18
Comments (12)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
Carter_Druse 1 point ago +1 / -0

Again, the decision was based on very flimsy grounds—and transparently so. The ruling actually made the following point (in addition to others):

Contestants' own expert witness ... also testified that he has no personal knowledge that any voting fraud occurred.

Wow, no personal knowledge. That's enough evidence for me.

It's almost as if the lower courts are purposefully showing that their rulings are illegitimate ...