But there was still no substantial evidence. The cases failed because they were shitty lawyers, who had no idea what they were doing, and then tried to blame the "deep state" for stopping them.
Wether you think the cases failed due to shitty lawyers or purposeful stonewalling is up to interpretation. However, because none of the cases got to the point where evidence was presented in court, it is objectively incorrect to claim the cases failed because evidence was not substantial.
1000s of sworn affidavits, statistical analysis by professional mathematicians, video evidence of votes being counted without proper oversight, counties that counted more than double the votes than they have legal age voters, and dominion machines being connected to the Internet when they weren't supposed to be. If that's not substantial, I don't know what is.
Also, what you or I consider substantial is moot. My point is that the judges never made a ruling on the evidence.
You just don't want to admit that the democrats cheated, because you don't like trump its cool we don't care about your feelings. Its the facts that you keep dancing around and omitting.
There were many reasons the cases were thrown out. None of them were for lack of evidence or unsubstantial evidence.
But there was still no substantial evidence. The cases failed because they were shitty lawyers, who had no idea what they were doing, and then tried to blame the "deep state" for stopping them.
Wether you think the cases failed due to shitty lawyers or purposeful stonewalling is up to interpretation. However, because none of the cases got to the point where evidence was presented in court, it is objectively incorrect to claim the cases failed because evidence was not substantial.
They've released all their "evidence" online, haven't they? From what I've seen, there's nothing substantial.
1000s of sworn affidavits, statistical analysis by professional mathematicians, video evidence of votes being counted without proper oversight, counties that counted more than double the votes than they have legal age voters, and dominion machines being connected to the Internet when they weren't supposed to be. If that's not substantial, I don't know what is.
Also, what you or I consider substantial is moot. My point is that the judges never made a ruling on the evidence.
You just don't want to admit that the democrats cheated, because you don't like trump its cool we don't care about your feelings. Its the facts that you keep dancing around and omitting.
100,000 ballots were 'adjudicated' and the original ballots were destroyed.
There is zero way to confirm the authenticity of those 100,000 votes.
Where was that? Can't find anything about it.