[Boogieman]

“The courts haven’t addressed allegations of fraud previously.”

And they obviously have no intention of doing so anytime soon. Fantasizing that they will won’t make it so.

“It would be quite embarrassing if the Italian court that took the confession in Naples...”

Which court took the confession? What’s the docket number of the case? What the exhibit number of that “confession” when it was entered into evidence?

If this “confession” is not just more fantasy, then you shouldn’t have a problem answering those questions.

[Dr. Franklin]

And they obviously have no intention of doing so anytime soon. Fantasizing that they will won’t make it so.

Without a party raising the issue, courts don't decide the issue. What should have been obvious is that the statutes in place that were ignored were made to ensure an honest election. The courts let the Dems break the rules. Now the crows will come home to roost, and the judges who ignored the illegalities will be embarrassed.

Which court took the confession? What’s the docket number of the case? What the exhibit number of that “confession” when it was entered into evidence?

1) A criminal court in Naples, Italy. 2) The case remains under seal. 3) The confession was made in open court under deposition by the presiding judge. So, it has no exhibit number.