To play Devil's Advocate, what is the legitimate angle here?
To me it sounds like PA disregarded the superficial mail-in ballot handling laws and instead counted every ballot received.
And the implication is that if all of the mail-in ballots that met any of those meager criteria were not counted, Biden would have fewer votes since presumably Biden got the bulk of mail-in votes.
To me, that's not fraud. It may be illegal, but it isn't necessarily deliberate fraud trying to unfairly swing an election. If anything it sounds like fraud that attempts to fairly swing and election by making sure every vote is counted. It's simply counting all the ballots. ALL of them. Instead of counting only the ones that meet the criteria for a mail-in ballot.
Besides the process of counting illegal ballots argument, it is fraud when you deliberately mislead or misrepresent of the fact such in ballot harvesting techniques, and legal voters suffer a "loss" at these illegal ballots committed by "unknown" voters.
Fraud is hard to adjudicate, but the threshold is lower, so the evidence need not be beyond the reasonable doubt.
I would prefer it is election fraud, not necessarily voter fraud, because it is systematic. These things happened in the past, and everyone was aware of it, but it wasn't as "institutionalized" as this federal election.
It just doesn't interest me because it reads like using technicalities to drop probably legitimate votes. Legitimate as in real votes cast by real people.
To play Devil's Advocate, what is the legitimate angle here?
To me it sounds like PA disregarded the superficial mail-in ballot handling laws and instead counted every ballot received.
And the implication is that if all of the mail-in ballots that met any of those meager criteria were not counted, Biden would have fewer votes since presumably Biden got the bulk of mail-in votes.
To me, that's not fraud. It may be illegal, but it isn't necessarily deliberate fraud trying to unfairly swing an election. If anything it sounds like fraud that attempts to fairly swing and election by making sure every vote is counted. It's simply counting all the ballots. ALL of them. Instead of counting only the ones that meet the criteria for a mail-in ballot.
Besides the process of counting illegal ballots argument, it is fraud when you deliberately mislead or misrepresent of the fact such in ballot harvesting techniques, and legal voters suffer a "loss" at these illegal ballots committed by "unknown" voters.
Fraud is hard to adjudicate, but the threshold is lower, so the evidence need not be beyond the reasonable doubt.
I would prefer it is election fraud, not necessarily voter fraud, because it is systematic. These things happened in the past, and everyone was aware of it, but it wasn't as "institutionalized" as this federal election.
Nope. Out out OUT!
Illegal (ballots not meeting criteria) = fraud. There is no difference.
Now if you're talking criminality, that requires proving intent. That's different altogether and goes through different Courts.
It just doesn't interest me because it reads like using technicalities to drop probably legitimate votes. Legitimate as in real votes cast by real people.
It's nothing compared to the weighted race fraud.
Ok so how do you eliminate ONLY the fraud, reconstruct the entire election, and determine an honest count? I agree this would be preferable.