despite the absence of evidence ........
despite the absence of evidence ........
despite the absence of evidence ........
despite the absence of evidence ........
despite the absence of evidence ........
despite the absence of evidence ........
.......................................
Hey. It’s Reuters. What would one expect?
There’s plenty of evidence. But it can’t even get a hearing in court, so it’s not going any further than the piece of paper it’s written on.
If the Democrats were in a similar situation (unlikely, since they are the ones who cheat) they’d have the lawsuits flying, accepted and probably already decided in their favor.
Evidence Bump!
bkmk
Affidavits sworn under penalty of perjury are normally considered ‘evidence’.
Notice how ‘perjury’ when casually thrown about with respect to figures like General Flynn are considered heinous crimes. Yet, the media seems to think that ‘ordinary poll watchers’ would easily commit perjury in a sworn statement.
Just wild.