From "no evidence of election fraud" to "no evidence of *widespread* election fraud"
"Widespread" is doing a ton of work in these formulations, in two different ways
Thread
First, there's no agreed-upon definition of "widespread," which allows the user to ignore any and all evidence of voter fraud by saying it doesn't meet their arbitrary threshold of being "widespread"
For example - the Trump campaign alleges ~675k ballots were opened without conservative poll watchers present
Is that enough ballots to be "widespread?"
How many poll watchers need to be wrongfully barred from observing voting/counting before it's "widespread?"
And open up two additional new special counsel investigations:
- Special Counsel to investigate money laundering/tax fraud by the Bidens related to Burisma and the China deals
- Special Counsel to investigate 2020 election fraud
All these Special Counsel investigations should be staffed at least 90% by people who donated to President Trump
Because under the Mueller standard, it's preposterous to think that biases the legal judgment of the lawyers involved
*IF* Biden wins, his DOJ appointees should be forced to swear under oath that they will not interfere in the special counsel investigations in order to be confirmed
We control the Senate, after all, and Trump let the Mueller investigation be completed