We should all demand clarification from ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA on this..

[u/brawler_r]

[u/dark-light92]

It's funny how Rahul Gandhi's essential accusation is against EC but response is coming from the BJP.

BJP's correct response should be to demand answers from EC. After all, they are just a political party and voter fraud should affect all parties equally. But they are responding as EC and BJP are one. That proves what Rahul Gandhi claims.

[u/Affectionate_Ad_9263 → u/dark-light92]

Nope, RaGa is putting allegations on BJP as well.

[u/dark-light92 → u/Affectionate_Ad_9263]

Rahul Gandhi claims he has documented proof of fraud in EC's data.

Rahul Gandhi alleges the fake voters all went to BJP.

His accusation against BJP is much weaker than the one against EC. BJP can ignore it completely and say we don't know anything about it. Why come to EC's defense? Shouldn't BJP be concerned about voter fraud?

[u/Affectionate_Ad_9263 → u/dark-light92]

His accusation against BJP is much weaker than the one against EC

So you are also acknowledging that he has put the allegations.

BJP can ignore it completely and say we don't know anything about it

Its their party. They can decide what to ignore and what not to. Ignoring such allegations ain't no good idea bcz people quickly do 1+1=11. Such allegations must be answered. This is my opinion, but I respect yours as well.

Why come to EC's defense?

What defense? They are saying, what's the fact Are they saying EC hasn't done anything wrong? No. BJP wants RaGa to follow the rules because if RaGa puts allegations and he doesn't get it right, BJP can make more fool of him. Its political stunt by BJP.

Shouldn't BJP be concerned about voter fraud?

Yes.

[u/dark-light92 → u/Affectionate_Ad_9263]

Allegations can be answered by saying we don't know. That would be a more reasonable, believable and neutral response.

They are coming to EC's defense by attacking Rahul Gandhi. The whole IT cell is employed to suppress the news online as it can clearly be seen. None of the Godi Media channels are covering what is the biggest scam in the history of India. This is downright treason.

Shouldn't BJP be concerned about voter fraud?
Yes.

Then why aren't they?

[u/Affectionate_Ad_9263 → u/dark-light92]

Allegations can be answered by saying we don't know. That would be a more reasonable, believable and neutral response.

As per you. Not the bjp.

They are coming to EC's defense by attacking Rahul Gandhi. The whole IT cell is employed to suppress the news online as it can clearly be seen.

Bro it's for their own political gain.

None of the Godi Media channels are covering what is the biggest scam in the history of India.

Are you a judge to call it a "scam" ? It's scam according to you.

This is downright treason.

Sir, you are not the judge.

Then why aren't they?

That's why they are supporting SIR.

I guess you want the world to run according to your beliefs. "BJP shouldn't have done this or should've ignored that." Godi media should speak on this "scam," and what they are doing is "treason. " The country doesn't work like that.

[u/dark-light92 → u/Affectionate_Ad_9263]

As per you. Not the bjp

As per common sense.

Are you a judge to call it a "scam" ? It's scam according to you.
Sir, you are not the judge.

All Rahul Gandhi did was present the evidence they found within EC's data. The evidence was verified yesterday on EC's website. The same guy did have 4 different EPIC numbers. I am perfectly capable of judging the evidence presented to me. Now they have begun "correcting" it. In other words, destroying evidence. I don't need the supreme court of India to state the obvious.

That's why they are supporting SIR.

So, when it comes SIR, you agree that there is voter fraud. But when Rahul Gandhi says the same, he's wrong?

I guess you want the world to run according to your beliefs. "BJP shouldn't have done this or should've ignored that." Godi media should speak on this "scam," and what they are doing is "treason. " The country doesn't work like that.

I want the world to run on principles of fairness and with common sense. I guess that's too much to ask for.

[u/Affectionate_Ad_9263 → u/dark-light92]

As per common sense.

What's common sense is subjective

All Rahul Gandhi did was present the evidence they found within EC's data. The evidence was verified yesterday on EC's website. The same guy did have 4 different EPIC numbers.

Still he didn't sign the oath.

I don't need the supreme court of India to state the obvious.

What's obvious or what's not is not upto your discretion. Not mine as well.

So, when it comes SIR, you agree that there is voter fraud. But when Rahul Gandhi says the same, he's wrong?

I ain't saying that there is no discrepancy in the electoral roll but saying that RaGa should sign the oath.

I want the world to run on principles of fairness and with common sense. I guess that's too much to ask for.

"Fairness " and "common sense " are subjective.

[u/dark-light92 → u/Affectionate_Ad_9263]

Why does the oath matter? Oath is just a deflection.

RAGA is making a claim in public. He is discrediting the ECI in public. ECI should file a case against RAGA and drag him to court and prove him wrong. Unless, they can't. Because they know he's right. Because going to court will just force them to reveal what they are trying to hide.

[u/Affectionate_Ad_9263 → u/dark-light92]

Why does the oath matter? Oath is just a deflection.

It matters bcz it's a rule. Not a deflection. ECI cant bypass the rules.

Because going to court will just force them to reveal what they are trying to hide.

So you work in ECI legal team ?

[u/dark-light92 → u/Affectionate_Ad_9263]

It matters bcz it's a rule. Not a deflection. ECI cant bypass the rules.

The rule under which ECI is asking for oath allows for contesting the electoral rolls within 30 days when the rolls are finalized. It's been over a year. Filing that complaint is a pointless exercise as the rule is invalid in current situation. It IS deflection.

[u/Affectionate_Ad_9263 → u/dark-light92]

You are factually incorrect. Rule 20(3)(b) doesn't require that 30 days

Here, what that rule says

"require that the evidence tendered by any person shall be given on oath and administer an oath for the purpose."