2024-10-04 15:25:22
She did not hack into or modify election results. She, weeks after the election had already taken place, illegally accessed the machines to look for evidence of fraud and preserve data from being deleted. The judge punished her extra for genuinely believing fraud occured. [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(39-1-87) Author
2024-10-04 15:46:36
The post says nothing about changing votes. The post accurately reflects her criminal actions. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(41-1-10) Author
2024-10-04 15:58:44
Suggested note is incorrect. "Illegally accessing the voting machine data" is, by definition, hacking it. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(33-1-13) Author
2024-10-04 16:25:43
Original note is showing it's bias in the face of facts NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(14-1-16) Author
2024-10-04 16:31:16
This post is mostly accurate but implies she hacked machines to aid Trump's election. In reality, she hacked them to find evidence of voter fraud, not to commit it. [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(32-7-102) Author
2024-10-04 16:46:50
NNN. Hacking a voting machine is committing voter fraud. Hacking voting machines is bad. NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(43-3-15) Author
2024-10-04 21:48:02
NNN "She did it to help Trump, driven by his big lie that the election was stolen." The post does not say that she hacked it to change the results. It clearly states that she tried to help Trump with his big lie. She committed a crime! NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(32-2-8) Author
2024-10-05 01:04:54
The above notes imply intent, whether honest or not, indemnifies a person from a crime. Breaking into a bank is still illegal, even if the person really really really believed the bank was stealing money from accounts. [Link] NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS(23-1-6) Author