[Hoot Gibson]

Why would I accuse him of doing this for either party without a shred of evidence?  Honestly, my first thought was what someone already posted, that he was stealing mail and that the ballots were just junk to him.

---

Remember that just because "Snowflake Trump" says something is true, there is a better than 50% chance that he is lying.

When the L.A. Times omits the party affiliation of a criminal, there is an almost 100 percent chance that the criminal was a Democrat.

I didn't realize that newspapers normally reported the party affiliation of people arrested.  

 Democrat news media also routinely omit the race of suspects who have not been apprehended unless they are white. The bias of the Democrat media in the U.S. is rarely noticed by liberals.

In this particular case, do you think that the party affiliation of a person in possession of 300 stolen ballots is relevant? If I were a reporter covering the story, that would be among the first pieces of information that I would want to know - regardless of whether the person arrested was a registered Republican, a registered Democrat, or a person who had never registered to vote. Why? Because that fact would be of interest to readers of the article and it might shed light on the thief's motive.

These stories rarely turn out like you boys think.

He’s probably on Republican Elder’s payroll and a part of a plan to disenfranchise a few minority/democrat neighborhoods.

There you go, making allegations with not even a hint of evidence to back them up. If he is a Republican, then the article should have included that information, instead of accepting the government's claim that there was no evidence that the theft of 300 blank ballots was related to the recall election. The reporting was shoddy, regardless of what the truth is.