Tag Archive for: 2000Mules

Election Integrity Should be Bi-Partisan

Estimated Reading Time: 7 minutes

Election integrity is something everyone should be concerned about. Both parties have an interest in ensuring the public has confidence in the process. If not, it is destructive to the very core of the democratic process. The reason: if elections are not “honest”, what is the point of elections and without elections how can you have “democracy”, that is rule by the people? And, if not rule by the representatives of the people, elected by the consent of voters, by what standard can the “legitimacy” of governance be determined in a Constitutional Republic?

We know that Democrats too are concerned about election integrity because of their loud complaints in the first two decades of the 21st century. However, now they want to demonize anyone who questions the process.

Comparatively speaking, election integrity is even more important than the investigation of the unfortunate trespassing at the Capitol building, but it does not generate near the concern by the press, government officials, tech oligarchs, and Republicans like Liz Cheney. That event applied to just one Presidential election.  Election integrity applies to all elections, at all levels of government.

It is also somewhat disgusting that those that suggest that talking about election integrity is a “threat to democracy” try mightily to shut down the discussion. That is not going to work. We want to discuss it anyway.

What is an honest election? At one time, this seemed rather easy to answer. The results of the election should be determined by the votes cast. That seems simple, but the last election has shown how truly complicated it can be.

Let’s start with the voter. Can we all agree that voters should be citizens? No, some jurisdictions want non-citizens to vote and some resist the presentation of any kind of identification that proves both age and citizenship requirements, and additionally proof the voter is currently alive.

Can we agree that the voter casting the vote should be alive? No, the system often does not reliably verify signatures and ties those signatures to a physical address, which proves the person is who they say they are, and presumably alive and voting only once. A dead person apparently can vote by mail much easier than showing up to the polls and voting in person.  That much has been established. Why they always vote Democrat remains a mystery.

Can we agree that people should only vote once and that my vote should not count more than your vote? A recent study indicated that is difficult to determine that the number of votes cast equals the number of voters. The study found a 2.89% gap between the number of ballots cast and the number of voters. In a number of jurisdictions, the difference could determine the outcome of the election.

Can we agree on how the vote should be exercised? No, we can’t seem to agree on that.  It used to be you voted on one day, election day, and you did so at a polling place where at least there was some supervision and representatives of both parties present to see the supervision was fairly applied. This was standard procedure for a number of years, even when transportation was much more primitive. You voted at the polls on election day.

Today, a good deal of voting, sometimes the majority is done by mail-in and can be spaced over a number of days. And, the votes can be delivered into unsupervised drop boxes, where ballot stuffing can be done. Every voter should see the documentary film, 2000 Mules to get a sense of the extent of the problem.

Today, voting can even begin before campaigns are officially concluded, which allows voters to exercise their franchise often ignorant of late-breaking news, debate results, and opposition research, that might have influenced their thinking and choices. For example, polls indicate a substantial number of voters would have changed their vote, had they known about Hunter Biden and his criminal activities. But the news came after many had already voted.

A process that goes on over days with geographically spaced and unsupervised depositories is just an invitation to defraud the process.

Mail-in voting destroys the important “chain of custody”, which is a way of saying the voter casts a ballot, and that ballot gets to the counting center with no opportunity to change that vote, augment that vote with fake ballots, or remove that vote from the stream of ballots. The chain of custody is very important because it can stop a lot of voter fraud. Mail-in voting is thus rife with opportunities to manipulate, alter, or suppress the actual voting result.

Voting rolls should be regularly updated so people who have moved or died, cannot have their names entered into the process. This will reduce ballot stuffing by “mules.”

Once the votes get to a counting center, ideally, they should be counted by hand or by machines not connected to the internet. Machine counting can be quite accurate. For example, coins and bills are counted at great speed and with great accuracy by financial institutions, but there is no need to connect such analog machines to the internet where software can be hacked or manipulated. Representatives of both parties should be present when tabulations are collected from accurate high-speed analog counting devices.

Getting results to the press needs to take second place to accuracy in the vote count.

Can we all agree that the system should be one man, one vote and that all votes should be counted as accurately as possible? That would seem to be a no-brainer.

Here we will offer perhaps a controversial suggestion. The integrity of the system is a more important value to society than the convenience of the voter, but make voting as easy as possible. Therefore, make election day a holiday from work, so all can participate without great sacrifice to work or home responsibility. Require the voter to show up in person, with ID, and cast his/her vote on election day, not weeks before.

Convenience is a relative condition. For decades I voted at the polls on election day and got addicted to the convenience of mail-in voting. If people could walk, ride a horse or wagon, and get to a distant voting center in our frontier past, it is hardly inconvenient to give a person one task in a day they are getting off, to take a short drive in an air-conditioned bus or car, to vote in person at a polling station. With just one task to perform on a special day of civic responsibility, even those wheelchair-bound should find no difficulty getting to the polls. Usually, there are plenty of volunteers from political parties willing to help get out their mobility-challenged members to vote.

There is no need for independent parties to “harvest” or vote on behalf of another person.

We asked earlier, what is an honest election, and we have talked mostly about the process of voting itself, the security of those votes, and their accurate tabulation.

Beyond those mechanics, what is an honest election process?

In an ideal world, you should maximize freedom of assembly and the free press to see that the public is educated about the policy positions of the candidates and that they make informed decisions based on that information. That also presumes a fairly high degree of knowledge on the part of citizens so they understand their own political system (civics) and know a bit of history about their nation. But there is no realistic way to keep ignorant, bigoted, or uninformed people from voting. If government derives its just powers from the consent of the governed, the quality of government will be roughly equivalent to the quality of the governed.

In this realm, there is huge room for improvement. Public-school teachers who teach civics and history often do a poor job. I can recall a few exceptional teachers, but many made these important subjects just about as boring as possible. School choice seems the only alternative to getting better-educated citizens in all subject matters.

However, one thing seems clear from the last election cycle. We now know that government agencies interfered with the flow of information to voters. A high-ranking FBI agent just was forced to resign by deliberately suppressing information about criminal activity in the family of a Presidential candidate. Also, several intelligence and law enforcement agencies conspired with one political party that paid for bogus intelligence, acquired from foreign intelligence operatives, to try to change the outcome of an election.

In a free society, we can’t stop politicians from lying. We can’t stop the press from lying, although competition can help in that regard. And likely, we will never be able to stop leaks from government agencies to their pet press outlets. But clearly, government agencies should not be allowed to put their thumbs, elbows, and feet directly on the electoral scales. Nor should government agencies recruit, intimidate, or otherwise manipulate social media platforms into suppressing some news and releasing others.

Our Constitution forbids the government from suppressing the freedom of speech. That should apply as well to media companies that act as agents of the government.

This last cycle also showed that private companies also were allowed to spend millions of dollars in payments to election officials and private organizations, supposedly to improve the election process.

Government officials should run our elections, not private companies such as FaceBook. To date, 24 states have passed legislation to ban “Zuckbucks”, but not all states have done so.

From what we have described, it should be clear we at present do not have an “honest” election process. The current system is full of deficiencies that can be exploited. Voting rolls are often shoddy, the chain of custody is questionable, and the identification of voters is sketchy.

Do we have an honest electoral process, including a free flow of information and an informed electorate? Probably not on both counts.

At the very least, government intelligence agencies should not be interfering in the process by either planting bogus stories or suppressing real stories. Certainly, to actively conspire with one political party is unethical and cause for dismissal.It likely should be illegal. Government is there for all of us, not just some of us.

A Congressional review of our intelligence agencies, somewhat like the Church committee of the Viet Nam War period seems justified. It appears they took an active role not in cheating on vote counting, but in altering the political outcome through information manipulation and an outright conspiracy with the Democrat party and foreign intelligence operatives.

If the voting process is not secure, and if the election process, specifically the free flow of information is not operative, then you can legitimately say our election process was compromised.

That is not a statement “inciting insurrection”, it is simply saying election integrity is in fact the most important factor supporting our democratic system. Integrity applies to all elections, not just those with electors needed to certify Presidential elections.

It is the enemies of democracy who want to shut the discussion down and block attempts to improve the integrity of our elections.

Our elections likely will never be perfect, but they could be a lot more secure and fair than they currently are.

By all means, let’s have an open discussion and let all views be considered and stop this nonsense that concerned voters are “semi-fascists” any more than concerned parents are “domestic terrorists.”

Our democratic institutions are too sacred to be soiled by this kind of demagoguery.

2000 Mules Comes to Arizona

Estimated Reading Time: 3 minutes

The technical team behind the hit documentary 2000 Mules appeared at a hearing at the Arizona Legislature on May 31, 2022. The hearing was chaired by Shawnna Bolick, Representative from District 20 and a candidate for Arizona Secretary of State.

It was sadly a partisan affair as no Democrat legislators attended the hearing to hear any of the evidence or ask questions.

True the Vote, a Houston-based voter integrity organization, is the team that developed the data for the hit Dinesh D’Souza produced  film, which can be viewed here. 

Founder Catherin Engelbrecht and her chief investigator Gregg Phillips presented and took questions from the panel of state Senators and Representatives.

In the movie, ballot trafficking was described both in Yuma and Maricopa Counties, as well as in other states such as Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Wisconsin. Over 200 mules were determined to be operating in Maricopa County.

An investigation is currently underway by the Yuma Country Sheriff and a recall effort is also underway to remove Yuma Country Chairman Tony Reyes from office.

Much of their presentation was to explain to the legislators the methods that can be used to organize cell phone data to track individuals who are involved in ballot trafficking. These so-called “mules” are believed to be part of an operation funded by nonprofit organizations that statistically were capable of altering the outcome of the 2020 election.

Gregg Phillips spent considerable time explaining technical details such as what is geofence, the threshold criteria necessary to establish if the behavior of an individual is that of a mule, and the quality and accuracy of their data.

Basically, any common cell phone is actually a tracking device that is also capable of making phone calls. By triangulating among cell towers, the location of the phone can amazingly accurate. Each phone has a unique ID or DNA, and thus multiple trips to drop boxes can be scientifically confirmed. Bolstered by data obtained from cameras monitoring drop boxes, a compelling case can be made for illegal voter fraud.

Phillips also spent considerable time responding to critical articles written about the movie in the New York Times and Washington Post. In short, the bulk of the testimony was to build confidence that cell phone tracking is accurate and accepted in a court of law. Phillips made a point that the Federal Government is using just such data to prosecute people that engaged in the January 6th Capitol riot.

Cell phone companies can be requested by law enforcement to “unmask” the owner of a cell phone and thus with video as an additional backup, can actually identify an individual engaged in voter fraud.

With this information available, legislators urged whistleblowers to come forward now, and cooperate with law enforcement or face serious consequences later.

It is not clear from the testimony exactly how nonprofits came into possession of ballots for distribution by their mules. It is not clear who funded these nonprofits and how they can operate in violation of IRS rules.

When asked if such information had been turned over to the Arizona Attorney General, Gregg said they had provided information earlier at a meeting with three individuals from the AGs office. But there is some confusion about that and Gregg said they would provide the information a second time. What happened to the first batch of information, was not made clear.

As to the list of nonprofits engaged in voter fraud, Gregg said they have not made a list public because they did not want to get out in front of law enforcement. However, such a list can be made available at the proper time.

There were a number of concrete suggestions given to the legislators to firm up voter integrity.

Voter rolls need to be regularly purged.

It is necessary that the month, day, and year of birth be used, not just the year of birth as is currently done.

Drop boxes destroy pretty much the “chain of custody”. Ballots that are provided by mail, in combination with unsupervised drop boxes are an invitation to fraud.

If drop boxes are used, there should be security cameras at each location and officials review the footage.

BREAKING: “2000 Mules” Documentary Sparks Recall Against Yuma County Board Chairman and Nonprofit Director Tony Reyes Alleging “Illegal Mules Activities”

Estimated Reading Time: < 1 minute

Tony Reyes, the Chairman of the Yuma County Board of Supervisors and Executive Director of the Comité de Bien Estar nonprofit in San Luis, Arizona, now faces a recall effort in direct response to the “2000 Mules” documentary.

“We’re seeing a lot of support from that film,” said Andres Rivera, the organizer of the recall submitted on May 19.

The Gateway Pundit recently reported that law enforcement served warrants at Tony Reyes’ Comité De Bien Estar nonprofit, and Gloria Torres was taken to have her home searched in connection to the Yuma County ballot trafficking conspiracy. Tony Reyes confirmed this to The Gateway Pundit.


Continue reading this article at Gateway Pundit.

Yuma, Dinesh D’Souza and Election Integrity in Arizona

Estimated Reading Time: 2 minutes

Editors’ Note. The following is a message to the supporters of AZ Representative Shawnna Bolick (LD 20) who is currently a Republican candidate for the Arizona Secretary of State. We share Ms. Bolick’s deep and ongoing concern about the integrity of Arizona elections, ballot harvesting, and fraudulent voting with the readers The Prickly Pear. Secure and fair elections are a primary role of the Arizona Secretary of State, Arizona’s Chief Election Office.


Yuma, Arizona has mass voting fraud caught on tape.

2000 Mules, a film by Dinesh D’Souza which debuted in early May, exposed the depth of the organized election fraud that occurred in the 2020 Presidential election and 2021 Georgia runoff election. Using the same cell phone proximity data that law enforcement uses to catch criminals, they found that “mules” were collecting ballots and stuffing ballot boxes in multiple key swing states, including Arizona. Up to 400,000 fraudulent votes, enough to flip many states, were involved in this criminal enterprise because these “mules” were being paid between $10 to $40 per ballot.

When I saw the movie and considered the evidence D’Souza showcased, I was disappointed, but not entirely shocked. When we passed a law prohibiting ballot harvesting, the DNC unsuccessfully sued Arizona to keep the practice alive. The practice is flourishing. Democratic Party-aligned non-profits have historically harvested ballots, but the scope of their fraud in 2020 was more extensive than we could ever imagine.

We will continue to have question marks about the 2020 election. It is clear to me that the ballot box stuffing was highly organized. Yuma’s law enforcement has raided these non-government organizations for false voter registrations, duplicate voting, fraudulent use of absentee ballots and impersonation fraud.

I’ve been rallying our efforts to secure elections in the legislature since I was elected, but I’m running into a lot of opposition. Before 2000 Mules released, we were offered an informational hearing in the House to hear the evidence they presented to the FBI and the AG’s office, but Speaker Bowers denied the hearing. I can be forward thinking and assist in passing laws to secure our future elections, but there are obstructionists preventing Arizona from truly improving the integrity of the process. That’s why I’m running for Arizona’s Chief Election Officer—the Secretary of State—to prevent 2020 from happening under my watch.

ICYMI [In Case You Missed It] a few weeks ago, my legislative office received six public records requests from left wing organizations, including one from The Washington Post. Afterall, it is an even year (aka an election year). We were asked to forward all communications my office had with Ginni Thomas. The Left went crazy over my response to an auto-generated form email sent. You can read it here for yourself.

I bet many other legislators across the US received similar emails from millions of frustrated voters after the November 2020 election. Why are the lazy lamestream reporters requesting such items now?

Hold firm, Justice Clarence Thomas!


Learn more about Shawnna Bolick at www.bolickforarizona.com.



Yuma County Announces Voter Fraud Investigation

Estimated Reading Time: 2 minutes

The following excerpt is from a press release from the Yuma County Sheriff:

“The Yuma County Sheriff’s Office (YCSO) and the Yuma County Recorder’s Office (YCRO) are working together to actively examine cases of voting fraud from the 2020 General Election and now a recent pattern of fraudulent voter registration forms leading up to the 2022 Primary Election.

As of March 2022, YCSO has 16 voting/registration open cases. All relevant evidence is being formally documented by the Yuma County Recorder’s Office and further investigated by the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office.

Some examples of voter fraud Yuma County is currently seeing are the following:

• Impersonation fraud: Voting in the name of other legitimate voters and voters who have died or moved away.

• False registrations: Falsifying voter registrations by either using a real or fake name, birth date, or address. This is being done by outreach groups who are paid for each registration form they submit, therefore, are out soliciting voters into unnecessarily re-registering or falsifying forms with Yuma County resident’s identities.

• Duplicate voting: Submitting multiple votes or registering in multiple locations and voting in the same election in more than one jurisdiction or state.

• Fraudulent use of absentee ballots: Requesting absentee ballots and voting without the knowledge of the actual voter; or obtaining the absentee ballot from a voter and either filling it indirectly and forging the voter’s signature or illegally telling the voter who to vote for.

If you suspect or witness individuals committing any of the mentioned voting frauds, share their name or any other identifying information to law enforcement immediately.

The majority of voter fraud cases in Yuma County are related to duplicate voting (typically charged as illegal voting and false voter registration). Under Arizona law, illegal voting is a class 5 or class 6 felony. A person found guilty faces up to 2 or 2.5 years in prison, fines, restitution, loss of voting rights, and/or probation.

YCSO and YCRO advise all Yuma County residents to go directly to the Yuma County Recorder’s Office or Arizona Secretary of State’s Office to register to vote, check their voter registration status and/or update their voter registration in advance of the voter registration deadline of Tuesday, July 5, 2022. You can also visit www.servicearizona.com to use the online registration system.

Do not fill out voter registration forms in the community unless it is a County employee as these are being processed.

If Yuma County voters find any incorrect information in their current voter registration record, please notify the County Recorder’s Office immediately at (928) 373-6034 or voterservices@yumacountyaz.gov.

Anyone with information regarding voter fraudulent schemes or believe they have been a victim of a fraudulent vote, please contact the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office at 928-783-4427 or 78-CRIME to remain anonymous. You can also visit our website at www.yumacountysheriff.org to submit an anonymous tip.

Information Released By: Tania Pavlak, Public Affairs Specialist.”

It is interesting that the action taken by Yuma County comes quickly on the heels of the release of the documentary film 2000 Mules.

The movie, which we have reviewed here, spends considerable time on the situation in Arizona, particularly in Yuma and Maricopa counties.  Whether this investigation is just a coincidence or is connected to the movie, is not the most relevant factor.  The most important factor will be whether substantial evidence of fraud is uncovered.

The movie 2000 Mules is now back in selected theatres or it can be streamed by clicking here.