by Sharon Rondeau

(May 27, 2022) — On Thursday the Arizona State Senate Republican Caucus announced that members of the voter-integrity organization TruetheVote.org will appear in Phoenix on Tuesday, May 31 to present their findings of “ballot harvesting” which were incorporated into the film, “2000 Mules” released earlier this month.

The film, produced by commentator Dinesh D’Souza and TTV executive director, Catherine Engelbrecht, and others, depicted individuals captured on video depositing multiple ballots into drop boxes during the 2020 election cycle, purportedly in violation of various state laws.

In Arizona, TTV has identified Maricopa and Yuma Counties as jurisdictions where ballot harvesting took place.

On May 11, the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office announced it had 16 active investigations into alleged “voting fraud” as of March beginning more than a year ago and emanating from the 2020 election and the upcoming 2022 primary elections.

In March Engelbrecht and elections analyst Gregg Phillips, who assisted in TTV’s research and data-collection, testified to members of the Wisconsin legislature about their conclusions that in 2020, 2,000 “mules,” or ballot-harvesters, deposited hundreds of thousands of ballots in Pennsylvania, Arizona, Georgia, Wisconsin and Michigan which altered the outcome of the presidential contest.

The evidence consists of “geospatial” data gleaned from cellphone data-compiling companies legally available to the public for a fee as well as video obtained through open-records requests from elections offices within the states in question, D’Souza, Engelbrecht and Phillips have said.

The mainstream media has criticized TTV’s claims and “2000 Mules” for failing to provide “context” for and proof of the film’s allegations. “None of the surveillance videos in the movie shows anyone visiting more than one drop box in a day,” the Atlanta Journal-Constitution wrote on May 10, just days after the movie’s release.

TTV claims it possesses such video but that the quality is “extremely poor.”

“We address this issue in the film,” TTV reported. “Most jurisdictions had no video or if they did, it was (illegally) destroyed. Of what does exist, 85% of it is bad; the camera poorly positioned, out of focus, the video compiled out of chronological sequence, inexplicably missing blocks of days and times.  This is why the geospatial evidence is the key.” 

Thursday’s press release from the Arizona Senate invites the media to attend the presentation, which begins at 3:00 p.m. local time and scheduled to run for 90 minutes.

Earlier Friday The Post & Email inquired of the caucus’s media contact, Kim Quintero, as to whether live streaming of the event is planned, to which the reply was, “Not that I’m aware of.”

Join the Conversation

16 Comments

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Test…..
    Where is John Brennan?
    One of Obama’s primary protectors and a frequent critic of Donald Trump, Obama’s former CIA director John Brennan is rarely seen or heard anymore. He was, and may still be employed by the far-left “news” outlet, MSNBC. Brennan has also been mentioned by John Durham and has been questioned as part of Durham’s investigation.
    When Brennan became conspicuous by his absence I decided to try to locate Mr. Brennan. I noticed Mr. Brennan had recently given an interview on MSNBC, talking with Andrea Mitchell about Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. He was introduced without naming his location, which is shown to be a very nice office, “somewhere”. Here is a link to the interview:
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/former-cia-director-john-brennan-putin-may-become-even-more-reckless/vi-AAUohcb

    Brennan’s absence from being interviewed over the last year or so has many people asking, where is John Brennan? My belief is he has moved to Ireland where this former CIA official has moved, and for similar reasons. Link here:
    https://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2308.htm

    The link above explains former CIA Director Michael Hayden’s, (GWB, May 30, 2006 to Jan.20, 2009, and then Obama to Feb 12, 2009) reasons for moving to Ireland and I believe Brennan’s motivation to move to Ireland is very similar. Information below is from the link above. Brennan’s father was an Irish immigrant and his mother a New Jersey grandchild of immigrants from Ireland.

  2. “In Arizona, TTV has identified Maricopa and Yuma Counties as jurisdictions where ballot harvesting took place.”

    The state Attorney General has indicted two people in Yuma County for ballot harvesting 4 ballots. Both are pleading guilty. The harvesting occurred in late July for the August primary not the general election. The two were indicated in December 2020.

    This would have preceded True the Vote’s purchase of cell phone tracking data.

    “On May 11, the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office announced …”

    None of those investigations involve ballot harvesting.

    The Yuma County sheriff has denied that any of their investigations are due to information from the film 2000 Mules.

        1. I beg to differ with your interpretation given that at the time the Yuma County Sheriff’s Office reportedly opened its investigations into alleged voter fraud, TTV had released none of the methodology it later used as a basis for the claims made in “2000 Mules.” Please feel free to suggest an edit, and we will take it into consideration. Better yet, do the research and write your own flawless article!

        2. As Yuma County’s investigation into voter fraud is unrelated to the movie’s allegations, the suggested edit would be to simply delete the paragraph beginning “On May 11.”

          Then the paragraphs beginning “In Arizona” and “In March,” which both describe the movie’s allegations, could be read without interruption.

  3. “The mainstream media has criticized TTV’s claims and ‘2000 Mules’ for failing to provide ‘context’ for and proof of the film’s allegations. ‘one of the surveillance videos in the movie shows anyone visiting more than one drop box in a day,’ the Atlanta Journal-Constitution wrote on May 10, just days after the movie’s release.”

    Yet second-hand hearsay from a stealth person was proof enough for the mainstream media, including the NYT and the WaPo, to support impeaching the President of the United States of America.

    Yet intentionally misconstrued opinion of a telephone call was proof enough for the mainstream media, including the NYT and the WaPo, to support impeaching the same President of the United States of America a second time.

    Gimmie a (bleep) break!

    1. From Bob68:
      ————————
      Good comment James:
      Fear of President Donald Trump, (instead of the promised in 2008 after Obama cover of Hillary Clinton), scared both complicit political parties into desperate action to keep Trump busy and if possible remove him from office. Both parties had knowingly given America’s government and her military to her enemies in the form of the Soros funded, Brennan and the CIA created Barack Hussein Obama. They had to eliminate the possibility of that HUGE criminal act, (giving America’s government and her military to her enemies), being revealed and acted on by Obama’s nemesis Donald Trump. That meant removing Trump from office, and if that failed to insure he was not re-elected. This is not complicated…., just too big to prosecute……..especially with the complicit investigating the complicit……As long as Obama, Hillary and The Obama Fraud remain off-limits, America loses………

      1. I said it before, the 2020 was a “hostile takeover” of this country and they tried to make it look like a lost election that was not true. Nancy Pelosi wrote two certificates on nomination for the Obama Biden team. One said they were qualified under the constitution, the other did not. I believe the narrative that the State of Hawaii refused was the one that said that Obama was qualified didn’t work for the Hawaii because he failed to provide a valid BC. A Certificate of live birth was not a valid BC on top of that, anyone with knowledge of the constitution would also know Obama/Soetoro was not a natural-born citizen because it was common knowledge his fake dad was not an American citizen. The INS was interested in deporting him from documented internal traffic because of his behavior. Both of the certificate’s of nomination were the first “in your face” point of election fraud documented this side of the counterfeit BC presented by the corrupt DNC and the equally corrupt RNC for not making any attempt to correct this issue for the American people. Everything went downhill from there. I believe the same players that selected BO in 08 are the same ones in back of this election fraud.

        1. Good comment Ed:
          “I believe the same players that selected BO in 08 are the same ones in back of this election fraud.”

          Yes, the people who put the fraud Obama in place did not want Obama’s nemesis, Donald Trump, in office because they know they are guilty of the biggest criminal act against America citizens and her Constitution in history, the installation and still on-going cover-up of the putative president, Barack Hussein Obama. America’s government and her military were given to her enemies in 2009 when John Roberts swore-in Obama. Crimes against America and the World do not get bigger than that. Unfortunately, with both parties complicit, and investigating themselves, it appears Obama, Hillary and all the others are going to continue to be free and very wealthy.

          Hillary was not supposed to lose and certainly not to Obama’s nemesis, Donald Trump……….this is not complicated, but enough lawyers and investigations can make it all eventually just disappear……

      2. Thank you Bob.
        Your comment (above) is also good, as usual.
        As long as methods of informing the masses remain the purview of the left, legacy America will continue to lose.

    2. Others, of course, would disagree with those characterizations of the two impeachment proceedings against the former president.

      Those who supported the impeachment proceedings unsurprisingly would describe them differently.

        1. Believing others are wrong does not show they are wrong; it shows only a disagreement.

          The better practice is to state one’s opinion as being just that, and not to portray one’s opinion as fact.

      1. Others are, of course, free to disagree with my characterizations of the two impeachment proceedings against former President Trump.

        However, for disagreement with my characterizations to have any validity requires providing a substantiated alternate basis upon which each of those impeachment proceedings was initiated.

        1. The subject of the first impeachment of the former president often is characterized as being based on his soliciting foreign interference in the 2020 U.S. presidential election, and then obstructing the inquiry about the solicitation.

          The subject of the second impeachment of the former president often is characterized as being based on his inciting the insurrection that occurred on January 6, 2021.

          That these characterizations may be rejected by some as invalid does not change that these characterizations are widely used by others. “Incitement of insurrection,” for example, is the literal text from H.R. 24.