I'm not familiar with American tort law. Do they do discovery for lawsuits? I thought that was just for litigation.
Either way, this legal filing is pure rhetoric. That alone is why it will be thrown out. "After unsuccessfully filling many unsuccessful lawsuits..." the were unsuccesfully unsuccessful in their un-success.
Seriously?
Also 'they were debunked' is not an argument against claims of voter fraud. What claims were debunked? How were they debunked? Maybe this stuff is explained more in the body of the submission, but I doubt the courts will have much sympathy for this.
Discovery means that both sides have to reveal witnesses and evidence that will be introduced at a trial. They can depose witnesses, under oath. That means the voters would have to turn over all of the voting data to prove Pres. Trump violated their rights. When they do that all of the fraud would be exposed. Not only would they lose but it could lead to all of their votes being tossed by the court and Trump would win Michigan.
"How DARE Donald Trump not count the votes of the proud, totally not fake, peoples in the dilapidated city of Detroit! All Biden votes, real and imagined, must be counted! Person doesn't exist? Well then you're racist!"
Anyone know if there's precedent for using the Voting Rights Act to go after people who influence the decisions of election officials? On that note, 'coerce' essentially means 'threaten', which is a heavy accusation that is completely unfalsifiable. They would have to prove that Trump threatened election officials, and without recording the call, they could never do that unless the people who were supposedly threatened testified against Trump, which won't happen.
Let them prove which votes among the illegal, un watched ballots are which.. then we can talk. On the other hand.. go eat a bag of dicks next time you wanna fuck with an election. I hope they have to lawyer up soon.
Guess they don't know what discovery will do to them.
Thinking the same thing
This will not end they way they think it will.
I'm not familiar with American tort law. Do they do discovery for lawsuits? I thought that was just for litigation.
Either way, this legal filing is pure rhetoric. That alone is why it will be thrown out. "After unsuccessfully filling many unsuccessful lawsuits..." the were unsuccesfully unsuccessful in their un-success.
Seriously?
Also 'they were debunked' is not an argument against claims of voter fraud. What claims were debunked? How were they debunked? Maybe this stuff is explained more in the body of the submission, but I doubt the courts will have much sympathy for this.
Discovery means that both sides have to reveal witnesses and evidence that will be introduced at a trial. They can depose witnesses, under oath. That means the voters would have to turn over all of the voting data to prove Pres. Trump violated their rights. When they do that all of the fraud would be exposed. Not only would they lose but it could lead to all of their votes being tossed by the court and Trump would win Michigan.
The discovery is probably going to be enough to get John James elected
Fuck em.
Well... seems like we should audit the whole state to make sure Trump isn’t trying to cheat!
This is why they stuffed votes in overwhelmingly black cities - so they could play the race card in response to any accusations of fraud.
We cannot allow baseless accusations of racism to control our behavior anymore. It's going to get us killed.
It's not going to matter. Just saying.
Maybe they should sue the people who decided cheating in their district was the best bet.
We should sue them for undermining the process
I love it. You’re disenfranchising black voters by trying to investigate election fraud before certifying. Good luck with that one chief.
So.
From a review on the lawyer's Yelp page:
You can't make this shit up. 🤣🤣🤣
"How DARE Donald Trump not count the votes of the proud, totally not fake, peoples in the dilapidated city of Detroit! All Biden votes, real and imagined, must be counted! Person doesn't exist? Well then you're racist!"
Anyone know if there's precedent for using the Voting Rights Act to go after people who influence the decisions of election officials? On that note, 'coerce' essentially means 'threaten', which is a heavy accusation that is completely unfalsifiable. They would have to prove that Trump threatened election officials, and without recording the call, they could never do that unless the people who were supposedly threatened testified against Trump, which won't happen.
Fuck race. Shit don't matter when the gloves are off
Bring it fuckers.
Let them prove which votes among the illegal, un watched ballots are which.. then we can talk. On the other hand.. go eat a bag of dicks next time you wanna fuck with an election. I hope they have to lawyer up soon.
Clown world.