I don't think that's the link you wanted.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
I think they should substantiate claims of Russian interference and hacking. Otherwise, why bother with a recount?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ToneLocNV
But their claims that RU hacked DNC are not tied to recount claims.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Then why cite that when rationalizing their participation?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ToneLocNV
They're not making their own claims, they're citing IC (and shitty WaPo piece).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
Right, and they're using those claims to support their participation. Can't have it both ways.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ToneLocNV
Actually, no. They cited RU to explain why they did so much work studying whether evidence of hack, which they didn't find.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
I feel like this is splitting hairs. It was cited in the press release announcing their participation.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ToneLocNV
Which you're reading out of context to claim equivalency w/Trump's own-voice unsubstantiated claims.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel
The context is a vote recount, predicated on zero evidence of any fraud or interference.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Trump's campaign is ALSO "active" in recounts. Because Stein made one.
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.