The problem is that for any issue one can always find an expert that will agree with them. Covid, climate change and so on.
So Powell shows affidavits from experts saying it is likely there was a fraud. Dominion and Biden show experts that will tell NY Times Data feed is not reliable, and the results while unlikely are not impossible.
Decide one way or the other... that’s what courts do. For dominion and the media to say this is unfounded or out of no where is a total lie. If a reasonable person hears “this has never happened” and I show them it happened yesterday, what should they do?
MI case is a good example. Mr Kallman asked for an injunction, to put certification on hold to be able to audit results to check for any irregularities.
And the court said: no, but you can go ahead and file a fraud case if you have evidence to prove it.
It is not likely courts throw out election results because of NY Times data feed, unfortunately.
On a contrary, since a judge that would flip a state from Biden to Trump would instantly become a new target of a worldwide hate mob, a wise judge will only rule for Trump if he’s presented with hard fraud evidence that cannot be interpreted in any other way.
In PA, judges changed election laws, not legislators. The change allowed additional ballots to be cast after polls closed. Even if those votes are real, they're illegally cast per the law. That's how I understand it at least. Is there another way to interpret that?
In some cases it was the governor, not even judges. Yes, these were illegal changes according to PA law, but my hopes that a PA court will overturn are slim. And I’m not sure SCOTUS will step that far into PA law.
They can only be considered to cast “illegally” when a court makes such determination. And that case has already been litigated up to PA Supreme Court so as of now these “illegal” votes are very much legal.
The problem is that for any issue one can always find an expert that will agree with them. Covid, climate change and so on.
So Powell shows affidavits from experts saying it is likely there was a fraud. Dominion and Biden show experts that will tell NY Times Data feed is not reliable, and the results while unlikely are not impossible.
And what is the court supposed to do?
Decide one way or the other... that’s what courts do. For dominion and the media to say this is unfounded or out of no where is a total lie. If a reasonable person hears “this has never happened” and I show them it happened yesterday, what should they do?
MI case is a good example. Mr Kallman asked for an injunction, to put certification on hold to be able to audit results to check for any irregularities.
And the court said: no, but you can go ahead and file a fraud case if you have evidence to prove it.
It is not likely courts throw out election results because of NY Times data feed, unfortunately.
A wise judge will fall on the side of highest probability. Case closed.
That’s not what has been happening so far.
On a contrary, since a judge that would flip a state from Biden to Trump would instantly become a new target of a worldwide hate mob, a wise judge will only rule for Trump if he’s presented with hard fraud evidence that cannot be interpreted in any other way.
In PA, judges changed election laws, not legislators. The change allowed additional ballots to be cast after polls closed. Even if those votes are real, they're illegally cast per the law. That's how I understand it at least. Is there another way to interpret that?
In some cases it was the governor, not even judges. Yes, these were illegal changes according to PA law, but my hopes that a PA court will overturn are slim. And I’m not sure SCOTUS will step that far into PA law.
They can only be considered to cast “illegally” when a court makes such determination. And that case has already been litigated up to PA Supreme Court so as of now these “illegal” votes are very much legal.
Have a brain and then use it?