Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sdgla who wrote (755802)	1/24/2022 12:23:53 PM
From: i-node	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 793772

I've not seen compelling proof of fraud. The election was, nonetheless, "stolen" in my view, through the use of tactics that were not fraud but did constitute blatant cheating. IN reality, I doubt a fraud determination is possible in the short two month period during which that decision might made. The discovery, alone, would take longer than two months for a legitimate fraud trial in most cases. So, it is very bogus standard. Between political parties of good character, the standard should be "cheating". Which, of course, may or may not be part of a "crime". There was mishandling of ballots, but no judge is going to throw out votes. I would argue that if the chain of custody is lost for ballots, those ballots should never be counted. Procedures should make verification of chain of custody a condition precedent to counting. Otherwise, why bother with chain of custody. We do have a cheating problem, however. We had zuckerberg buy a seat in hundreds of election offices around the country, and notably, the six that mattered -- and those six he didn't just buy but he bought them outright -- including control of the process. There was massive cheating by making last-minute changes to the law that should never have happened. Any Republicans who supported these changes needs to be run out of office on a rail -- it was apparent long before the election what was happening here. IN Wisconsin, there is documentation that some of the office personnel were extremely uncomfortable with the use of that private money to fund the counting offices. The list is very long. But none of meets the stiff requirement of fraud. IMO, that should not be a requirement to fix a stolen election.