Dinesh D’Souza’s Vile Big Lie documentary is too stupid even for Fox

There are many reasons why Donald Trump’s big lie about voter fraud in the 2020 election is among the most despicable political acts in US history.

It has poisoned the minds of millions of Americans – quite likely permanently – into believing that our elections cannot be trusted (unless the Republicans win). It was the impetus for the attack on the Capitol on January 6th. It was the pretext to break the previously sacrosanct American tradition of peaceful transfer of power.

It is tragic that this democracy-threatening hoax was perpetrated by a known compulsive liar – a corrupt businessman from a privileged upbringing notorious for stiffening his working-class contractors. Trump had falsely claimed an electoral fraud conspiracy back in 2016 (the election he actually won), and then again for the entire 2020 presidential cycle when he babbled about nameless forces conspiring to steal the election from him.

Both times he sent the implicit message to his supporters: No election result is valid unless I win. And they believed this incoherent charlatan.

The new documentary 2000 mules (a joint by Dinesh D’Souza) is little more believable than your average rando conspiracy theory video on YouTube, but its production values ​​lend it a surface seriousness. The film’s intended audience will see a rational “questioners only” guy (D’Souza) conversing with some ideological allies (like Charlie Kirk, Dennis Prager, Sebastian Gorka, and Larry Elder) who only care about the integrity of the voters in America worry you love.

But the bulk of the film consists of D’Souza’s highly dramatized explainer sessions with a couple of technological “experts” (also credited as executive producers) whose claims that they used geotracking data to uncover thousands of vote-collecting mules fall apart on the mere Test.

Surveillance footage of people taking selfies after voting in Dropboxes is presented as “A-ha!” Evidence — while ignoring the fact that taking voter selfies was a commonplace thing in 2020 (and a few years before).

Video clips of people casting a few ballots are presented as indisputable evidence of voter fraud, although casting ballots for family members was also common. And despite the “experts'” repeated claims that they have tracked literally thousands of “mules” dropping votes, not a single one of these supposed professional voter swindlers is shown on screen making more than a drop.

These are all things that even D’Souza later admitted didn’t actually prove anything.

In a scathing interview with The Washington Post‘s Philip Bump, who told D’Souza that his entire charge of the election was based on speculation and that he “puts up no convincing arguments,” D’Souza replied, “I put forward arguments that are perfectly convincing to an independent observer.” , who isn’t clouded, who isn’t trying to play defender like you are for the Biden administration.”

And that gives away the whole game. Anyone unconvinced by their unproven narrative that the election was stolen is either a “Biden defender” or a cowardly Republican. (At the beginning of the film, Dennis Prager is literally called a “coward” by one of his right-wing panelists for saying he was “agnostic” about voter fraud in the 2020 election.)

Throughout the film, D’Souza complains about Republicans just wanting to “move on” — which includes all Republican election officials who have investigated allegations of voter fraud in critical swing states … and found absolutely nothing notable. He also laments that the Supreme Court (with a 6-3 majority and three Trump-appointed individuals) refuses to hear allegations of voter fraud that have already been debunked.

But after making his case through relentless repetition of innuendo and almost no verifiable facts, the MAGA Brain Trust (Prager, Kirk et al) reemerges towards the end of the film. All of them are horrified (Prager in particular) and breathing heavily after absorbing all of D’Souza’s supposedly incontrovertible evidence of a vast multi-state conspiracy being carried out on a granular level by thousands of paid agents – none of whom acknowledge their involvement passed anyone, ever.

D’Souza’s whining extends beyond the film itself and extends to the film’s coverage as well. Or in the case of Fox News and Newsmax, the lack of coverage 2000 mules— likely because both networks have already been sued for making potentially defamatory big-lie allegations against voting tech companies. (D’Souza’s white knight, Donald Trump, came to the film’s defense when he slammed Fox for ignoring “the greatest and most impactful documentary of our time.”)

But even a Trump-supporting right-wing fire-eater like Ben Shapiro can’t bring himself to say that D’Souza made a compelling argument 2000 mulesbecause the film’s central thesis simply isn’t backed by any supporting evidence – let alone an overwhelming amount of verifiable, indisputable data.

There’s no reason to watch 2000 mules, unless you really want to be ready to tussle with your MAGA relatives on Thanksgiving. The film isn’t meant to be persuasive, it’s meant to reinforce the already passionate certainty of people who believe in something that just doesn’t exist.

It’s a vile piece of agit prop spreading an untruth that could very well tear our country apart. It’s also a very dumb movie packaged as a smart, fearless scumbag. In a way, it’s a 90-minute safe room for MAGA snowflakes who can’t accept the fact that their hero is a loser.