Here’s hoping that the Philly DA stays true to their word about the people attempting to disrupt and threaten voters will FAFO.
Did you mean “Here’s”? I’m trying to figure out if that is a typo that kinda flipped the meaning of that sentence.
Then again, it’s early and I’m easily confused before coffee.
I don’t think these chicken shits will turn up anywhere
It’s some crazy third-world-country shit that in the United States of America, you’ve almost reached the point of needing to declare martial law during an election period in order to ensure no one gets hurt.
I’ve noticed an extremely heavy police presence today and I’m not even in a swing state.
Stand by. Stand trial.
If they observe unarmed and nonviolently (a lot to ask for, I know) then I actually don’t mind this. One of the things that made Trump’s initial fraud claims so effective is nobody really knew, so the conspiracy theories flourished in the unknown. But if there’s tons of witnesses everywhere, then this just becomes harder to accomplish, not easier.
I hear that but ‘‘witnesses’’ who don’t understand the process are bound to cry foul even when everything is running smoothly. We saw it in 2020.
True. But they’re still adding evidence. We can point to things like the mail worker delivering the mail-in ballots the other day. While sure, a whole bunch of people will see that and cry foul, those people were already lost. But a normal person can watch the video that was recorded and see with their own eyes a postal worker going about their day-to-day job.
I think that video hurt Trump’s fraud claims in the long run, despite it initially going viral as some kind of nefarious plot. They shot themselves in the foot, as they so often do.
I don’t think “normal” people are looking at any of the details. The big lie will be out there regardless.
Also you should consider voter intimidation any time proven violent gangs are hanging around polls, whether they are doing so “peacefully” or not.
edit:
Intimidating conduct can take many forms. For example, courts have found the following conduct to constitute unlawful intimidation:
…efforts to closely follow, monitor, or surveil voters at polling places
and improper threats of potential criminal prosecution, arrest, or other legal action.
I’m not so sure, things are easy to google these days. And yes, I did mention that unarmed and nonviolently was a lot to ask for.
but there are even nonviolent ways they can intimidate people that is against the law.
Intimidating conduct can take many forms. For example, courts have found the following conduct to constitute unlawful intimidation:
…efforts to closely follow, monitor, or surveil voters at polling places
and improper threats of potential criminal prosecution, arrest, or other legal action.
not to mention the mere presence of such a notorious group may be intimidating, it’s like an unspoken threat. I certainly would not feel 100% comfortable with them there - would you?
Yeah that’s a fair point.
Polling places with extra wide wheelchair access better quake in their boots.
