote Act of 2002, which was passed after the 2000 election to address the Bush v Gore election lawsuit in the Supreme Court.
In Wisconsin, a Special Council decreed Zuckerberg’s donation was an illegal bribe Election Bribery Under Wis. Stat. § 12.11, and there was widespread voter fraud in nursing homes.
https://legis.wisconsin.gov/assembly/22/brandtjen/media/1552/osc-second-interim-report.pdfMore than likely, Zuckerberg didn’t donate $419.5 MILLION to the government out of the kindness of his heart, he pays armies of tax attorneys to not pay taxes. Trump was trying to break up Big Tech and reform Section 230, and Democrats were using the Russiagate hoax to trick Social media companies into censoring Republicans who were talking about the mail-in voting fraud. It wasn’t just Republicans talking about it, here is an article from Representatives Tulsi Gabbard and Rodney Davis on 10/5/2020 warning that Ballot harvesting would be used by $billionaires to affect the election outcome by paying more ballot mules right before the vote counting stops. It’s not like Trump got upset he lost and threw a hissy fit, we had been warning people it was going to happen for months, and exactly what we were warning about happened.
https://www.newsweek.com/stop-ballot-harvesting-before-it-threatens-2020-election-opinion-1536081In October of 2020, Kamala Harris’s buddy Xavier Becerra, then-Attorney General of California, wrote a letter to the heads of YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter demanding they censor Republicans warning about the mail-in voter and ballot harvesting fraud citing the Russiagate committee, which Kamala Harris sat on. Becerra threatened to bring the full force of the State of California down on Big Tech if they did not censor Republicans, which would require the use of Section 230. Kamala Harris knew Russiagate was a hoax and she politically prosecuted/impeached Trump to affect the election outcome. Harris used to be the AG of California so they were operating as a crony network, and State officials were using Section 230 to censor their political opponents so Trump would lose.
https://oag.ca.gov/news/press-releases/attorney-general-becerra-urges-social-media-companies-stop-spread-electionThey said the Russians were trying to affect the election outcomes, so you had to let them do a shadow campaign to fortify Biden and suppress Trump.
https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/So the question is what ballot dumps had illegal votes? The answer is in this article
https://votepatternanalysis.substack.com/p/voting-anomalies-2020Four ballot dumps caused Biden to win. The four vote updates in question are:

1. An update in Michigan listed as of 6:31AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 141,258 votes for Joe Biden and 5,968 votes for Donald Trump
2. An update in Wisconsin listed as 3:42AM Central Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 143,379 votes for Joe Biden and 25,163 votes for Donald Trump
3. A vote update in Georgia listed at 1:34AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 136,155 votes for Joe Biden and 29,115 votes for Donald Trump
4. An update in Michigan listed as of 3:50AM Eastern Time on November 4th, 2020, which shows 54,497 votes for Joe Biden and 4,718 votes for Donald Trump

As you can see, the number of ballots needed for Biden to win was very small, so more than likely ballot mules could have affected those dumps. The ballot dump in Georgia happened during Suitcasegate when a toilet leaked and they kicked everyone out saying there was a water leak and they pulled out those suitcases of ballots from under the table. All of these cities where the ballot were dumped from had illegal ballot harvesting boxes funded by Zuckerberg’s illegal donation, and the ballot dumps were beyond a reasonable doubt from a large city.
Not on the list of the four ballot dumps in Pennsylvania, where the Supreme Court after the election struck down the State’s mailing voting law because it was unconstitutional.
The problem is that when they separated the ballots from the envelope, it became impossible to track the ballot harvesting and ballot mule fraud. Thus we must base our decision on the facts above.
To recap our evidence:

• 503(c)(4) non-profits funded by Zuckerberg, Soros, and Obama-PACs funded illegal ballot mules who got busted by smartphone ping data
• Mark Zuckerberg did an illegal private takeover of county election offices in Swing States to do illegal ballot harvesting using an illegal $419.5 million that a Special Counsel found to be an illegal bribe under Election Bribery Under Wis. Stat. § 12.11.
• Trump was trying to reform Section 230 and Big Tech conspired in a shadow campaign to use Section 230 to censor Republicans and defame them as far-right extremists.
• The four ballot dumps mentioned above were small enough that the mules certainly would have been able to affect the election outcome.
• The ballot dumps happened when the Democrats were illegally counting votes, and also happened in the State where Zuckerberg’s donation was found to be an illegal bribe under Wis. Stat. § 12.11.
• AG of California threatened to bring the full force of the State of California down on Big Tech if they didn’t censor Republicans warning about election fraud using Section 230.
• The Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled the 2020 election was unconstitutional.
• There was widespread voter fraud at nursing homes.
  So where does the data not match up? Drop your comments below. Here is the list so far.
• We must mask the mules.
  • Counterargument: We know the mules were operating and so we must answer the question how do we more than likely know the mules didn’t affect the election outcome?
• There aren’t videos matching the mules to all of the drop boxes, the mules could have just been walking around town and went to 21 dropboxes on average and non-profits who pay mules.
  • Counterargument: I was born at night, just not last night. The Zuckerberg drop boxes didn’t have video cameras on them and they were illegal. The Mules were certainly trafficking ballots. The chain of custody was broken, and more than likely it’s a source of voter fraud, and hence the ballots must be discarded. A legal ballot delivered illegally is not a legal vote. $billionaires can just pay an army of ballot harvesting mules at the last minute to rig all of the elections moving forward.
• We can’t match the ballot to the envelope and thus you can’t prove fraud.
  • Counterargument: In Court, we would then say the State’s evidence proving that fraud didn’t happen is not admissible due to the break-in chain of custody. It’s the State’s burden to prove the ballots were not fraudulent, not ours; we don’t run the elections. they do. It’s like you put $100,000 into a bank, and then you come back the next day and $50,000 is gone. Is it my burden of proof to prove the bank took my money because I don’t know what they did with it? No. It’s the Bank’s burden to show you where your money went, else it’s theft.
• We don’t know exactly how much Zuckerberg, Soros, and Obama-PACs donations affected the election outcome.
  • Counterargument: This all depends on if we can’t revisit Citizens United. Was Zuckerberg, Soror, and Obama-PACs donations illegal? Under Citizens United maybe. Roe v Wade was just overturned. The Supreme Court has never ruled on the legality of using Citizens United to justify illegal ballot harvesting drop boxes and mules paid for by 503(c)(4) non-profits who are not legally allowed to engage in engaging in electioneering. Citizens United was certainly never intended for $billionaires to spend $billions purchasing elections with illegal ballot harvesting and mules. That abuse certainly should have been foreseen by the Court but was not.