re: What Are Your Arguments Against Bill Barr’s Determination The Evidence Was Not Fraudulent?

If you want people to trust the system, you need to fix it first.

quote:

---

How could Barr openly ignore it?

---

Barr disagreed with pursuit of a stolen election from the getgo.
Let's repeat that, Barr disagreed with pursuit of a stolen election from the getgo.

You reference Barr's ""Investigation"". Barr's method of investigation would be to send the DOJ's investigative arm out to take a look. The DOJ's investigative arm is referred to as the FBI Soooo....

How many precincts did the FBI investigate?
That answer would be "zero".
THERE WAS NO INVESTIGATION! NONE! ZIP! NADA!

Why?
Because in Barr's warped reasoning, the ramifications of a full-on federal investigation were simply too ugly and too severe regardless of outcome. So it was/is better, in Barr's capitulatory calculations, to pretend/assume/hope things were on the up-and-up.

What Barr (and you) fail to comprehend is without that ugly, horrible, terrible, nasty, unsettling investigation, there will never be a perception of truth in an outcome claiming PotatoBrain garnered 81 million votes, and that is dangerous.

Here's the caveat: A democracy can survive corrupt elections if its society doesn't perceive them as corrupt. A democracy cannot survive if there is widespread perception of electoral corruption ... even if corruption is in fact not widespread.
...

Now we have a hand-picked Kangaroo Court comprised entirely of rabid, mouth-foaming, spittle generating, Anti-Trump Extremists summoning only the witnesses they are certain will bolster their pathological anti-Trump narrative in a made-for-TV infomercial.

Have you asked yourself why?
Why, if the evidence was clear, would a Kangaroo Court stacked 100% with Anti-Trump monkeys be required?
The answer is, it wouldn't be.