Famous Lawyer Robert Barnes lists large numbers of “irregularities” on a website, HereIstheEvidence.com . As of now, they list 69 separate incidents of election irregularities ranked by “Significance” and “Admissibility Level”.
I am still waiting to hear more details from that lawyer who claimed to have proof that Dominion Software was developed for Venezuela, with the specific intention to rig elections. Until we see more details, this claim doesn’t mean anything.
So long as Trump and his lawyers continue with court law suits, given my limited knowledge of your legal system, and the alleged fraud, I think Trump has a strong chance of winning, regardless of what we were told by the media
The media does not decide elections, so I am told
Courts listen to sworn affidavits, sworn testimony etc. under penalty of perjury etc
IMHO this election will be decided by the Supreme Court
"I think Trump has a strong chance of winning, regardless of what we were told by the media"
Wayne,
What do you base his strong chance of winning on?
I put the odds of him winning at 1 in 100,000.
Several lawyers with no axe to grind, regardless of the out come, have talked about what the actual law is, concerning elections in the USA. It is true that Trump is losing most of the law suits, presently. PA is one state in which the court ordered separation of late ballots. However, to the best of my knowledge, most of these courts, that Trump lost, have a Dem biased judge. Of coarse one can not say this bias is true in any court, just a general statement. But, the important part to know, plaintiffs have the right to appeal a decision and ask a higher court for an opinion . There are several appeals to a higher court in the process, at least in Canada, and I assume your courts are similar. If you look at several states the margin is very small as a % of total votes. 40,000 may sound like a lot but if 21,000 were counted incorrectly, then you have some thing. One witness or poll watcher, told the media, [which may be a biased media] that the poll watcher witnessed 3 ballots for Biden, twice, in three minutes which were actually clearly marked as Trump votes. The situation got bad enough a supervisor was called to that station. So we have evidence of fraud on re-counts. Also, when that Biden staff member said Biden had stolen the election on a hot mic at the podium, which she quickly corrected to say Biden had won, was very telling as to what the actual truth might be
Given the appeal process and not one perjury charge re: witness and their statements to the court Of coarse we have not heard all the witness statements, thus it would be almost impossible if some body was not caught shading the truth.
However given how serious this process seems to be: that is why I said the Supreme court will have to decide
If the lower courts can prove the witness has presented false evidence, that is perjury and jail time. Thus a witness wants to be very sure about testimony in court. So far I am not aware of any perjury, but at the risk of repeating myself, no perjury charges, so far.
In our country, ordinary court judgements move very slowly on appeal. In this case, since it is an election with a deadline, I would guess the appeal process will move quickly
So far I have seen no evidence, other than lower court decisions to support your position. I have given my opinion of why lower court decisions are not the ultimate end game, re: the appeal process..
If you watch TV it is a constant barrage of false Trump this or that
But have you noticed the shift in the media position. At 1st they said there was no fraud, [an agency I forget] stated there was no fraud. Where and when have we heard this before. [Shades of Hillary and 17 agencies]
Now the media admits fraud but not enough to change the out come
This is a developing story that we the people will learn more as time goes by. But to jump to a conclusion such as yours is a bit premature. The media admits fraud, aglorithims [sp] have been developed to show the Dominion machines can be connected to the internet. Anybody can tamper with a machine connected to the internet. Texas refused the Dominion machines. It remains to be proven if the Dominion machines counted correctly. Michigan found false counting but this was brushed off as human error. Was this the only error in some 37 states that used these machines???
Please give me your reasons for your position re: Trump and 1 in 100,000
"Please give me your reasons for your position re: Trump and 1 in 100,000"
Because there is ZERO evidence that would come close to giving him the number of votes he needs to win.
Because the vote count, had him losing by a wide enough margin in 3 states that he needed to win, that there is no way a recount is going to change it.
Recounts never change the outcomes, except for elections that are within a few hundred votes in 1 state or one county and even then, it almost never happens.
He needs 3 states and many tens of thousands of votes.
Actually, I'm tempted to make it 1 in 1,000,000 but knowing how corrupt/dishonest, sneaky/tricky his opponents have been, will dial in the chance that they somehow managed an impossible to fathon scheme that gave Biden many tens of thousands of votes over several states.
Your whole ball of wax is based on that scheme.
But the scheme is just a wild speculative theory with zero evidence.
Regardless, I'm dialing in the possible scheme. Otherwise odds would be less than 1 in a million.
metmike: Here a view from somebody that I respect............but he also sees no evidence of the voter fraud that would have to have occurred to flip the election to Trump.
Imagine if they did find it and flipped it to Trump. The widespread violent rioting and destruction and lack of acceptance for the next 4 years would destroy our country forever. Seriously, forever.
I still would want the legal and honest results but flipping it to Trump now would obliterate our country forever.
It would NEVER be accepted by the majority of people, the MSM, dems, DOJ and other enemies. For 4 years they would do even more to destroy him and block anything he tried to do. There would be another impeachment right away in the house.
It's consequences are unimaginable. The republicans in the house and senate know this. Denying Biden 270 electoral votes by using legal challenges will just dely things and if it comes down to republicans voting because Biden does not have the 270, I think most will still vote for Biden.
Not only because of the description of an apocalypse above that they know would happen............they know its the right thing to do if Biden is going to get 270 eventually.
Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said that Joe Biden isn’t the president elect but is entitled to describe himself as such.
“The president elect doesn’t get named as president elect until at least he has 270 state certification of electors, or his opponent concedes. Neither of that has happened as of now,” the high-profile lawyer told NTD News.
“I think that he is entitled to describe himself as the president elect. At the moment he’s won 305 or so electoral votes and President Trump is entitled to dispute that. That’s freedom of speech. That’s politics. Neither is entitled as a matter of law or constitutionality to say that they are the president elect.”
Dershowitz, who served on Trump’s legal team during the Senate impeachment trial earlier this year, said he believes the Trump legal team is seeking to have the election forced into the House of Representatives, by not letting Biden reach the 270 electoral college votes required to secure the presidency. Republicans have a 26–23–1 state delegation majority in the House of Representatives.
One possible way the Trump campaign can legally get electors to not vote is that if the challenges in court haven’t been resolved, some state secretaries of state, many of whom are Republican, may refuse to certify the vote by mid-December, Dershowitz said.
“That will be challenged in court. And that will be a mess, it would create a constitutional crisis of a kind we haven’t had before,” he said.
He noted that Trump’s lawyers are counting on a constitutional provision that moves the election to the House of Representatives if there is no definitive winner in the Electoral College by mid-December.
“I understand why the Trump legal team is trying to have the the election thrown into the House of Representatives. That’s their constitutional right. And I can’t condemn them for using every possible legal recourse. That’s what lawyers do.”
“I think that the lawsuits in the end will not bring about a reversal of fortune for Donald Trump,” he said. “I think that on January 20, Biden will be elected president and inaugurated as President of the United States, but I have no criticism of the Trump team for fighting and battling and trying everything they can legally, ethically, constitutionally politically, to try to preserve his presidency.”
Trump’s campaign or legal team haven’t publicly described what specific kind of strategy they are employing. Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of lawsuits that have been filed by the Trump campaign in several states, according to Dershowitz.
“One I call the kind of wholesale constitutional lawsuits, like in Pennsylvania, where they’re challenging legally, whether all the votes that came in after Election Day have to be discounted, even if they were voted, even if they were submitted before Election Day,” he said. “That’s a constitutional challenge based on Article Two of the Constitution. It’s wholesale and involves many, many thousands of votes. And that has a good chance of succeeding.”
“The other challenges are retail challenges. They are case by case in a few people who shouldn’t have been eligible to vote, vote. Was there fraud? Was there a computer glitch? Those are much harder, because those require actual trials, witnesses evidence, and they will take time, and it will be very hard for them to succeed,” he said.
He said he is aware that Trump’s lawyers have spoken about potential computer anomalies that, if they turn out to be true, could trigger a “major disruption and shift.”
“We’ve never had anything like this before, because we’ve never had computers play such a major role in the election … The big challenge is whether or not there were computer malfunctions that turned many, many thousands of votes away from Trump and toward Biden, if that turned out to be true. And again, I haven’t seen the evidence. I’ve just heard the lawyers talk about it. That would change a lot of things.”
“And, of course, the American public would be very upset because they’ve been told by the networks who the winner is already. Remember that the networks don’t declare the winner, legally and constitutionally.”