3 ms·
Sure, I’m curious; however, you are merely making an assertion that 1) these events happened the way you’re presenting them, 2) there is no legitimate reason fo
by germinalphrase 6y ago
Sure, I’m curious; however, you are merely making an assertion that 1) these events happened the way you’re presenting them, 2) there is no legitimate reason for the events to have happened as you’re presenting them, 3) this constitutes a conspiracy to commit election fraud, and 4) this indicates the election was wrongly decided.
- ctdonath 6y ago1. The incidents are well documented in general news media. 2. Illegal to count votes without observers present. 3. Between deceptive removal of observers, and subsequent dramatic change in counters’ behaviors per video recordings, conspiracy is at least a reasonable suspicion of not proven outright. 4. Vote tally for one candidate spiked from decisive loss to commanding lead in minutes during this period. Considering you’ve moved the goalposts for this subthread, from “no evidence” to “prove intent”, I’ll consider my point made.
- loceng 6y agoSo you have a link(s) you can share to said media that we can review?