Claims in 'Duty to Warn' Letter to Harris Alleging Compromised Election Are Misleading
www.snopes.com
Its writer alleged, "In my view it is a near certainty the results have been changed at a scale which reversed the [2024] U.S. presidential election."

Here you go, a “real” source. He said there were more bullet ballots than there likely really are, but there’s still a really suspiciously high number of them. How is this not at least worth investigating?

  • macniel
    114·
    4 hours ago

    Damn imagine if true, knowing that your US Government was illegally elected. This really should be investigated for the sake of the entire world.

      • macniel
        142·
        3 hours ago

        according to that planetcritical post I shared, it seems that the public still doesn’t know the actual results of the 2000 election? Doesn’t seem democratic to me.

        • WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.worldEnglish
          5·
          2 hours ago

          It doesn’t seem democratic because America is a corporate plutocracy masquerading as a democracy.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      68·
      3 hours ago

      Seems it’s been investigated enough and no surprises, the numbers are off and allegations based on no evidence.

      Remember when there was a bunch of idiots from the red camp, all bent on the idea Biden stole the election? Well, it’s that and the blue camp has idiots too. This is something we’ll have to get used to now, a bunch of idiots from X claiming Y stole the election.

      • cm0002@lemmy.world
        182·
        3 hours ago

        Except for one MASSIVE difference, Harris isn’t making the claims, calling for violence and to “stop the count”

      • macniel
        82·
        3 hours ago

        but it can’t be that off the margin. from 1% to 7.2% in the case of Arizona, thats highly suspicious. Also the theory shared by those computer scientists is too damn convincing so those ballots should be hand counted, imho.

        https://www.planetcritical.com/p/cyber-security-experts-warn-election-hacked

        Also I will never understand why USA insist on using Computers for voting.

        Or how a winner-takes-it-all approach is in any way fair or reasonable to the people.

          • EndlessApollo@lemmy.worldOPEnglish
            3·
            2 hours ago

            “partially debunking” here basically means “correcting numbers that were slightly too large and clarifying the explanation given is a hypothesis”. This is still suspicious as heck, especially given all the other ways republican politicians and voters and funders have tried to influence and tamper with the election

            • naught@sh.itjust.works
              1·
              1 hour ago

              I mean this puts a bad taste in my mouth for the credibility of the letter:

              In an email, North Carolina State Board of Elections spokesman Patrick Gannon told Snopes, “Without access to confidential data, there is no way that anyone could know what this individual claims to know about North Carolina’s presidential election. North Carolinians cast secret ballots, and cast vote records and ballot images that could potentially provide this information are confidential in North Carolina. My first step in fact-checking this would be to ask the writer to show his work.”

              I welcome investigation & would fully believe if this is corroborated and true. I won’t believe it until then especially when there are crucial discrepancies in tallies that invalidate some (not all) claims from the letter