Election fraud and the Democrats' suspicious conduct - American Thinker For example, in United States v. Trullo, 809 F.2d 108, 112 (1st Cir. 1987), a case involving cocaine distribution, it was not error to defer to a police officer’s conclusion that the defendant was acting suspiciously when he had a chat with a third party who got into the car, the two drove to a deserted street, and then, after a short chat, the third party got out of the car and walked right back to his starting point. If it looks like a drug deal, that’s sufficient on-the-ground evidence to arrest someone. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, uh, that's been debunked. Not. Scott Adams has taken note of the correlation between suspicious behavior and criminal activity. In one of his videos, he made the point that, when bullying poll workers in Democrat precincts chase out Republican witnesses, those poll workers have essentially admitted that they are cheating. No!!!! Someone took that video footage and spliced it with footage of the behavior Adams was describing. The resulting video is short and powerful: https://youtu.be/rNM3K0cH2tc Kyle Becker @kylenabecker Here's how you know Democrats' lying "fact check" is a bunch of garbage. Fulton County falsely reported it sent the ballot counters home on election night. Then how was ballot counting after that point caught on video 'normal'? Don't believe a single word they say. Period.🔻 End of story.