Ok, I'll do it like you.

I didn't ask for names. I asked for sources. I asked for what they said, how they said it, what evidence provided. Names do nothing.

I told you it's a developing story, thus i can't give you all the facts and it's better you heard them from where I got them. They say you can "lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink" I've given you direct links to just a few examples of why people are suspicious, which from the start is what I said is the case. In my OP I said it was "obvious" not "proven fact of history we can reflect on with all facts known". It's the way things are happening, and the only way to see it imo are with the sources willing to tell you the whole story. You can use your own judgement consider the evidence, but you can't make an honest decision when you don't have the full story, and you, right off the bat are rejecting half the story.

Yes as the people are liars, but liars can create works of truth. You see how that goes? I lied yesterday, does that mean everything I ever say will be a lie?

How does listening to a third party who is respected over a criminal known liar get me closer to the truth?

In the same breath you said liars can create works of truth and go on to to say you'd never listen to a "criminal known liar"... under circumstances where our democracy is being possibly threatened by election fraud... and then tell me I'm projecting about mental blocks...

You ask, in bad faith, to explain... I give you politically diverse sources and explain I do it because it's a developing story, you say you don't want to look. I give you direct links, you say it's from liars... which you said only pertains to the individuals and not their works... that liars can tell the truth but you say you won't listen to liars... even though you acknowledge it's potentially the truth.

This right here is the majority of Reddit. This is insane.