no merit to their claims.
they provide no evidence.
it's up to them filing to provide the evidence.
i saw the witnesses.
lucky they aren't in jail for perjury.
in case you forget, even the supreme court threw it out.
even with impotus stacking.
THEY said no. go away.
you're religious, so it makes sense.
believing what you're told by a carny barker or facts.
see it how you like.
FACTS are FACTS.
not faith.
you can believe the moon is made of cheese.
doesn't make it fact or truth.
you grapple with those differentiations.
that's why you believe carzy sh!t.
1st: Affidavits ARE evidence, moron.
2nd: Evidence is only able to even be presented in court in an evidentiary hearing, and efforts at confirmation of early evidence are done through discovery. Again, NO COURT HAS ALLOWED THIS. Put up or shut up; show me 1 case that has allowed an evidentiary hearing and discovery.
There is PLENTY of evidence available. If you read the
Texas case, it lays the evidence and concerns out quite well. It was not rejected by the courts because of evidence (the court's ruling is basically a paragraph, if you are contesting this point, you will need to provide an actual quote). There are
plenty of other places to find documented evidence as well. And
strong analysis of evidence as well. You can look at
statistical anomalies indicating data manipulation (Benford's Law, for instance).
Broader election abnormalities. Unconstitutional and otherwise questionable rule changes to break chain's of custody, frustrate confirmation of signatures, etc (this is where the TX case focused), shady and contradictory actions by election officials to cover up fraud. Judges literally changing the standard after their initial standard is met, looking to avoid the issue. Plenty of evidence. We even
have them on video counting ballots after kicking out observers, and running ballots multiple times.
Robert Barnes, a practicing attorney with a strong background in election law, summarized it as follows:
This election comes down to the fact most states scrapped their singular check on illegal ballots: the signature-match check on mail-in ballots. Most either watered down the method of making the signature-match check or didn't really enforce it strictly at all. The net effect was millions of illegal ballots cast and counted across the nation, more than the margin of victory in each key swing state. The biggest remedy would be an independently-observed, signature-match-check process. Guess what every state officials refused to do, and is refusing to do? An independently-observed, signature-match-check process. The biggest hurdle for Trump is the likely cowardice of courts & Congress in making this simple remedy available or actionable.
