can you cite one hearing where the witnesses who signed affidavits were called to testify?

That's the core problem. It isn't the court's job to bring witnesses and evidence, it was Rudy's. He didn't do his job.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.202.0_1.pdf

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

The few affidavits I've seen were total junk. There was that one guy, from Texas I think, that they had do an affidavit (for the Michigan suit?) that signed a list of precincts with numbers next to it that had no citation, it gave so source where the numbers might be from, and worst of some of them were from a different State. You present yourself as an expert, in a very serious and important case, and you don't know what state a given precinct is located in?

Come on.

It was so bad one might be inclined to think it was a damn false flag operation to discredit the claim. I have no idea what Rudy thought he was doing?

can you cite one hearing where the witnesses who signed affidavits were called to testify?

That's the core problem. It isn't the court's job to bring witnesses and evidence, it was Rudy's. He didn't do his job.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.202.0_1.pdf

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

The few affidavits I've seen were total junk. There was that one guy, from Texas I think, that they had do an affidavit (for the Michigan suit?) that signed a list of precincts with numbers next to it that had no citation, it gave so source where the numbers might be from, and worst of all were from a different State.

It was so bad one might be inclined to think it was a damn false flag operation to discredit the claim. I have no idea what Rudy thought he was doing?

can you cite one hearing where the witnesses who signed affidavits were called to testify?

That's the core problem. It isn't the court's job to bring witnesses and evidence, it was Rudy's. He didn't do his job.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.202.0_1.pdf

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

The few affidavits I've seen were total junk. There was that one guy in Texas that signed a list of precincts with numbers next to it that had no citation, it gave so source where the numbers might be from, and worst of all were from a different State.

It was so bad one might be inclined to think it was a damn false flag operation to discredit the claim. I have no idea what Rudy thought he was doing?

can you cite one hearing where the witnesses who signed affidavits were called to testify?

That's the core problem. It isn't the court's job to bring witnesses and evidence, it was Rudy's. He didn't do his job.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.202.0_1.pdf

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.

The few affidavits I've seen were junk. There was that one guy in Texas that signed a list of precincts with numbers next to it that had no citation, it gave so source where the numbers might be from, and worst of all were from a different State.

It was so bad one might be inclined to think it was a damn false flag operation to discredit the claim. I have no idea what Rudy thought he was doing?

can you cite one hearing where the witnesses who signed affidavits were called to testify?

That's the core problem. It isn't the court's job to bring witnesses and evidence, it was Rudy's. He didn't do his job.

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057/gov.uscourts.pamd.127057.202.0_1.pdf

One might expect that when seeking such a startling outcome, a plaintiff would come formidably armed with compelling legal arguments and factual proof of rampant corruption, such that this Court would have no option but to regrettably grant the proposed injunctive relief despite the impact it would have on such a large group of citizens. That has not happened. Instead, this Court has been presented with strained legal arguments without merit and speculative accusations, unpled in the operative complaint and unsupported by evidence.