Hi Yoda,
Since you're pressing me on this - yes, I was not aware of the refutations of claims that I had mentioned.
Thanks for responding, and saying this. I see no reason to have been cagey, since if it were otherwise anyone would have simply said "yes, I knew that." I hope it's obvious by now I don't care to do the Internet dunking thing of "if you didn't know that thing your opinion is invalid," so admissions like this only serve to move the conversation along. I have no intention of using them to end it, or try to invalidate anyone's position. I pressed the issue only because it suggests a related problem:
I think it's fine to not know these things, but I don't think it's fine to even entertain the accusations--much less
repeat them, sans qualifiers initially!--without making any attempt to learn them, either. You must see the problem here, yeah? Simple facts exist, that you can find in
literally seconds, but no attempt to learn them is made. I think any reasonable person has to be a little self-reflective here, because it's clearly a case of not
wanting to hear any contradictions.
Unless you have another explanation I'm unaware of. Or another definition of dishonesty that doesn't accompany a total disregard for easily available facts. Maybe you can quibble with "lie," but it sure isn't honest. And neither is the hyperbole about "5,000 eyewitness accounts" in response to a simple request for any hard evidence at all.
P.S. I'm just posting links SIMPLY to show that these stories are out there and being reported - as to the veracity of each one, I don't have the time to do in-depth Internet investigations on every claim that is reported by alleged news sites. As we know, the Trump administration has filed suit on some of these issues and they are currently in litigation. The sites are ones that came up in searches - I neither endorse the sites nor know anything about their affiliations if any.
That's fine as a disclaimer, but I'm curious as to how many of these you plan to follow up on? I'm sure it's very easy, in a giant messy election with 150+ million votes, to find plenty of run-of-the-mill typos and irregularities, most of which get explained or sorted out afterwards, and none of which suggest deliberate fraud or have the potential to change the outcome.
Think of how easy it is to notice and pass along all of these...and then never think of them again. Very easy to do that and go on believing the election was fraudulent, even creating that impression in the minds of anyone who read the things you shared, only to conveniently avoid spending a few seconds trying to invalidate them, or checking a bit later to see if any really withstood scrutiny. And if you don't do that, then what value are the reports, since they get passed along with they conform with existing beliefs, and never even get seen if they don't?
What use are facts if we never allow them to change our minds?