Once again, you're being disingenuous. This is about irregularities that have to be investigated to determine whether or not it was intentional and favored one candidate over the other. This case is most definitely an irregularity. Is it intentional, yes. Did it favor one candidate over another...that requires an investigation which the democrat is in lockstep against. Why? We would still to determine the motive. Did he think was helping one candidate over another?
So let's get away from the fake narrative about voter fraud and the media favorite "wide spread" voter fraud. Nothing wide spread about targeting one or two counties in six states. It does allow a mouthpiece to go in front of a camera and say "there is no evidence of wide spread voter fraud".
Originally Posted by the_real_Barleycorn
And I keep asking you since you what "irregularities" do you think exist in the 2020 elections? The number of people voting exceeding registration is false. Every claim of voter irregularities has been explained in detail as to why they are false.
"Wide spread" to me means having to find irregularities that would change or dismiss 10,000 or so votes in Arizona, even if it is in only one county. That's a lot of votes whether it be in California, Texas, or Alaska. Or Arizona. It would require several or many people working in tandem to pull off such an "irregularity". And there is absolutely no proof at this point in time that a single vote in Arizona was fraudulent.