*based on evidence that was to be presented in a bunch of court cases that failed because the judges refused to hear them for one bullshit reason or another.
In a detailed, 35-page decision, Judge James T. Russell of the Nevada District Court in Carson City vetted each claim of fraud and wrongdoing made by the Trump campaign in the state and found that none was supported by convincing proof. The judge dismissed the challenge with prejudice, ruling that the campaign failed to offer any basis for annulling more than 1.3 million votes cast in the state’s presidential race.
The campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor in an amount equal to or greater than” Biden’s margin of victory, which was about 33,600 votes, Russell wrote.
The difference there is that if you ran that trial 60 times with different people involved in the process, he would have been convicted probably many many times.
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.
"Possible illegal votes" based on a bunch of failed court cases. I, for one, am enjoying this show. I like farces. ????
*based on evidence that was to be presented in a bunch of court cases that failed because the judges refused to hear them for one bullshit reason or another.
In a detailed, 35-page decision, Judge James T. Russell of the Nevada District Court in Carson City vetted each claim of fraud and wrongdoing made by the Trump campaign in the state and found that none was supported by convincing proof. The judge dismissed the challenge with prejudice, ruling that the campaign failed to offer any basis for annulling more than 1.3 million votes cast in the state’s presidential race.
The campaign “did not prove under any standard of proof that illegal votes were cast and counted, or legal votes were not counted at all, due to voter fraud, nor in an amount equal to or greater than” Biden’s margin of victory, which was about 33,600 votes, Russell wrote.
Now show me Michigan, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania, and Georgia. The states that mattered.
So you basically admit that fraud doesn't matter, only that he lost. Got it.
TIL a lack of evidence is a bullshit reason. Huh. I guess that's why you're a lawyer, and I'm not. My bad.
Courts let OJ go scot free. I guess you're still looking for the "real killer" since the courts said there was a lack of evidence.
The difference there is that if you ran that trial 60 times with different people involved in the process, he would have been convicted probably many many times.
Yes, because OJ was innocent. Also, this is different, because there is actual evidence of the opposite of your claim.
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.