Claims in 'Duty to Warn' Letter to Harris Alleging Compromised Election Are Misleading, But Still Alarming - eviltoast
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?

  • saltesc@lemmy.world
    1211·
    21 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
      233·
      21 hours ago

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

    • grue@lemmy.worldEnglish
      61·
      17 hours ago

      Remember when they demanded a hand recount, got it, and then kept lying about the results even after they were verified?

      That’s the difference.

    • macniel@feddit.org
      135·
      21 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
          64·
          20 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
            7·
            19 hours 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

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        22·
        15 hours ago

        Their “theory” amounts to, “the Internet exists”. They make no specific claim of a breach in election security and have no evidence of a breach. It’s all purely, “somebody could have reprogrammed the machines at some unknown time and place.”

        They have no theory for how such a reprogramming would be distributed. Just fear mongering about how computers can be programmed to do anything.