Eric's Beijing Diary

This film posted above addresses the movie 2000 Mules. The 2020 election seems never to be able to escape controversy. Why are people still arguing about it after two years? I hate to even think about publishing yet one more confusing diatribe on the sad events leading up to the disaster on January 6th, 2020.

But recently John posted a video (above) in the Politics group regarding that movie. It’s not a shortened version of the movie; it’s a commentary on the movie. Basically this guy (he does not introduce himself) is saying that the movie is not convincing, because they don’t show more than one video of the same person. I am not sure how important that is, but I have to admit that it is a fair point. Nevertheless, I also had a problem with his approach, because he used that weakness as an excuse to blow off everything else in the movie.

But one thing he did in the video above that really fascinated me was to show that many media outlets who dismissed 2000 Mules had actually copied and pasted the Associated Press “fact check” written by Ali Swenson. That peaked my attention, because Ali Swenson’s bogus fact check is the one I featured in the podcast I made on 2000 Mules back in May (posted below). The main point I was trying make then was that she clearly had not seen the movie when she wrote that fact check. So now it appears that many, if not most, of the mainstream media reports on 2000 Mules were written by people who did not actually take time to watch the movie; they just copied from the Associated Press article written by Ali Swenson, who also had not seen the movie when she wrote her “fact check.” For this research, I give this guy credit. 2000 Mules should be in the Guinness Book of World Records as the movie most criticized by people who did not bother to watch it.

But astonishingly, this guy seems completely unaware that Ali Swenson’s own review is fundamentally dishonest, because she clearly had not seen the video herself when she wrote the fact check. This is not obvious when you first read the fact check. I was actually impressed by her fact check when I read it before I saw the movie. But as I explained in the podcast episode below, she wrote things in that article that she would not have written if she had seen the movie. He goes even further. He did an exhaustive research of everything (almost) that Ali Swenson had put online for the past ten years. He did this to show her credibility—all without ever noticing that she wrote a fact check about a movie she clearly had not bothered to watch. This leads me to wonder if he is really objective. He is disturbingly blind to the faults of someone he seems to have an emotional need to believe in.

But in spite of my respect for his research, there is something else about his review (I mean the video above) that troubles me. He focuses on what he sees as the great weakness of the 2000 Mules movie, but he totally blows off everything else, and this is not really fair to the movie or to its creators.

So here's a scene from the movie: We see a lady walking up to a box for depositing ballot envelopes. She puts a few ballot envelopes in the ballot depository, then she turns around, pulls off her rubber gloves, and throws them in the garbage can. Which of the following best explains this behavior?

1. She is wearing rubber gloves to protect her hands from the cold winter air.
2. She is wearing rubber gloves because she is afraid of getting COVID.
3. She is wearing rubber gloves because she does not want her fingerprints to be on the envelopes, so she keeps them on until she has placed the ballot envelopes in the box, then she throws the rubber gloves in the garbage, because she no longer needs them to shield her identity.

Come on, you guys. Let’s have a moment of integrity. We all know what the obvious answer is. So does 2000 Mules prove that Donald Trump actually won the 2020 election? No, of course not. Once the ballots are separated from the envelope, there is no way to tell where they came from, or who filled them out. So you couldn’t prove anything, and in fact, you couldn’t even prove that a single ballot was filled out inappropriately. But the fact that this kind of corruption is so difficult to trace is exactly why it is not legal to deliver ballots for other people. The only way to deal with certain kinds of corruption is to set up a situation such that it could not happen.

But if this movie (2000 Mules) does not prove that Trump won, does it at least show evidence of malfeasance? It certainly does. It’s not perfect, and the observation made in the video above is well taken. But his failure to address critical information presented in the film is also concerning. It suggests that perhaps he is not totally objective.

So why do people avoid this movie so much? Because they are clearly threatened by the possibility of having their chosen beliefs knocked down. My advice: watch the movie. Watch it critically, and then share your thoughts. But share your thoughts after you have seen the movie. All comments are welcome. If you comment on the video above, I will assume that you watched it. But if you comment on 2000 Mules, I may take the liberty to ask you if you actually watched it, because so many people haven’t, even including people like Ali Swenson, who wrote a fact check about a movie she had not actually seen.

Where will this end up? Will there ever be healing from this national hate fest that pits people against each other in American society? I’ll tell you the answer: Democrats think Republicans are the problem. Republicans think Democrats are the problem. Healing will not come until both Democrats and Republicans realize that they have forgotten God. 2000 Mules is a good example of this problem. The Movie accuses people of corruption. They don’t name the people, but we led to assume that they are opponents of Trump. Democrats, in other words. But I don’t know how many of you remember that, just before he left office, Donald Trump pardoned Dinesh D’Souza. Do you remember what the crime was? You guessed it. Election fraud. Granted, it wasn’t voter fraud. But it was fraud nonetheless—a crime to which he pled guilty in a court of law. There is a lot of corruption in the Democratic party. But the Republicans are not better if they measure themselves by the Democrats. A little bit better than really bad is still bad:

But when they measure themselves by one another and compare themselves with one another, they are without understanding. (2nd Corinthians 10:12)

The only hope for America is for everyone to allow themselves to be held up against God’s standards.

Comments

Labels: Election 2020