The video makes a compelling story of the notion that China tampered with the 2020 election. You may want to read Wikipedia’s entry on the producer, The Epoch Times, to become aware of their bias.
The source makes no difference to me. The story the video tells is plausible and worthy of consideration for that reason.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
A few observations:
The video is way, way too long.
Epoch Times is a conspiratorial aficionado.
Dominion is going to sue the pants off of FOX, ONAA, Newsmax the Trump campaign and its legal eagles. And they will win.
Trump will join Bill Cosby in prison for the rest of his life after 24 women bring rape charges and defamation suits.
IMHO
LikeLiked by 3 people
Is there something specific in the video you think is fallacious? If not, then none of your observations matter.
LikeLike
So it is written and so it shall be.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Typical Trumpish horseshit. Losers gotta keep losing, I guess.
“Plausible” is not a standard worth the name. Too many things are “plausible.” But, with that said, there is nothing “plausible” about this nonsense. If you do not know what “plausible” means, look it up before you throw it around.
LikeLiked by 3 people
RE: “there is nothing ‘plausible’ about this nonsense.”
Can you give an example?
LikeLike
Most conspiracy theories have a sense of plausibility to them. That is why the easily misled believe in them. You keep posting them here in hopes that someone else will believe the story. It is tiresome and a waste of time a space.
EPOCH TIMES – a bullshit manufacturer that you appear to have some deep interest in. The source SHOULD make a difference, especially one that spreads more manure than a farmer in April.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “The source SHOULD make a difference…”
I’d like to know why. Is it because we’re not allowed to think about ideas that don’t come from “approved” sources?
LikeLike
No, because the source in question is, at best, questionable in its theories and reporting.
Keep spreading your fertilizer. But remember that too much will taint the harvest.
LikeLiked by 2 people
That’s the problem with “seemly” legitimate sources, they prey on the easily led and conspiracy minded.
Hell, Tang created the Epoch Times specifically to present the more batshit crazy conspiracy stuff and, as we see here, it does seem to work on some people…
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “No, because the source in question is, at best, questionable in its theories and reporting.”
So, it’s a container vs. content problem. If the box doesn’t suit you, then the food can’t be eaten?
I’d say, given the video itself, it should be easy to point out where the material is questionable. For example, do you dispute that China adheres to a doctrine called “unrestricted warfare”? Or that HBO produced a documentary on electronic voting machines that warned they are easily hacked? Or that a prominent CCP official boasted about being able to influence the core circle of power in the U.S.?
My only rule for choosing items to share here is that I find them interesting and capable of inspiring discussion. I would caution against making assumptions beyond that.
LikeLike
You find them to be fertilizer to be spread. If anyone else were to posit something based in bullshit but did NOT support your delusional world view, you would be all over it.
I have thrown the bullshit flag at you and you don’t like. I don’t give a shit. Sources are as important as the information provided. You have a real bad tendency to poo-poo ANYTHING from WAPO or NYT. Your attempts to explain are more often than not bigger piles of fertilizer that the conspiracy crapola you believe to be worthy of discussion. Keep feeding the tin foil hat theories and I’ll increase my stake in Alcoa.
LikeLiked by 1 person