Anonymous ID: 88e706 Nov. 12, 2018, 11:30 p.m. No.3881338   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1361

>>3881298

Of course not, I already assumed a sting was occurring before anon's post. You really think POTUS would let blatant fraud slide unfettered? He wouldn't but you can't forget our research is just a glimpse, it'll never show the full picture irregardless of us having "more than we know".

Anonymous ID: 88e706 Nov. 12, 2018, 11:45 p.m. No.3881412   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1444

>>3881361

Monitoring isn't illegal, anon and actions happens regardless of what you think, otherwise operations like the one in Seattle wouldn't happen. That aside, state rights don't trump federal mandates stemming from our nation's constitution, especially when they undermine the very foundations of democracy and prove we've been unknowingly living in a dictatorship for years already. Either way you have a dictatorship from your perspective, the difference being that Trump is fighting for The People, a regular fucking Maximus Aurelius giving us our country back.

Anonymous ID: 88e706 Nov. 13, 2018, 12:06 a.m. No.3881511   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1531

>>3881484

Good lord, chill out. If it is being run in-tandem with the states then there's no issue, why would there be if they're only monitoring activity and not actually handling ballots prior to count? Once ballots are confirmed, they need only cross-reference social security numbers, living and citizenship status. There's NOTHING wrong with that, period.

Anonymous ID: 88e706 Nov. 13, 2018, 12:23 a.m. No.3881565   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1573

>>3881531

Kek, seems like a backpedal but I'll take it. There's a thin veil between sting and cooperation with them, only the intent makes a difference. To suggest that is the extent of the operation is pretty trusting of you or plain gullible, not sure which.

Anonymous ID: 88e706 Nov. 13, 2018, 12:36 a.m. No.3881598   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>1605

>>3881573

I said it could be but states can equally refuse cooperation, so what's to stop election interference when there's no oversight? Nothing. How then do you catch them in the act? A sting, likely approved by the DOJ and Senate in closed session. It doesn't have to be overtly intrusive as you seem to think it is.

Anonymous ID: 88e706 Nov. 13, 2018, 12:54 a.m. No.3881637   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>3881622

Welp, now I'm right back to thinking this was a sting in conjunction with regular monitoring. No oversight means blind trust and I'm not okay with that, nobody should be but I do expect full declas of the case's operation, as in how they arrived at such wrong-doing and public hearings for the accused.