I'm gonna need a citation for the claim that I "swore there was absolutely no voter fraud in 2020." https://twitter.com/vjeannek/status/1376977716809981954 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread
-
Dan McLaughlin Retweeted
There is no inconsistency in arguing that we should be against voter fraud *even though we have no evidence that it occurred at sufficient scale to change the outcome of the 2020 election across three states each decided by more than ten thousand votes* https://twitter.com/vjeannek/status/1376980742253731843 …
Dan McLaughlin added,
This Tweet is unavailable.9 replies 4 retweets 33 likesShow this thread -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @FayeKnoozstrik1
Yes - if it results in enough illegal votes to change the outcome. But it did not.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @FayeKnoozstrik1
One, not all rules changes are illegal. Two, they thought it might be even closer. Or at least, they weren't sure.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
I think SCOTUS should have taken the PA case, but the reason courts would not take the cases was precisely because, to have standing to challenge an illegality, you have to show that it affected enough votes to alter the outcome.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.