Mail ballots and the custody story

The claim is narrower than the mood that usually carries it. It says ballots are diverted or altered in large numbers after a voter gives one up and before a count. That is a physical claim. It can be supported by a broken chain, a reconciliation that does not close, or a record of altered ballots. It is not supported by a general distrust of institutions.

What shows up on X is mostly procedure treated as proof. People photograph drop boxes, recirculate affidavits from older disputes, and describe ordinary curing rules as a hidden step where a ballot could be swapped. The volume is high. New primary documents are scarce.

Election offices publish chain-of-custody policies, staffing rules, and reconciliation totals. Those records show a system with real unevenness: late challenges, observer access that differs by place, and signature checks that are not one national standard. Uneven procedure is not the same exhibit as a diverted tray of ballots.

This file moves when a numbered reconciliation, a court finding, or an internal log changes that balance. Until then the posts are the lane, and the lane is not the proof.