3 ms·
One need not prove fraud to substantiate the claim that it was stolen. It could have been stolen, for example, if laws were bent or broken to dramatically incr
by twitchreplyfor 6y ago
One need not prove fraud to substantiate the claim that it was stolen. It could have been stolen, for example, if laws were bent or broken to dramatically increase the number of mail-in absentee ballots, while at the same time decreasing the scrutiny given to those ballots as required by law.
In fact, this is exactly what was alleged in many court cases. These cases were not allowed to move forward, however, because of procedural issues, not the merits of the case (standing, mootness, and latches).
- PaulDavisThe1st 6y agoPeople keep saying this. If it's true, where is this evidence? It hasn't been on Fox. It hasn't been on OAN. It hasn't been on Newsmax. What's been presented has been uniformly debunked in ways that I find completely convincing. If this is as big as it's claimed to be, you don't shut up just because a judge says you don't have standing. I haven't found a statistical summary, but I've just surveyed the status of all the cases on several neutral sites (ABA, Ballotpedia and others). I don't see how it is possible to draw any conclusion other than a deeply incompetent legal team with no convincing evidence failed to get a single in-place ruling that supports their wild claims.
- twitchreplyfor 6y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related_to_the_2020_United_States_presidential_election https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-election_lawsuits_related... and ctrl+f "standing" = 16 results (6 cases). Bowyer et al. v. Ducey et al. Wood v. Raffensperger et al. Pearson et al. v. Kemp et al. Feehan et al. v. Wisconsin Elections Comm'n et al. Texas v. Pennsylvania et al. Gohmert et al. v. Pence ctrl+f "laches" Tyler Kistner et al. v. Steve Simon, et al.