BLAST FROM THE PAST: Sunday, May 14, 2017- LOGIC. ONE WAY TO ENCOURAGE PROPER ANALYSIS: DO NOT COMBINE TWO DISTINCT ISSUES.

 

As the controversy about a possible RUSSIAN INVOLVEMENT IN THE 2016 U.S ELECTION HEATS UP, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE THING PERFECTLY CLEAR;  MY SERIES OF POSTS TITLED, "THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION- SOMETHING IS VERY WRONG...", DOES NOT ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING:  

INFORMATION ACQUIRED, AND DISSEMINATED, THROUGH "HACKING" OR UNAUTHORIZED VISITATION TO ANY FILES, EITHER INDIVIDUAL OR GROUP.

THE MULTI-PART ARTICLE,"THE 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION- SOMETHING IS VERY WRONG...", DEALS WITH CALCULATED AND DELIBERATE ACT(S) OF ALTERING THE VOTING RESULTS IN AT LEAST 5 STATES, WITH THE GOAL OF ENSURING DONALD TRUMPS VICTORY IN THE 2016 ELECTION.  IN THIS POST, I WILL NOT GET INTO THE EVIDENCE, OR MY REASONING, FOR COMING TO THIS CONCLUSION. FOR THAT I REFER 
YOU TO THE SERIES OF POSTS ADDRESSING THE SUBJECT.

WHAT MUST BE MADE CLEAR IS THE FOLLOWING: THE TOPIC OF RUSSIA, OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY, INDIVIDUAL, OR GROUP BEING GUILTY OF TAMPERING WITH THE ELECTION BY PROVIDING ILLEGALLY OBTAINED INFORMATION TO ONE SIDE IN BENEFITTING THEIR CANDIDATE OF CHOICE, IS AN ENTIRELY SEPARATE ISSUE FROM THE SUBJECT MATTER CONTAINED IN MY ARTICLE. 

THE CONCLUSIONS:

X OBTAINED INFORMATION ILLEGALLY, AND PROVIDED IT TO ONE SIDE IN THE DESIRE TO BENEFIT CANDIDATE A...

AND

THE VOTING COUNTS IN ...WERE ALTERED DELIBERATELY, GIVING ELECTORAL VICTORY TO CANDIDATE B...

...ARE SEPARATE AND DISTINCT.  THE TRUTH OF ONE IS NOT DEPENDENT ON THE OTHER. THEY MAY BOTH BE TRUE, OR BOTH FALSE. ONE MAY BE TRUE, AND THE OTHER FALSE. WE MUST NOT ALLOW EVIDENCE, OR LACK OF, IN ONE CASE TO BE USED IN JUDGING THE OTHER.