Um...they aren't really using the fraud much in the case. It's mostly about their election rules being unconstitutional because they didn't go through their respective legislatures.
It's very difficult to prove that there was fraud, because obviously who committed the fraud made sure that it was not possible to prove it.
We have affidavits about it, but it's difficult to argue that they affect enough ballots to change the outcome.
Therefore they have built a case only on the basis of the proven facts.
It's very difficult to prove that there was fraud, because obviously who committed the fraud made sure that it was not possible to prove it.
not really.
just do an audit with signature verification. Also, assume fraud in any case where it turns out the ballots, or envelops have been destroyed or decoupled.
i thought they were supposed to keep batches of ballots together with batches of their envelopes. So individual ballots are decoupled, but you should be able to audit the envelopes for a specific batch and know how many votes in there are illegal, even if you can't know which specific ones.
I agree. Taking a fraud case to SCOTUS would probably not even get accepted. Taking a MAJOR constitutional state vs. state case to them, they almost have no choice.
SOME of the fraud is easy to prove, such as the dead people, the people who moved etc. What I've seen is they've pointed those out and the states are outright ignoring the fact that they even exist. To me, if any election official is shown someone ineligible to vote and still counts that vote, that election official should immediately be brought up on criminal charges by the state's AG. Including the SOS if they certify the results knowing there is fraud in them.
Um...they aren't really using the fraud much in the case. It's mostly about their election rules being unconstitutional because they didn't go through their respective legislatures.
That's what they should do.
It's very difficult to prove that there was fraud, because obviously who committed the fraud made sure that it was not possible to prove it. We have affidavits about it, but it's difficult to argue that they affect enough ballots to change the outcome.
Therefore they have built a case only on the basis of the proven facts.
I know you're not arguing this point, but this is complete bullshit.
Even just the sample of confirmed fraudulent vote found by Matt Braynard is enough to win every swing state.
not really. just do an audit with signature verification. Also, assume fraud in any case where it turns out the ballots, or envelops have been destroyed or decoupled.
Every ballot has been decoupled from the envelope. It's part of the legitimate process (unfortunately).
So you truly don't have evidence of fraud anymore.
You might have envelopes missing, but you don't know which ballots correspond to them.
i thought they were supposed to keep batches of ballots together with batches of their envelopes. So individual ballots are decoupled, but you should be able to audit the envelopes for a specific batch and know how many votes in there are illegal, even if you can't know which specific ones.
Yes, it's a case aimed at the originalists at SCOTUS.
<3 ACB <3
If this legal maneuver works, it will cement the Federalist Society as one of the most effective legal organizations in America’s history.
Enough ballots to make a difference has been shown I thought, in multiple states.
I agree. Taking a fraud case to SCOTUS would probably not even get accepted. Taking a MAJOR constitutional state vs. state case to them, they almost have no choice.
SOME of the fraud is easy to prove, such as the dead people, the people who moved etc. What I've seen is they've pointed those out and the states are outright ignoring the fact that they even exist. To me, if any election official is shown someone ineligible to vote and still counts that vote, that election official should immediately be brought up on criminal charges by the state's AG. Including the SOS if they certify the results knowing there is fraud in them.