You’re right, that did all happen! But your examples had proof. Y’know, evidence?
The elections have been audited. They’ve been audited again. In one state, we’re on a third audit — because we just can’t find proof of that darn voter fraud that is supposedly so clear. All we seem to be able to garner is some handwritten affidavits, typo-ridden lawsuits, and half-baked conspiracy theories about bamboo, UV ink, and Chyna.
to which they have since been demonstrated to have been wrong
Wanna show me another audit that said the first audit is wrong? Or is this the typical case where you just drop the “here’s the evidence” link and run.
That site legitimately considers a handwritten affidavit about being called a “Karen” while in line to vote as evidence of voter fraud, by the way.
The source your citing reported a year later, after an audit, that this wasn’t the result of voter fraud.
https://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/2017/02/09/state-audit-finds-questionable-votes-detroit/97696820/
You’re right, that did all happen! But your examples had proof. Y’know, evidence?
The elections have been audited. They’ve been audited again. In one state, we’re on a third audit — because we just can’t find proof of that darn voter fraud that is supposedly so clear. All we seem to be able to garner is some handwritten affidavits, typo-ridden lawsuits, and half-baked conspiracy theories about bamboo, UV ink, and Chyna.
I take your implication is that an audit is wrong if it doesn’t find voter fraud?
That’s not the point of an audit my guy.
I'm just glad to see your support for forensic audits, that will shed light on the election.
Wanna show me another audit that said the first audit is wrong? Or is this the typical case where you just drop the “here’s the evidence” link and run.
That site legitimately considers a handwritten affidavit about being called a “Karen” while in line to vote as evidence of voter fraud, by the way.