There's been loads of cases where the evidence was presented and then dismissed on its merits, heres a few to get you started, though there's lots more.
"There are multiple independent grounds upon which to dismiss Plaintiffs’
Complaint. Accordingly, it is not necessary to reach the merits of Plaintiffs’ requests for a
temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction and the Court will therefore only
briefly addresses those Motions here."
The judge then goes on to summarize the evidence when he says
"These insurmountable legal hurdles are exacerbated by insufficiently
plead allegations of fraud, rendered implausible by the multiple inadmissible affidavits,
declarations, and expert reports upon which their Complaint relies."
And then in conclusion says
"Not only have Plaintiffs failed to provide the Court with factual support for their
extraordinary claims, but they have wholly failed to establish that they have standing for
the Court to consider them. Allegations that find favor in the public sphere of gossip and
innuendo cannot be a substitute for earnest pleadings and procedure in federal court."
Judges can't help it if Trump can't seem to file a case correctly, but they've still heard the evidence and given a pretty damning assessment of it.
If you aren't interested in reading these cases for yourself, and seeing the courts undeniable weighing of the merits of thr evidence, then I'm not sure you're actually interested in the truth, you're just after confirmation for what you want to be true.
Read page 23 - 27 of that same judgement. It goes into great detail on the evidence presented, and why it utterly fails to meet the standard required for fraud. Why did you think they hadn't been able to present the evidence?
Read page 23 - 27 of that same judgement. It goes into great detail on the evidence presented, and why it utterly fails to meet the standard required for fraud. Why did you think they hadn't been able to present the evidence?
There's been loads of cases where the evidence was presented and then dismissed on its merits, heres a few to get you started, though there's lots more.
Bowyer v Ducey - https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/12/Order-Granting-MTD.pdf "Plaintiffs have not moved the needle for their fraud theory from conceivable to plausible"
King v Whitmer - https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/Preview_7405F132-B4F1-4A0A-9BB1-28CB11C48E21.pdf "Nothing but speculation and conjecture"
Trump v Benson - https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/20201106-Opin-and-Ord.pdf "hearsay within hearsay"
Arizona Republican Party v. Fontes - https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/CV2020014553-elections-m.e.-1.pdf "A theory for which no evidence exists" "the real issue" was not fraud, but "the outcome of the election"
Ward v Jackson - https://www.democracydocket.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/45/2020/11/AscDecisionOrder-3939735-0.pdf "the challenge fails to present any evidence of misconduct [or] illegal votes”
Who told you that they'd refused to hear the evidence and what steps did you take to verify if that was accurate?
It actually says
"There are multiple independent grounds upon which to dismiss Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Accordingly, it is not necessary to reach the merits of Plaintiffs’ requests for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction and the Court will therefore only briefly addresses those Motions here."
The judge then goes on to summarize the evidence when he says
"These insurmountable legal hurdles are exacerbated by insufficiently plead allegations of fraud, rendered implausible by the multiple inadmissible affidavits, declarations, and expert reports upon which their Complaint relies."
And then in conclusion says
"Not only have Plaintiffs failed to provide the Court with factual support for their extraordinary claims, but they have wholly failed to establish that they have standing for the Court to consider them. Allegations that find favor in the public sphere of gossip and innuendo cannot be a substitute for earnest pleadings and procedure in federal court."
Judges can't help it if Trump can't seem to file a case correctly, but they've still heard the evidence and given a pretty damning assessment of it.
If you aren't interested in reading these cases for yourself, and seeing the courts undeniable weighing of the merits of thr evidence, then I'm not sure you're actually interested in the truth, you're just after confirmation for what you want to be true.
Read page 23 - 27 of that same judgement. It goes into great detail on the evidence presented, and why it utterly fails to meet the standard required for fraud. Why did you think they hadn't been able to present the evidence?
Read page 23 - 27 of that same judgement. It goes into great detail on the evidence presented, and why it utterly fails to meet the standard required for fraud. Why did you think they hadn't been able to present the evidence?