Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

Conservative Ag said:

---

MASAXET said:

---

In response to OP, the lawsuits truly are as embarrassing as all of the criticism they're getting. Everything from the pleadings, to the "affidavits," to the hearings, to the briefing, to the appellate shortcomings, it's honestly hard to overstate how bad it has been. Dreams of SCOTUS arguments and overturning any states are a pipe dream.

It's been said many times on here but here is just one metric for how little interest SCOTUS has to get involved in the merits: the one case that has actually made it to SCOTUS has been waiting on the decision on the cert pet since Oct. 27.

---

I haven't reviewed any of them. What's wrong with the affidavits?

---

Where to start? Several unsigned, several don't meet standards of affidavit or declaration, many don't even allege wrongdoing but merely bad feelings and things that didn't "look" right, and many stating things they think are "wrong" but actually only detail what is required (the declarations simply didn't understand how elections work). That's not even getting into the "expert" declarations that mix up states, don't allege wrongdoing, and inflate "expertise" that's irrelevant

Conservative Ag said:

---

txagbear said:

---

Conservative Ag said:

---

txagbear said:

---

If you are going to allege fraud in Federal Court, you have heightened pleading requirements under Rule 9B. Your case will be dismissed without any discovery if your pleadings don't meet those levels of scrutiny. The pleadings I have seen do not.

And I do practice in Federal court, not that it will really matter to anyone who doesn't want to be convinced.

---

They don't yet have access to the evidence they'd need to meet it.

---

That's why the rule is there. They don't want lawsuits filed on mere speculation, where a Defendant is forced to spend time and money on a non existent case.

---

Have they pled fraud?

---

That's what one Judge tried to ask them. Looks like they allege fraud but they aren't even sure if they are pursuing a fraud case. It's a mess

Conservative Ag said:

---

MASAXET said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Once you have discovery, then you can uncover the elements of fraud. Get a peripheral issue accepted by the judge => discovery => find fraud in the data.

---

The affidavits and notes from hundreds of eyewitnesses should have met that question, in my view.

---

The "affidavits" largely didn't even support the claims actually pled. Regardless, they don't overcome the other myriad issues (standing as just one example). And the courts who actually have waded into the "affidavits" have detailed the many issues that they suffer. Your view has so far been roundly rejected by multiple courts (federal and civil) in several states

---

What's "my view"? That I believe fraud occurred?

Surely you mean federal and state.

---

I wasn't responding to your view? Read the post I was actually responding to and you'll see the view being referenced. Not sure your point here

And, yes, I meant federal and state. Pardon the typo

I am not a lawyer nor in law enforcement, however, based on sworn affidavits I have read I would have expected law enforcement officers would have seized all relevant documents.

Including all ballots and segregated them by in person, mail in and absentee. All envelopes for all mail in ballots and absentee ballots should been seized. All video evidence from surrounding surveillance cameras during original counting and recounting, both from cameras at the counting facilities and any pertinent surrounding buildings.

This is a complete and utter travesty.

Zeke1995 said:

---

The trick is getting getting Biden to confess while on the stand.

---

No, the big climax is when people march in and start emptying bags containing thousands of mail-in ballots addressed to Santa Claus.

richardag said:

---

I am not a lawyer nor in law enforcement, however, based on sworn affidavits I have read I would have expected law enforcement officers would have seized all relevant documents.

Including all ballots and segregated them by in person, mail in and absentee. All envelopes for all mail in ballots and absentee ballots should been seized. All video evidence from surrounding surveillance cameras during original counting and recounting, both from cameras at the counting facilities and any pertinent surrounding buildings.

This is a complete and utter travesty.

---

What? Seize all ballots while Trump is still insisting on recounts and audits? And who do you think is going to seize all of this? How many agents do you think we have? I don't think you have any idea what you are asking for. One average healthcare fraud case can take up a whole warehouse

richardag said:

---

I am not a lawyer nor in law enforcement, however, based on sworn affidavits I have read I would have expected law enforcement officers would have seized all relevant documents.

Including all ballots and segregated them by in person, mail in and absentee. All envelopes for all mail in ballots and absentee ballots should been seized. All video evidence from surrounding surveillance cameras during original counting and recounting, both from cameras at the counting facilities and any pertinent surrounding buildings.

This is a complete and utter travesty.

---

Are you really suggesting that the police should be able to arbitrarily seize anything and everything they wish based on random musings?

State election agencies should be doing whatever it needs to in able to ensure an accurate election. Instead,a campaign has to file suits to TRY and get the information to prove the elections accuracy. That's bull*****

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

Once you have discovery, then you can uncover the elements of fraud. Get a peripheral issue accepted by the judge => discovery => find fraud in the data.

---

The affidavits and notes from hundreds of eyewitnesses should have met that question, in my view.

---

You are correct on the latter lawsuits, but some of the earlier ones were tentative, and the reports I heard were that the plaintiffs backed off of calling out fraud as an issue. I think they did have affidavits and testimony, but, from memory, I think there was more of the "dead people" voting, moved out of state, illegitimate age voting, etc. And proving an amount of votes that would overturn the results was difficult.

Sidney's latest filings are more substantial in terms of fraud, as well as affidavits of people who were observers, or prevented in terms of observing, than were the earlier the filings...and they talked vote counts that would be significant and could overturn the election.

But, I still think that PA is much easier to get in front of the SCOTUS than other suits, because Alito stepped on their toes for bending/breaking State Law, and they did not follow through properly AFTER that edict...

richardag said:

---

I am not a lawyer nor in law enforcement, however, based on sworn affidavits I have read I would have expected law enforcement officers would have seized all relevant documents.

Including all ballots and segregated them by in person, mail in and absentee. All envelopes for all mail in ballots and absentee ballots should been seized. All video evidence from surrounding surveillance cameras during original counting and recounting, both from cameras at the counting facilities and any pertinent surrounding buildings.

This is a complete and utter travesty.

---

They didn't because longtime poll workers, both republican and democrat had to painstakingly explain why most, if not all the affidavits had no understanding of how the process works, and in fact turned out it was normal procedure. Not to mention many hadn't even attended the training

Plus, trumps lawyers themselves had to throw out a ton of 'sworn affidavits' that they themselves found ti be false. Which is why the judge called into question the whole process of how they get the 'sworn affidavits'.

Troutslime said:

---

State election agencies should be doing whatever it needs to in able to ensure an accurate election. Instead,a campaign has to file suits to TRY and get the information to prove the elections accuracy. That's bull*****

---

Pretty sure that is what they do when they certify the ballots BTW, Trump had a cyber security chief who oversaw this stuff and he said the election was fair.

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

Quote:

---

They didn't because longtime poll workers, both republican and democrat had to painstakingly explain why most, if not all the contents affidavits had no understanding of how the process works, and in fact turned out it was normal procedure. Not to mention many hadn't even attended the training

Not to mention trumps lawyers themselves had to throw out a ton of 'sworn affidavits' that they themselves found ti be false. Which is why the judge called into question the whole process of how they get the 'sworn affidavits'.

---

Oh there was training, alright. Just on how to sway the election.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3158950

Sterling82 said:

---

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

---

If fraud is found it will be prosecuted. Trump's people can't find enough to prosecute. At least they haven't yet, because we all know Barr would be all over it

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

They didn't because longtime poll workers, both republican and democrat had to painstakingly explain why most, if not all the contents affidavits had no understanding of how the process works, and in fact turned out it was normal procedure. Not to mention many hadn't even attended the training

Not to mention trumps lawyers themselves had to throw out a ton of 'sworn affidavits' that they themselves found ti be false. Which is why the judge called into question the whole process of how they get the 'sworn affidavits'.

---

Oh there was training, alright. Just on how to sway the election.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3158950

---

lol

Didn't read the thread, I see.

txagbear said:

---

Troutslime said:

---

State election agencies should be doing whatever it needs to in able to ensure an accurate election. Instead,a campaign has to file suits to TRY and get the information to prove the elections accuracy. That's bull*****

---

Pretty sure that is what they do when they certify the ballots BTW, Trump had a cyber security chief who oversaw this stuff and he said the election was fair.

---

What is their explanation regarding the spikes?

Certifying unaudited votes is lazy and welcomes fraud. We deserve better.

txagbear said:

---

Sterling82 said:

---

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

---

If fraud is found it will be prosecuted. Trump's people can't find enough to prosecute. At least they haven't yet, because we all know Barr would be all over it

---

How is it found if no one can investigate it?

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

They didn't because longtime poll workers, both republican and democrat had to painstakingly explain why most, if not all the contents affidavits had no understanding of how the process works, and in fact turned out it was normal procedure. Not to mention many hadn't even attended the training

Not to mention trumps lawyers themselves had to throw out a ton of 'sworn affidavits' that they themselves found ti be false. Which is why the judge called into question the whole process of how they get the 'sworn affidavits'.

---

Oh there was training, alright. Just on how to sway the election.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3158950

---

Consider the 4 legitimate glitches/mistakes, 2 in Michigan, 1 in Georgia, and 1 in Arizona. 2 benefited Biden before it was caught, 1 benefited Trump before it was caught, 1 was about county commissioner, not president.

3 of them happened in rural deep red counties, so more training sounds great. Zuck should donate to those counties too.

Troutslime said:

---

txagbear said:

---

Sterling82 said:

---

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

---

If fraud is found it will be prosecuted. Trump's people can't find enough to prosecute. At least they haven't yet, because we all know Barr would be all over it

---

How is it found if no one can investigate it?

---

I have been reminded many times that Trump is still the president. Head of DOJ. Get after it

Troutslime said:

---

txagbear said:

---

Sterling82 said:

---

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

---

If fraud is found it will be prosecuted. Trump's people can't find enough to prosecute. At least they haven't yet, because we all know Barr would be all over it

---

How is it found if no one can investigate it?

---

Because our DOJ is nowhere to be found.

I have given up on Barr. Pains me to say that but I have.

Troutslime said:

---

txagbear said:

---

Sterling82 said:

---

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

---

If fraud is found it will be prosecuted. Trump's people can't find enough to prosecute. At least they haven't yet, because we all know Barr would be all over it

---

How is it found if no one can investigate it?

---

So are we finally, finally, at all those twitter clickbait scam allegations are bogus?

Sterling82 said:

---

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

---

Fraud is absolutely criminal whether or not it affects the election. Trumps team and Sidney Powell do not have any power to open criminal investigations. If authorities believed the evidence being put forth was election fraud they can and would be opening criminal investigations (maybe they are).

For example, the voter lists indicating a voter voted Nevada but filed a change of address form. Those were referred for criminal investigation.

Back to my favorite Kraken tentacle, the revelation that Dominion voting machines are shipped to Dem counties with HOW TO STEAL ELECTIONS instruction manuals and in-person training if you want to make damn sure.

CondensedFoggyAggie said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

They didn't because longtime poll workers, both republican and democrat had to painstakingly explain why most, if not all the contents affidavits had no understanding of how the process works, and in fact turned out it was normal procedure. Not to mention many hadn't even attended the training

Not to mention trumps lawyers themselves had to throw out a ton of 'sworn affidavits' that they themselves found ti be false. Which is why the judge called into question the whole process of how they get the 'sworn affidavits'.

---

Oh there was training, alright. Just on how to sway the election.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3158950

---

Consider the 4 legitimate glitches/mistakes, 2 in Michigan, 1 in Georgia, and 1 in Arizona. 2 benefited Biden before it was caught, 1 benefited Trump before it was caught, 1 was about county commissioner, not president.

3 of them happened in rural deep red counties, so more training sounds great. Zuck should donate to those counties too.

---

Read the damn thread and articles posted in it. The places where CEIR spent the most money training their people are exactly where the most anomalous results are.

Square that round peg, if you can.

Troutslime said:

---

txagbear said:

---

Sterling82 said:

---

Fightin TX Aggie said:

---

Lawyer here.

The effort so far has been embarrassing.

I've seen nothing that would give me any confidence of convincing a judge of anything. Courts don't work on conjecture. They work on evidence.

There is no good strategy that would support keeping Trump's evidence "secret." He just doesn't have it. He hopes to find it, but so far it isn't there.

He has to prove he would have WON 3 different states. He could prove thousands of cases of fraud, but unless those add up to him winning 3 more states, it won't help him.

It isn't enough to suspect broader fraud that cannot be shown. You have to prove the case.

It isn't going to happen.

---

So fraud isn't criminal unless it was pervasive enough to reverse the result? As an American that believes in an honest and transparent electoral process that's very disturbing.

---

If fraud is found it will be prosecuted. Trump's people can't find enough to prosecute. At least they haven't yet, because we all know Barr would be all over it

---

How is it found if no one can investigate it?

---

It can ABSOLUTELY be investigated by FBI and DOJ and Barr even gave his folks special instructions to investigate. Things seem pretty quiet on that front.

Quote:

---

Sidney Powell do not have any power to open criminal investigations

---

Guess you missed where Powell was designated a MILITARY lawyer for the tribunals. Serous stuff.

aggiehawg said:

---

CondensedFoggyAggie said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

They didn't because longtime poll workers, both republican and democrat had to painstakingly explain why most, if not all the contents affidavits had no understanding of how the process works, and in fact turned out it was normal procedure. Not to mention many hadn't even attended the training

Not to mention trumps lawyers themselves had to throw out a ton of 'sworn affidavits' that they themselves found ti be false. Which is why the judge called into question the whole process of how they get the 'sworn affidavits'.

---

Oh there was training, alright. Just on how to sway the election.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3158950

---

Consider the 4 legitimate glitches/mistakes, 2 in Michigan, 1 in Georgia, and 1 in Arizona. 2 benefited Biden before it was caught, 1 benefited Trump before it was caught, 1 was about county commissioner, not president.

3 of them happened in rural deep red counties, so more training sounds great. Zuck should donate to those counties too.

---

Read the damn thread and articles posted in it. The places where CEIR spent the most money training their people are exactly where the most anomalous results are.

Square that round peg, if you can.

---

You do realize in Philly Trump increased his vote count by 32k vs 2016? And his overall vote share by 5%? Including nearly six times as many votes in reliably red Packer Park in South Philly as in his best ward in North Philly?

Not to mention he almost doubled his vote count in detroit while Biden stayed the same?

So are you saying Zucks training enabled democrats to cheat and give trump more votes and a higher percentage?

aggiehawg said:

---

CondensedFoggyAggie said:

---

aggiehawg said:

---

Quote:

---

They didn't because longtime poll workers, both republican and democrat had to painstakingly explain why most, if not all the contents affidavits had no understanding of how the process works, and in fact turned out it was normal procedure. Not to mention many hadn't even attended the training

Not to mention trumps lawyers themselves had to throw out a ton of 'sworn affidavits' that they themselves found ti be false. Which is why the judge called into question the whole process of how they get the 'sworn affidavits'.

---

Oh there was training, alright. Just on how to sway the election.

https://texags.com/forums/16/topics/3158950

---

Consider the 4 legitimate glitches/mistakes, 2 in Michigan, 1 in Georgia, and 1 in Arizona. 2 benefited Biden before it was caught, 1 benefited Trump before it was caught, 1 was about county commissioner, not president.

3 of them happened in rural deep red counties, so more training sounds great. Zuck should donate to those counties too.

---

Read the damn thread and articles posted in it. The places where CEIR spent the most money training their people are exactly where the most anomalous results are.

Square that round peg, if you can.

---

Holy cow! More money was spent in bigger counties? Who would have thought?

I'm just confused as to why the Democrats ever lose at all given this cheating superpower that Hugo Chavez gave them in 2007. I mean, sure, they have to take a couple hits to throw people off the scent. But you'd think they could at least get Beto in office or something similar.

Sadly, DOJ and FBI have been bumps on a log for four years, seemingly frozen by the specter of appearing politically motivated. Their effort to maintain the public's trust in the institutions has, in fact, destroyed what little public trust was left after revelations of the lawless conduct during the transition. Now our trust in elections is swirling down the drain and again, nothing.

TheFirebird said:

---

I'm just confused as to why the Democrats ever lose at all given this cheating superpower that Hugo Chavez gave them in 2007. I mean, sure, they have to take a couple hits to throw people off the scent. But you'd think they could at least get Beto in office or something similar.

---

Not to mention they control the FBI, DOJ and all state and local law enforcement agencies that investigate voter fraud. It's really impressive what the Dems have managed to do.

Conservative Ag said:

---

txagbear said:

---

If you are going to allege fraud in Federal Court, you have heightened pleading requirements under Rule 9B. Your case will be dismissed without any discovery if your pleadings don't meet those levels of scrutiny. The pleadings I have seen do not.

And I do practice in Federal court, not that it will really matter to anyone who doesn't want to be convinced.

---

They don't yet have access to the evidence they'd need to meet it.

---

As Judge Judy would say, "Well that's too bad."

And I still say viewing this through a Trump-Biden lense is the wrong approach. This is potentially a national emergency. Every effort is owed to the People that the a) elections are either not rigged and are legitimate or b) perpetrators of the corruption are facing full punishment for their crimes. As a citizen, I want a damn answer one way or the other.