The court trials have not even started yet. The PA court ruling was on a procedural issue, not the massive fraud issue.
Yep. Giving up your evidence allows the opposition to develop counter arguments ahead of time.
I’d like to add to your memo, although it’s not likely anyone in any position to DO anything about it will read the thread..
FOCUS. ON. DOMINION, and the many, overwhelming “irregularities” in the vote count. Like, FIFTY-THREE batches of “votes” being split EXACTLY 50.092 vs. 49.998 (or something like that) to the THIRD DECIMAL POINT, **EXACTLY** the same for Biden v. Trump, over many separate districts - IN. A. ROW based on timestamps.
My God..how freaking STUPID is our team? The vote data is glaringly OBVIOUS, and they’re focused on dumb things like the “mean D guy that wouldn’t let our vote observers in”.
The win is in the Dominion data. NOTHING else matters. NOTHING.
Fighting battles in the court of public opinion is a losing strategy, especially when it's all on the leftists terms.
Careful, the trolls will accuse you of being ignorant, a p***y, a traitor, etc. Ask me how I know...
Then quietly and effectively get it done in court. Quit being showboat. It’s becoming a Hannity tic-toc that never goes off.
FYI....I just heard Jenna Ellis say that the Trump Campaign team is ONLY focusing on Election Official fraud, not machine fraud (that’s Sidney’s focus, per Jenna).
And, that they have only three lawsuits filed, on this Election Official fraud, at this time.
They’re sticking with ‘free and fair’ elections, election integrity, going forward.
I think in most court cases you need to give the other side your evidence ahead of time per the discovery rules.
Here’s a memo:
I believe what’s been going on is “vote swapping”. The RATs knew, based on Trump’s urging for his voters to vote in person on election day, that they produced a massive storehouse of Biden ballots as “mail-ins”, just in case.
When the numbers started hitting big for Trump, they had to throttle back and start their ‘swapping’ process. The in-person voting paperwork had been kept separate, thus enabling the bad guys to lay their hands on it quickly.
They changed the votes in the tabulation software, dumped the Trump in-person voting paperwork, and then supplanted it with the Biden bogus mail-in paperwork.
This would mean that a recount really wouldn’t turn up much.
It would also explain why, in some precincts in some areas, they had a very high turnout. This is because the lowlife morons that were manning the polling locations effed up and didn’t dump the Trump votes as they were instructed to do, thus resulting in inordinately high turnout.
If you don’t present evidence to support your case you won’t even get on the docket for a preliminary court hearing.
Court cases aren’t like TV shows where one of the lawyers introduces a bunch of bombshell evidence in the middle of a trial. The evidence has to be presented up front and shared in the discovery process or it won’t even be allowed in a trial.
No information about what Trump Team has should be made public.
Trump WON. Even 30% of democracks KNOW this. The statistical analysis is glaring. Just make sure the demonrats are in the dark.
Making Freepers happy by showing them all evidence is not the goal.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Do not forget, the Trump Team is involved in civil action. Their goal is not to adduce evidence, but rather to obtain an wide ranging expedited discovery order.
Then they can get into the actual way ballots were handled and depose those involved.
Its not a crinibal case approach. They have no subpoena power, but they do have a discovery process to access.
They have to disclose it to all parties at court.
It’s called discovery.
And before any facts are tried.
Very good post.
All the journalists and political ‘pundits’ seem to think that Sidney has the duty to disclose her evidence to THEM - as if THEY are the ultimate arbiters of what stands up as true or not in a Court.
She’s a very smart lawyer, and isn’t afraid of taking her time and taking heat for her convictions.
use your head, for god’s sake. they’re (powell and wood) talking about the foremost criminal and political conspiracy in the history of the world. that’s literally what they’re saying. of the thousands of people that would have access to just a shred or two of the evidence of the premier crime against democracy in the history of the world, it would be getting out. we wouldn’t be hearing **cking crickets.
no doubt. no question. no hesitation.
Since these are civil proceedings and not criminal proceedings the plaintiff need not present ANY evidence at this early stage of the litigation (that is why there is discovery), and need only to file a well-pleaded complaint.
This may be so, but there is also an advantage to making the case in public since it may come down to state legislatures.
I agree.
Instead FReepers should be digging into the details of how elections are run in the battleground states.
For instance, are FReepers aware:
Georgia voter history files. 60 days after the election each county has to submit to the state the list of voters by their 8 digit REGISTRATION NUMBER. So let’s assume Joe Biden was registered in Gwinnett and then Joseph Robinette Biden JR moves to Fulton and registers at Fulton under his full name without telling anyone that he is still registered in Gwinnett. How does the State detect whether Sleepy Joe Biden has been voting in both Gwinnett and Fulton for years when the only thing they are looking at is the registration number of the voter?
It seems to me that a regular comparison of names of Georgia voters needs to be done. Probably 90% of Georgia voters have a Georgia drivers license and that would be the first thing I would check to see if two or more voters with similar names also had a Georgia drivers license.
https://elections.sos.ga.gov/Elections/voterhistory.do
All the judges probably watch the same lamestream news as the ignorant masses. They probably also notice the Republicans don’t care about the alleged vote fraud, so why would they risk Antifa knocking on their doors by making any heroic decisions? Just go with the flow.....
I like what you’re saying, but it doesn’t take into account “legal fact” (where an event took place or a condition exists and nobody disputes it.
Arguing a procedural point serves a legal fact purpose as the argument is there’s a process (which nobody disputes), and it is in progress (again, nobody disputes). The argument is on elements of the process.
In 2016 there were two states with uncannily close percentages:
Michigan: Trump 47.6%, Clinton 47.3%
New Hampshire: Clinton 47.6%, Trump 47.2%
Trump could’ve argued then that it’s so implausible for two states to get the exact same percentages that the voting system itself must be flawed in some way. It would’ve been difficult for Clinton to argue against that possibility, as the margins were so tight she could’ve been disadvantaged by the system - so it would’ve been to her advantage to look into it.
Trump took the view that since he’d won by EC without officially winning the popular vote, it didn’t matter that the system looked like it might’ve given Clinton a few more votes than she should’ve gotten. He knew that discrediting the system would just as likely have resulted in him losing votes elsewhere so it wasn’t worth the risk.
Now, what he and his team are trying to do is argue that voter fraud or electoral fraud or counting fraud or mail ballot fraud is behind almost every instance where Trump lost - and we’re not talking 500 votes here and there, we’re talking hundreds of thousands of votes.
Per the film “A Few Good Men”, it doesn’t matter what you believe, it only matters what you can prove.
And if Trump and his team keep arguing in effect that MILLIONS of votes were fraudulent, it doesn’t matter that they have evidence proving that this guy here and that guy there diddled 50 votes. The scale of what they can prove is nowhere near close to proving the scale of the fraud they’re alleging.
Lots of allegations piled one on top of each other create a massive legal risk for Trump. If even one of those allegations is so comprehensively debunked then it calls the rest of the allegations into question - this is why so many cases so far have been chucked out. The rhetoric on Twitter and in press conferences suggests that every time a judge is expecting to see a Kraken in the courtroom, they get presented with a bag of sea monkeys.
Lawyers can prove one thing, maybe two. But not the whole barrel of conspiracies. Even if every state that flipped from Trump to Biden after the count of votes in person did so thanks to millions of fraudulent postal ballots AND a compromised electronic system AND collusion between RINOS and ‘crats, that combination is a tough argument to prove and it doesn’t help if you’ve got a bunch of space cadets throwing Hugo Chavez (a long time dead dude) into the ring as if that’s ever gonna help.