Reply #52: Actually, the way I look at it....

[Chi]

Is it is an old communicational mistake.

If you try and have an intelligent discussion with someone, and their basic understandings/definitions are different, you waste time and patience.

Now, as I said in post 46...
"If your opinion is there is no valid 'evidence' of election fraud (never mind proof), so be it as well."

You just agreed with that again, so I can only assume it is your final opinion.

As for the other statement in post 46...
"If your opinion is that circumstantial evidence outside a courtroom can never produce proof, so be it."

This is my 5th post to try and get your opinion, and I'm still not clear.
Do you agree with that statement or not?


Edited to change incorrect post numbers