[Texas Fossil]

Thank you. All relevant arguments.

There should not be a question if a sane Judge examines only a few of them. Question? Is there a Sane Judge who would touch this??

[linMcHlp]

A judge? Yes.

Statistics are evidence. Levels of probability are evidence; and there is a "beyond a reasonable doubt" level among those levels of probability.

Though odd-ball, or rare, or less likely, events can occur and some do occur, there remain preponderance levels of probability.

- - -

Disenfranchisement is a judicial and political buzzword.

Yet there are judges who, in their pursuit of rubbing out what they say is disenfranchisement of some number of people, end up creating greater disenfranchisement of actual residents who make the effort to observe all the lawful and legal processing to make their votes count.

"Count every ballot" is sweeping, and that careless administrative and/or judicial decision means, that ANYBODY in the world, could vote in Pennsylvania, given the state's careless and crude administration of ballots (no signature, no established date of reception stamp, no USPS confirming postal markings).

- - -

Former FBI Special Agent finds MASSIVE number of absentee votes from non-residents in Georgia

https://freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3910326/posts?page=1434#1434

[little jeremiah]

Suits will most likely get bumped up to SCOTUS quickly, whichever way a judge rules. Then SCOTUS can hear massive evidence, and thankfully there are enough sane constitutionalists to vote the right way.