Posted on 11/07/2020 2:30:57 PM PST by Hojczyk
It’s confusing to hear reporters “You have to have hard evidence before you make accusations” about improprieties in the 2020 election.
That’s untrue. Here are ten relevant points.
1. Accusations are made all the time, spurring investigations that may or may not turn up hard evidence.
2 Evidence doesn’t walk up, knock on your door, and present itself.
3 Those guilty of malfeasance or crimes tend to try to hide their acts.
4. Some evidence can only be gathered if the accusers are granted access to it.
5 Lack of evidence in hand is not proof that no crime occurred.
6 It’s reasonable and important to ask the questions and investigate.
7 Claiming it’s irrational to even ask the question only generates more suspicion.
7 Fraud doesn’t have to be “widespread” to make a difference.
8 Those who claim there was “no fraud” are making that statement without evidence. It’s impossible for anyone to know.
9 Ultimately, if no convincing evidence is presented, no charges will be filed and the question will have been answered.
10 There was a time not long ago when reporters would search for evidence, firsthand, rather than demand someone give it to them.
There’s no dispute there were, at the very least, errors involving many thousands of ballots in the 2020 race.
Considering the facts that have been revealed over the past four years, it would be irrational not to ask questions and suspect that bad actors would continue to do all they can to negatively impact President Trump.
Thorough investigations will flag improprieties, if any occurred, by either side.
It is not wrong for both sides to fight for every legal vote. Allowing the process to be thoroughly fleshed out, will allow for greater confidence in the final result during a very divisive time.
(Excerpt) Read more at sharylattkisson.com ...
If it was a bug it would randomly switch votes evenly.
But we know it was a feature and not a bug.
Good point.
The problem is no court's going to order some big election disrupting inspection absent significant, specific evidence of a widespread problem.
The campaigns and parties have had a year or more to examine and sometimes litigate the election process in each state. Every state allows observers from both sides, and when there's a problem like in Philly where the observation station was too far away they can go to court and get it changed.
Given this the burden on either campaign to have the courts intervene is pretty high.
Thanks. I and agree, the threshold for disputing an election should, rightfully, be high. We don't want every election result being disrupted simply because the declared loser can afford an attorney. Even small town candidates probably already have more than one that they could afford and use to file frivolous complaints.
However, in some of these cases, what we ALREADY know is extremely suspicious, if not damning. Not only were appointed ballot watchers denied access, a lot of them were even denied access AFTER courts had ordered they be allowed to return, at least for some time. Not to mention the mixing of ballots that had been ordered by the US Supreme Court to remain separate.
So these aren't just some two-bit complaints put together by a sore loser. These are US court rulings that were being ignored. For what reason is the question, but any honest judge would at least strongly consider discovery to find out more.
Their job now is to provide cover and support for the party they back, the democRATS.
Saying that President Trump has made allegations of election fraud without providing any evidence to support that position is very infuriating, I agree. It is the media who should be investigating and providing the facts and evidence of any voter/election fraud if allegations are made.
But it is exhibit A in the way the media operates today as opposed to 40-50 years ago. They act as a propaganda arm for the DNC
Some people would go so far as to say that the democRATic party acts as the political arm of the major media corporations.
*bookmark
1. Accusations are made all the time, spurring investigations that may or may not turn up hard evidence.
2 Evidence doesn’t walk up, knock on your door, and present itself.
3 Those guilty of malfeasance or crimes tend to try to hide their acts.
4. Some evidence can only be gathered if the accusers are granted access to it.
5 Lack of evidence in hand is not proof that no crime occurred.
6 It’s reasonable and important to ask the questions and investigate.
7 Claiming it’s irrational to even ask the question only generates more suspicion.
7 Fraud doesn’t have to be “widespread” to make a difference.
8 Those who claim there was “no fraud” are making that statement without evidence. It’s impossible for anyone to know.
9 Ultimately, if no convincing evidence is presented, no charges will be filed and the question will have been answered.
10 There was a time not long ago when reporters would search for evidence, firsthand, rather than demand someone give it to them.
p
You should not be in the least surprised as the MSM is merely the propaganda arm of the Demshevik party.
Please read and share this link sent to me by a retired Marine officer.
https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/we-people-demand-verification-ballots-cast-2020-election
We the People Demand VERIFICATION of Ballots Cast in the 2020 Election
Created by D.F. on November 05, 2020
NOTHING destroys a democracy faster than voter fraud... Nothing.
bump
Bump
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.