The rules may be “applied equally and judiciously for everyone”, not that I believe it, but that is like applying the law against stealing bread equally to rich and poor.
One is against "inciting unlawful conduct to prevent a peaceful transfer of power". OK, but no rule against those who would prevent a peaceful continuation of power?
They ban "disputed claims that could undermine faith in the process". Um, what? We're no longer allowed to discuss problems? IMHO that's almost an admission that the problems are real. If you find a real problem, all it takes is one person to dispute it, and then you're muted. This sounds like an attempt to tamp down the outrage that we'll have over any irregularities, brushing any fraudulent outcome under the carpet.
One is against "inciting unlawful conduct to prevent a peaceful transfer of power". OK, but no rule against those who would prevent a peaceful continuation of power?
They ban "disputed claims that could undermine faith in the process". Um, what? We're no longer allowed to discuss problems? IMHO that's almost an admission that the problems are real. If you find a real problem, all it takes is one person to dispute it, and then you're muted. This sounds like an attempt to tamp down the outrage that we'll have over any irregularities, brushing any fraudulent outcome under the carpet.