6547 BREAKING EXCLUSIVE: Accurate List of 2020 Election Fraud Cases Shows 81 Cases Total, 30 Still Active – And NOT ONE SINGLE COURT Has Allowed Evidence to be Argued (www.thegatewaypundit.com) posted 82 days ago by Deemike 82 days ago by Deemike +6548 / -1 317 comments share 317 comments share save hide report block hide child comments Comments (317) sorted by: top new old worst You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread. ▲ 3 ▼ – SparrowHawk 3 points 81 days ago +3 / -0 Is there a way to show that none have allowed evidence to be shown? I've tried telling normies, but they can't believe that part permalink save report block reply ▲ 4 ▼ – maga_mama_757 4 points 81 days ago +4 / -0 This is the site the article links to: http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm You'll see all the reasons cases weren't seen under the "disposition" category. There's also a column called "decided on merit" and every case says NO. permalink parent save report block reply ▲ 1 ▼ – SparrowHawk 1 point 81 days ago +1 / -0 Thank you. From looking briefly, though, a lot of the cases have 'Yes' on Decided on Merit. Are these different types of cases? Just for my own clarification, lack of standing means that the court decided that the plaintiff did not have the right to file the case? permalink parent save report block reply
Is there a way to show that none have allowed evidence to be shown? I've tried telling normies, but they can't believe that part
This is the site the article links to:
http://wiseenergy.org/Energy/Election/2020_Election_Cases.htm
You'll see all the reasons cases weren't seen under the "disposition" category. There's also a column called "decided on merit" and every case says NO.
Thank you. From looking briefly, though, a lot of the cases have 'Yes' on Decided on Merit. Are these different types of cases?
Just for my own clarification, lack of standing means that the court decided that the plaintiff did not have the right to file the case?